The following appeared in a memorandum from the planning department of an electric power company.
"Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances, such as refrigerators and air conditioners, that are almost twice as energy efficient as those sold a decade ago. Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating. Therefore, the total demand for electricity in our area will not increase—and may decline slightly. Since our three electric generating plants in operation for the past twenty years have always met our needs, construction of new generating plants will not be necessary."
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument that construction of new plant for generating electricity is not necessary is based on the unwarranted assumption and unsubstantiated claims and hence, the argument falls apart.
First, the author cites a dubious survey where in people are shown to be eager to save the energy. However, provides no information about the sample size, whether the population was representative or not. Also, it is being assumed that the people who showed eagerness to save energy in the survey will necessarily save the energy. It might be that survey consisted of many other question and one of them was whether people want to save the energy or not? Most people are going to respond it affirmatively and author has taken affirmation of a few people to the face value. It might be that no one really cares about saving energy but said so as not to come across as dupe. If the people are not eager to save the energy, it is likely that electricity requirement will increase and the existing plant will not be able to meet the increasing demand of electricity. Therefore, the author's argument fails.
Second, the author cites increase in marketing electrical appliances which are twice as efficient as they were a decade ag as evidence to support argument, the electricity need will not increase and thus, there is no need to build new plant of electricity generation. However, author fails to give any information about the efficiency about the electrical appliances a decade ago. It is being assumed in the argument that they were not consuming much electricity a decade ago and now since they are twice as efficient as a decade ago, they will reduce the electricity usage. It could be that a decade ago these electrical applicances required considerably higher electrical energy and increase in their efficiency has not made any big difference. As a result, the energy demand will continue to increase. Also, it is being assumed in the argument that people have money and willpower to but these new electricl appliances. The author's argument also implies that people already don't have any electrical appliances and are looking forward to buy new one. Since it is unlikely that people will buy new ostentatiously energy efficient electrical appliances, the energy demand would continue to rise and there will be need to build a new plant.
Third, it is being assumed in the argument that the people use electrical energy only for the purpose of home heating and not for any other things. But author provides no substantial evidence in the supporta of same. It could be that people use electrical energy for more than one purposes and the need for energy will continue to rise. Therefore, the author's argument that there is no need to build new plant is undermined.
Finally, it is being assumed that the population and the demand of energy with increasing population will not increase. But, the author fails to provide any evidence in support of the claim and hence, the author's argument falls apart.
In conclusion, the argument is riddled with unwarranted assumption and falacious reasoning therefore, the argument fails.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. need to argue:
Several recent surveys indicate that home owners are increasingly eager to conserve energy. At the same time, manufacturers are now marketing many home appliances, such as refrigerators and air conditioners, that are almost twice as energy efficient as those sold a decade ago.
//we may argue like:
maybe people will user more home appliances.
argument 2 -- not OK. need to argue:
Also, new technologies for better home insulation and passive solar heating are readily available to reduce the energy needed for home heating.
//we may argue like:
maybe those technologies are too expensive and people don't use them.
argument 3 -- not exactly or not OK
argument 4 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 523 350
No. of Characters: 2551 1500
No. of Different Words: 185 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.782 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.878 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.724 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 177 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 122 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 100 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 64 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.792 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.357 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.346 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.538 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.091 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 878, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...g demand of electricity. Therefore, the authors argument fails. Second, the author cit...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 927, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...but these new electricl appliances. The authors argument also implies that people alrea...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 977, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...gument also implies that people already dont have any electrical appliances and are ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1037, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[7]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'to buying'.
Suggestion: to buying
...ical appliances and are looking forward to buy new one. Since it is unlikely that peop...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 352, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...y will continue to rise. Therefore, the authors argument that there is no need to build...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 205, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... in support of the claim and hence, the authors argument falls apart. In conclusion, t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, hence, however, if, look, really, second, so, therefore, third, thus, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 35.0 19.6327345309 178% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 11.1786427146 188% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 28.8173652695 118% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 16.3942115768 171% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2603.0 2260.96107784 115% => OK
No of words: 522.0 441.139720559 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98659003831 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77988695657 4.56307096286 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76695274804 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.369731800766 0.468620217663 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 865.8 705.55239521 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 4.96107784431 222% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 19.7664670659 121% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.2874047185 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.458333333 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 23.324526521 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.125 5.70786347227 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0902230813622 0.218282227539 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0313798020668 0.0743258471296 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0334616843296 0.0701772020484 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0406558696693 0.128457276422 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0301004737245 0.0628817314937 48% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.3550499002 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.5979740519 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.28 8.32208582834 87% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.