The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group:
“The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit primarily to see our magnificent bird population.”
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 if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The argument has been raised by an Environmental protection group rasing their voice against development of a land that is a part of Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. Although concern for environment is neccesary but the argument here do not provide reasoning that are acceptable.
The group has made a claimed that the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for their area. There is no reason as to why this claim should be plausible. The haven't mentioned any specific consequence that the development of land might cause to their area. It might be possible that the development may not actually be disastrous. Had the author mentioned details about the type of disaster that the development could cause the claim would be more acceptable.
Further claim is that the development in no circumstances can benefit the group and their community. There are no reasons behind why the assumption is made. The development may infact prove beneficial as it may attract more tourists to the area. As stated, the plan for land development is building a small hotel. If built, the hotel might attract more tourists towards the sanctuary as it will be in close vicinity. Hence it would lead to increase in sale of the community as they can benefit form being guide to the tourists. Hence they may get hike in their business. Moreover, increasing number of tourists can also lead to increase in other sales for the community like local items that are being sold at tourist spots. Hence, the development sounds beneficial for the sales of the community. The group has nowhere mentioned why the development would lead to not anything but harm to the community.
The argument states that only a small percent of land will be sold to the Smith. Also it is stated that the Smith corporation has promised the preservation of the wildlife sanctuary but the environment protection group asserts that in no way the Smith preserve the sanctuary. The plans of Smith will definitely harm the sanctuary. This is an assumption by the group that The Smith will definitley cause the degradation of the sanctuary. There are no points mentioned by the group about what harm they are concerned about. It appears that the group just want to stop The Smith from land development. There might be some hidden rivalry between members of The Smith and some people in the community. Si that the people in the community do not want The Smith of earn business and are just trying to hinder their cause. Had something been mentioned about why the land shouldn't be given to The Smith, some past failures of the corporation, etc the argument would be more convincing.
Hence we can conclude that the argument is not backed by strong reasons. The claims in the argument sound false as they do not have supporting evidence with them. So it fails to give a correct interpretation of the concern for the environment by the environment protection group. If there would have been some specific examples, numbers mentioned the argument have been cogent one.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 28 15
No. of Words: 469 350
No. of Characters: 2236 1500
No. of Different Words: 183 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.654 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.768 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.616 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 128 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 16.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.389 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.464 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.301 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.467 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.114 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 175, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...why this claim should be plausible. The havent mentioned any specific consequence that...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 418, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ctuary as it will be in close vicinity. Hence it would lead to increase in sale of th...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 529, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...nefit form being guide to the tourists. Hence they may get hike in their business. Mo...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 82, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...cent of land will be sold to the Smith. Also it is stated that the Smith corporation...
^^^^
Line 9, column 864, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...thing been mentioned about why the land shouldnt be given to The Smith, some past failur...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...argument would be more convincing. Hence we can conclude that the argument is no...
^^^^^
Line 13, column 290, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had been'?
Suggestion: had been
... environment protection group. If there would have been some specific examples, numbers mention...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, hence, if, may, moreover, so, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.9520958084 185% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 55.5748502994 90% => OK
Nominalization: 29.0 16.3942115768 177% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2292.0 2260.96107784 101% => OK
No of words: 467.0 441.139720559 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90792291221 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64867537961 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68839568394 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 204.123752495 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.413276231263 0.468620217663 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 694.8 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.0706571956 57.8364921388 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 81.8571428571 119.503703932 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6785714286 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.70786347227 35% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 16.0 6.88822355289 232% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.180378724662 0.218282227539 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.054339714177 0.0743258471296 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0430753411997 0.0701772020484 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106588958879 0.128457276422 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0622863834251 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 14.3799401198 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.3550499002 132% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.197005988 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.5979740519 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.03 8.32208582834 84% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 98.500998004 78% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 12.3882235529 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.9071856287 67% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.