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.
Environmental protection groups, understandably, are keen on preserving endangered species. They create ecological sanctuaries to protect these living creature that cannot vocally protect themselves. However, at times, these groups provide stances with flawed reasoning, which hurts their goals. Often, they argue that the living creatures of a given sanctuary deserve land set aside because somehow taking part of it would lead to disastrous consequences. In this case, the environmental protection group from Youngtown believes that, by permitting Smith Corporation to take a small percentage of land from the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve, the survival of three hundred bird species would be in jeopardy. They provide a flawed argument because their reasoning is based on assumptions that lack strong evidence and is flat-out incorrect.
The environmental protection group of Youngtown spuriously believe that. because part of the land will be used, all of the land will somehow deteriorate. This is a typical "slippery slope" reason. It is easy to state that the use of one parcel of land will lead to deterioration of the whole land, thus jeopardizing the survival of the birds. If this protection group believes that, they need to prove so. Where is their evidence? Do they have cases in which a corporation used a parcel of land in a sanctuary and the number of species in that land decreased? The environmental protection group weakens their argument by assuming that one action will lead to this dangerous result. If anything, they weaken their credibility by making an assumption without the necessary evidence.
The author also assumes that because there are three hundred bird species living in the area, there is a "magnificent" bird population. True, a large number of bird species residing there tends to indicate that there is a large population of said birds. However, and typically, a large number of bird species indicates simply a large number of endangered species. Endangered bird species often have small populations, not surprisingly so, because only a few of them still remain in existence. Because there are a few birds of each species at the preserve, it is easy for the environmental protection group of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve to find space for those birds so that they are not affected by the hotel. If there were large populations of the birds, then yes, it would seem likely that the hotel may affect their cohabitation; however, because there may just be small populations of each of the species, the hotel is unlike to harm any of them. Additionally, as aforementioned, the environmental protection group can relocate them with ease.
Worst of all, the author fails to realize the relationship between tourism and the bird species. He or she does not understand that an increase in tourism after the construction of a hotel may help their cause. The author assumes that tourists visit primarily to visit birds. How do we know that tourists are visiting for that reason? What if they are visiting for other reasons? Would they be more enticed to visit if a small hotel were located there? Coming from a narrow perspective, the environmental protection group is likely to state that tourists want to see the birds--because members of the environmental protection group want to see the birds. However, it is likely that the tourists may go because the weather is warm and ideal for hiking. Or perhaps, tourists go because there are great trails for biking. These two reasons allow for ideal economic development, which, ironically, can give the Youngtown government the funding to create more land for the survival of the three hundred bird species. Instead of assuming that tourists want to see the birds, the environmental protection group needs to see the situation from an alternative point of view, one that may actually help them.
The environmental protection group of Youngtown has good intentions: They want to protect the birds that live in the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. They are afraid that land change may hurt the birds' likelihood for survival. Those birds may have lived there for hundreds of thousands of year. They may additionally provide ecological benefit to the citizens of Youngtown, though the citizens of Youngtown may not realize it. However, if they want to see the preservation of the sanctuary--and the birds--they need to take alternative points of view to realize they can do much more benefit by permitting the Smith Corporation to develop the land. For all they know, it may cause the birds to breed larger numbers of species and further develop the preserve.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 756 350 //the content is somehow wordy. write the essay in 30 minutes. around 450 words are enough.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 38 15
No. of Words: 756 350
No. of Characters: 3785 1500
No. of Different Words: 283 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.244 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.007 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.762 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 250 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 206 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 137 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 93 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.591 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.255 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.417 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.105 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 370, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to land'
Suggestion: to land
... creatures of a given sanctuary deserve land set aside because somehow taking part o...
^^^^
Line 3, column 74, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Because
...p of Youngtown spuriously believe that. because part of the land will be used, all of t...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 113, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... because part of the land will be used, all of the land will somehow deteriorate. This is ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 104, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...rd species living in the area, there is a 'magnificent' bird population...
^
Line 5, column 153, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...agnificent' bird population. True, a large number of bird species residing there tends to in...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 289, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
... of said birds. However, and typically, a large number of bird species indicates simply a large n...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 337, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...number of bird species indicates simply a large number of endangered species. Endangered bird spe...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 193, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...re afraid that land change may hurt the birds likelihood for survival. Those birds ma...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, however, if, may, so, still, then, thus
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 : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 26.0 13.6137724551 191% => OK
Pronoun: 70.0 28.8173652695 243% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 92.0 55.5748502994 166% => OK
Nominalization: 30.0 16.3942115768 183% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3910.0 2260.96107784 173% => OK
No of words: 753.0 441.139720559 171% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19256308101 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.23840104116 4.56307096286 115% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97508476302 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 300.0 204.123752495 147% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.398406374502 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1195.2 705.55239521 169% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 4.96107784431 343% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 14.0 8.76447105788 160% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 39.0 19.7664670659 197% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 55.2279836452 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.256410256 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3076923077 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.41025641026 5.70786347227 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 8.20758483034 207% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.67664670659 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.248254193284 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.065899020862 0.0743258471296 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0728248855364 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165058825025 0.128457276422 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0693700060241 0.0628817314937 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.3799401198 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.3550499002 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 137.0 98.500998004 139% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.