The following argument was made in a newspaper editorial:
“The autonomy of any country is based on the strength of its borders; if the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked, both its economy and national identity are endangered. Because illegal immigrants pose such threats, every effort must be made to return them to their country of origin.”
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.
In the argument published in the newspaper editorial, there was a claim that the economy and the national identity of any country is threatened due to the presence of illegal immigrants. Thus, in order to prevent this danger, they must be returned back to the country of their origin. Though the claims put forth seems to be true, there are many unstated assumptions, which weaken the argument and require introspection.
Firstly, the author alleges that the autonomy of any country depends on the strength of its borders. Though it seems like it is a widely accepted claim, there must be proper evidence and test cases to explain how the strength of a country's borders reflects its autonomy. The author could have provided the statistics of the autonomy and the immigrants of a certain sample of countries in order to buttress his claim.
Secondly, there was a claim that the economy and national identity of a country are endangered due to the immigration. However, there are no supporting reasons to this statement. The immigrants in some ways may threat the indigenous people, but there might also be some of them who help in developing the country's economy by working in some jobs, which enhances the economy. There was no clear evidence to support his above mentioned claim. The author must have provided an example to support his claim that the country's identity is threatened due to the illegal immigrants to make his argument convincing.
Thirdly, if at all we believe that there are threats due to the invasion of illegal immigrants, there was no mention about the kind of threats. If they might get involved in robbery, firing and such deleterious activities, it could be a threat. However, if they enter just to make their livelihood, there would not be any threat to the community. As there was no mention regarding the threats, the claim weakens the argument.
Fourthly, the claim that illegal immigrants must be made to return to their own country is worthwhile. However, there was no mention of the plans or schemes about how they would be returned. If they do not have enough money to return, will the government provide the funding to leave them across the borders safely? If yes, who would be providing the funding? There was no mention about all the above mentioned queries in the argument. Had the author provided the convincing reasoning to all these assumptions, it would have strengthened his argument.
Lastly, there was no mention about how the illegal immigrants are entering the country across the borders. Every country usually takes measures to prevent the incoming of illegal people. However, if there are still people entering the country, there might be some defect in the system itself. Thus, in order to support his argument, the author might have provided the reasons for the illegal entry of the people. Is it due to the failure of the government or due to the intelligence of the immigrants?
To conclude, though the assumptions made in the argument seems convincing at the first look, if we evaluate thoroughly, there are many loopholes. The author must provide convincing reasons behind the threats, types of efforts to make the immigrants leave, the correlation between a country's autonomy and national identity and the kind of threats due to the immigrants in order to make his argument a cogent one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 240, Rule ID: RETURN_BACK[1]
Message: Use simply 'returned'.
Suggestion: returned
...er to prevent this danger, they must be returned back to the country of their origin. Though ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 2, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e argument and require introspection. Firstly, the author alleges that the aut...
^^^
Line 11, column 216, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'peopled'.
Suggestion: peopled
...gal people. However, if there are still people entering the country, there might be so...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, look, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, third, thirdly, thus, while, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 28.8173652695 125% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 55.5748502994 139% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2801.0 2260.96107784 124% => OK
No of words: 562.0 441.139720559 127% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98398576512 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.86893614481 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66412180475 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 204.123752495 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.384341637011 0.468620217663 82% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 864.9 705.55239521 123% => 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
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 2.70958083832 406% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 19.7664670659 142% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.3226676781 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.035714286 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0714285714 23.324526521 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.03571428571 5.70786347227 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 7.0 5.15768463074 136% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 16.0 6.88822355289 232% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311882081629 0.218282227539 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0953136340735 0.0743258471296 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0817025923661 0.0701772020484 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175308585103 0.128457276422 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0572449785157 0.0628817314937 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.63 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 98.500998004 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.