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.
The argument states the number of illegal immigrants entering a country cannot be checked and so it proves harmful for the economy and national identity of the country. Here, the argument is full of loopholes and does not explain well the reasons for the conclusion it makes that every effort must be made to return the illegal immigrants to their country of origin. The argument fails to cogently make all the points clear and lucid.
Firstly, it is unknown on what factors the newspaper editorial is based on or what were the basis on which it made such a claim. Even if the claim is true, what exactly the autonomy of the country means in context of the argument is quite ambiguous. The autonomy can be related to a person's freedom, government activities or any other thing which is not known. Also, the strength is based on the "borders" of the country, does not prove which borders, as there can be illegal immigrants only entering from some specific borders like east, west, north or south.
Moreover, the argument proposes a uncertainity that the number of illegal immigrants entering cannot be checked, so what are the possible reasons that can warranty that such a claim is true. Even if assumed true, the argument fails to offer any particular "number" of immigrants who are entering the country. The assumption that the illegal immigrants may surely cause some harm is also not supported through this argument.
Also, the economy and national identity can be endangered is what the argument claims but there can be many other reasons for the deteriorating economy and national identity which the newspaper editorial may have failed to cover. In the sense of this argument, there is no specific detailed explanation of what national identity is referring to, it can be related to anything which the newspaper editorial considers as national identity but not necessarily is considered similar by every person.
However, the conclusion that the argument makes on the basis of this unwarranted information is dubious. The threats that the immigrants own is not mentioned, so it is quite unclear what type of threats they can be and what kind of efforts must be taken to mitigate them. The argument fails to offer limpid reasons that the effort taken would improve the condition and keep the economy and national identity intact. It can happen that if the country is not sure of what kind of threat the immigrants own then it would be a mere waste of time in applying unnecessary efforts.
In sum, the argument fails to offer information that can prove the claims made. Also, it does not guarantee the improvement in the current situation if the conclusion is accepted by the country. It fails to offer many evidences that would have acted as a support to the porous statements in the argument. So to make the argument believable and authentic, there is a need of concrete information which would be cogent enough to be understood and believed.
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 502 350
No. of Characters: 2401 1500
No. of Different Words: 190 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.733 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.783 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.57 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 168 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 95 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.1 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.093 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.363 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.603 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.097 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 284, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...guous. The autonomy can be related to a persons freedom, government activities or any o...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 33, 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
...h. Moreover, the argument proposes a uncertainity that the number of illegal...
^
Line 19, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...time in applying unnecessary efforts. In sum, the argument fails to offer info...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, well, kind of
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 : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 55.5748502994 88% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2497.0 2260.96107784 110% => OK
No of words: 502.0 441.139720559 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97410358566 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75195868695 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.396414342629 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 789.3 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5662183347 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.85 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1 23.324526521 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.9 5.70786347227 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.30638292481 0.218282227539 140% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101463255503 0.0743258471296 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0732847177717 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176662047906 0.128457276422 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0652604549366 0.0628817314937 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.