The following opinion was provided in a letter to the editor of a national aeronautics’ magazine:
“Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men and women into space. Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight."
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 letter to the editor, the author concludes that resources should be invested in unmanned space flight. He came to this conclusion based on the fact that manned space flight is costly and dangerous, and also, successes have been recorded in recent unmanned space probes. Though this conclusion may be true, it rests on several unwarranted assumptions that if not carefully evaluated weakens the persuasiveness of the argument.
First, the author assumes that the manned space flight and unmanned space flight are comparable. This may not be the case as individually flight might have its specific function. and the usefulness of one might not be comparable with the usefulness of the other. It is also possible that there is a specific period where unmanned space flight can be used and also where manned space flight can be used. It is possible that the climate condition in the largely supports unmanned flight in the winter, whereas in the summer where there is increased turbulence which will require human to control, only manned space flight can be launched. If either of the above holds, then the author's argument is significantly weakened.
Furthermore, even if both flights are comparable, the author presumes without substantial evidence, that the cost of launching an unmanned space flight is lesser than that of launching a manned space flight. This may not be the case, as unmanned space flight may require additional sophisticated engines whose prices are far greater than the manned space flight. Maybe the unmanned planes will require three additional turbo engines to operate whereas only none is required for the manned. It is also possible that the unmanned space flight will require other additional expenses like unmanned travel license and government-imposed levies which are not required in manned space flight. The author can better improve the substantiality of his argument by providing evidence to show that launching an unmanned flight cost lesser than launching a manned flight.
Finally, the author assumes that both manned and unmanned flight can gather the same amount of useful information and that there is no reason why preference should be given to manned space flights. Maybe an unmanned space probe can only gather 10% of the total amount of useful information a manned space probe will gather. It may be the case that sending men and women into space increases the volume of useful information that can be gathered. It is also possible that manned space flight stays longer in space and captures a greater volume of information due to higher time spent in space. If either of the above scenarios holds, then the author's argument is inviable and does not hold water.
In conclusion, even if investing resources in unmanned space flight will yield equal fruit as manned space flight, the author's argument as it stands now is substantially flawed. The author needs to provide more evidence may be in the form of scientific research for the argument to be better evaluated.
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 20 15
No. of Words: 494 350
No. of Characters: 2482 1500
No. of Different Words: 188 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.714 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.024 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.6 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 196 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 47 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.7 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.059 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.85 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.422 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.59 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.158 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 180, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...light might have its specific function. and the usefulness of one might not be comp...
^^^
Line 3, column 677, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... If either of the above holds, then the authors argument is significantly weakened. ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 643, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... of the above scenarios holds, then the authors argument is inviable and does not hold ...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 120, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...equal fruit as manned space flight, the authors argument as it stands now is substantia...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, if, may, so, then, whereas, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.6327345309 158% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.9520958084 170% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 13.6137724551 154% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 28.8173652695 101% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2533.0 2260.96107784 112% => OK
No of words: 494.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12753036437 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65206677486 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 204.123752495 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.402834008097 0.468620217663 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 792.0 705.55239521 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7021536097 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.619047619 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5238095238 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.61904761905 5.70786347227 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.303798110399 0.218282227539 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124592094331 0.0743258471296 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0923977404164 0.0701772020484 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208681370003 0.128457276422 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036164970903 0.0628817314937 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.