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 this assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
A letter was sent to the editor of national aeronautincs magazine. An opinion was observed, which suggested the that the space research organizations should increase their investment in resources for unmanned space flights, as the success of a series of recent unmanned space flights has demostrated to be worth by avoiding the excess expenditure and high risks of sending a manned space flight. But before this assertion is held true, few points must be discussed.
Firstly, the recent success of series of unmanned space probes belies the myriad of failed unmanned space probes which were sent earlier for research purposes. If we take only recent successes in consideration by neglecting the abundant failures, then we are setting ourselves up for an uncertain future, as the aggregate success rate is much lower. A complete record of all the missions of unmanned space probes must be studied thoroughly and then with the help of statistical information, one shall optimize the resources for space flight.
Secondly, the unmanned space probes are nothing but machines which are manufactured by humans. Undoubtedly, the probes undergo numerous tests and debugging, but we must agree that humans are bound to make mistakes. If a faulty probe is sent on a mission, then it will blatantly gather faulty data and we will never be able to check the veracity of it. If manned space flights are employed, then a skilled engineer can always fix the probe and will double check the truthfulness of data before processing it. If one such probe is failed, then millions of dollars which are invested in it are wasted, which is a huge misuse of the resources. For example, the Chandrayan-2 mission of Indian Space Research Organization was failed because of communication error and suffered a harsh landing. Huge amount of resources were wasted in this project. Had it been a manned space flight, an engineer could have taken care of communications equipment and the landing as well.
Thirdly, if manned space flights are employed, then we can expand our basis of research to many other scientific fields. For example, a man can go and study the geographical structure of celestial bodies. We can also start research of the structure of soil and many endless doors might open up. This is only possible with manned space flights, because robots are designed to do specific tasks and they are unable to think out of the box, unlike a man. This will vastly increase the scope of research.
It must be acknowledged that sending a manned space flight comes with inherent risks and prodigal use of resources; but failed unmanned space flights usually make up for the money which could have been used for a manned space flight. So, if we invest in manned flights by decreasing the resource allowance for unmanned space flights, we will open ourselves up for many other unsolved mysteries of the universe.
In conclusion, more focus on the statistial study on the success rate of unmanned space flights is required to corroborate the assertion of investing more resources in the unmanned space flights. Also, investing in manned space flights will has its own pros and cons and with proper care and handling, their success rate will be more than overall success rate of unmanned space flights.
Comments
e-rater score 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: 23 15
No. of Words: 546 350
No. of Characters: 2675 1500
No. of Different Words: 243 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.834 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.899 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.59 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 203 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 143 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 101 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 50 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.739 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.301 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.783 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.313 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.533 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.127 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 509, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...thfulness of data before processing it. If one such probe is failed, then millions...
^^
Line 11, column 242, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'have'
Suggestion: have
... investing in manned space flights will has its own pros and cons and with proper c...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, well, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.9520958084 154% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 28.8173652695 97% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 16.3942115768 55% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2745.0 2260.96107784 121% => OK
No of words: 546.0 441.139720559 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02747252747 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.56307096286 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66607853374 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450549450549 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 705.55239521 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.413039752 57.8364921388 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.347826087 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7391304348 23.324526521 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.65217391304 5.70786347227 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.328149535171 0.218282227539 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10597069361 0.0743258471296 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0884486641066 0.0701772020484 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208967483 0.128457276422 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0740655578733 0.0628817314937 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 98.500998004 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.