An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
In the given argument the author wrote about the solution to vitamin A deficiency in the people living in an area named Tagus, who are poor in wealth, and are used to of taking millet. The solution discussed was a breed of millet which is high in vitamin A but is a costly solution, and to combat the cost of farming breed of this millet, farmer will be given subsidies from the government of Tagus. While the argument and the solution posit look quite exciting but leaves several questions unanswered and having several fallacies discussed below.
First of all, the author mentioned that the people of Tagus are deficient in vitamin A. The author does not mention the number or percentage of people having this deficiency. Perhaps only a small amount of people are facing this deficiency which is due to their genetics. To beat this small amount of patients, producing and farming a the given breed on a national level does not seem reasonable. And if they are facing this illness due to their gene, then giving them vitamin A supplements would not resolve the issue. Hence, to make the argument pragmatic, the author should mention the number of patients having vitamin A deficiency and the reason of this illness.
Secondly, the author did not mention any review report of the residents of Tagus. Perhaps the new millet produced would not have a good taste, and people refuse to take that new one and continue to having previously producing millet as their food. In that situation the overall activity from the efforts of international development organization to the field farmer's hard work would fail. And as the author did not mention any clue of public opinion on this breed, the whole argument looks absurd and quixotic.
Lastly, the argument neither give any hint about the amount of subsidy that would be given to the farmers, nor mention the cost of the new breed. Perhaps the given solution was as much costly as farmers could not farm them even after getting subsidies from the government. And due to the lack of resources, farmers continue to farm and produce the previously famous breed of millet. Thus, author of the argument should have mentioned the cost analysis to make the argument rational.
In short, on the basis of above fallacies and unanswered questions, we are concluding that the argument discussed is incomplete and fail to give the answers to the aforementioned questions posed.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet.
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 411 350
No. of Characters: 1961 1500
No. of Different Words: 172 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.503 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.771 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.449 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 144 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 96 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 65 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 38 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.176 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.741 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.529 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.347 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.585 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 256, Rule ID: A_BUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a bit'?
Suggestion: A bit
...reed of millet which is high in vitamin A but is a costly solution, and to combat the...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing several fallacies discussed below. First of all, the author mentioned that ...
^^
Line 2, column 335, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'a' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: a; the
...ount of patients, producing and farming a the given breed on a national level does no...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 479, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'A supplement' or simply 'supplements'?
Suggestion: A supplement; Supplements
...to their gene, then giving them vitamin A supplements would not resolve the issue. Hence, to ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ciency and the reason of this illness. Secondly, the author did not mention any...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...le argument looks absurd and quixotic. Lastly, the argument neither give any hi...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nalysis to make the argument rational. In short, on the basis of above fallacie...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, if, lastly, look, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while, in short, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 11.1786427146 170% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 55.5748502994 103% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2003.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 411.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87347931873 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51672791658 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.43795620438 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 622.8 705.55239521 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.3705171968 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.277777778 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8333333333 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.55555555556 5.70786347227 97% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.29561923162 0.218282227539 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0947523481484 0.0743258471296 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783096758973 0.0701772020484 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1540424558 0.128457276422 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.094120567527 0.0628817314937 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.3799401198 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.5979740519 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 98.500998004 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.