Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered.
This argument is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, the argument is based on unwarranted assumption that the people will die if they are inoculated against cow flu, rendering its main conclusion that inoculations against cow flu cannot be permitted invalid.
The argument leaves many unanswered questions as it makes its conclusion based on a small possibility and not actual figures. It leaves out the percentage of people that died as a result of the inoculation. Had the argument provided information about the actual number of people inoculated and the number deaths that occurred as a result of the inoculation, we would have been able to calculate the percentage of deaths that occurred. Moreover, if the percentage death is known, we would be able to compare it with the percentage of people that would be saved as a result of the inoculation, and this will help decide if the conclusion is valid or not.
The argument also states that there is a small possibility that people will die if inoculated. This could mean no one has actually died, and it is just a speculation. Therefore, not inoculating the people because of a mere speculation will be foolhardy. The data used to arrive at this possibility needs to be validated before we can arrive at a worthy conclusion.
Finally, the argument claims without warrant that many lives will be saved if the people in the endemic areas are inoculated against small pox. The argument is still lacking because it does not provide any information as to whether or not these people have been previously immunized against the virus. If they have been previously inoculated, inoculating them again will be futile. The information regarding the number of people that have been previously inoculated is needed before we can say that many lives will be saved if they are inoculated against the virus
Because the argument makes several unwarranted assumptions, it fails to make a convincing case that inoculations against cow flu cannot be permitted to be routinely administered.
Comments
e-rater score report
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: 14 15
No. of Words: 335 350
No. of Characters: 1665 1500
No. of Different Words: 140 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.278 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.97 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.834 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 121 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.929 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.264 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.786 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.378 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.6 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.198 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 219, Rule ID: WHETHER[4]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; whether or not; as to whether
...use it does not provide any information as to whether or not these people have been previously immun...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, if, moreover, regarding, so, still, therefore, as to, in conclusion, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1708.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 335.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09850746269 5.12650576532 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92101411454 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.432835820896 0.468620217663 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 562.5 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 19.7664670659 71% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.7763152559 57.8364921388 143% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.0 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9285714286 23.324526521 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.394463862093 0.218282227539 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144806594117 0.0743258471296 195% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.113728162463 0.0701772020484 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234092735967 0.128457276422 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0497763996458 0.0628817314937 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.3799401198 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 98.500998004 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => 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.