Paleo diets, in which one eats how early hominids (human ancestors) did, are becoming increasingly popular. Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food, especially bone broth, a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours. They believe it has many health-promoting nutrients, such as cartilage, which can heal our joints, and chondroitin, which promotes nerve regeneration. Skeptics point out that ingested cartilage can’t replenish cartilage in your knees or elbows and ingested chondroitin doesn’t make our brains any healthier. Yet, there is strong anecdotal evidence that people who consume bone broth have fewer metabolic and inflammatory diseases than those who don’t. Therefore, ancient humans knew something about our physiology that we don’t, and that by emulating the way they ate, we can cure many chronic illnesses.
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 this pargraph, the authors tried to argue that the Paleo diet, which is similar to the diet of early human beings, the hominids, is best for humans today. In doing so, the authors assumed several fallacies which weaken their argument and makes it irrelavent.
The first assumption this paragraph wrongly makes is that human beings today, and the threats posed to them, are biologically similar to their ancestors, the hominids. This assumption is the basis of the argument since it is needed in order to concieve that a modern person mimicing the hominids nutrition by eating paleo diet foods, will enjoy the same positive outcomes as the hominids enjoyed from such a diet. In reality, we know that the human body, and the threats posed to it, have evolved substantuially since the time of the homonids, and therfore the human body developed different needs and abillities. Due to that, it is wrong to assume that what was benefical for our ancestors would undoubtly be beneficial for us. For example, today the human body must protect itself from a wide range of viruses that were previously unheard of. This protection, in many cases, requires a different diet than that eaten by the hominids. THis fallacy must be adrressed by the authors of the paragraph, mainly by examining the biological differences between hominids and modern human beings.
The second probalmatic assumption this paragraph states is that anecdotal cases are proof for a general truth. In the paragraph, the writers argue that since there are some instances in which the Paleo diet had positive outcomes for modern human beings, it must be inferred that the diet has universal positive outcomes. In reality, no matter how many anecdotal instances occoured, as long as they are not examined using statistical methods, these outcomes cannot be seen as more than private instances. Only through statistical examination would we be able to infer that the anecdotal evidence is proof of a general positive outcome of the Paleo diet.
Lastly, the paragraph assumes that a healthy diet is one that protects the body from only a small set of problems: joint and nerve problems, and metabolic and inflammatory diseases. While any person should act to protect himself from these issues, in the 21st century the body needs a diet that protects a person from many other problems. Such problems, in many cases, were irrelavent to ancient hominids and thefore the absence of food that protect them from such problems would not have hurt them at all. For example, human beings today, as part of modern jobs, must use their brains much more than the hominids. It is a well knwon fact that many food products support such use, for example by stimulating brain proccesses or promoting memory abilities. Therefore, the paragraph wrongly assumes that the human body must protect itself from only a small set of problems, all of which are similar to problems threatining the hominids, but in fact many new problems have arised that might not be addressed by the paleo diet. In order to strengthen the argument, the effects of the Paleo diet on issues such as brain functions must also be examined and addressed by the authors of this paragraph.
In conclusion, the paragraph bases it's conclusion on three arguments that are most likely fallacies. Only by adrressing these, in various methods I mentioned above, would this paragraph become more convincing.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Sentence: In this pargraph, the authors tried to argue that the Paleo diet, which is similar to the diet of early human beings, the hominids, is best for humans today.
Error: pargraph Suggestion: paragraph
Sentence: In doing so, the authors assumed several fallacies which weaken their argument and makes it irrelavent.
Error: irrelavent Suggestion: irrelevant
Sentence: This assumption is the basis of the argument since it is needed in order to concieve that a modern person mimicing the hominids nutrition by eating paleo diet foods, will enjoy the same positive outcomes as the hominids enjoyed from such a diet.
Error: concieve Suggestion: conceive
Error: mimicing Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: paleo Suggestion: pale
Sentence: In reality, we know that the human body, and the threats posed to it, have evolved substantuially since the time of the homonids, and therfore the human body developed different needs and abillities.
Error: substantuially Suggestion: substantially
Error: abillities Suggestion: abilities
Error: homonids Suggestion: hoods
Error: therfore Suggestion: therefore
Sentence: Due to that, it is wrong to assume that what was benefical for our ancestors would undoubtly be beneficial for us.
Error: undoubtly Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: benefical Suggestion: beneficial
Sentence: THis fallacy must be adrressed by the authors of the paragraph, mainly by examining the biological differences between hominids and modern human beings.
Error: adrressed Suggestion: addressed
Sentence: The second probalmatic assumption this paragraph states is that anecdotal cases are proof for a general truth.
Error: probalmatic Suggestion: problematic
Sentence: In reality, no matter how many anecdotal instances occoured, as long as they are not examined using statistical methods, these outcomes cannot be seen as more than private instances.
Error: occoured Suggestion: occurred
Sentence: Such problems, in many cases, were irrelavent to ancient hominids and thefore the absence of food that protect them from such problems would not have hurt them at all.
Error: thefore Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: irrelavent Suggestion: irrelevant
Sentence: It is a well knwon fact that many food products support such use, for example by stimulating brain proccesses or promoting memory abilities.
Error: proccesses Suggestion: processes
Error: knwon Suggestion: known
Sentence: Therefore, the paragraph wrongly assumes that the human body must protect itself from only a small set of problems, all of which are similar to problems threatining the hominids, but in fact many new problems have arised that might not be addressed by the paleo diet.
Error: arised Suggestion: No alternate word
Error: threatining Suggestion: threatening
Error: paleo Suggestion: pale
Sentence: Only by adrressing these, in various methods I mentioned above, would this paragraph become more convincing.
Error: adrressing Suggestion: addressing
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 20 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 568 350
No. of Characters: 2780 1500
No. of Different Words: 235 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.882 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.894 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.482 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 186 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 153 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 106 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.818 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.348 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.591 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.522 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.117 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 288, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'hominids'' or 'hominid's'?
Suggestion: hominids'; hominid's
...cieve that a modern person mimicing the hominids nutrition by eating paleo diet foods, w...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, lastly, second, so, then, therefore, well, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 28.8173652695 184% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 55.5748502994 119% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2865.0 2260.96107784 127% => OK
No of words: 568.0 441.139720559 129% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04401408451 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88187981987 4.56307096286 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57322283793 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 204.123752495 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.454225352113 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 887.4 705.55239521 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.22255489022 261% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.4420237527 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.227272727 119.503703932 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8181818182 23.324526521 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.95454545455 5.70786347227 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => 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: 0.140005730816 0.218282227539 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0457841547194 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0276358672804 0.0701772020484 39% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0840687806875 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0329899743999 0.0628817314937 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.3799401198 106% => 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: 12.25 12.5979740519 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 98.500998004 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => 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.