"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."
The argument which is stated above is based on the unwarranted assumptions which when taken as a whole, holds the argument fallacious. The city government is of the view that to increase the interest of people towards the riverside recreational activities an ample amount of money should be devoted to the betterment of the riverside. As a result, more people will be able to play their favorite water sports without ado. However this claim is based on some false assumptions.
Firstly, the surveys are not the prevalent ways to know the right consensus of the people. Survey reports that the Mason city residents rank water sports among their favorite but it is not at all mentioned that which group of people where the part of the survey, what was the sample size etc. It might be possible that the survey was close-ended and consists of only the limited riverside activities as the options. Such survey will definitely engender the biased results. Only if it was mentioned that the entire population was the part of the survey or that the open ended questions were asked then it could be much better to determine the fondness of the residients towards the sports.
Secondly, It is said that the state has it's plans to devote it's budget towards improving the river water's quality and smell with a view that the river water sports will increase but this is just an overstated assumption held by the government. It might be possible that people don't have much interest in playing the riverside sports across the nearby river. They might find it more zealous to travel far to some other riverside and play there so that it could involve a long drive too. It can be also be inferred from the line where it is said that Mason river flowing through the city is rarely used for such pursuits even if it's maintenance is ensured.
Also, the complaints which the government is receiving regarding the quality of river water and the river's smell will surely be alleviated by devoting the budget towards its clean up. But how we can give this surety that the people who are making the complaints are the ones who want to use that river for recreational activities. It's possible that they may go for a stroll or their homes are close to that river hence the malodorous surrounds annoys them. But this not at all concludes that they are the ones who are fond of riverside recreational activities. Instead, the government should first ensure that those who are making the complaints should also report the way in which they will use that river.
Thus unless all these assumptions are not taken into concern they argument will surely fall apart. And the government's decision to devote money out of their yearly budget to riverside recreational activities would not be of mere use and might just be the waste of money in that regard.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not really
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2305 1500
No. of Different Words: 226 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.685 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.424 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 143 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 96 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 71 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.895 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.72 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.301 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.547 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.068 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 423, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...heir favorite water sports without ado. However this claim is based on some false assum...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 278, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...nment. It might be possible that people dont have much interest in playing the river...
^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...y in which they will use that river. Thus unless all these assumptions are not ta...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, thus, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.6327345309 173% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 31.0 13.6137724551 228% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 51.0 28.8173652695 177% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2344.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 491.0 441.139720559 111% => OK
Chars per words: 4.77393075356 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.46443082824 2.78398813304 89% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 204.123752495 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.452138492872 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 726.3 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.22255489022 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.3516065961 57.8364921388 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.2 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.55 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => 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: 0.17013002513 0.218282227539 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0522755119015 0.0743258471296 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0526034078757 0.0701772020484 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.090987422446 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0459185725441 0.0628817314937 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.3550499002 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.5979740519 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.79 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.