A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter to institute an adopt-a-dog program. The program would encourage dog ownership for patients recovering from heart disease, which should reduce these patients' chance of experiencing continuing heart problems and also reduce their need for ongoing treatment. As a further benefit, the publicity about the program would encourage more people to adopt pets from the shelter. And that will reduce the incidence of heart disease in the general population.
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.
The argument attempts to bridge a strong positive correlation between pet ownership and healthier life. The conclusion is based on the premises that, dog owners have lower heart incidence of heart disease. However, on deeper analysis, it becomes evident that certain relevant aspects have not been taken into consideration, leading to a number of misleading assumptions and logical flaws.
One such flaw is that the argument is based on a study, which reported, pet owners have longer, healthier lives than people who owns no pet. But the scope and validity of the report is not justified. The author did not present any concrete evidence regarding the actual comparison between these two section of people regarding their living condition, economic condition, age. For example, presumably, a person who owns some pets can have a better economic condition than a destitute person who hardly can bear his life late alone a pet. So, obviously it is possible that, a person of wealth can have better physic no matter what he is having any pet or not. That is why, without exemplifying the exact comparison regarding physical, environmental, economical conditions, that study can only undermine the conclusion rather than strengthen it. Additionally, we can not reject the possibility that the the study was backed up by the people doing business of pets and publicizing that type of study results, so that, they can expect to have a boost up in their business.
Moreover, another pitfall of the argument is that it specifically emphasize on having a dog pet for reducing heart disease risk. But it is known to all that, when a person owns a dog/pet, sometimes he may go out for morning walk with it. That daily walk can have a significant positive impact on the person, as we know exercise like walking strengthen heart and other muscle of the body. That is why, having a dog can not be attributed to healthy physic and less heart disease of the owner rather the daily exercise does the main job. So, that pitfall seriously undermines the conclusion of the whole statement.
To conclude, the argument lacks information and seems to present irrational assumptions. The solution presented by the author seems tenuous due to lack of supporting evidences. The author must have given more concrete evidence to substantiate his viewpoint and to make the argument a more cogent one.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 749, Rule ID: ECONOMICAL_ECONOMIC[1]
Message: Did you mean 'economic' (=connected with economy)?
Suggestion: economic
...ison regarding physical, environmental, economical conditions, that study can only undermi...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 897, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
... we can not reject the possibility that the the study was backed up by the people doing...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 897, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
... we can not reject the possibility that the the study was backed up by the people doing...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 536, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , that” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...r the daily exercise does the main job. So, that pitfall seriously undermines the conclu...
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.225 0.25644967241 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.159090909091 0.15541462614 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.1 0.0836205057962 120% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0545454545455 0.0520304965353 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0340909090909 0.0272364105082 125% => OK
Prepositions: 0.102272727273 0.125424944231 82% => OK
Participles: 0.0522727272727 0.0416121511921 126% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.76689287876 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0227272727273 0.026700313972 85% => OK
Particles: 0.00454545454545 0.001811407834 251% => OK
Determiners: 0.122727272727 0.113004496875 109% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0227272727273 0.0255425247493 89% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0181818181818 0.0127820249294 142% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2378.0 2731.13054187 87% => OK
No of words: 395.0 446.07635468 89% => OK
Chars per words: 6.02025316456 6.12365571057 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.367088607595 0.378187486979 97% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.26835443038 0.287650121315 93% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.210126582278 0.208842608468 101% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.139240506329 0.135150697306 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76689287876 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 207.018472906 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.53164556962 0.469332199767 113% => OK
Word variations: 59.5210848615 52.1807786196 114% => OK
How many sentences: 18.0 20.039408867 90% => OK
Sentence length: 21.9444444444 23.2022227129 95% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.1702896994 57.7814097925 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.111111111 141.986410481 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9444444444 23.2022227129 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.5 0.724660767414 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 48.7798874824 51.9672348444 94% => OK
Elegance: 1.53211009174 1.8405768891 83% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.266455611434 0.441005458295 60% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.116205532764 0.135418324435 86% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0574587499226 0.0829849096947 69% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.535524332554 0.58762219726 91% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.108530258725 0.147661913831 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112964253109 0.193483328276 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0792829262072 0.0970749176394 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.366436185295 0.42659136922 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0920706524139 0.0774707102158 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.187680037022 0.312017818177 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.07152523774 0.0698173142475 102% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.33743842365 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.82512315271 41% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 14.0 14.657635468 96% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.