In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes litt

Essay topics: In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities.

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.

amin_khormali1's picture

Based on three premises the argument concludes that more budget should be devoted to riverside recreational facilities by city government. First of all, based on some surveys water sports are being ranked in higher levels among Macon City resident’s favorite recreational activities. Second, quality of river’s water and its smell is bothering the residents. And finally, cleaning up the river will increase the use of river for water sports. None of these premises are satisfactory and there are several loopholes in the argument which makes any conclusion deduced from it untenable.

First premise of the author is that residents rarely use river for water sports however they are highly interested in swimming, boating, and fishing based on some surveys. Actually there is not any information about neither the procedures in which these surveys are conducted nor the time they conducted. It might be these survey have been done based on the reports of inadequate number of samples or also it might be the samples used in these surveys are not representative of all residents of the city. In addition, it is plausible that resident’s favorites have changed since the surveys have been done. the findings of these surveys are outdated and resident’s favorites have changed since the surveys have been done. Therefore, the findings of these surveys are outdated and neither valid nor reliable. Furthermore, maybe the river has no sufficient water to conduct water sports due to probable severe drought there.

Second notion of the argument is that city residents are being bothered due to river’s smell and bad quality. It is only mentioned that there have been complaints for years and the author fails to give further information to the readers whether or not there is still complaints from residents. In addition, the author fails to take into consideration other main reasons for smell and bad quality of the river, it might be the problem is due to a factory which depletes its waste to the river. If so, cleaning up the river would have least effect on solution of the problem.

The final aspect which is mentioned in the passage is that cleaning up the river would increase the use of river for water sport. This prediction suffers from lack of sufficient evidence for correlation between cleaning up and increase in use of river for sport. In addition, as mentioned in the passage the water quality as bad, and there is no guarantee that after cleaning up the river its quality improves. Consequently, people will still abandon the river for its water quality. Furthermore, the city might be located by sea or there might be other more quality facilities such as modern pools in the city which people prefer them for swimming, boating, and fishing.

In final analysis, the author’s suggestion cannot be taken into be correct because, for the given information, it depends on number of premises all of which could be explained in other ways. The argument could have been more comprehensive if the author had presented sufficient yet convincing evidence to support his claim. Therefore, the passage is not totally convincing and unsound.

Essay Categories: 
Votes: 
Average: 5.4 (1 vote)
This essay topic by other users:
Post date Users Rates More about the essay
2 weeks 9 hours ago Lokesh Varshney 40 Read full essay
2 weeks 14 hours ago prakharsharma 60 Read full essay
2 weeks 6 days ago Pruthviraj R Patil 78 Read full essay
1 month 2 days ago nealsaha1007 78 Read full essay
1 month 4 weeks ago rammohan231220 33 Read full essay
3 months 3 weeks ago pg 33 Read full essay
7 months 3 weeks ago Saud 38 Read full essay
8 months 20 hours ago hchittoo 53 Read full essay
8 months 3 weeks ago hadis1994 53 Read full essay
8 months 3 weeks ago zamira7979@mail.ru 49 Read full essay

Pages

More essays by this user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 613, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...anged since the surveys have been done. the findings of these surveys are outdated ...
^^^
Line 5, column 243, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...give further information to the readers whether or not there is still complaints from resident...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 258, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are still complaints'?
Suggestion: there are still complaints
...formation to the readers whether or not there is still complaints from residents. In addition, the author...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 534, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[3]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'have the least'.
Suggestion: have the least
...ver. If so, cleaning up the river would have least effect on solution of the problem. T...
^^^^^^^^^^

Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'also', 'consequently', 'finally', 'first', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'in addition', 'such as', 'first of all']

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.252971137521 0.25644967241 99% => OK
Verbs: 0.173174872666 0.15541462614 111% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0713073005093 0.0836205057962 85% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0424448217317 0.0520304965353 82% => OK
Pronouns: 0.025466893039 0.0272364105082 94% => OK
Prepositions: 0.129032258065 0.125424944231 103% => OK
Participles: 0.0696095076401 0.0416121511921 167% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.77546281818 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0169779286927 0.026700313972 64% => OK
Particles: 0.00848896434635 0.001811407834 469% => OK
Determiners: 0.0984719864177 0.113004496875 87% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0220713073005 0.0255425247493 86% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0101867572156 0.0127820249294 80% => OK

Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3184.0 2731.13054187 117% => OK
No of words: 519.0 446.07635468 116% => OK
Chars per words: 6.13487475915 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7730044521 4.57801047555 104% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.352601156069 0.378187486979 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.28901734104 0.287650121315 100% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.200385356455 0.208842608468 96% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.129094412331 0.135150697306 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77546281818 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 207.018472906 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.412331406551 0.469332199767 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.1759857715 52.1807786196 90% => OK
How many sentences: 24.0 20.039408867 120% => OK
Sentence length: 21.625 23.2022227129 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.110285277 57.7814097925 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.666666667 141.986410481 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.625 23.2022227129 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.666666666667 0.724660767414 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 3.58251231527 112% => OK
Readability: 50.526734104 51.9672348444 97% => OK
Elegance: 1.87323943662 1.8405768891 102% => OK

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.416664038693 0.441005458295 94% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.197331632979 0.135418324435 146% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.140723966774 0.0829849096947 170% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.54044441169 0.58762219726 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.121542982795 0.147661913831 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.174539463625 0.193483328276 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0607478407477 0.0970749176394 63% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.458436893721 0.42659136922 107% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0652147775832 0.0774707102158 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.294448501938 0.312017818177 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0665350571198 0.0698173142475 95% => OK

Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.33743842365 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.87684729064 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.82512315271 83% => OK
Positive topic words: 6.0 6.46551724138 93% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 2.0 2.82389162562 71% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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: This is not the final score. 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.