"Two years ago the city voted to prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. They claimed that skateboard users were responsible for the litter and vandalism that were keeping other visitors from coming to the plaza. In the past two years, however, there has only been a small increase in the number of visitors to Central Plaza, and litter and vandalism are still problematic. Skateboarding is permitted in Monroe Park, however, and there is no problem with litter or vandalism there. In order to restore Central Plaza to its former glory, then, we recommend that the city lift its prohibition on skateboarding in the plaza."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the argument highlights that the city should lift its prohibition of skateboarding in the central plaza enacted two years ago because there was no change in the number of visitors visiting the plaza. However, the premises upon which he puts his claim are fallacious. For the support of which more evidence needs to be given.
The first assumption that lacks some semblance of truth and can be overtly impugned is the fact that the number of people visiting the plaza did not increase dramatically during the past two years. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since there is not a sufficient evidence to support if the low level of visiting the plaza was because of a prohibition of skateboarding. One point that should be considered is that there are many factors that can appeal visitors' attention to qualities, a location of the plaza, good prices and so forth. In fact, the author does not show to the extent these factors play a role in visiting the central plaza. If skateboarders are allowed in the central plaza, what if the number of visitors remain constant and do not increase?
Furthermore, the author points out that the Monroe Park lift the prohibition and skateboarding are allowed there, and there is no problem with litter and vandalism. Although it might seem tenable at a face, it has some defects due to the paucity of evidence that would consolidate the premise the otherwise. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that maybe Monroe Park assigns an especial location for skateboarding, which there might be no interference with visitors and vandalism. Or maybe the small number of people preferred to visit Monroe Park because of its far-place location. Indeed, make a comparison between two centers might not be wise owing to the fact that situations and conditions of two Plaza are different in case of accessibility, commodities, facilities, being well-known and so forth.
Putting the two assumptions above aside, there is still room for doubt. As set forth by the author the skateboarders should not be banned in order to provide an opportunity for the plaza to restore to its previous condition. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to an unsettle evidence to support if restore skateboarding could be helpful for the plaza. One point that should not go unnoticed is that although restore skateboarding might attract visitors to the plaza, there is no guarantee litter and vandalism diminish dramatically. What if vandalism and litter increase drastically? What if these litters and vandalism again cause people not to visit the central plaza in the future?
Having scrutinized all the premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there are numbers of evidence having been ignored by the author while the presence of which could add to the logic of each premise.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 484 350
No. of Characters: 2364 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.69 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.884 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.717 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 85 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 51 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.2 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.108 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.321 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.524 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 303, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...is premise could be challenged owing to an unsettle evidence to support if restore skateboa...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 217, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...could add to the logic of each premise.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, well, while, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.6327345309 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 13.6137724551 132% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2422.0 2260.96107784 107% => OK
No of words: 484.0 441.139720559 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0041322314 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69041575982 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80844030211 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.438016528926 0.468620217663 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 759.6 705.55239521 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => 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: 54.750707758 57.8364921388 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.1 119.503703932 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.15 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.27536983883 0.218282227539 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0905411528277 0.0743258471296 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0683987617392 0.0701772020484 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.162118103821 0.128457276422 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0999954377077 0.0628817314937 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.02 12.5979740519 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => 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.