The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Quiot Manufacturing.
"During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
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 writer of the argument concludes that the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot Manufacturing will reduce and its productivity will increase if they shorten their three work shifts by one hour, which lets the workers to get adequate amounts of sleep. He concludes this from comparing his plant with the other plant, PAnoply Industry plant. However, this conclusion cannot be accepted as it rests on a number of assumtions, all of which can be challenged in one way or another.
The first problem with this argument is that the writer assumes that the two plants have the same work shifts with different woking hours, which leads Quiot Manufacturing to have more on-the-job accidents. However, there is a possibility with Panoply Industry plant to have more wok shifts which can significantly influence the effetiveness of workers. As a result if it is proved that they do not have identical work shifts this conclusion cannot be made.
Another problem with this argument is that it is presumed that fatigue and sleep, resulted from having more work hour, have the significant contribution in these kinds of accidents. However, the plants may have different conditions of working and they provide their subordinates with different levels of safety and different devices. Moreover, it is not known whether both of the plants manufacture the same products with the same devices and workers are in the same level of dangerous and on-the-job accidents. So, if it is proved that both plants are not the same in all other respects rather than work hour, this conclusion cannot be accepted to be valid.
A third problem with this discussion is that, it is mentioned that through decreasing the number of accidents there will be an increase in the productivity. However, there are many other factors which can affect the productivity such as finance-related issues, or issues relating to the access to the source of materials and efficience and skills of the workers. This assumption can underlie the conclusion that through reducing work houre and increasing sleep time there would be less on-the-job accidents and more productivities.
As a final analysis, this argument cannot be taken to be valid because the conclusions are made on the base of several assumptions which are dubious. The conclusion can be made only if the lack of the evidences are all remmoved.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-07-22 | nateray42 | 69 | view |
| 2019-06-03 | zickzion123 | 82 | view |
| 2019-05-17 | LMMM | 69 | view |
| 2019-04-21 | DAISY CHANG | 59 | view |
| 2019-01-21 | evanlu | 78 | view |
- TPO18(integrated) 80
- TPO32(integrated) 70
- TPO30(integrated) 85
- Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In dev 40
- TPO22(integrated) 70
Sentence: However, this conclusion cannot be accepted as it rests on a number of assumtions, all of which can be challenged in one way or another.
Error: assumtions Suggestion: assumptions
Sentence: The first problem with this argument is that the writer assumes that the two plants have the same work shifts with different woking hours, which leads Quiot Manufacturing to have more on-the-job accidents.
Error: woking Suggestion: working
Sentence: However, there is a possibility with Panoply Industry plant to have more wok shifts which can significantly influence the effetiveness of workers.
Error: effetiveness Suggestion: effectiveness
Error: wok Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: However, there are many other factors which can affect the productivity such as finance-related issues, or issues relating to the access to the source of materials and efficience and skills of the workers.
Error: efficience Suggestion: No alternate word
Sentence: This assumption can underlie the conclusion that through reducing work houre and increasing sleep time there would be less on-the-job accidents and more productivities.
Error: houre Suggestion: house
Sentence: The conclusion can be made only if the lack of the evidences are all remmoved.
Error: remmoved Suggestion: removed
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- partly correct
argument 3 -- OK
--------------------
Let's analyze the structure of the statement and argue accordingly:
condition 2:
During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. //maybe 30 percent more on-the-job accidents are not because of fatigue and sleep deprivation.
conclusion :
to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, //your argument 3
conclusion 2:
we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep. //maybe workers will not use the one hour for sleep.
-----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 389 350
No. of Characters: 1940 1500
No. of Different Words: 165 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.441 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.987 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.763 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 135 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 103 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 73 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.933 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.933 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.733 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.361 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.608 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.077 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5