The following opinion was provided in a letter to the editor of a national aeronautics magazine:
“Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men and women into space. Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight."
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 stated here is that national aeronautics should invest their resources in unmanned space flight. The author in the letter is of the opinion that manned flights are costly and dangerous.He has even given an analogy that since they experienced success with recent unmanned space probes and satellites it is worth investing in. The argument at first would look convincing but when we dig deep, we can see a lot of unsubstantial loopholes in the argument. The argument is based on some assumptions which are explained below.
The first loophole is that the author assumed manned flight is costly and dangerous. The author has not provided any reason for it as On what basis have they concluded that it is dangerous? or What were the tests conducted? Who conducted the tests on manned space satellite? Under what conditions were the tests conducted? Without adequate proof to reach to such conclusion is waste, The author should have given more details to get proper insight of the issue.
The second loophole is that the author assumes that since the recent unmanned space probes have proven to be successful without the risk of sending men and women into space more investment should be made in unmanned satellites.It is possible that they were able to gather useful information because the unmanned space satellites was able to reach till there. But what if some places it is impossible to reach through unmanned space satellite and u need someone to control the satellite to reach a place and gather information from there due to some complexity.
The third loophole is that the author has just assumed the final results of a series of unmanned space probes. But he has not given any details on the number of total space probes occurring and the number of successes out of them.Moreover if some probes were successful does not mean all probes will be successful of unmanned space satellites. What if all the probes were to same place or similar places?
Is the information collected valid? How can u justify? If men and women are there on the space flights they could help in justifying the proof of validity but not unmanned space flights.
The argument could have been strengthened if the author would have provided details about the tests conducted to draw conclusions on manned space flight. Also more details on the series of satellite probes which were successful by answering the questions stated above as conclusion cannot be drawn based on just one reason. As it stands, the argument is flawed for the reasons indicated.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 199, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: He
...manned flights are costly and dangerous.He has even given an analogy that since th...
^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...sumptions which are explained below. The first loophole is that the author assum...
^^^
Line 3, column 86, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... manned flight is costly and dangerous. The author has not provided any reason for ...
^^^
Line 3, column 134, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...or has not provided any reason for it as On what basis have they concluded that i...
^^
Line 3, column 192, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Or
...ve they concluded that it is dangerous? or What were the tests conducted? Who cond...
^^
Line 3, column 430, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...author should have given more details to get proper insight of the issue. The ...
^^
Line 5, column 228, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: It
...t should be made in unmanned satellites.It is possible that they were able to gath...
^^
Line 7, column 55, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hole is that the author has just assumed the final results of a series of unmanne...
^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Moreover
...and the number of successes out of them.Moreover if some probes were successful does not...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 232, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...and the number of successes out of them.Moreover if some probes were successful does not...
^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 57, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had provided'?
Suggestion: had provided
...ld have been strengthened if the author would have provided details about the tests conducted to dr...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 10, column 155, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...raw conclusions on manned space flight. Also more details on the series of satellite...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'look', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'then', 'third']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.240088105727 0.25644967241 94% => OK
Verbs: 0.196035242291 0.15541462614 126% => OK
Adjectives: 0.103524229075 0.0836205057962 124% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0308370044053 0.0520304965353 59% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0286343612335 0.0272364105082 105% => OK
Prepositions: 0.129955947137 0.125424944231 104% => OK
Participles: 0.0550660792952 0.0416121511921 132% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.59091512026 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0264317180617 0.026700313972 99% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.105726872247 0.113004496875 94% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0242290748899 0.0255425247493 95% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0264317180617 0.0127820249294 207% => Maybe 'Which' is overused. If other WH_determiners like 'Who, What, Whom, Whose...' are used too in sentences, then there are no issues.
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2552.0 2731.13054187 93% => OK
No of words: 429.0 446.07635468 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.94871794872 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.57801047555 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.354312354312 0.378187486979 94% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.240093240093 0.287650121315 83% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.172494172494 0.208842608468 83% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.114219114219 0.135150697306 85% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59091512026 2.79052419416 93% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 207.018472906 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.440559440559 0.469332199767 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 47.788948662 52.1807786196 92% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.039408867 105% => OK
Sentence length: 20.4285714286 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 81.0376022012 57.7814097925 140% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.523809524 141.986410481 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4285714286 23.2022227129 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.47619047619 0.724660767414 66% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.14285714286 117% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 3.58251231527 335% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 44.4378954379 51.9672348444 86% => OK
Elegance: 1.66379310345 1.8405768891 90% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.577592343014 0.441005458295 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.148126425788 0.135418324435 109% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.111099507397 0.0829849096947 134% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.575564485385 0.58762219726 98% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.164420499005 0.147661913831 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.215187897029 0.193483328276 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13026343749 0.0970749176394 134% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.365124569568 0.42659136922 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0558138146818 0.0774707102158 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.374309984036 0.312017818177 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0775242238618 0.0698173142475 111% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.87684729064 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.82512315271 145% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.82389162562 35% => OK
Total topic words: 15.0 14.657635468 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.