"The following was used as part of an internet advertising company's appeal to businesses: Furniture Depot employed our internet advertising company to help. Since then its sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Furniture Depot's success demonstrates how using our internet services can increase your profitability. "
Describe how well reasoned you find this argument. In the discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the argument's conclusion. You may also address possible changes in the argument that would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
While it may be true that the internet advertising company's help would have increased the furniture depot's sales in the last year but the author's argument is rife with holes and assumptions. The goal of the depot was to increase their profitability of the business. The evidence provided by the advertising business is the increase in the number of sales of the company.
In order to strengthen the argument, the author must stipulate the proper reasoning for the increase in the total sales of the furniture depot. What was the particular reason for the sales to rise? To prove this, the author may back statement with norm surveys and accurate figures, if possible. The lucidity of the declared assumption would only be possible and considered true by other businesses if correct claims and reasoning be provided. Perhaps, the author could quote a fellow furniture depot employer or employee on their success pertaining to the advertising company's efforts to make it popular.
Moreover, the argument asserts, perhaps allegedly, that the sales increased by 10% over last year's totals. Even though the author might be correct with the figure but one can question that what if the whole 10 percent was on a fixed amount of products that were sold last year. What if the increase was because of the higher revenue of a particular department in the furniture business, for example, the growth of the managerial department would have hired better and highly skilled employees who would have made finely finished products. Absence of proven evidence of the assumed contribution of the advertising company, in a way, weakens the argument.
Additionally, a very important question that can be certainly posed would be: What were the exact incidences and things that ameliorated the furniture depot's success? There could be a new product /furniture manufactured by the depot last year which increased the sales of the business. The depot might have focused on increasing the quality of the furniture from what it used to produce the years before. It is not necessary that the advertising company's "help" was the only window they had to increased sales.
In conclusion, the author of the argument might have reasonable evidence in order to support the efforts of the internet advertising company but more lucid and proven points and facts would be requisite in order for other businesses to believe that in the internet company.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 139, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...e depots sales in the last year but the authors argument is rife with holes and assumpt...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'then', 'while', 'as to', 'for example', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.268348623853 0.25644967241 105% => OK
Verbs: 0.130733944954 0.15541462614 84% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0871559633028 0.0836205057962 104% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0298165137615 0.0520304965353 57% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0160550458716 0.0272364105082 59% => OK
Prepositions: 0.128440366972 0.125424944231 102% => OK
Participles: 0.0344036697248 0.0416121511921 83% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.76662260735 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0229357798165 0.026700313972 86% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.139908256881 0.113004496875 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0366972477064 0.0255425247493 144% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0229357798165 0.0127820249294 179% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2440.0 2731.13054187 89% => OK
No of words: 398.0 446.07635468 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.13065326633 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46653527281 4.57801047555 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.366834170854 0.378187486979 97% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.298994974874 0.287650121315 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.238693467337 0.208842608468 114% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.145728643216 0.135150697306 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76662260735 2.79052419416 99% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 207.018472906 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.464824120603 0.469332199767 99% => OK
Word variations: 49.7126807742 52.1807786196 95% => OK
How many sentences: 17.0 20.039408867 85% => OK
Sentence length: 23.4117647059 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2088385748 57.7814097925 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.529411765 141.986410481 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4117647059 23.2022227129 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.588235294118 0.724660767414 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 3.58251231527 28% => OK
Readability: 53.3112621933 51.9672348444 103% => OK
Elegance: 2.44155844156 1.8405768891 133% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.298727667122 0.441005458295 68% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.163256732701 0.135418324435 121% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.112786059633 0.0829849096947 136% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.670817096466 0.58762219726 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.130077631117 0.147661913831 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149166833334 0.193483328276 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0622218616468 0.0970749176394 64% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.551272113469 0.42659136922 129% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.109685999024 0.0774707102158 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.21890020459 0.312017818177 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0453862653043 0.0698173142475 65% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.33743842365 144% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.87684729064 29% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 12.0 6.46551724138 186% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 5.36822660099 37% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 14.657635468 116% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.