"Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that the person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered."
The argument conclude that many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the diseases is detected and there is small possibility that person will die as a result of the inoculations the argument is full of gapes and loop holes since it presents fragmentary evidence. Neither are the premises convincing nor is the conclusion compelling the argument is very evidently the result of hasty generalization.
first of all the argument does not indicate there the people die what is cause to that they are sick or it's natural death and there not be aver that what is age of them who die as result of the inoculations or something ales. There not perfectly shown in argument inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered and in areas where they people dies.
Secondly, there only small possibility that person die. It’s not to be says who take inoculating maybe he dies or not that not mention. And there is not mention other side of the inoculation someone’s life also saved if that to be possible many of them to be cure through the inoculation.
The argument is other problematic in certain other respects as well. If assumed that small possibility that person will die as a result of the inoculations that to be cannot permit inoculation against cow flu to be routinely administration. That is the also be possible that part but it’s possibility not ascertain truth. I cannot be convinced that assumption.
It may be said that writer totally to make a convincing argument because of complete absence of statement data .convincing reasoning is given The argument end with an entirely unjustified optimistic conclusion based on wishy-washy observation that are likely to be incorrect for inculcations against cow flu to be routinely administered .And so here assumption are not enough to prove the feasibility of the idea they must present credibly figures to support their proposals. Whatever is presented fails to provide a holistic pitcher to the superfluous claims being made.
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. 50
- The Mozart school of music should obviously be the first choice of any music student ,aware of its reputation. First of all,the Mozart age. second, the school has ample facilities and up-to-date professional equipment, and its faculty includes the best so 54
- All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary. 50
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 41
- The following appeared in a newsloetter offering advice3 to investors:"Techroporation is our pick for investment this term. we urge all of our clients to invest in this new compaqny. For the first time in ten year ,a company that has developed satellite t 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'concludes'.
Suggestion: concludes
The argument conclude that many lives might be saved if inocu...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: First
... the result of hasty generalization. first of all the argument does not indicate t...
^^^^^
Line 6, column 368, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... I cannot be convinced that assumption. It may be said that writer totally to ma...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 111, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...se of complete absence of statement data .convincing reasoning is given The argume...
^^
Line 8, column 337, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
...nst cow flu to be routinely administered .And so here assumption are not enough to...
^^
Line 8, column 339, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: And
...t cow flu to be routinely administered .And so here assumption are not enough to pr...
^^^
Line 8, column 573, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r to the superfluous claims being made.
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'if', 'may', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'well', 'as a result', 'first of all']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.230352303523 0.25644967241 90% => OK
Verbs: 0.181571815718 0.15541462614 117% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0813008130081 0.0836205057962 97% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0867208672087 0.0520304965353 167% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0406504065041 0.0272364105082 149% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.113821138211 0.125424944231 91% => OK
Participles: 0.0460704607046 0.0416121511921 111% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.02565120829 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0379403794038 0.026700313972 142% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0813008130081 0.113004496875 72% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0189701897019 0.0255425247493 74% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0243902439024 0.0127820249294 191% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2088.0 2731.13054187 76% => OK
No of words: 341.0 446.07635468 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.12316715543 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.29722995808 4.57801047555 94% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.33137829912 0.378187486979 88% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.278592375367 0.287650121315 97% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.225806451613 0.208842608468 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.158357771261 0.135150697306 117% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02565120829 2.79052419416 108% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 207.018472906 81% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489736070381 0.469332199767 104% => OK
Word variations: 50.5015089256 52.1807786196 97% => OK
How many sentences: 13.0 20.039408867 65% => OK
Sentence length: 26.2307692308 23.2022227129 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 119.334297485 57.7814097925 207% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 160.615384615 141.986410481 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2307692308 23.2022227129 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.846153846154 0.724660767414 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 54.0900067674 51.9672348444 104% => OK
Elegance: 1.26315789474 1.8405768891 69% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.624148070621 0.441005458295 142% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.149595440193 0.135418324435 110% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0738073973448 0.0829849096947 89% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.633463892626 0.58762219726 108% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.199039988572 0.147661913831 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.267859740167 0.193483328276 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.161219781717 0.0970749176394 166% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.424304278346 0.42659136922 99% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0644099789079 0.0774707102158 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.417633285185 0.312017818177 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.142837162363 0.0698173142475 205% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.33743842365 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.82512315271 21% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 5.36822660099 130% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.82389162562 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 11.0 14.657635468 75% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.