ARGUMENT ESSAY :
The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News:
"The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built."
The argument that " inorder to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built" is unsupported because it has many flaws in it.
The main flaw is "analogy flaw",as it is compared with neighbouring Eastern Carpenteria sanctuary. we cannot say that a thing happened to one happens to us. the conditions may be completely different because the sea otter may live in a different environment than that of a tufted groundhog. As these are two different species one cannot compare in such a way.
Secondly,the decline in the population of sea otters may be due to other reasons also, it may be because of spread of some epidemic disease also.so there is no point in comparing this kind of scenario with the present one.
Inaddition if we allow the construction of road there may be a chance for the government to take care of the tufted groundhog with more attention and some special provided may help for further development of those kind.
Further more simply not allowing the construction of road only may not fetch for the development of wildlife, they should be provided with good feed and must be seen with good care. merely hindering the construction of road doesn't allow progress.
Finally as it is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons one cannot conclude by thinking in a box. nally as it is flawed due to the above mentioned reasons one cannot conclude by taking into consideration of some factors only. So the writer of the argument should take into viewof the factors related to the wildlife protection and give a conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2014-01-01 | pulkitbhatnagar | 75 | view |
| 2013-10-22 | Bhagirath93 | 55 | view |
- ISSUE:As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 60
- ISSUE ESSAY: The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment. 50
- The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend."Of the two leading real estate firms in our town—Adams Realty and Fitch Realty—Adams Realty is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents; in contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work 75
- Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently 80
- In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions. 43
flaws:
No. of Words: 280 350
More arguments wanted.
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 280 350
No. of Characters: 1317 1500
No. of Different Words: 141 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.091 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.704 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.727 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 94 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 74 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 30 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 35 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.214 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.75 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.42 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.855 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.165 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5