A recent study reported that pet owners have longer, healthier lives on average than do people who own no pets. Specifically, dog owners tend to have a lower incidence of heart disease. In light of these findings, Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter to institute an adopt-a-dog program. The program would encourage dog ownership for patients recovering from heart disease, which should reduce these patients' chance of experiencing continuing heart problems and also reduce their need for ongoing treatment. As a further benefit, the publicity about the program would encourage more people to adopt pets from the shelter. And that will reduce the incidence of heart disease in the general population.
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 that Sherwood Hospital should form a partnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter, so as to reduce the incidence of heart diseases and also that may help in curing continuing heart problems and minimize their ongoing treatment is logically unsound because it fails to acknowledge certain crucial assumptions.
Initially, it posits, based on the findings of a study, that pet owners live healthier lives than their non pet owner counterparts but lacks information to bolster this claim. There is no explanation provided on the study results i.e. the place where the research was conducted, the environment of the place, the ethnicity or ages of people involved in the study. Hence, it cannot be verified that the results could be applicable elsewhere. May be the people were younger and the environment they lived in was healthier than that of Sherwood. In addition, folks who owned pets may be following other health regimes and exercises that assisted them in staying fit. The insufficiency of these particulars renders the claim spurious.
Secondly, since it cannot be proved that the findings of the research conducted can be applied elsewhere or will be beneficial, if applied to the town of Sherwood. Therefore, the author’s assertion of a partnership between Sherwood’s Hospital and Animal Center is apocryphal.
Finally, if Sherwood’s Hospital and Animal Center are to collaborate to initiate an Adopt-A-Dog program and publicizing it, there is no evidence that the general population will be encouraged to adopt dogs. The reason may be that most of the residents are allergic to it or might have scanty resources in order to pet a dog. Also, the people may be incorporating exercise and other healthy food options in their diet and they might not require petting a dog after all.
Thus, the argument that espousing a pet will make people lead healthier lives and that Sherwood should institute an Adopt-a-Dog program in order to decrease heart related problems in the town by owning a pet, fails to make a cogent case.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not exactly. only need: 'folks who owned pets may be following other health regimes and exercises that assisted them in staying fit.'
argument 2 -- need to argue: The program would encourage dog ownership for patients recovering from heart disease, which should reduce these patients' chance of experiencing continuing heart problems and also reduce their need for ongoing treatment.
argument 3 -- need to argue: As a further benefit, the publicity about the program would encourage more people to adopt pets from the shelter. And that will reduce the incidence of heart disease in the general population.
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 13 15
No. of Words: 333 350
No. of Characters: 1670 1500
No. of Different Words: 178 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.272 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.015 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.764 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 44 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 25.615 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.753 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.846 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.336 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.6 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.076 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 93, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...rtnership with Sherwood Animal Shelter, so as to reduce the incidence of heart diseases ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 446, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...ults could be applicable elsewhere. May be the people were younger and the environ...
^^
Line 7, column 56, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (Center) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...rwood's Hospital and Animal Center are to collaborate to initiate an Adopt-A-D...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, after all, as to, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 11.1786427146 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 55.5748502994 67% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1732.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 333.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2012012012 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92333974841 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.54954954955 0.468620217663 117% => OK
syllable_count: 531.9 705.55239521 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 19.7664670659 66% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.1457832855 57.8364921388 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.230769231 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6153846154 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.70786347227 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249282114857 0.218282227539 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0826741995662 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0559112169001 0.0701772020484 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128401718876 0.128457276422 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0527933066149 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 14.3799401198 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.3550499002 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.197005988 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.32208582834 112% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 12.3882235529 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: 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.