Search the Community

[h=4]Argument Task Prompt:[/h]The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville: "Over the past three years, there has been a marked increase in cases of 'sidewalk rage,' similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road, but instead among sidewalk walkers. The result is an increase in assaults, property damage, and disruptions of normal pedestrian traffic. In order to address this growing problem, the council must ban cell phone use on sidewalks. Not only do people texting or using their phones slow down pedestrian traffic, but they are also more likely to walk into the road or bump into other walkers. Children are especially vulnerable because they are too short to be easily seen. Middletown passed such a ban and not only have they heard no complaints, but the reported incidents of sidewalk crime has gone down significantly." The argument to initiate a ban on mobile phones, for pedestrian, is based on numerous assumptions. Not only the council ought to ban mobile phone usage with no hard evidence, also there isn't any valid source mentioned from where the following figures have been accumulated. The idea of the problems faced by children, to not being visible to pedestrian is unnecessary related to the usage of mobile phones. The assumption is that children walks in a firm manner as like a adult. Another problem associated is that the children are tend not be seen because of their height, this is a fallacious argument. The author doesn't feel the need to give us a figure of about how many children usually walk on the sidewalks. Bumping into a child, is that a 1 case in week or it;s a daily situation. Another argument claiming, ban on mobile phones in the Middletown doesn't provide enough evidence, it assumes the complaints were touching sky before. The author rather provides an obscure anecdote, that the complainants are null after the ban. The assumption is that ban on mobile phones, irrelevant of what was the figures before the ban or it's just the same case. Author provides another anecdote of about how the reports of sidewalks crime are significantly decreased. The assumptions are that earlier the pedestrian traffic was humongous and couldn't be controlled. The author heightens the need to ban without some factual data. Anecdotal evidence is provided to the reader that just the ban was sufficient to control this variable, however it could have been due to police support. Also, the other possible variables are ignored and assumed these arguments would be sufficient. The urge to ban mobile phones for pedestrians, through this precis is filled with assumptions and anecdotal evidence. Another variables should also be considered to examine its effects on the situation.

Argument topic: 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 paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation. Essay: Author says government of Tagus should do everything to promote new type of millet to combat vitamin A deficiency. There is vitamin A deficiency in the impoverished nation of Tagus. According to given argument, seeds of new millet cost more so farmers will be paid subsidies for farming them. What if subsidies are not sufficient? We do not have exact numbers of how much subsidy is given to farmers and how much is the cost of seeds. How the farmers will manage with low subsidies? Farmers will have their own farming techniques, which crops they want to farm. They must be doing it since years. Farming land will be same then why would they shift from their regular farming to new type of millet. What if farmers are not ready to farm new variety of millet? Millet is already a staple food in Tagus. Then why people will shift from regular millet to this new variety? It may happen that people won't like taste of new millet. Government is giving subsidies to farmers as seeds of new variety of millet are costly. It means that most probably new millet will also be costly than regular millet. Vitamin deficiency is in the impoverished nation of Tagus. Poor people won't be able to afford new millet if it is costly. Author says to combat vitamin A deficiency, government should do everything to promote new type of millet. Government should find out why their is vitamin A deficiency in people. If there is any solid reason for deficiency then government should spread awareness among the people regarding it. Argument does not provide any evidence of research conducted. It says international development organization has engineered a new breed of millet. Government should conduct research first. They should experiment it on a group of people before promoting it in Tagus. Government should conduct a survey to examine efficiency of the new type of millet. Is it really effective? It should be verified it it is causing any other harmful effects on consumers. There should be proper research about how much quantity of millet should be consumed daily to overcome vitamin A deficiency. It is not even mentioned in the argument that any research is conducted before giving new millet to people. Argument is fallacious in terms of efficiency of new millet, millet will be promoted without any prior experiments, poor people will be able to afford new millet and why would farmers farm new type of millet ? Author has not given valid explanation for above points.

Statistics gathered over the past three decades show that the death rate is higher among those who do not have jobs than among those with regular employment. Unemployment, just like heart disease and cancer, is a significant health issue. While many health care advocates promote increased government funding for medical research and public health care, it would be folly to increase government spending if doing so were to affect the nation's economy adversely and ultimately cause a rise in unemployment. A healthy economy means healthy citizens. The argument suggests that the government should not increase government spending as it might affect the nation’s economy, causing a rise in unemployment to the detriment of people’s health. There are many flaws in the argument: some of them being analogous, statistical and causal. This essay will examine the assumptions on which the argument is built, prove that these are wrong and thereby illustrate that the argument’s implications are misleading. The text mentions that the statistics have been gathered over the past three decades and show that death rate is higher among the unemployed than those with regular employment without giving details of the data sample. It fails to mention the age range of the survey participants, their background, whether it is rural or urban, and most importantly their number. It may be possible that the sample range is small, rendering the study unfeasible; or that most participants are too old; or that a majority of the participants are from villages, where it is possible that they don’t have access to good healthcare. Without these details, we cannot come to any conclusion, leave alone one that is so strong and bleak. Moreover, the argument says that because death rate is higher among the unemployed than those with regular employment, those who will become unemployed as a result of the nation’s economy deteriorating will die soon. This seems like a causal flaw. Just because death rate among the unemployed is higher doesn’t mean that those who become unemployed will die. With this assumption proving to be wrong, the argument falls apart. The argument also says that unemployment is a significant health issue, just like cancer and heart disease, without saying anything to justify this claim. This is an analogous flaw. The argument doesn’t give any data to reach such a strong conclusion. Without knowing the comparable statistics, how are we to be sure that unemployment is as serious a disease as heart ailment and cancer. With the several flaws in the argument being pointed out, it is clear that the government doesn’t need to cut back on spending in the fear that it will affect the nation’s economy and eventually harm its citizens due to increase in unemployment. Without accurate statistics and enough information that justifies the argument’s conclusions, we can dismiss the argument as flawed.

"During the past year, Quiot Manufacturing had 30 percent more on-the-job accidents than at the nearby Panoply Industries plant, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts say that significant contributing factors in many on-the-job accidents are fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Quiot and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that employees will get adequate amounts of sleep." 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. While it may true that shortening the work shifts will decrease the number of accidents and increase the productivity of Quiot company, the argument fails to make a cogent case for it. The argument is rife with holes and assumptions like job nature of Panoply company and Quito company are similar, no other reasons behind the accidents except fatigue and deprivation of sleep and reduction in work hour will increase the productivity of Quiot company. Therefore, significant evidences must be judged before reducing the work hour in Quiot company. First of all, the argument assumes that, job nature of Quiot company and Panoply company are similar and what was worked well for Panoply company will also work for Quiot company. However, job nature of the two companies can be different. Panoploy company can be auto-mobile company where workers have a nice safe working environment. On the other hand, Quiot company can be steel manufacturing company where, workers have a higher risk for accident. Moreover, argument assumes that 30 percent increase in accident is a significant number. While it may true that, 30 percent can lead to a small number or, Quiot company is a big company than Panoply company where the number of accidents are relatively low than that of Panoply manufacturing company. Unless we know, the actual number of accidents and job nature of both the company, we can't compare compare them and can't say that what had gone well for Panoply company will also go well for Quiot Company. Secondly, the argument hinges upon on the assumption of experts that fatigue and deprivation of sleep are the only causes of accident in Quiot company. While it may be true, there can be other causes which can lead to the increased number of accidents like safety factors, awareness of workers etc. It may be true that, in Quiot company, workers are not fully aware of work-related dangers or how to handle these kinds of dangerous situation. Moreover, they can be inefficient and not expert workers. Aside from these, the environment, in which they are working, can be highly dangerous. For all these cases, the assumption of experts falls apart and we need to investigate other factors that can cause accidents. For this purpose, a committe of experts can be formed to evaluate the actual reasons behind the accidents. Lastly, the agrument assumes that, reduction in work shifts will increase the overall productivity of Quiot company. It may not hold in every case. For example, reduction in work shifts can reduce the production rate and decrease the profit margin. Consider the case of television company, if workers work less, they will produce less television and thus production rate will fall. Moreover, reduction in work-shifts won't necessary solve the crisis of sleep deprivation. For instances, workers are depressed for family reasons, low income or other psychological problems etc. Then, reduction in work shift will not help them to solve the problem of sleep deprivation and fatigue. Thus, to increase the productivity of Quiot company we must take consider the evidence how reduction in work hour will affect the overall working condition and production of the company. Therefore, significant evidences like job nature, actual causes behind the accident, how reduction in work shift will affect the productivity of Quiot Company, we can't predict that reduction in work shifts will decrease the number of accidents and increased the productivity in Quiot Company. Please Grade my essay and give me feedback how to improve.

Please evaluate the following argument task based on GRE AWA scale. ---------------------- QUESTION : In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating, and fish - ing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river’s water and the river’s smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is, therefore, sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year’s budget to riverside recreational facilities. 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 the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. ----------------------------- RESPONSE : The government of Mason City should probably allot more money to riverside recreations, but the given argument is not strong enough to compel the move. The argument is full of holes and assumptions that need to be dealt with in order to make a cogent argument. The author states that water sports rank top among the resident’s favorite recreational activities, solely based on surveys. However, there is no clarity in the scope and depth of the surveys. For example, the survey could have been conducted among the youth of the city, who might prefer water sports to other activities. Such might not be the case for the rest of the population. Also, the survey could have consisted only a few options under the ‘favorite recreation’ section, thus limiting the possible choices for the residents. We don’t know about the credibility of the survey. To make a convincing case, the surveys should represent the whole of the city’s residents. Since it clearly fails to do so, the argument cannot be backed by the surveys. Additionally, the author states that there have been numerous complaints about the poor quality of the river, and cleaning it would surely increase its usage. However, there is no clarity about the source of those complaints. The people who complained could be the small population that has interest in water sports. Or it could be a small group of environmentalists. Thus, cleaning the river need not necessarily increase its usage significantly. Adding to the unwarranted assumptions, the author also states that the cleaning of the Mason River would surely lead to its increased usage for water sports. This has major hole in the fact that a clean river alone is not enough for water sports. The residents need to have the time, facility, and equipment for sports like swimming, boating, etc.; considering that they are interested in water sports in the first place. It could also be possible that the weather of the city is not suitable for such events, a factor that is not taken into consideration at all by the argument. Further, if the river’s smell was caused by the dumping of wastes from nearby factories, it could have killed most of the fauna and flora of the river, rendering it unusable for fishing, which is mentioned in the argument as one of the favorite activities. Keeping the river clean and beautiful should be a priority for the people, as well as the government of Mason City, but the given argument fails to be convincing enough to compel the government to allot more money for riverside activities.

While the author states that most of the American Universities occupied the largest portion in the list of top universities, it is totally obscure that whether the Universities rated are from wide range of courses and fields. The universities which are listed as Top Universities may belong to the same specific field, say, Computer Science. The author never mentioned about the variety of fields taken into account for the survey. Secondly, the author indicates that most of the world's laureates and scientific papers are established by Top American Universities. Here, a large number of critics can be raised with respect to this context. For example: What is the ratio of the total number of universities in America to the Universities that produce achievements? If the number of universities is much higher than the achievements produced, then it would result a negative impact in author's statement regarding American Higher Education. Moreover, it is not explicitly stated whether the papers and laureates produced belong to a specific field of interest or from wide variety of fields. Hence, it marks the statement of author that "Scientific output of American institutions is unparalleled". The author also suggests that college graduates earn more than the people with no degree on an average. However, this may not be true since the percent of college students who earn more than the others is not mentioned. Additionally, the author presents that there is growing anxiety in America regarding higher education. With a deep insight into this statement, it is clear that irrespective of top universities and number of achievements made, there is a increasing anxiety. This may not only due to increased student debts but also due to other factors such as the involvement of students, study environment, harassment in study place. Thus, irrespective of the academic achievements made by the Universities and high pay of college graduates, the author believes that a inner state turmoil is prevailing in America regarding higher studies due to high debts and low returns. But this many not be true since there are many plausible fallacies and the author doesn't provide any cognitive flow of ideas.

The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station. "Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have canceled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to our news programs and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should expand our coverage of weather and local news on all our news programs." 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. Author claims that increased time for national news and decreased time for weather and local news has frustrated the channels viewers and advertisers. He sites complaints from viewers and cancellation by advertisers as a proof for reverting these actions. But the argument he makes is rife with illogical conclusions as there could be several other alternate explanations for viewers complaints and cancellation of advertising contracts. Firstly author states about the complaints made by viewers on the stations coverage of weather and local news. But he doesn't lucidly explain that the complaints by viewers are actually because of decrease in the time taken for weather and local news converge. It is wrong to reach the conclusion taken by the author without inspecting the nature of these complaints from viewers. For example they might be complaining about the accuracy of the weather and local news coverage and not the decrease in time of the coverage. Also this complaints might have been already in existence before, when there was much time dedicated to the local and whether coverage. In that case it is obvious that the coverage time is not the problem for the viewers but it's something else which can only be understood by getting into the details of these complaints. Another possible explanation is that these complaints might be from a very few viewers, were as others might be happy about the increase in the national news coverage. Without surveying the whole views it is wrong to conclude that viewers are not pleased with the recent changes in the stations coverage. Secondly the author states that advertisers has cancelled there contract with the stations because of decrease in coverage time for local and weather news. Again the author fails to get the specifics of these cancellations. There are several other explanations for these contract cancellations. It could be because these businesses want to try out other medium other than the station like online advertisement for a more effective advertisement strategy. Another explanation is that these local businesses are having a hard time financially and decided to cut back on there budget and axe advertisement expense as a whole. Another explanation is that the station itself might have increased the advertisement cost resulting in these local businesses to look for other alternate cheaper solutions. As it is pointed out in the above paragraphs the authors argument and conclusion that he has reached is not accurate because the reasons he has sighted to back these claims are not accurate. Thanks!

The following appeared in a letter from the faculty committee to the president of Seatown University: A study conducted at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for their own college-aged children. Therefore, Seatown should institute a free-tuition policy for its professors for the purpose of enhancing morale among the faculty and luring new professors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The statement claims that Seatown University should institute a free-tuition policy for professor's college-aged children on the basis of the study at Oceania University. Stating in that way the faculty committee failed to make logical connections between the evidence given and general conclusion, which rests upon the assumptions for which no evidence is provided. The first problem with the argument is that faculty committee is considering both Seatown and Oceania Universities on the same level, without providing much detail on them. The study at nearby Oceania University showed that faculty retention is higher when professors are offered free tuition at the university for their own college-aged children. However, we are given very little information on Oceania University, other than the fact that this university is near to the Seatown. First off, the committee should mention the number of professors in the Oceania University for which they plan to provide free-tuition for their children. It is possible that number of professors from Oceania University is far less than that of from Seatown University. So, planning to provide free-tuition for their children, the Oceania university might balance their fund, whereas, with the large number of professor at Seatown University this decision might not be fruitful enough for the university as a whole. The second problem with the argument is the reasoning of such planning at Seatown university. We are only given that this planning have been beneficial in the sense that faculty retention is higher at Oceania, but we don't know the present status of the faculty retention at Seatown. What if the faculty retention at Seatown is very satisfactory and the university professor's don't have such demand to be provided with their children tuition-fee, rather they require fund for their ongoing or future research. Before introducing such plan at Seatown university the committee should mention the current status of the Seatown university and what are the demands of its professors. The third problem with the argument is that it discriminates among the faculty members by proposing beneficial plan for ONLY the professors. However, an university faculty consists of members of various designations, starting from lecturer to professor. Even if we consider that this proposed plan might increase the professor's retention, but we cannot conclude that this will increase FACULTY retention, which includes faculty members other than professors. The committee should be very much sincere on the wording on their recommendations. Again, retention means to more diligent to the work, however, this definition of retention is NOT ONLY related to the morale. What if the faculty's at Seatown have pure morale sense of their work? Also, given take relationship cannot ensure morale aspect, rather it ruins the morale and make it more selfishness and relates to monetary facilities. Finally, teaching profession needs the dedication from heart. The committee is recommending a proposal to increase morale among the faculty and luring new professors. In other sense the committee is questioning on the morality of the faculties at current situations. Also, only focusing on attracting the new professors, disregarding the need of other faculty members, rather than looking for other options, e.g. increasing fund, transport facility, computer facility, etc, this plan's success is not convincing. Above all, without talking much on Oceania university, their plan will work for the Seatown university, this assumption is way too extreme. The president should be skeptical and should not accept the committee's proposal.

Prompt: A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring. Argument Analysis: The argument being scrutinized makes some interesting deductions and extrapolates the findings on rhesus monkeys to compare similar behaviour among humans. However, the argument is rife with assumptions and shortcomings. To begin with, the conclusions that have been drawn regarding the effects of birth order on individual's levels of simulation have been made by the study of only eighteen monkeys. There is a high possibility that this kind of behaviour is limited to the monkeys of the region that have been analysed for the study and not applicable on the general population. Moreover, the ratio of monkeys that were affected is not given. Further, the reliability and validity of the cited study is unknown. In addition, the author mentions that in simulating situations, the firstborn infants produce up to twice as much cortisol as do their younger siblings. However, the argument fails to provide the simulating situations that were studied as a part of the survey. Also, we cannot be sure that this phenomenon occurs due to the birth order and not due to the difference in emotional capabilities of individual monkeys. It is probable that the firstborns studied were more emotionally charged than their siblings and it has nothing to do with the birth order. This makes the claim fuzzy. Furthermore, the deduction drawn regarding the firstborn humans has not been fortified by any form of statistical figures or studies which leaves room for questions such as how was the conclusion drawn, how reliable was the study that aided this claim and so on. Moreover, the claim about the first-time mother monkey has not been consolidated by the details of the survey. We do not know how many monkeys were studied, how many monkeys displayed the proposed behaviour or how reliable is the survey. It could be possible the external conditions used during the study caused some monkeys to release higher levels of cortisol as compared to others. Such possibilities weaken the argument and leave it indefinite. In conclusion, the argument has some promising propositions; however, the lack of information about the validity and reliability of the study renders the argument passive and open to questions. The argument could have been consolidated by providing extensive details of the performed study and more accountable extrapolations. P.S. I wrote this within 30 mins, could someone please grade my analysis and give me a few pointers on what all do I need to improve upon. Thank you.

Request to review my argument. 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 paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet. Answer The argument is about a millet developed by an organisation which helps combat vitamin A deficiency. At first glance the argument does look cogent but there are several aspects in which it is lacking. Vitamin A deficiency is due to low exposure of sun rays. In the argument there is no mention of the testing of the new breed of millet. It is widely know fact that genetically modified substances may prove to be pernicious to humans. There is strong possibility that after adopting to the new breed of millets there may side-effects experienced by the people. The argument further states that farmers will be paid subsidy on farming the new variety of mullet which is certainly a good thing. However it would be imprudent to assume that the people will readily adopt to it.Since the cost of the new variety is high and there may be farmers who cultivate vegetables other than millet.For them adopting to the new variety might prove to be difficult. Lastly instead urging the government to promote the new type of millet it would be beneficial if there is a focus on improving the agricultural facilities at Tagus.Thus resulting in a better life for the people.

Argument topic: In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes little of its budget to maintaining riverside recreational facilities. For years there have been complaints from residents about the quality of the river's water and the river's smell. In response, the state has recently announced plans to clean up Mason River. Use of the river for water sports is therefore sure to increase. The city government should for that reason devote more money in this year's budget to riverside recreational facilities. 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 the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted. My Essay: As indicated by the city survey, water sports are a favourite for some of the residents in Mason City. The argument made by the writer is that Summary that the use of water sports on the Mason River will increase if the Mason River is cleaned up, which will require budget spend from the city. The increase in budget to clean up the Mason river comes from the assumption that people will use it if cleaned up. However, there are many fallacies in this assumption that I will explore. The survey indicates that water sports are a favourite ranked activity by Mason City residents. However, the location of where the city residents prefer to do water sports is not indicated. The city residents may perform water sports on vacation out of own, or at another river in the city. They do not necessarily do the water sports in Mason River. This opens holes in the argument that recreational activities at Mason River will increase if cleaned up. The second assumption is that recreational use will increase with if the quality of the river water and smell of the river improve. In contrast to this point, the smell and water quality may not be linked specifically to recreation use. Perhaps the river has a strong water flow and is not friendly towards the use of recreation. There could be a number of reasons, including accessibility, location, or temperature of the river that could affect the usage numbers. Shifting from a census lens more political lens outlook, a sensitive issue in most city debates is budget. If the budget this year is devoted to riverside recreational facilities, the question is will it go to the Mason River? The specific allocation of resources is not indicated, and therefore the assumption is made that the funding will go to Mason River when there may be more geographic areas with higher recreation use that would benefit from the funding. The last point to address is the stated complaints from citizens regarding the smell and quality of the water may warrant a call to action, however the spending of the budget to clean up the river does not indicate how or why - other than recreational purposes. Perhaps the river needs to be eradicated of some pollution for environmental purposes or ecological purposes. This would drastically change how the city would clean up the river and whether the river would be used for recreational purposes after. In assessing the argument, the assumption that the increase in budget to clean up the Mason River will increase recreational use needs to be more clearly articulated to make a case, as many assumptions are used. There is no direct correlation comes from the assumption that people will use it if cleaned up. If the assumptions are unwarranted, the city could spend a lot of money towards a recreational site that may not get used or may not be cleaned out for the right rationale.

It would be very kind if someone can grade my argument essay.Hope to see positive response. Thank you in advance. Argument prompt - "Despite its downtown location, the Rialto Movie Theater, a local institution for five decades, must make big changes or close its doors forever. It should follow the example of the new Apex Theater in the mall outside of town. When the Apex opened last year, it featured a video arcade, plush carpeting and seats, and a state-of-the-art sound system. Furthermore, in a recent survey, over 85 percent of respondents reported that the high price of newly released movies prevents them from going to the movies more than five times per year. Thus, if the Rialto intends to hold on to its share of a decreasing pool of moviegoers, it must offer the same features as Apex." Essay- The mentioned business plan of the manager of Rialto Movie Theatre concludes that their Movie theatre should make changes in the business plan to prevent it from closing forever. To justify his conclusion, author provides few evidences such as; a recent survey indicating negative response about the theatre. As these evidences are based on certain assumptions which are not very sound, I do not think that the author’s conclusion is well-proved. Firstly, the author mentions about the recent survey of Apex Theatre which is having good facilities. Author here assumes that the people are satisfied completely only by the facilities provided by Apex Theatre. There may be a possibility that this happened due to considerably better location of the Apex Theatre or because of other reasons such as transportation facilities to outsiders and more interested people who are living in that same area where Apex is located. Furthermore, author indicates about the recent survey which implies 80 % of people’s negative response about the high price of new movies. Author here clearly assumed that the prize of ticket will not matter for people if the Theatre authority improves its service. He also assumes that high prizes of movie tickets are just because of the theatre authorities. There might be a case that people will not go to movies even after improving service and also there might be a possibility that these high rates are just because of high taxes by the government . Lastly, author also believes in extrapolation as it directly compares the strategies of Rialto Movie Theatre with the Apex Theatre without considering number of other factors in which they differ. It is not always true that, what works on one place will surely work on another place too. The author could have provided certain logical evidences to bolster the argument such as, information about both the places, people around them and facilities provided there so as to compare them. Also he could provide the number of respondents of survey, the actual reason behind the decreasing number of moviegoers and demands of respondents about the service and price.

hi , this is my first post can anyone review this argument essay 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." RESPONSE :- The magazine article claims that as manned spacecrafts are more costly and dangerous , future investments should be made on unmanned flights . The writer proposes a opinion taking into the dangers involved in manned flights . however the writer fails to propose a cogent argument to support the case . The article mentions that quote 'manned flights are costly and dangerous ' While this may be true , the writer does noit mention how costly , a clear data backing this assertion is needed . what is cost difference between the manned and unmanned flights ? Is it too much ?It is possible that it may of negligent amount . The article also discusses the safety of the manned space flights . However there is no specific details on the the plausible hazard of the flight . Has there been any recent incident where the safety of the astronaut was jeopardy ? Has there been any virtual simulations that prove manned flights are dangerous ? Thus the assertion of the writer is incomplete . further , the article mentions the recent success of the unmanned probes . But what was so successful about the unmanned probe . Was the data collected more accurate and precise than the manned space craft . or is it just a compromise between security and accuracy . Author maintains that a series of unmanned satellites have been successful . Considering this as true , there is no information on where and how many space probes were sent . Isn't it possible that all the space probes were sent to the same space destination for eg to the moon . While this might marka successful unmanned probe to the moon , nothing can be inferred about the success these unmanned probes might have on other planets and on their other ventures . . A unmaaed space probe which is allegedly so successful on the moon might prove to be futile when sent to mars What was the complexity of the missions . Was the mission as convoluted and conundrum as the human missions . was it easier than than ? No comparison has been made .. Without the clear distinctions and accolades of unmanned space crafts , the argument is based on incomplete reasoning and can be considered to be naive at best . On of the most important advantage of man over algorithm run machines is intelligence and ability to thinbk . A computer is more accurate than human but it cannot be considered wiser than humans . the ability to improvise is non existent in machines . If the idea of the writer of unmanned space probe is to be accepted , We\ need 'thinking' machines . Has ehe technology been implemented ? was it successful ? We need clear answers to these questions before reaching to any conclusion .

Hi all! I'm taking the GRE pretty soon and would appreciate any feedback (and a grade) for my practice argument essay. Thank you in advance! Here's the question.... 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 a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permit inoculations against cow flu to be routinely administered. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. And my response... Much evidence is needed in order to evaluate the argument that routine administration of inoculations against cow flu should not be permitted. First, a cost/benefit analysis must be conducted; it is important to know exactly how many lives might be saved if the inoculation were to be routinely administered (i.e. mortality rate from the cow flu when people are not inoculated) and how many lives might be lost if the inoculation were to be routinely administered (i.e. the probability of inoculation-caused death). This comparison concerning the general population might shed some light on the net benefits of the inoculation. In addition to probabilities associated with population-level effects, it is important to delve deeper into what exactly the numbers mean. Are there specific vulnerable populations who are more susceptible to cow flu or more likely to die from the disease? Are there specific vulnerable populations who are at a higher risk of inoculation-caused mortality? Is there overlap between these two groups, or are they distinct (or even mutually exclusive)? If any of the above questions were to be answered, a more targeted approach to inoculation for cow flu could be implemented, saving as many people as possible. Providing the above answers and evidence could be incredibly beneficial to the population generally, but the most efficient and all-encompassing approach would be to examine the inoculation itself. Why do the cow flu inoculations come with a small possibility of death and how can that be fixed? This type of approach can be observed in the formulation of vaccines for the annual flu, which now come in multiple forms (live virus nasal spray and dead virus shot) in order to provide the preventative vaccine to those with compromised immune systems without placing them at risk for getting sick from the vaccine itself. If it were possible to understand the cause of potential mortality related to the cow flu inoculation, it could be possible to develop a better, less risky version of it. It is incredibly difficult to weigh the importance of protecting people from cow flu against the possibility of unintentionally causing death from inoculation. Life is valuable, and preventing as many deaths as possible should be of the utmost importance, especially for those involved in the creation and distribution of preventative measures. In order to make an assessment of whether or not inoculations against cow flu should be routinely administered, all the facts about how many people could be harmed (both with and without the inoculation) and whether there is a safer way to inoculate must be collected and examined altogether. Without this proper, holistic analysis of the issue, no truly evidence-based, ethically sound conclusion can be formed.

“The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit.” My Response: Here, the petition is sent by an environmental protection group to residents of Youngtown, not to permit the Smith Corporation to develop the land that is small portion of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. In this petition, protection group makes unwarranted assumptions about the impacts and consequences when the land will be used to develop a small hotel. Taken all these assumptions in regard, the argument that the protection group is trying to make, will fall apart, if such assumptions do not hold true. Firstly, the assumptions about the disastrous consequences for the area, that will follow if The Smith group makes a hotel on the small portion of the land, are not underpinned by any facts or figures. The assumptions do not state how hotel building will be deleterious to Wildlife Preserve. Rather, the protection group is firing the shot in the dark. The protection group should inquire about the project of Smith group that how the building will ensure preservation to the sanctuary as such they are promising. The protection group should also inquire about how the sewage system for the hotel will be carried out and how it will not spoil the near Wildlife preserve land. If the Smith group is able to justify themselves by providing cogent explanations how their building will not spoil the near- by land, then the whole argument falls apart. Secondly, without looking at their perspective and analysing, the protection group are clearly indicting the Smith group that their plans will do anything but harm to the sanctuary. This is again the case of unwarranted and unstated assumptions. On what grounds, protection group is accusing the Smith group of polluting the near-by land, is explicitly unclear. If the protection group are making such malicious accusations based on some facts, then they should have been mentioned in the petition. Lastly, assumptions about how the sale will not benefit the community of Youngtown, are also unsupported. Therefore, they cannot demand the people of Youngtown not to permit the Smith group to acquire the land and build the hotel. How this sale might harm the community should been mentioned to get the clear perspective of the protection group. However, there might be case, in future, if Smith group makes the hotel, the hotel can serve purpose to attract more tourists from all around the world to see the sanctuary which is just near by, which in turn can help Youngtown to gain economic and historic status. In conclusion, the petition here makes unwarranted and unstated assumptions that it seriously enervates the argument the protection group is trying to make. Unless these assumptions are addressed properly, the argument in the petition falls apart and which in turn, might not help to convince inhabitants of Youngtown to protest Smith group.

Hi everyone, I'm new to the forums, I'm going to take my second GRE to apply to grad school as an international student. In my first take, I got a 3 in my AWA section, which is why I want to re-take it and improve it. Any correction, comment or critique is welcomed. Please be strict! The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist. "Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures." 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. Dr. Karp’s conclusion in his article, about Tertia’s children rearing, claims that his method and results are better than those of Dr. Field, 20 years ago, and thus, invalidating Dr. Field’s research and methods. Meaning that the interview-centered approach that Dr. Karp uses to study cultures in these islands is more accurate to understand the child-rearing traditions of them. First of all, Dr. Karp does not provide what questions he used in the interview with the children. If the questions were about his parents or nuclear family, the answers would be obviously about them, making Dr. Karp’s point stronger, but untrue. He needs to present those questions to see if they were inclined to the parents or were varied. Dr. Karp also fails to support why he says that Dr. Field’s observations are invalid, if the children speak more of their parents, does not mean that the village did not rear the children, when it might just be because the children would be closer to their progenitors. Also, Dr. Karp says that his interview-centered method of research is better than the observation-centered approach that Dr. Field used. But he does not present the possible flaws it could have, such as that in interviews people tend to think more their answers and are affected by the interviewer attitude, while when you observe them, they behave more naturally. If Dr. Karp provided the evidence that observation affects the behavior of the people being observed, and the interviews does not affect the authenticity of their answers, it would make Dr. Karp’s point stronger. Finally, Dr. Karp ignores the difference in the culture of the Island 20 years ago from the one that exists now. Maybe difference in results occurs because the Tertia’s society is very different than it was when Dr. Field made his study. Dr. Karp should consider both approaches in the same research, and compare results to verify if the methods do actually provide different conclusions or if it all was because of the change Tertia’s society suffered over time. In conclusion, when Dr. Karp takes all these points into consideration, one could assume his results are more valid than the ones he originally presented without such evidence.

I am taking the GRE in a week and just found out about this website. I would really appreciate it if someone could grade my argument essay. Thank you very much in advance! *********************************************************************************** ​Argument task: The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station. “Over the last year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to local news and weather. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of weather and local news. In addition, local businesses that used to advertise during our late-night news program have just cancelled their advertising contracts with us. Therefore, in order to attract more viewers to the program and to avoid losing any further advertising revenues, we should restore the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level.” Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. The business manager of the television station makes some unwarranted assumptions as to the reasons behind complaints from viewers, termination of advertising contracts, and loss of revenues. If these assumptions are not backed up by stronger arguments, the manager could be coming to a faulty conclusion. The manager's statement implies that the sole reason for the complaints from the viewers is the change in time allocation for national news vs. weather and local news. What he or she fails to clarify is what these complaints are about. It is not necessarily true that viewers are unhappy with the change in time for each program but may be unhappy with the program content itself. In order to make a more sound judgement on the reason behind the unsatisfaction of the viewers, the manager needs to look more carefully into the details of the complaints received. Secondly, the business manager assumes that local businesses cancelled their advertising contracts in the late-night news program because of the increased air time of national news. However, it may be that they simply no longer want to advertise on this channel because of decrease in number of viewers as a result of unsuccessful programs but not specifically because of the change in time distribution. It may also be that they no longer have the funds to pay this channel to air their advertisements. On the other hand, it could be that they still want to advertise on the same channel but in the morning programs instead to target a different audience. In order to better justify this reason stated by the manager, he or she needs to ensure that he fully understands the story behind the cancellation of the advertising contracts. At the end of the statement, he or she comes to the conclusion that restoring the time devoted to weather and local news to its former level will attract more viewers and stop the loss of revenues, therefore solving all the problems the channel is facing. This conclusion is rash and unjustified as the channel may be losing viewers and revenue because of several other reasons, such as a decline in the quality of the programs aired, the launch of a new rival channel that is more up to date and more to the liking of viewers, or an unorganized program schedule. Without a comprehensive comprehension of the increase in complaints from viewers and the the drop in revenue, there is no reason to believe that restoring the system to its previous state will solve these issue. Should the manager find evidence which supports all his or her arguments and confirms that the reason behind all the challenges is the decrease of time allocation to local news and weather, it would be a reasonable measure to return to the previous system followed. If however, it appears that there are different reasons for these challenges, the television station could be making an unwise decision to switch back to the former schedule as it may not have the positive effect anticipated in the memorandum.

Comments appreciated:"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring." Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument. Studies on a sample of monkeys seem to indicate that there is a direct correlation between order of birth and cortisol levels during a stimulating situation. This seems to be corroborated further with another study in which firstborn humans produce high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations and first-time pregnant monkeys also experience higher-levels of cortisol than those reproducing multiple times. However, this comparison and implied conclusion, without further experimentation and proof is flawed. We must first consider the relationship between the stimulus and that being stimulated (monkey vs. human.) While science has drawn some general conclusions of the relationship between monkeys and man, there are still enough differences between the two that would void the “apples to apples” comparison. A monkey being introduced to an unfamiliar monkey may have a much more or less dramatic impact on raising cortisol levels in that monkey than the effects of a returning parent does on a human. To further this point, the difference of life experiences between the subjects may be enough to account for the differences in cortisol levels and not actually have anything to do with the order of birth. The study referenced above draws a significant conclusion based on a small pool of monkeys. No further information is given about these monkeys. Are they all from the same area or spread out throughout the monkey’s typical habitat? What have these monkeys experienced throughout their lifetime? The same applies to the human examples. The study states “firstborn humans”, but does not elaborate on the context or boundaries of these finding. We are not given any type of information on who was studied, where they were from and/or what life experience they have had to date. In order to substantiate the claims this study is making, a more thorough investigation using a wide variety of sample subjects needs to be conducted. To simply lay claim that birth order is the determining factor of cortisol levels during stimulation, without a more in-depth study, seems to be unfounded and therefore not entirely plausible.