Argument essay: The following opinion was provided in a letter to the editor of a national aeronautics magazine:

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."

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 author of the given passage suggests that the National Aeronautics magazine should invest their resources in unmanned space flight rather than manned ones. The argument however does not completely hold strong on the grounds of the above claims. The author provides many such faults that show chance for doubt to the author's claim and hence the following reasons can be considered to bolster the fact that the argument is flawed and inconsistent. 

Firstly, the author mentions that the space flight that accomodate men or women are costly and dangerous. The author doesn't give any instance or examples to prove his point. How is the space flight carrying men be costly and expensive? Is it the additional expense that is given to the pilots or is it the cost of the high quality equipments used in the flight? On grounds of being dangerous, if the flight is a manned one, how does it show that it is dangerous? The problem can also lie in with the parts used in the flight or their might seem to be a problem with the machinary or mechanism during the build. In fact , if the flight is a manned one, their can be regular updates about the proceedings or faults in flight during the mission and the working can turn out to be more efficient. However the author provides no statistics or analogy to prove his point. 

Also the author feels that a larger and wider amount of information can be obtained from unmanned space probes than from manned ones. The author compares two probes that are not analogous to each other. Maybe a manned flight is differently built than an unmanned one. Maybe the cost of construction is more for the unmanned one as it substitutes all the requirements that a man could perform in a machine, which would surely require a more complicated and convoluted machinary as well as higher chances of failing. Likewise, a manned system will have different machinary and workings depending on the strength of the people travelling in it and human expertise required to update data and information. Therefore the grounds of comparison here, are flawed and not proven correctly.

Finally the author also feels that investing their resources in unmanned flights is more useful and maybe profitable for them. However the author fails to realize that the unmanned version of the space flight might require a higher amount of time, money, effort and human interference during its construction and would have to be fed with a set of pre fed instructions to gather information as per the requirement. Also the author should not forget the fact that a machine can never be 100% efficient and any failure can lead to a huge and massive debacle. Therefore the national aeronautics dept should give this consideration another thought.

Hence in conclusion, we can say that the above argument gives the above points for it to be considered as flawed and hence cannot be averred to. If the author kept the above points in mnd during his analysis of the manned and unmanned space probe, then he could have proven his point in a better and stronger way with valid points and justification. 

Issue Essay: Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks.

Men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks.  



Men and women can never be the same. The statement given in the topic can be completely agreed upon. This is so because their structure and body patterns are not the same. Their built is different. The way each sex is traeted in the society is different and the way the society in general perceives things about females and males is different. But even after all these facts, I would like to disagree with the statement that "Men and Women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks". Is this really true? Can this actually be averred to? Today the world has advanced till the moon and stars.Theres a women in every field. Women in noway are set back on any grounds whether it be physical or mental abilities. Someone rightly said, "Give a women a penny and she'll show you the power of that single currency within no time". That's how advanced women are today. And that's how advanced we as a society have become today. 

Now let us consider the example of the great Indian Boxer Anju Bobby George, whose trainer for the Olympics was her husband and who undoubtedly gave a brilliant performance in the Olympics and made all her country men proud. Boxing per say is a sports which needs a lot of hard work and physical efforts. From practicing over 5hours to maintaining diets and punching heavy boxing bags and practicing for long stretches. Long back this was a game meant only for boys. Girls were nowhere close to even the boxing arena. And today there are these luminaries who not only prove their gender but also make their country proud. And their partners support them immensely in doing so. This is something to be proud of. 

To take another instance, we can consider the case of Sania Mirza and Maria Sharapova who are world famous sports people. Even Kiran Bedi and Priyanka Chopra do not fail to surprise the world with their talent. If Neil Armstrong can touch the moon, so can Kalpana Chawla as a female. Even politics doesn't stand behind with female luminaries partiipating actively. Every field, every chapter, every page of todays history has instances of how women have proved their abilities against men and so do men. There sure is a huge contribution from today's male members as well who actively support every step of their female partners and not only encourage but also help them in rising in all ways possible. So why do men and women need to consider their physical differences when it comes to performing different tasks. If men can do it, so can women and if women can, so do men. There's no doubt in bolstering to this statement. 

Therefore in conclusion, I would like to say that no matter what the physical differences are, women can compete with men on all grounds. In fact they are all set to prove male sovereinism wrong and show the power of their gender. No physical difference can stop a women from doing the same job that a man can do. Whether it be weight lifting, playing tremendously strenous games like hockey or the all time rough sport- boxing. Whether it be the NASA or the Olympics, Women are leaving the mark of their amazing and incredible work in every field. The case is the same with men as well. Today, men support their ladies in every aspect. Whether it be household work or the regular office chores. Every field that had a dominance for men has the same for women and vice versa.Hence there is no doubt in denying to the above given topic that men and women, because of their inherent physical differences, are not equally suited for many tasks. The world today is a place where men and women share their duties and responsibilities equally. Whether it be on grounds of competition or partnership, sports or IT, work or household. They are equally responsible for for it all. 

Argument Essay: Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser

The regional brand manager sent the following memo to the national brand manager for Sun-Beem Facial Cleanser.
“We need to institute a huge publicity campaign for the launch of Sun-Beem’s improved formula. Without an enormous media blitz, including television, radio, internet, and magazine ads, potential new customers will not be aware of our product. And previous customers will not be aware that Sun-Beem’s new, non-carcinogenic formula is on the shelves. The best way to combat the negative publicity Sun-Beem’s old formula received is to fight fire with fire, by using the media’s insatiable interest in any new news about Sun-Beem to sell the new formula. This will erase the negative connotations in the minds of former customers, and will ensure that Sun-Beem is once again the best-selling facial cleanser on the market.”
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 given argument is from the Regional brand manager to the national brand manager about promoting the new Sun Beam Facial Cleanser. The manager suggests that the company should have a huge media coverage for the release of this product as this is the most convenient way to build up a good reputation about the brand, as they faced a few criticisms about their previous products before. However, the argument does not seem to be cohesive and lucid and the points provided by the author to bolster his claim do not seem to be satiable or fully strengthen his points. Hence the argument has multiple flaws and the following points give a more pellucid picture of the same. 

Firstly, the regional manager feels that instituting a huge publicity campaign for the new product by involving media like magazine, television, radio etc, would make the product famous and attract potential customers towards it. However, the manager fails to consider the point that the quality and history of the product and the brand name also matter to some extent. The customers who already know about the previous impressions about the past products would be skeptical about trying the new ones and the one's that are new to the brand would buy it only if the product is affordable and of good quality. Therefore, the brand should focus on these intricacies rather than throwing an enormously exaggerated product release in the media. 

Secondly, the author mentions that the new formula is non-carcenogenic and wants to make the customers aware of it. However the author does not provide any evidence for the same, such as some test results or some guarantee stating that the product is safe to use. This makes things bewildering and unsure for the customers as the product that does not claim to be safe, cannot be used by the public, no matter how luxurious the branding is. The author, therefore, should have provided some strong supporting background data to make his point more cohesive and convincing. 

The author also mentions that the branding of the product through a huge media coverage would be like fighting fire with fire and would help remove the previous impression of people about the product and would also give media a chance to publicize the new product in a better way. However, there have been multiple other sources through which peple would get reviews about the product and would also know about previous impressions of the same. And as the famous quotation goes, first impression lasts long, hence this would make it difficult for the product to make a clean entry into the cosmetic and skin care market. Had the author presented the article with some good reviews or evidences proving that the new product is improved and the customers must try it once before judging it on pre-conceived notions, would the point have made a better meaning. 

In conclusion, it can be said that, had the Regional manager kept the above points in mind, his argument would have been much more coherent and convincing. However, since the author fails to consider the above points, the argument remains incoherent and doesn't provide satiating reasons for the customers to buy the new product from Sun-beem facial cleanser. 

Issue Essay: Science is meaningless without Religion

Science is an area or study of the things going on in our surroundings. It includes matter, atoms, molecules, substances that are tangible and intangible, it also analyzes the things happening around us. What are they composed of, why is something happening, what is the molecular composition of the air we are breathing and gases we are exhaling. Why do we perform certain activities related to medical terms or psychological processes. Scince is diversity and we as humans have been exploring, discovering and inventing numerous researches and scientific objects since ages. But have we ever imagined if there is some connection between science and religion? Can religion ever relate to Science? In my opinion it cannot. 

 Religion according to humans is a belief in a supernatural power we know as God. Religion is an aspect of believing in God, be it Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jew or anything else. We as humans humbly accept the religion we are born in and consider it as our soul and think of an omnipotent, omniscient energy controlling us from within. So then how can religion have a role in Science? Maybe in the weather? or maybe in the things happening around us? 

 Long back people belived that the Apple or any fruit falling down was due to some heavenly power that wanted humans to get the fruit. Now this power was Jesus for Christians and some other God for some other religion, but later it was discovered on Scientific grounds that the Apple or any other fruit falls down on the ground was due to an unseen energy known as the gravitational energy pulling it. This energy per say pulls everything towards itself with a force, no matter how haevy the object is, it has to fall down if left un handled in free air. This scientist was the great Sir Isaac Newton and is remembered till date for his discovery. Religion had no roles to play in this and majority of us don't even know the religion to which he belonged. So religion cannot define science. It is just a perspective that drives the human thoughts

 Considering the example of the great Niel Armstrong or Kalpana Chawla, the people who went to the moon. Did their religion matter when they were shortlisted for their voyage? I dont think so. There contributions to science, technology, to history and to the field of research is no less important and their religion plays no role in the records they've created and the prodigies they have been for us today. It's their work and achievement that inspires us rather than their religion or secularity which is of any concern

 Hence I would like to conclude that scince has all it meanings for who does it and not defined by the religion of the person associated with the science. Be it research, medicine or psychology, all that matters is the work and not the religion. A person's religion cannot ever define a person's character, brain, potential or science. It is the effort put in the scince and the work performed by the individual that gives meaning to science. Similarly the belief a person has in his abilities and the super power controlling him defines religion. But to say that science is meaningless without religion cannot be bolstered.  

Argument Essay - Kaliko Islands

Humans arrived in the Kaliko Islands about 7,000 years ago, and within 3,000 years most of the large mammal species that had lived in the forests of the Kaliko Islands were extinct. Previous archaeological findings have suggested that early humans generally relied on both fishing and hunting for food; since archaeologists have discovered numerous sites in the Kaliko Islands where the bones of fish were discarded, it is likely that the humans also hunted the mammals. Furthermore, researchers have uncovered simple tools, such as stone knives, that could be used for hunting. The only clear explanation is that humans caused the extinction of the various mammal species through excessive hunting.

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.

The given argument shows that the author feels that human settement in the Kaliko Island, 7000 years ago, was responsible for the extinction of mammal species due to excessive hunting.He also provides multiple evidences and premises trying to prove that humans majorly depended on hunting and fishing for their survival and hence excessive hunting was the main reason for the extinction of large mammals in the Kaliko Island. However, the argument is filled with flaws and the author does not provide lucid evidence to bolster his points.The following are few of the points which the author missed to make his point more pellucid. 

Firstly, the author mentions that the humans came to the Kaliko Island, 7000 years ago, and within 3000 years, most of the large mammal species that lived in the forest were extinct. However, it may so have happened that, the environmental conditions that were previously suitable for the survival of large mammal species no longer persist in the islands. Conditions like food, atmosphere, climate and reproduction are responsible for the sustainability of the species population. Such conditions suitable for the survival of large mammals might not be available in the Kaliko Islands 3000 years after the Humans settled there and hence the extinction of the species. Had the author mentioned evidences of human hunting animals for their use such as food or fur, would the argument make a better sense of judgement. 

Secondly, the author also mentions that the humans depended mostly on fishing and hunting as the archaelogists found evidences of discarded fish scales, due to which the author makes an assumption that this would make it obvious for the settled population to survive on fishing and hunting. However, the discarded fish bones can also be remnants of what the already present species ate for their survival or maybe those were traces of lost water bodies near the area where there might have been a previous water body. There is also no remnant or discarded animal bone found by the archaelogists which can prove that the human population surviving in the island was responsible for the extinction of the large species, due to their hunting. 

Moreover researchers have uncovered simple tools such as stone knives, which according to the author are evidences that were used for hunting. However, the author fails to consider the fact that such tools can also be used for defence, cutting trees or farming purposes or for construction and other kind of survival activities. Presence of simple tools, such as stone knife, in no way makes it clear that such tools were used for hunting or killing purposes. Had the author mentioned that there were traces of animal blood or flesh found on the tools, then the argument must have given some strength to his point. However the author fails to so. 

Thus, in conclusion, it can be said that, had the author kept the above points under consideration, his point of  humans being responsible for the extinction of large mammals in the Kaliko Islands, would have been more convincing. But the author, however, fails to provide lucid and cogent points to prove his stand. Hence the argument remains incohesive and flawed. 

Argument Essay: The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News

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 author suggests that the development of a road in the edge of the wetlands of Western Lansburg should not be allowed by the council due to multiple reasons. The author supports his argument by giving multiple reasons which are not complete and cohesive and hence leave the argument doubtful and do not make the author's point lucid. The following are few of the points where the author's argument is flawed and is filled with doubts. 

The author compares the conditions in the West Lansburg to those in the neighboring Carpenteria region where a similar construction activity caused in a decline in the populaion of sea otters in that sanctury. However, the author misses out on the fact that the two areas can vary in multiple aspects like size, land area, otter population and steps to preserve the otter in the sanctuary. The author makes an analogy between two different places which vary in multiple aspects and hence do not support his point of argument. Had the author provided some statistical data about the two regions or mentioned that the neighboring land of Eastern Carpenteria is similar in the above mentioned characteristics, then the comparison would have given a stronger justification. 

Secondly, the author also gives a rough statistics of the population of the groundhog numbering to roughly some millions in 2004 since they were declared a sanctuary and is skeptical about the development of roads since he feels that this activity miht cause a decline in the groundhog population. But the author fails to understand that not only the development activity but other reasons can also affect the decline in population. For example, death, lesser reproduction, improper climatic conditions, unsupportive environmental conditions, hunting and poaching etc, can also be reasons for the reduction in number. Development of a road in the edge of the wetand might not be a strong enough reason for the decline even if it might count as a minor one. 

The region's biodiversity and healthy environment are also points that the author provides for declining the construction of the road along the wetland. However, the biodiversity can be maintained by maintaining a healthy environment, by reducting deforestation and increasing greenary around the environment. This would also help the wildlife to grow and keep the air clean and healthy. The contruction of a road would make communication and transportation easier for the locals and would help them in better ways. The author should have hence supported his reasoning with examples like maintaining the forest lifestyle and natural fauna, or trying to build a road in the perimeters of the coastal wetlands would have been a better option for the government. 

Therefore, in conclusion I would say that, the author's argument is filled with flaws and incomplete and incogent reasons. Had the author kept the above suggestions and points in mind, his argument would have been bolstered much better with valid facts, evidences or statistics. The argument would also be more convincing and well-reasoned. 

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.

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.

Real and true talent is always appreciated no matter what time it is and who or how the person is. The same applies to the given topic. A person need not necessarily be dead for his real talent to be popularly assessed or be judged by people. If a person is genuinely good at something and is universally acclaimed for it, then his talent is appreciated when he is alive as well as after he is dead for several generations. Every person is born with some talent and we as individuals need to realize what our talent is to bring it forward, enhance it and use it for the betterment of others as well as ourselves. This in turn will be appreciated if it is of some benefit to the society as well as if it is considerably prominent and the person is prolific at it. So in case of a popular musician, the person will be appreciated if his work is attractive to people and if his music is as melodious and as rhythmic to his audience.He will definitely be a prodigy at it and nobody can fail to appreciate the great work of music.

Let us consider the example of the famous musician and composer AR Rahman who has won several awards and is universally acclaimed for his work. The person had no background in the industry and had to work hard to mark his position and presence in the line of music. Today his persistance, perseverance and talent have brought him to a point where he, not only stands with a humongous fan following but is also the winner of several awards and appreciation for his work. Needless to say, the musician is still alive with his work being avidly appreciated and his compositions creating sensation in the music industry as always. His fame has never interfered with the honest assessments as he is someone who has seen both ups and downs and the moment he achieved prominence, he still maintained his humble demeanor and never let pride overpower his compassion for his honesty and dedication towards the great songs that he composes.

Similar is the case of the renowned Bethovan who gained equal appreciation and applause for his work during his life as much as he got after death. His fame was due to his music and not due his life or death . His fame and eminence was due to his passion and excellent work of musical compositions which had no parallel competition and which was the best of its kind. There have also been several musicians who have gained fame due to their previous work and do ot maintain a consistency or uniqueness and yet are considered famous and good. There are some others who gain attention due to a musical family background in the industry. But there are always exceptions to everything and these cases are just few instances of such examples.

Therefore, in conclusion I would like to say that, hardwork and talent are unique to a person. In the field of music this is prominent and the real talent can be accurately assessed from the work of the artist and not by the fame he or she attains during their life time. Real talent will find it's way to prominence and fame and no matter what, life or death cannot decide the value it deserves.