Can someone please rate my essay
bb Bunuel AjiteshArunThe argument’s conclusion that the installation of an on-board warning system will solve problems of mid-air collisions- omits certain concerns that must be addressed in order to substantiate the argument.
The author seems to assume in his reasoning that the majority mid-air collisions that have happened in the past can be attributed to the inability to assess the likelihood of a collision.
Moreover, the author draws a blanket assumption that the computerized on-board warning system will function properly most of the time so much so that the likelihood of a collision can be assessed with great accuracy. Not just this, the argument also assumes that there would be enough technical expertise or operational capability in perhaps the personnel of the control unit in the commercial airlines to accurately interpret the right signals and thereby assess the likelihood of a collision.
Therefore, in order to assess or evaluate the author’s reasoning, it would be suitable to know: one, the probability of the warning system to assess the likelihood of a collision and two: if there exists personnel on the commercial airlines with sufficient operational capability to operate and interpret the computerized on-board warning system to execute the recommended evasive action by the computerized on-board warning system.
Hence, in the light of the above evaluations, it can be said that the author’s reasoning has unsupportive claims and can be weakened in case the warning system doesn’t detect the likelihood most of the time.