For me it’s very difficult to follow the text without asking myself: “What are you arguing at the moment? What’s the position against which you are arguing?”
But that makes it hard to critique. “The strongest argument” was not a very strong argument at all, which put the rest of the article on very shaky ground.
The essay would probably improved by starting with some form of definition for inefficiency.
From what perspective would it be improved? Because there’s a reason there’s no definition in the essay...
For me it’s very difficult to follow the text without asking myself: “What are you arguing at the moment? What’s the position against which you are arguing?”
You’re starting to see the weakest point of the whole essay ^_^
But that makes it hard to critique. “The strongest argument” was not a very strong argument at all, which put the rest of the article on very shaky ground.