Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers.
The leader is the one who leads from the front and is considered to be the captain of the ship. The prompt suggests that the ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers considered a more important characteristic of an effective leader than sound moral judgment. But, in reality, Taking the moral judgment stands superior to maintaining mutual respect with his or her peers. I would argue this by comparing them in the following two paragraphs.
Firstly, history shows that a leader who concentrated more on mutual respect with his or her peers than making a moral judgment was not successful and created chaos than peace and prosperous. For example, during world war leaders with poor decisions resulted in a nuclear attack and resulted in the destruction of life in the two cities of Japan and still, there is no hope of life in those two cities due to the presence of traces of nuclear radiation. The cause for the nuclear attack is mainly because, of the poor judgment and to maintain mutual respect with the countries that are against Japan. This paragraph depicts the consequences of poor judgment over the ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers.
Further, moral judgment and mutual respect should be in harmony and these impacts the functionality of one another and it is proven that only based on mutual respect, a leader should not come to a conclusion and that is mutual respect should not be sole reason before coming to judgment and he or she should consider the forthcoming of their judgment. For instance, a movie director had an amazing script but due to peer pressure of mutual respect made him choose the wrong casting for his movie and the movie failed miserably in the theaters. This example shows the effects of choosing mutual respect over moral decisions results in disaster.
However, mutual respect is also held responsible for making quality judgments and it is an input to a decision making the process and hence moral judgment is considered as an important characteristic of an effective leader.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | jason123 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | arpit6798 | 79 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-25 | srujanakeerthi | 50 | view |
- 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 sidew 50
- Academic staff percentages in faculties by gender 2012 73
- You have a problem with the neighbour. Write a letter to your neighbour. In your Letter:Describe the problemSay how long it has been a problemExplain what action you want the neighbour to take. 78
- You should spend about 40 minutes on this task.Write about the following topic. Buying things on the Internet, such as books, air tickets and groceries, is becoming more and more popular.Do the advantages of shopping in this way outweigh the disadvantage 61
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, so, still, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 58.6224719101 82% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1709.0 2235.4752809 76% => OK
No of words: 349.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89684813754 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32221490584 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63633672816 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 215.323595506 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.461318051576 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 516.6 704.065955056 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 20.2370786517 59% => 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: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 77.6520014767 60.3974514979 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.416666667 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0833333333 23.4991977007 124% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.91666666667 5.21951772744 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.42846330947 0.243740707755 176% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.17752258775 0.0831039109588 214% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.166231663962 0.0758088955206 219% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.311456607594 0.150359130593 207% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132632843011 0.0667264976115 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 100.480337079 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.