A person’s worth nowadays seems to be judged according to social status and material possessions. Old-fashioned values, such as honour, kindness and trust, no longer seem important.
To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
With the change over time, a lot of variations can be witnessed in the thinking and judgment criteria of an individual. The priority towards a particular individual is highly weighed based on their worldly status. Many people advocate in favor of valuing a person's position looking at their social status and materialistic possessions while many others claim the importance of traditional values such as trust and honor to be acknowledged to weigh an individual's capability. I am in accord with the given statement and think that modern culture has a strong grip on today's society, where the money is valued more than a life. Although it's good to earn honor and status in one's lifetime, it should be judged in a balance with the golden etiquette and values held by an individual.
The golden period of old times is unforgettable when all people were respected for their honorable and trustful dealings. There was no definition of prioritizing one's money over their sense of gratitude. For instance, a feeling of security, trust, and power of kindly spoken words was of immense value. Hence, it is an undeniable fact that humans and their ethics were the real treasure in earlier times.
However, a contrasting trend is more prevalent in modern times. How much a person possesses in his bank account and in his physical environment has gobbled up the real human values. Nowadays, no one is bothered about one's true capabilities and ethical values, while showoff and powerful positions have engulfed the true worth. For example, during the times of an interview higher connections, physical outlook, and social status wins over the individual's ability and truthful values. So, a person's preferences and way of communication gets overly impacted through a person's status in society.
To conclude, it is rightly said that the modernization has taken over the ethical values defined through old generations. It's all a moot point now whether to acknowledge values or material belongings to estimate a person's worth. However, in my opinion, people's point of view should be unbiased, as a result, a person's ethics should be respected above monetary status.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-12-04 | tsln7607 | 56 | view |
| 2023-09-15 | Nowshin Tabassum | 61 | view |
| 2023-04-14 | tuyetsa2004@gmail.com | 73 | view |
| 2023-04-14 | tuyetsa2004@gmail.com | 67 | view |
| 2022-08-14 | ThanhNT | 89 | view |
- The line graph below shows the household recycling rates in three different countries between 2005 and 2015 78
- The chart compares the number of people per household by percentage in the UK in 1981 and 2001 68
- The chart below shows the results of a survey of people who visited four types of tourist attractions in Britain in the year 1999 78
- The charts below show the distribution of the world s water and the use of water in three countries 78
- The column graph shows the rate of consumers in three age groups taking healthy food between 2011 and 2016 72
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 452, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...nd honor to be acknowledged to weigh an individuals capability. I am in accord with the giv...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 567, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'todays'' or 'today's'?
Suggestion: todays'; today's
...hat modern culture has a strong grip on todays society, where the money is valued more...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 673, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...gh its good to earn honor and status in ones lifetime, it should be judged in a bala...
^^^^
Line 3, column 163, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...There was no definition of prioritizing ones money over their sense of gratitude. Fo...
^^^^
Line 5, column 444, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...utlook, and social status wins over the individuals ability and truthful values. So, a pers...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 567, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...nication gets overly impacted through a persons status in society. To conclude, it i...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 311, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...view should be unbiased, as a result, a persons ethics should be respected above moneta...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ected above monetary status.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, if, look, so, while, for example, for instance, such as, as a result, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 10.4138276553 154% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1818.0 1615.20841683 113% => OK
No of words: 352.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16477272727 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84081249836 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579545454545 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 573.3 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0189444834 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.941176471 106.682146367 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7058823529 20.7667163134 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.82352941176 7.06120827912 82% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 5.01903807615 159% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.9879759519 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.208768799334 0.244688304435 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0603290208935 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0394945612753 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119715702502 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0374262729199 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.0946893788 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 50.2224549098 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.3001002004 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 78.4519038076 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 9.78957915832 148% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.