As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious.
The statement assumes that the complexity of current life with various social interaction is attributable to a formidable amount of accumulating knowledge. Although it seems plausible to take consideration whether I agree or disagree with the statement according to a logical assessment, it indeed arouses several sets of doubts before positing my argument. That is, we need to be wary of the presumption that we are acquiring more knowledge compared to the past and clarify the validity of it.
To begin, especially for those who might prefer to agree with the statement would be likely to argue the various means of acquiring new information, including online sources such as YouTube, Wikipedia, and numerous informational posts that are uploaded by our neighbors on social media. However, information and knowledge has substantial differences in terms of acknowledging it as a social fact. A social fact is something that have gained enough authority and validity in order to be deemed as credible and thoroughly verified. A piece of informing data that depicts an image of a flying UFO in the middle of the sky does not mean that UFOs and life in outer space exist in real life. Similarly, a piece of information posted by uncle Tom on Facebook - although it seemingly is analogous to - is different to a news article posted on New York Times, or in other authoritative journals. That is, the mere fact that there are growing numbers of informational sites cannot be equal to the fact that we are acquiring more knowledge. Information has to be socially discussed and confirmed in order to act as a knowledge or social fact. Yet it is not surprising that many are confused with discriminating information with knowledge, as there are numerous scandals on issues that have contradictory disputes.
For example, a well-known, tragic incident that happened in Gwang-ju, South Korea in May 18 of 1980 has gained attention to the public until now, as there are several gossiping attempts to nullify the politics that was going around it. Although, the massacre in Gwang-ju has gained enough factual evidence and is understood as a historical event, there are handful people arguing that it had never have happened or it was a plan launched by the North Korean members posting videos on YouTube in order to make the knowledge invalid. That is the case which makes people confused and regard the current time as complex, but this is not due to an accumulation of knowledge but instead to the state of our current mind that cannot discern arguments and knowledges.
Furthermore,
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-01 | wexoc | 50 | view |
| 2024-02-13 | Tammy__kk | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-25 | topeibisanmi@gmail.com | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-25 | topeibisanmi@gmail.com | 66 | view |
| 2023-10-25 | topeibisanmi@gmail.com | 66 | view |
- Claim Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate practical application Reason It is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty 83
- Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed 72
- The main benefit of the study of history is to dispel the illusion that people living now are significantly different from people who lived in earlier times 79
- Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals 83
- The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries 83
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 83, Rule ID: IN_JANUARY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'on May'? This seems to be a day date.
Suggestion: on May
... that happened in Gwang-ju, South Korea in May 18 of 1980 has gained attention to the ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 399, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...andful people arguing that it had never have happened or it was a plan launched by t...
^^^^
Line 4, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rguments and knowledges. Furthermore,
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, similarly, so, well, as to, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2151.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 427.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.037470726 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94629104916 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529274004684 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 694.8 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.0147421914 60.3974514979 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.642857143 118.986275619 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5 23.4991977007 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.97078651685 60% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123025442371 0.243740707755 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.047260533439 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783232918884 0.0758088955206 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0909827160913 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0531562046169 0.0667264976115 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.8420337079 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 83, Rule ID: IN_JANUARY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'on May'? This seems to be a day date.
Suggestion: on May
... that happened in Gwang-ju, South Korea in May 18 of 1980 has gained attention to the ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 399, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...andful people arguing that it had never have happened or it was a plan launched by t...
^^^^
Line 4, column 14, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...rguments and knowledges. Furthermore,
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, may, similarly, so, well, as to, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 33.0505617978 106% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2151.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 427.0 442.535393258 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.037470726 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94629104916 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529274004684 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 694.8 704.065955056 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.0147421914 60.3974514979 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 153.642857143 118.986275619 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.5 23.4991977007 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.97078651685 60% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123025442371 0.243740707755 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.047260533439 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783232918884 0.0758088955206 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0909827160913 0.150359130593 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0531562046169 0.0667264976115 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.8420337079 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 100.480337079 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.