In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
The statement links the significant achievements with past experiences. As the great scientist, Isaac Newton, once put: “If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulder of the giant.” The metaphor means that it is easier to discover base on the previous discoveries. But it seems that this concept can not be applied universally on different fields such as art field.
In scientific field, most of the innovation come from the past experiences. Base on the established theory, scientists are able to pose new hypothesis from the existing knowledge and, by conducting experiment, we can either prove the hypothesis or reject it and ultimately increase our bank of experience. The process is slow but firm. Over time, by accumulating the experiences little by little, surly some important breakthroughs will happen. Almost all of the scientists are following this path.
Some people may argue that the path of the science making innovation is changing because we are heralded into a new era of inter-discipline science. Inter-discipline science no longer address on the development of the conventional field, but the combination of wide varieties of fields, such as Artificial intelligent, Robotic, Fin-tech, and so on. Take Fin-tech for example, it requires a scientist with knowledge of not only computer science and statistics but also finance and economy. By this cross-linking in different technology, we are able to make a breakthrough without past achievements. Nevertheless, this concept is arbitrary because it is still using the foundations of previous scientific achievements. Thus, the innovative process of inter-discipline science is still following the same way.
However, the procedure seems different in the fields other than science. Fields such as the arts, there are myriad examples show that unprecedented achievements can be realized without experience basement. The evaluation of the arts field may not be the same as in the science, it is decided by its audiences. For example, in 18 century, lots of musicians implemented new techniques, used various kinds of instruments, or based on innovative tempo theory in order to create brand new music atmosphere for the audience. However, only few of them succeed. On the other hand, one of the greatest musician, Beethoven, actually didn’t make any innovative approach, but exploited the existent techniques and pushed it to the limit. In the arts field, as a kind of entertainment, the primary issue is to entertain the audiences.
To sum up, it is important for science field to make a significant contribution on the basis of previous achievement, while for art field it is not. Because the evaluations for each of them are on different standards. For the science that is decided by how much innovative it is, but for the arts that is depend on the audiences. Thus there are more chances for scientist to make contribution by following their predecessor, but that is generally not the case in terms of the arts.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-16 | HAN YEBIN | 50 | view |
| 2024-04-02 | guozhishan | 50 | view |
| 2023-09-01 | Sovendo Talapatra | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | Jonginn | 83 | view |
| 2022-11-04 | raghavchauhan619 | 83 | view |
- Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study prepare them for lucrative careers. 58
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 50
- Peoples behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making 58
- In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field. 50
- Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 55, Rule ID: PAST_EXPERIENCE_MEMORY[1]
Message: Use simply 'experiences'.
Suggestion: experiences
...links the significant achievements with past experiences. As the great scientist, Isaac Newton, ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 59, Rule ID: PAST_EXPERIENCE_MEMORY[1]
Message: Use simply 'experiences'.
Suggestion: experiences
...d, most of the innovation come from the past experiences. Base on the established theory, scient...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 453, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...rtant breakthroughs will happen. Almost all of the scientists are following this path. ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 330, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'century' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'centuries'.
Suggestion: centuries
...ed by its audiences. For example, in 18 century, lots of musicians implemented new tech...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 306, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'depended'.
Suggestion: depended
...ovative it is, but for the arts that is depend on the audiences. Thus there are more c...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 331, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e arts that is depend on the audiences. Thus there are more chances for scientist to...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, thus, while, for example, kind of, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
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 : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2536.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 483.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25051759834 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22200441486 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498964803313 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 783.9 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0742600504 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.44 118.986275619 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.32 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.44 5.21951772744 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21702523962 0.243740707755 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619015624793 0.0831039109588 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0724536577997 0.0758088955206 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12089762674 0.150359130593 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0525573881428 0.0667264976115 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.