In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievemnts within that field.
What motivates us most if not previous triumph? Some may same mistakes, but I am of an opinion that successful previous achievements have indeed a leading role here. This is why, in particular, I agree with the statement: it seems rather unachievable to make a major contribution in any field of endeavor without first being influenced by past achievements within the same sphere. There are, however, different reasons for this statement to hold true.
First and foremost, all of us know many names within any significant discipline. It is not only one Shakespeare within literature, not only one Einstein within science, not only one Da Vinci within art. There are many great scholars that contributed to the same field of endeavor. Any descendent has an ancestor, and vice-versa. Every time a scientist, or a writer steps up, there exists generational experience and knowledge to rely upon.
Secondly, results – not merely ours – push us forward and provide us with a clearer understanding of the future direction. Generational experience helps scientists, artists, and scholars to cumulate knowledge and to continue working towards the same goal. Failures, at the same time, let wise men to learn from mistakes that have already been made once.
It can, however, be possible to become a pioneer in a field of endeavor without almost any previously made discoveries. But it is a rare case. Like, for instance, the first human outer space journey. We should also underscore that this contribution was not made solely by one person, it was a collective work.
To sum up, it seems plausible that many significant contributions were influenced by past achievements within the same field.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-03-07 | dariamazepova | 50 | view |
- In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievemnts within that field. 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 54
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, for instance, in particular, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.4196629213 24% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 33.0505617978 67% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 58.6224719101 65% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1426.0 2235.4752809 64% => OK
No of words: 276.0 442.535393258 62% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16666666667 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.55969084622 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96155262503 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 215.323595506 77% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.601449275362 0.4932671777 122% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 704.065955056 65% => 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
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.3945446478 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.8823529412 118.986275619 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2352941176 23.4991977007 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.64705882353 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.325513553618 0.243740707755 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0903301376965 0.0831039109588 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.125836783911 0.0758088955206 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1825880771 0.150359130593 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0983914266544 0.0667264976115 147% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.1392134831 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.8420337079 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.41 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 100.480337079 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.