The argument has proposed the future generations to be the deciding factor of the greatness of an individual. This theory might prove to be true in certain cases but considering this as the only parameter to define the greatness of any individual would be fallible. Further analysis of this argument will depict the loopholes of this theory.
At first, it would not be difficult be find consensus on the fact that some experiments have imminent outcomes while it takes years for other to evolve. But that does not necessarily imply the failure of the individual who conducted the experiment or proposed the initial theory. We have seen this throughout our history when the accomplishments of an individual are realized by the later generations. A testimony to that is the finding of the scientist Aristarchus, who was the first person to put forward the theory of heliocentric solar system. Most astronomers of that era not only rejected his theory but demanded to put him on trial for misleading people. Now we all know that his theory was absolutely correct.
In addition to that, there may be some instances in the medieval times when a theory was believed to true but later findings concluded it to be wrong or based on false assumptions. The planet earth, for instance, was believed to be flat by the Greeks and everyone seemed convinced at that time. But later in the 6th century B.C., another Greek philosopher, Pythagoras, proposed that earth is spherical in shape and he went against the Greek mythology, which at that time was considered as sinuous. Later scientists found that theory to be true and it still prevails. Although it was difficult for Pythagoras to persuade the philosophers of that time, to believe earth to be spherical, but later it was acknowledged by populace.
On contrary to that, history is testimony of many events where not only fellow scientists praised an individual for discoveries but that still has significance in modern science. For example, Albert Einstein has bestowed us with the theory of relativity. He conducted several experiments to prove his theory, to fellow scientists, who praised him for the discovery.
To sum up, it would not be justified to generalize an opinion on the achievements of a person simply by looking at one facet of the coin. Rather one should consider several consolidated aspects to make an opinion about someone.
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious. 58
- “Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places” 50
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 58
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 50
- Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study that will prepare them for lucrative careers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supp 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 393, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: spherical
...her, Pythagoras, proposed that earth is spherical in shape and he went against the Greek mythology...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 139, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...ly by looking at one facet of the coin. Rather one should consider several consolidate...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, look, may, so, still, while, as to, for example, for instance, in addition, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2001.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 399.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01503759398 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89309916895 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.511278195489 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 631.8 704.065955056 90% => 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: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.9897493791 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.315789474 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.31578947368 5.21951772744 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149958316007 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.04899501477 0.0831039109588 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0468443566594 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0842558001074 0.150359130593 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0509734663605 0.0667264976115 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 14.1392134831 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 100.480337079 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.