If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.
The issue of whether the end justifies the means has been pondered at length by many great minds without producing an opinion that is universally accepted. This essay aims for a brief reflection on the controversy to illustrate why it is dangerous to insist on this principle.
Firstly, even if the process may be slow and tortuous compared to a visible shortcut, bearing in mind the specific ways of achievements and trying not to go beyond moral principles and ethics should be put on priority. This is so because, even in a pragmatic view point, processes may gain its value more than the results that are observed in the long term. Take the example of the Soviet Union and other socialist countries which lost their power in the end. Even though their eventual goals were innovative and utopian, the specific steps in terms of achieving the task were neglected in most circumstances. As a result, the public, even though not visible at first glance, turned their back against the communist government because of the spartan way of disciplining the people. As the people were punished and being scrutinized in their everyday life, the public health went into misery and fell into poverty due to lack of enthusiasm, notwithstanding their full consent with the high ideals and principles. Thus, it can be inferred that democratic and transient means shall not be overlooked when trying to reach the eventual good.
Secondly, even if some argue that every behavior for change has inevitable costs and sacrifices so that these costs can be easily justified, it is important because improper means are likely to be misused in the future. This is a phenomenon that we can observe now in the Korean peninsula. Even though the citizens gained their power through protests in 2016 and achieved the goal to impeach a president who showed extreme corruptcy during her presidency, now there are groups of people who are trying to retain the power and give support to the former president by holding numerous protests and riots. These people have been using the same way of dispelling the personal issues of the opposite side of political power and spreading false news that are unreliable and erroneous. The citizens have now learned that their means for impeachment were unjust and falsified in many cases. As a result, the current political landscape has become as chaotic as it was several years ago, and the political parties have divided into two by dwelling into useless fights and conflicts. It is said that if the means had been fair and proper enough at the former incidents, the current dispute might not have occurred. Thus, in order to maintain a desirable and sustainable society, one has to make sure that the means have been just enough.
In conclusion, even if the goals can be defined as worthy and timely enough to be achieved, it is important not to lose track and keep the process within the boundary of ethics and dignity.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-11-19 | Juhong Park | 70 | view |
| 2023-10-23 | Oladelejnrr | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-09 | Nowshin Tabassum | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-08 | Hitesh2411 | 66 | view |
| 2023-07-30 | rickxiangx | 83 | view |
- People s behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making 50
- In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people 85
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station s coverage of local and 68
- Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people Recently however archaeol 68
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...dangerous to insist on this principle. Firstly, even if the process may be slow...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, as to, in conclusion, as a result, in many cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2441.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 499.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89178356713 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72634191566 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59036931977 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 215.323595506 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539078156313 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 756.9 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.5753076182 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.611111111 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.7222222222 23.4991977007 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.27777777778 5.21951772744 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0845611619562 0.243740707755 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0265522828225 0.0831039109588 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0301339417407 0.0758088955206 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0599183717214 0.150359130593 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0210210562988 0.0667264976115 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.06 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.