Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes? Why or why not?
In order to understand the deep-rooted effect of tourism we must first understand the reason what makes tourism such an attractive activity. Humans are nomadic creatures. We like to discover and appreciate beauty in all its forms, therefore an activity such as tourism is ecstatic and cathartic to us.
The conditions in the 21. Century allows humans to journey longer than ever before. This “mass tourism” therefore is a social phenomenon. It makes it easier for us to enjoy and understand other cultures which in time leads to greater plurality in ones thought patterns, which is something wonderful in itself.
However, there are also counter arguments against mass tourism. People, who live in areas which are heavily influenced by tourism, such as Venice or Paris, state that their way of living gets damaged because of the tourism industry, which is a fair and a valid concern. Other than that, the cultural monuments may get damaged during the visits.
Therefore, in my humble opinion, the benefits of mass tourism weigh heavier than its problems. I do understand world in an existentialist way and that forces me to support any kinds of socio-cultural activities. There is literally no way for me to discard the problems of mass tourism but there are naturally some ways of combating those damages, for example we could use some kind of institutions to help secure the world heritage sites against aggressors, for example ISIS.
- Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes Why or why not 78
- Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes Why or why not 86
- The Social and Psychological Reasons of Food Waste 70
- The Social and Psychological Reasons of Food Waste
- Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes Why or why not 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 249, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...h in time leads to greater plurality in ones thought patterns, which is something wo...
^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nts may get damaged during the visits. Therefore, in my humble opinion, the ben...
^^^^
Line 7, column 119, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in an existentialist way" with adverb for "existentialist"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...han its problems. I do understand world in an existentialist way and that forces me to support any kinds...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, may, so, therefore, as to, for example, kind of, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 3.15609756098 253% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 20.0 5.60731707317 357% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1216.0 965.302439024 126% => OK
No of words: 237.0 196.424390244 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13080168776 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75899039269 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 106.607317073 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.632911392405 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 283.868780488 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 1.53170731707 261% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 8.94146341463 145% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 68.3054400183 43.030603864 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.5384615385 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2307692308 22.9334400587 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38461538462 5.23603664747 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 1.13902439024 439% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192330294635 0.215688989381 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0669797934399 0.103423049105 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0600645024527 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.108379286796 0.15604864568 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0246083121191 0.0819641961636 30% => 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: 11.8 13.2329268293 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 11.4140731707 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.06136585366 115% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 40.7170731707 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.