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.
- The Social and Psychological Reasons of Food Waste 67
- How should the government act against eco terrorism and climate change 73
- Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes Why or why not 56
- Are the benefits of mass tourism greater than the problems that it causes Why or why not 60
- The Social and Psychological Reasons of Food Waste 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 248, 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 5, 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 23, 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".
...an 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 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1217.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 237.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13502109705 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.92362132708 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75899039269 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.632911392405 0.540411800872 117% => OK
syllable_count: 380.7 419.366225166 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.23620309051 36% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 68.3054400183 49.2860985944 139% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.6153846154 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2307692308 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38461538462 7.06452816374 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.09492273731 147% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192330294635 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0669797934399 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0600645024527 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101290115638 0.162205337803 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0573511719723 0.0443174109184 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.