People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Before taking the decisions which might have dangerous results, people should thoroughly and carefully consider the possible risks. A discussion of this topic is essential since it relates to the right way of making a decision. In my stance, I support that people should evaluate the results punctiliously when they might face any endanger situation as a consequence for the following reasons.
First of all, some people might think a little mistake would not change things a lot. However, in the opposite, some little mistakes really destroy other people's lives. To illustrate, an offender who passes a cross roads in red light might consider this behavior would bring the offender benefits, such as using less time driving. Nevertheless, the offender might ignore the possibility that the person's car might hit the others and cause someone injured or even kill somebody. In the contrast, if the person appraises all the consequences, all the pros and cons, the person might not violate the traffic rules and have any chance to hurt others.
Secondly, if people really think about what might happen as a result, they can prepare at first or at least prepare their mind to face the implications. For instance, if one person wants to open a new restaurant, the person should consider the possibilities of lack of consumers, not tasty food, and hygiene problems. All these issues could be the problems as an implication of running a restaurant. If the owner design the restaurant including all these possibilities, these issues might not merge. Hence, considering the results meticulously could facilitate people to prepare the things they might encounter in the future.
Finally, appraising the implications into depth could aid people to understand what they really suitable for. Some people might be appealed by the appearances of something, while overlooking the difficulties and efforts that might need to deal with. In the process to evaluate every detail, those difficulties would have to be considered, too. In this way, people might find out something is not so easy and beautiful to process as their appearances. For example, people might deem working in a flower shop is an easy job. Notwithstanding, processing some flowers, like roses, which have thrones would injure workers. People who solely desire for an easy and elegant job might not be fit in working in flower shops.
To sum up, evaluating the implications thoroughly could help people to prepare what might need to face in the future, what they have to prepare for, and what they are really suitable for. Therefore, considering things meticulously before taking decisions would be a wise choice.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 433 350
No. of Characters: 2177 1500
No. of Different Words: 220 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.562 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.028 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.691 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 160 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 107 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.682 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.115 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.682 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.316 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.513 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.071 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 216, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'road'?
Suggestion: road
...ustrate, an offender who passes a cross roads in red light might consider this behavi...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 397, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...r might ignore the possibility that the persons car might hit the others and cause some...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['finally', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'nevertheless', 'really', 'second', 'secondly', 'so', 'therefore', 'while', 'at least', 'for example', 'for instance', 'such as', 'as a result', 'first of all', 'to sum up']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.232032854209 0.240241500013 97% => OK
Verbs: 0.162217659138 0.157235817809 103% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0492813141684 0.0880659088768 56% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0492813141684 0.0497285424764 99% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0225872689938 0.0444667217837 51% => OK
Prepositions: 0.0965092402464 0.12292977631 79% => OK
Participles: 0.0349075975359 0.0406280797675 86% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.7916654311 2.79330140395 100% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0308008213552 0.030933414821 100% => OK
Particles: 0.0041067761807 0.0016655270985 247% => Less particles wanted.
Determiners: 0.127310061602 0.0997080785238 128% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0595482546201 0.0249443105267 239% => Less modal verbs wanted (like 'must , shall , will , should , would , can , could , may , and might').
WH_determiners: 0.0225872689938 0.0148568991511 152% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2673.0 2732.02544248 98% => OK
No of words: 433.0 452.878318584 96% => OK
Chars per words: 6.17321016166 6.0361032391 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.58838876751 99% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.38337182448 0.366273622748 105% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.263279445727 0.280924506359 94% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.187066974596 0.200843997647 93% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.131639722864 0.132149295362 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7916654311 2.79330140395 100% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 219.290929204 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519630484988 0.48968727796 106% => OK
Word variations: 59.2801718186 55.4138127331 107% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6194690265 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.6818181818 23.380412469 84% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.0120299573 59.4972553346 57% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.5 141.124799967 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6818181818 23.380412469 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.909090909091 0.674092028746 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 46.0097627546 51.4728631049 89% => OK
Elegance: 1.55263157895 1.64882698954 94% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324818789958 0.391690518653 83% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.108609546792 0.123202303941 88% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0963702541923 0.077325440228 125% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.506597181181 0.547984918172 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.149864774189 0.149214159877 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.124090320181 0.161403998019 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0730452598551 0.0892212321368 82% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.395061239614 0.385218514788 103% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0583129991867 0.0692045440612 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.227510057789 0.275328986314 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0278917683972 0.0653680567796 43% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.4325221239 77% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.30420353982 170% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88274336283 102% => OK
Positive topic words: 8.0 7.22455752212 111% => OK
Negative topic words: 9.0 3.66592920354 246% => OK
Neutral topic words: 5.0 2.70907079646 185% => OK
Total topic words: 22.0 13.5995575221 162% => OK
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations to cover all aspects.