Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented above.
Education is a very important aspect of our lives since it influences our jobs, our behaviour, our values and overall our role in the society at large. Hence it is crucial that children are shown the right path and taught to differentiate between the good and the bad early on in their schooling ages. Whereas some believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education, others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society. It is indeed quite difficult to completely adhere to and adopt only one of these views.
It is agreeable that teaching morality in schools would shape the child into a disciplined person, who respects morals and follows decent conduct. But it goes too far to say that morality should be the very foundation of education. It is not hard to imagine what it would be like if schools taught largely moral education in their classes without much emphasis on subjects like language, mathematics and science. Sure, the child would be very strong in morals but to survive in the world it's not only morals that are sufficient, isn't it? The child should have sufficient knowledge in language and the sciences so that he/she can take up skilled jobs and make a living.
Also, believing that the teaching logical reasoning would result in shaping a moral society seems quite illogical in itself. Morals do not necessarily follow from sound logic. Imagine a person who has terrific logic skills, able to solve problems and arrive at decisions based on precise logical reasoning. How can it be said with certainty that such a person is moral in behaviour? He/she might be a rude, arrogant and haughty person whose mannerisms are grossly inappropriate. He/she might be a habitual liar, a sadist or a person who simply doesn't respect others. In that scenario, quite clearly, his logical skills has failed to shape his/her values and by generalising to a larger section of people, doesn't aid in the creation of a moral society.
From a deeper look at the viewpoints presented, it can be seen that both are quite incomplete and fail to recognise what would ultimately lead to a moral yet thriving society. Therefore, the ideal position regarding the matter at hand is a mix of both views. Education should be based on teaching both logical reasoning and moral values in approximately equal proportions. Teaching morality would aid in instilling in the child the right values that would be necessary for the well-being of society. On the other hand, logic would help in progress of the society intellectually and bring prosperity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 153, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...erall our role in the society at large. Hence it is crucial that children are shown t...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 530, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ts not only morals that are sufficient, isnt it? The child should have sufficient kn...
^^^^
Line 5, column 545, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...l liar, a sadist or a person who simply doesnt respect others. In that scenario, quite...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 706, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ralising to a larger section of people, doesnt aid in the creation of a moral society....
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, look, regarding, so, still, therefore, well, whereas, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2172.0 2235.4752809 97% => OK
No of words: 439.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94760820046 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57737117129 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68303094476 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.501138952164 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 677.7 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.740449438202 270% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.2683566433 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.428571429 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9047619048 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42857142857 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.368436510548 0.243740707755 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117968973038 0.0831039109588 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.153389567284 0.0758088955206 202% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.231635500457 0.150359130593 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0484498607401 0.0667264976115 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.1392134831 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.