People should question the rules of authority as opposed to accepting them passively.
Of all the animals only humankind has the ability to question, this ability makes us superior to other animals. Our capacity to reason and question things based on our innate curiosity has helped us leap many social and technological barriers. Questioning authority is not all different than questioning the rules of nature. Where we can’t alter the rules of nature, we can however change the rules made by societies by questioning them and revealing their ulterior motives. Hence, I am of the firm belief that people should question the rules of authority instead of accepting them quietly.
Questioning authority does not mean, you have to write an angry screed against it or go to create a junta to topple the authorities. It simply means to seek out the truth by properly complaining and criticizing certain rules that are either not productive or are not in favor of the mass populace. “Friction creates fire”, this maxim accurately illustrates how resistance to something can turn into something productive for the society. There are many examples in the history where we have seen theory work, whether it is the French and American Revolution or the independence of the Indian subcontinent from the British Raj, all of them are a result of people questioning the rules of authority.
Another example of people aptly standing up against the farce rules made the society is cited in the first wave of the feminist movement. In today’s world, the most important commodity is not gold or silver, it’s the human brain and back then in the 1970s nearly half of the population (women) wasn’t allowed to work, depriving the country of its biggest resource. This movement questioned the patriarchal mindset of the authorities by advocating for the basic rights of women. Again this resistance by women to conform to the norms of society helped us progress as in all spheres of life. Today we see many successful women contributing for the betterment of society in unimaginable aspects, all this wouldn’t have been possible if they had just agreed to the rules made by the authorities and sat at home quietly knitting their lives away.
But, this doesn’t mean that we have should question every decision made by the authorities. This would create havoc, and nothing would be achieved. Alternatively, we should strive to understand the reasons behind the rule or policy in question. For example, many countries have banned the use of plastic bags, one of which countries is Pakistan, a commendable action which was received with severe criticism from the public. They did not understand the reason or even the need for this rule to be implemented. The problem is that sometime the general population is unaware of the circumstances under which a particular becomes a necessity, like a ban on the plastic bag is a necessity given the dire climatic conditions.
In conclusion, I can say that I am a strong advocate of the given prompt, people should not passively accept the rules of authorities, but rather question them to understand their impact on society. But, people should also be cautious of question every rule, as there are certain things that are best left to the experts to decide.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 288, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...stioning authority is not all different than questioning the rules of nature. Where ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, so, then, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 24.0651302605 179% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 74.0 41.998997996 176% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 8.3376753507 204% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2680.0 1615.20841683 166% => OK
No of words: 534.0 315.596192385 169% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01872659176 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80712388197 4.20363070211 114% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78032567013 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 279.0 176.041082164 158% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522471910112 0.561755894193 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 844.2 506.74238477 167% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 5.43587174349 258% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 16.0721442886 137% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.96407542 49.4020404114 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.818181818 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2727272727 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.36363636364 7.06120827912 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 3.9879759519 276% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.364875069426 0.244688304435 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113382448345 0.084324248473 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.125262983556 0.0667982634062 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.225461718194 0.151304729494 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132553462151 0.056905535591 233% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 13.0946893788 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.58950901804 101% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.