Ethics and morals are one of the most important pillars of a society. History tells us that it doesn't take long for immoral and unethical societies to perish. The prompt suggests that any person holding a public office must be extremely ethical and moral for him/her to be an effective leader. In my opinion, I strongly agree with this suggestion and argue that public officials should try to be the epitome of morality to serve as an example to the members of the state for 2 reasons.
To begin, the public official was elected as the leader by the people who expect him to be completely honest, ethical and moral. Thus, to be unethical would be equivalent to deceiving the very people who appointed him to this office. He might also have to face public denigration and humiliation or even legal actions might be initiated against him, which will greatly affect his social and professional life. For instance, recently Mr Kalmadi, a highly celebrated member of parliament, was given the responsibility of managing one of the most esteemed international sports events which were to be held in India. However, the event was a fiasco where a foot overbridge collapsed and several irregularities were found in the expenses of the event. He was found guilty for these irregularities and is now behind the bars. This not only ended his political career, but has also made it difficult for him to lead a respectable social life. The above example illustrates that the constituents of a state would not hesitate to punish a corrupt leader no matter how esteemed he was before his wrongdoing was discovered.
Further, public officials are expected to exemplify moral and ethical behavior of fellow citizens. Being a public figure, millions of people look up to them and imitate their behavior. However, if the leader is unethical and immoral, his followers are bound to be corrupt. Additionally, it will also hamper his effectiveness since it would be hypocritical for him to be unethical himself and expect ethical and moral behavior from others. For example, there are a lot of instances now-a-days where a public leader has avoided taking action or even supported certain miscreants fearing that he himself would be exposed of wrong doing if the scam comes to light and even more laws are broken. This vicious cycle continues and causes the leader to get even more entangled in corruption. Instances such as these actually promote unethical and immoral behavior in public rather than curbing it. One unethical or immoral act can thus handicap the leader in the execution of his duties. This might also create his image as an ineffective leader in the minds of the constituents of his state and ultimately lead to his removal from office in the next election.
Ofcourse, some might argue that sometimes it is imperative for public leaders to use unethical methods to bring miscreants to justice. However, wouldn't this serve as a contradictory example for the miscreants and general public who might be encouraged to use unethical and immoral ways to do things which from their perspective are right? Following the idealistic path is difficult for everyone however it is the only path for leaders to be successful and effective.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 96, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
... of a society. History tells us that it doesnt take long for immoral and unethical soc...
Line 7, column 145, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
...o bring miscreants to justice. However, wouldnt this serve as a contradictory example f...
Line 7, column 214, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX
Message: Use simply 'public'.
...adictory example for the miscreants and general public who might be encouraged to use unethica...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, look, so, thus, for example, for instance, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 25.0 14.8657303371 168% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 33.0505617978 148% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2693.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 540.0 442.535393258 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98703703704 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82057051367 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76558992881 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 215.323595506 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494444444444 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 879.3 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5318423971 60.3974514979 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.208333333 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.125 5.21951772744 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.228685333812 0.243740707755 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739797244422 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0625035749153 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158024325085 0.150359130593 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0495252011142 0.0667264976115 74% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.1392134831 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 135.0 100.480337079 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.