This topic raises the controversial issue of whether authorities made rules should be questioned rather than just accepting them thoughtlessly. Indisputably, questioning settled rules and habits can be very beneficial for the society since there might be a better solution for the faced issue and it keeps the inferior continuously using his/her cognitive skills. Nevertheless, the existence of authorities has proved itself very useful and efficient in many areas over the past centuries and makes it possible for many complex systems to work. Thus, I generally disagree with the opinion that people should always question the rules authorities make, but rather when they are sure about a much better approach, so it depends on definite conditions.
First, a hierarchy system with its several authorities on different levels keeps a vastly complex system running, or even possible to have been created. I would like to point out that as soon as many people are involved, some stick out because of extraordinary knowledge, specific skills or ambition and often become an authority in this institution for that reason, meaning they proved an over-average competence for a job. To illustrate, let us look at the example of the army. There, authorities play a very important role and are the reason why an army including thousands of people actually work efficiently. If every soldier would question his or her authority, no command would be followed, and widely complex war strategies would never be feasible in practice. Consequently, it is pretty obvious that the passive acceptance of authorities is crucial for numerous complex systems.
Furthermore, questioning leader’s decisions or rules can make a progress less time efficient and generate worse outcomes. Specifically, when people joining a system with little specific knowledge, it is important for them to learn the basics before fully understanding and, then, questioning the system they are in. As an example, in school, children come into a very well-thought-out institution and need a learn a lot in a relatively tight curriculum. Both common sense and personal experience have told us that learning basics like reading and writing are tremendously important for everyone to learn and questioning the sake of learning it would cost valuable time. Hence, all the evidence above demonstrates that at an early stage in an institution, accepting authorities is usually beneficial for all stakeholders.
Admittedly, questioning authorities can be very important in many areas, too. This is especially true when it comes to very controversial or extreme changes or in politics. As an example, very horrific and incompetent leaders like Adolf Hitler need to be questioned as an authority if his decisions follow the common sense of the people underneath him. However, the above argument does not constitute sufficient support that it makes sense in all fields.
In conclusion, although it is crucial when authorities make extreme and controversial decisions to question and criticize them, in general, the system of authorities makes sense and is time efficient. Therefore, the statement should include conditions where and when to accept the set-up rules by leaders, and when it is needed to see them with a critical eye. In fact, the level of knowledge and experience in the field rises proportionally with the reasoning of questioning rules of authorities, in my opinion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 412, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...y well-thought-out institution and need a learn a lot in a relatively tight curriculum....
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, thus, well, in conclusion, in fact, in general, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 14.8657303371 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2902.0 2235.4752809 130% => OK
No of words: 540.0 442.535393258 122% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37407407407 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82057051367 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0917253164 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 281.0 215.323595506 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52037037037 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 919.8 704.065955056 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.7146402435 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.909090909 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5454545455 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.77272727273 5.21951772744 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181185077942 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0579000016204 0.0831039109588 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0409460562163 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113364260509 0.150359130593 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415368309808 0.0667264976115 62% => OK
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.1392134831 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 138.0 100.480337079 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.