"Although many people think that the luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life are
entirely harmless, they in fact, prevent people from developing into truly strong and
independent individuals."
With the majority of the world's riches cloistered into the hands and pockets of millionares and billionares we often question ourselves that does this wealth and luxury really harmless for the remainder of the 7 billion population on this planet, or is it in someway inimical and it is not inimical enough to understand. The statement in consideration seems to be hardlined.
The Luxury and conveniences that one can afford by the virtue of his industrious and laborious duty that he has served as an employee or as an contributor to the society justifies the theme that is contrary to the issue in consideration. If a man has worked through out his entire life and that has resulted into commensurate riches stuffed in his pockets, he has deserved it. The assertion that the conveniences and luxury would have hindered him from being a strong and independent individual fails miserbly in this context. Paragons exist in this world and some of them are, namely the renowned Technology enthusiasts Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos. Starting out from their garages to toiling hard their entire life they earned the luxury that surrounds them and questioning their independent character and strength seems farsical.
It can be fairly stated that the possession of riches or luxury and conveniences is completely okay if they do not dorectly or indirectly affect someone else's lives in a bad way. The possession of the above stated, many a times bring debates into existence about the morality of its owner and how it may be detrimental to the people getting indirectly or directly affected. One of the effects being the impedance in development of true strength and independence of character. Referring to the roots of morality one can cite that something is immoral only when the doer has a choice and consequences affect someone in a bad way. The people in possession of luxury and conveniences don't have the choice to control how their spendings or possessions can affect someone directly or indirectly until and unless they have done it with good intentions. It's the people who might take advantage of that resource to ultimately be lacking of strength and independent character, and that is an immoral thing to do on their part.
One may argue that the above reasonings will not be applicable to those who primarily inherit their riches from their ancestors. Though the claim is true but the effect luxury and convenience might have on someone depends not only on them as a person but also on the company that surrounds them. If they have been nurtured by rational and pragmatic parents or guardians who have a true sense of the real world the upbringing might lead to a strong and independent individual. The opposite is fairly possible and thus can be concluded the people whose riches are by virtue of inheritance will have a circumstancial effect on their character strength and individuality.
Thus, it can be concluded from the above points made, that the strength and independence of one's individual character does not solely vary by virtue of his possessions of luxury and conveniences but also with the external and important factors like, their experiences and understanding of life and if inherited then on the upbringing and moral views they inherited from the surroundings during their foundational stages in life.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 141, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...that he has served as an employee or as an contributor to the society justifies th...
^^
Line 2, column 258, Rule ID: THROUGH_OUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'throughout'?
Suggestion: throughout
...e in consideration. If a man has worked through out his entire life and that has resulted i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 567, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...Paragons exist in this world and some of them are, namely the renowned Technology...
^^
Line 3, column 166, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad way" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...r indirectly affect someone elses lives in a bad way. The possession of the above stated, ma...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 220, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a time' or simply 'times'?
Suggestion: a time; times
...he possession of the above stated, many a times bring debates into existence about the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 614, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a bad way" with adverb for "bad"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... choice and consequences affect someone in a bad way. The people in possession of luxury and...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 680, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...n possession of luxury and conveniences dont have the choice to control how their sp...
^^^^
Line 3, column 846, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: It's; It is
...they have done it with good intentions. Its the people who might take advantage of ...
^^^
Line 5, column 93, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
..., that the strength and independence of ones individual character does not solely va...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, may, really, so, then, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 43.0 14.8657303371 289% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 56.0 33.0505617978 169% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 77.0 58.6224719101 131% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2775.0 2235.4752809 124% => OK
No of words: 554.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00902527076 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85151570047 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89620530817 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.447653429603 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 877.5 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 81.0515763245 60.3974514979 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.166666667 118.986275619 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.7777777778 23.4991977007 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.33333333333 5.21951772744 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 7.80617977528 115% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More 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: 0.232869327496 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718625334368 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0504204834691 0.0758088955206 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127131559486 0.150359130593 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485027621006 0.0667264976115 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.8420337079 84% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.37 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 100.480337079 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 20.0 11.7820224719 170% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.