In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
The statement links strong influence of past achievements to the present significant contribution in any field such that no other factors are equally crucial. While strong influence of past successes may instill inspiration for ones endeavoring, they may or may not catapult one’s success trajectory depending upon one’s circumstances and the field on endeavor.
Verily, proponents of the statement could argue that from the beginning, humans have generated, accumulated, documented and passed on knowledge from one generation to other, and this has served as the basis for modern discoveries and achievements. For example, the significant contribution of Gauss and Leibniz laid the foundation of modern mathematical modeling; Avicenna's work on medicines served as precedent for present day health care; and so on. Likewise, Einstein had to first learn the Newtonian classical mechanic laws to challenge them whereas Zuckerberg was required to learn programming to launch ‘Facebook Inc’.
The statement is further supported by the argument that past successes set benchmarks and high standards for future generations as learnt from several examples of athletes, virtuosos, leaders, etc. who found inspiration in the success of some of their predecessors. For instance, Martin Luther King, in his fight for the rights of people of African descent, was strongly influenced by the success of Mahatma Gandhi's 'Satyagraha' movement. Similarly, the 2018 World-Cup winning French footballer Kylian Mbappe derived his inspiration from the exploits of legendary Cristiano Ronaldo.
However, both the arguments cannot suffice for the statement’s generalization. Firstly, learning from prior achievements is not equivalent to being strongly influenced by them. In many endeavors, strong influence of previous success in the may result in customary approach, limited by convention, thus hindering progress and restraining innovation. Otherwise, the emergence of screen-touch smart phones would not have been plausible considering the success of keypad cell phones. Similarly, when keyboard computers were a norm to interact with operating system, Apple got tremendous success in McIntosh with a device called 'mouse' which can be used to simply click icons obviating the need to type tedious programming command. Similarly, in novel scientific frontiers such as quantum computing, data science, artificial intelligence, etc. the prime requisites are out-of-box thinking, creativity and an innovative mind rather than the influence of non-existing precedents.
Secondly, past glories of the pioneers in field must be interpreted positively by the tyros. A strong influence, at times, may have an overwhelming effect that can lead to underestimation of one's potential. This negative interpretation be extremely demoralizing for one’s efforts especially when the results are not as desired and promising. On the contrary, making significant contributions in a field invoke questioning the validity of ‘established’ norms and challenging the past achievements. For instance, Ptolemy’s geo-centric model of the universe was considered an irrefutable truth by the Church and the highly related contemporary scientific fraternity because they believed that it endorses their idea of anthropocentric universe. Had Copernicus been influenced by Ptolemy’s achievement, he would have never been able to question Ptolemy assumptions’ and immortalized his name in History by refuting the latter’s theory.
In conclusion, the statement is an unfair generalization for the reason that while past achievements are good resource for learning and taking inspiration, their strong influence may or may not help individuals to achieve success subject to one’s circumstances and field of endeavor. In fact, many times, strong influence of past achievements can have an overwhelming and underestimating effect on an individual. To achieve success, one must always be courageous enough to challenge the set benchmarks, creative enough for out-of box approaches and motivated enough to rise from setbacks while taking inspiration and cues from past achievements.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 588, Rule ID: AFFORD_VBG[1]
Message: This verb is used with infinitive: 'to program', 'to programme'.
Suggestion: to program; to programme
...hereas Zuckerberg was required to learn programming to launch ‘Facebook Inc’. The state...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... influence of non-existing precedents. Secondly, past glories of the pioneers i...
^^^^^
Line 10, column 192, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...ect that can lead to underestimation of ones potential. This negative interpretation...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, likewise, may, second, secondly, similarly, so, still, thus, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in fact, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 91.0 58.6224719101 155% => OK
Nominalization: 35.0 12.9106741573 271% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3563.0 2235.4752809 159% => OK
No of words: 603.0 442.535393258 136% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.9087893864 5.05705443957 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9554069778 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.29911981222 2.79657885939 118% => OK
Unique words: 337.0 215.323595506 157% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558872305141 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 1073.7 704.065955056 152% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0075644103 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.52 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.12 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44 5.21951772744 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 21.0 10.2758426966 204% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => 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: 0.257436262609 0.243740707755 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0739271082884 0.0831039109588 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0913655285165 0.0758088955206 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141739664458 0.150359130593 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0935459747791 0.0667264976115 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 14.1392134831 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 48.8420337079 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.29 12.1639044944 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.38 8.38706741573 124% => OK
difficult_words: 212.0 100.480337079 211% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 11.8971910112 139% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.