In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within the field.
Faced by recent innovations or breakthroughs done by some intellectual persons, we are used to considering them as a genius. A genius is defined as someone who shows extraordinary insights or ability in certain fields. At first glance, these so-called geniuses may be regarded as figures who are self made through unprecedented talent and endeavor. However, it should never be overlooked that talents can be realized mostly through infrastructural basis and opulent social resources that had already been established. This essay puts emphasis on the past achievements accomplished through numerous people and commitments, thereby underscoring the strong connection between splendid innovations done by representative figures and the heritage of accumulated knowledge.
Admittedly, looking into the endeavors of some prominent figures such as those who are considered as ‘Great men’ throughout centuries and decades, their prominence in novelty appears as singular and unique. For example, Benjamin Franklin, the American polymath active as a writer, scientist, inventor, and political philosopher, is mostly known for his establishment in electric transfer and was portrayed as the quintessential self-made man who in fact had been indebted from collective knowledge and precedent achievements. In other words, we are, in many cases, exposed to numerous fortuitous stories of an inventor and a great scholar who had built up fortune out of nothing, even though, in reality, the outcome consists of a conjugation of previous studies.
However, such complexion shall be revised through fully acknowledging the fact that these genius thoughts and ideas have actually come into being due to a bountiful reference from past achievements. For instance, the german sociologist Max Weber, mainly cited as the author of <Protestantism and the Capitalist spirit>, shared similar thoughts with his contemporaries, although he is known to be the only one who had had the insight in analyzing the social structure with the collective mind. In his text, he mentions several preceding authors who had given him the clue and lens in terms of precisely interpreting the interaction among human agencies. That is, it can be said that such innovative ideas had been likely to be realized as a result of the Zeitgeist inherited by the ancestors and shared among other contemporaries. Thus, as Thomas Kuhn famously stated, revolutions in any field of endeavor can be viewed as a development by accumulation of accepted facts and theories.
Furthermore, above all the outstanding creations and inventions that are listed in our textbooks, we can easily notice that the basic materials used in everyday life such as the computer, our language, and even the space that we reside in had once been a significant innovation in the past. Without proper recognition of the historical connection between the past and the present, it is unlikely that novelty can inchoate and flourish in our times. Thus, in order to be equipped with innovative attitudes in any field of inquiry, an in-depth investigation in the historical context and bygone thought should be fully undergone.
The conclusion stands now that the awareness of precedent achievements can be helpful even in looking for trivial inquiries. History does not only give us the clue to develop creative ideas and thoughts, but also permits us a sense of modesty.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 414, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: had
...ough he is known to be the only one who had had the insight in analyzing the social str...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, so, thus, for example, for instance, in fact, such as, as a result, in many cases, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2872.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 530.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41886792453 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1320618322 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 302.0 215.323595506 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569811320755 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 901.8 704.065955056 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 64.2471116707 60.3974514979 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 159.555555556 118.986275619 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.4444444444 23.4991977007 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 5.21951772744 172% => 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 : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162368342524 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0494476267582 0.0831039109588 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0495912677892 0.0758088955206 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0824849787181 0.150359130593 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0468531263385 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 14.1392134831 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 48.8420337079 69% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.1743820225 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.75 12.1639044944 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.29 8.38706741573 123% => OK
difficult_words: 175.0 100.480337079 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 19.0 11.7820224719 161% => 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.