In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past
achievements within that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
There are several factors that might influence success or significant contributions in a field, for instance, education, the upbringing of the contributor, the inherent resolve to contribute, and some amount of luck and vicissitude. The fact that the founders or inventors of any field of endeavour were presumably informed by one or many of these factors, drives us to arrive at the notion that past achievements in a particular field are not really a requesite to impact a significant contribution. While there are obviously certain fields that necessitate thorough training and dedication whereby the a contribution is influenced by past styles and achievements, yet again the very styles that are emulated, date back to a certain contributor who invented the style. Hence, one cannot agree wholly with the given statement without first examining the history.
To begin with, not all significant contributions were impacted by past successes. History is rife with examples of innovators, scientists and autodidacts who had no scope to be influenced by the past achievments in their fields, and yet their innovations, strategies, or styles made prodigious contributions. We are aware that microbiology is a highly preferred subject today that has substantially served the world with their expert researches and discoveries on genetics, microbes, biotechnology,to name a few. However, it was Leewenhoek, a cloth merchant and an autodidact, who invented the most fundamental equipment, the microscope that made these researches and discoveries possible. Leewenhoek observed microorganisms with his hand made microscopes and discovered a world that was never known to man before. He is called the “Father of Microbiology” for his inventions and discoveries. His contributions were driven by curiosity and not by any past achievements in microbiology. Similarly, Charles Dickens is deemed by many as the greatest English novellist of all times. His unique style has been emulated by both aspiring, and conversant writers throughout the ages, all around the world. However, Dickens was an autodidact who could not afford education because of poverty. Again, Dicken’s contributions were influenced by passion and not by his past contributors. Thomas Alva Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, Ramanujan are all other examples of autodidacts whose contributions were not influenced by any achievement in their pasts.
Additionally, it is not always the past contributions that might influence significant contributions. In fact, there are instances in history where people were instead dissuaded by past activities or ideologies and it was their inner resolve to right the system, or the school of thought. Buddha, Christ, Phophet Mohammed, were all people who desired to contribute for the growth of a peaceful, egalitarian, stable and holistic society. Their contributions were not influenced by past ‘achievements’, but rather from the failures of the extant societal systems and discontentment of their fellow people. Gandhi’s successful non-violence strategy that bought freedom to India after two centuries of subjugation by the British, was not inpired by any past strategies of the like. No country and no state prior to India had ever won or received independence through entirely non-violent means, and nobody believed Gandhi’s method to be efficacious either.But it was Gandhi’s own policy and faith, his inner resolve to fight so. The idea f non-violence was not emulated, inspired and influenced by any former strategy. It instead, influenced others like Martin Luther King, Jr. in his Civil Rights movement.
Of course there are fields like STEM that requires one to master the existing knowledge in that field, to be able to make worthwhile contributions. While these people are trained to be perfect a skill, they will inevitably be influenced by the past achievements of their predecessors. However, even in such fields we have successful entrepreneurs like Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and Steve Jobs who were drop outs and who apparently followed their own distinctive styles and passions. These people were not discoverers or innovators of Computer Science engineering or programming, but were innovators of their own schemes. They were not influenced by any of the past achievments in their own fields, simply because there were none of the kind. Each of them wanted to do something new in their fields and they chased their own, unique, approaches and predelictions.
In conclusion, a significant contribution is not made possible only by past acheivements in a field. The pages of history contain a surfiet of examples where people made enormous contributions even in the absence of any past examples to follow or be influenced from. Many a times, it is curiosity that leads to make a contribution. At other times, it is the growing discontent and the urge to bring about a change, that leads to make a contribution for the betterment of the society. Many of such contributions were not tried and tested back in the past. They sprung from novel ideas and thoughts, and seldom from past achievements. Hence, it is not impossible to contribute significantly without any past influence.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 601, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'a' is left.
Suggestion: the; a
...horough training and dedication whereby the a contribution is influenced by past styl...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 498, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , to
...ies on genetics, microbes, biotechnology,to name a few. However, it was Leewenhoek,...
^^^
Line 3, column 1429, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (Ramanujan) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
...dison, Alexander Graham Bell, Ramanujan are all other examples of autodidacts whose...
^^^
Line 5, column 954, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: But
...andhi’s method to be efficacious either.But it was Gandhi’s own policy and faith, h...
^^^
Line 7, column 503, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e styles and passions. These people were not discoverers or innovators of Compute...
^^
Line 9, column 273, 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
...s to follow or be influenced from. Many a times, it is curiosity that leads to make a c...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['apparently', 'but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'really', 'similarly', 'so', 'while', 'for instance', 'in conclusion', 'in fact', 'of course', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.259911894273 0.240241500013 108% => OK
Verbs: 0.140969162996 0.157235817809 90% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0825991189427 0.0880659088768 94% => OK
Adverbs: 0.057268722467 0.0497285424764 115% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0407488986784 0.0444667217837 92% => OK
Prepositions: 0.11013215859 0.12292977631 90% => OK
Participles: 0.0385462555066 0.0406280797675 95% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.25716636261 2.79330140395 117% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0264317180617 0.030933414821 85% => OK
Particles: 0.0011013215859 0.0016655270985 66% => OK
Determiners: 0.09140969163 0.0997080785238 92% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.00550660792952 0.0249443105267 22% => Some modal verbs wanted.
WH_determiners: 0.0220264317181 0.0148568991511 148% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 5225.0 2732.02544248 191% => OK
No of words: 812.0 452.878318584 179% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.43472906404 6.0361032391 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.33812829534 4.58838876751 116% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.397783251232 0.366273622748 109% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.307881773399 0.280924506359 110% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.248768472906 0.200843997647 124% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.197044334975 0.132149295362 149% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25716636261 2.79330140395 117% => OK
Unique words: 385.0 219.290929204 176% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.474137931034 0.48968727796 97% => OK
Word variations: 63.435366566 55.4138127331 114% => OK
How many sentences: 37.0 20.6194690265 179% => OK
Sentence length: 21.9459459459 23.380412469 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3717771915 59.4972553346 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.216216216 141.124799967 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9459459459 23.380412469 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.405405405405 0.674092028746 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.21349557522 115% => OK
Readability: 52.7341232858 51.4728631049 102% => OK
Elegance: 1.70967741935 1.64882698954 104% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.352376126683 0.391690518653 90% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.111424923965 0.123202303941 90% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0841556323502 0.077325440228 109% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.44463416651 0.547984918172 81% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.120196042252 0.149214159877 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.131035211714 0.161403998019 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0717460404864 0.0892212321368 80% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.462822828191 0.385218514788 120% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0527938252515 0.0692045440612 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.27728206438 0.275328986314 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643944173758 0.0653680567796 99% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.4325221239 182% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.30420353982 113% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 12.0 4.88274336283 246% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 13.0 7.22455752212 180% => OK
Negative topic words: 4.0 3.66592920354 109% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.70907079646 258% => OK
Total topic words: 24.0 13.5995575221 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Less content wanted. Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.