In this age of the technology, different fields are developing faster than ever. It becomes a common situation that old theories are toppled by the new one. Therefore, people begin to wonder, what is the right attitude towards all the past achievements. Trully, the past achievement could be proved to be flawed even totally mistaken if we view it from now. However, it is still valueable and could inspire people to make breakthroughs in many fields.
First paragraph
To begin with, one should know about all the achievements of a paticular field in the past to make significant achievements, since those achievements, even could be flawed or incomplete, were still brought with brilliant minds. Even these top genius need to stand on the shoulder of giants to look further. In the field of computer science, for example, a plenty of courses from the princle of computer, which is about the detail of hardwares, to the automata theory should be taken as the prequisite of the master degree and each of those courses are the result of hundreds experts' effort for several decades, making to impossible for a individual to understand how the computer works without those knowledge, let alone to make breakthroughs.
Second paragraph
However, the influence of past achievements could be a misleading factor in some certain knowledges. The classic controversy of Geocentric theory and heliocentric theory illustrates the former achievements could be obstacles in the way of making breakthroughs. In the eighteenth century, the mainstream theory of universe is that the earth is the center of the universy and the rest of stars revolves around the earth, which conflicts with the newly rised theory that the sun is the center of the university. Both theories are certainly mistaken from the perspective of the modern astronomy, yet the heliocentric theory are much closer from the truth. However, the contemporary public of that time are so obstinate at the geocentric theory and view the heliocentric theory as a heretic one.
Therefore, the influence of past achievements could not be always postive.
Third paragraph
Finally, what is the right attitude toward the former achievements? With all the knowledge we can drain from the former achievements, we should view those achivements as relative truth which is not the real truth but the truth people can find with limitation of their time. With the modest attitude and encourage to challenge the old theories with solid evidence, one could have higher possibility to make significant achievements of particular fields.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 467, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ail of hardwares, to the automata theory should be taken as the prequisite of the...
^^
Line 5, column 638, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...veral decades, making to impossible for a individual to understand how the comput...
^
Line 5, column 696, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this knowledge' or 'those knowledges'?
Suggestion: this knowledge; those knowledges
...derstand how the computer works without those knowledge, let alone to make breakthroughs. S...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 17, column 314, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'challenging'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'encourage' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: challenging
... With the modest attitude and encourage to challenge the old theories with solid evidence, o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, look, second, so, still, therefore, third, for example, of course, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 33.0505617978 51% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2184.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 415.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26265060241 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95541358257 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 215.323595506 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.49156626506 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 661.5 704.065955056 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 90.730407915 60.3974514979 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.470588235 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4117647059 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.70588235294 5.21951772744 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.196140739463 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0629251188459 0.0831039109588 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0524868309688 0.0758088955206 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120637505282 0.150359130593 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0340141481206 0.0667264976115 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 100.480337079 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.