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.
In our rapidly developing world, advancements in all fields are made through impactful contributions that propels each field forward. However, to claim that these invaluable contributions are made based on precendence is faulty, because otherwise innovations of any type would be inexorable.
On closer examination, we might find that significant contributions are made because individuals are unsatisfied with existing achievements in a particular field. Rather than using past accolades as motivation, it might have the opposite effect inadvertently. For example, we might consider it difficult to live a day without the use of communicative devices, such as our phones and computers. If we trace back to a period without technology, we might easily recognize that our ancestors resorted to using pen and paper to communicate with people whom they are not in immediate contact with. Eventually, someone found this archaic process to be inefficient, and his disdain with the current resources - pen, paper, and a messenger - led to the invention of telephones. When telephones became inconvenient due to its lack of portability, the cellular phone was invented. A rippling effect is thus created based off our unsatisfaction and insatiable need for advancement, paving way for more commendable contributions.
Whether the contribution is in terms of financial support or intellectual property, the benefactor almost always demonstrate an interest in that field. This interest is hardly ever piqued by previous contributions. Although we indisputably applaud breakthrough achievements regardless of the field, it hardly serves as a motivation for us to contribute if we have no previous interest in the field. When Mark Zuckerberg invented Facebook, he might have been influenced by existing platforms such as MSN. However, we should not forget that he was also a Computer Science college student, who possibily noted a deficit in aspects of MSN. As mentioned previously, unsatiable human desire, along with his interest in the Computer Science field, created Facebook. Assuming that he had no knowledge of programming languages and no money to hire software engineers to carry out his vision, the most he can perhaps do is to complain about what MSN lacks.
Anomalies may exist, where individuals are encouraged by existing achievements. As an active feminist and a brave voice for female rights, Malala received the Noble Peace Prize. Undoubtedly, she has heard of the contributions of other advocates for human right, such as Mandela, and Ghandi. Leaders in the past have used their voice to fight for justice, and are certainly inspiration and role models for the leaders of the future. Under their influences, Malala found her own voice. However, if we live in a world of perfect equality, or if she never found her passion for activism, perhaps we would have never known her intrepid contributions.
Overall, significant contributions can be made to any field with the prerequisite of interest and desire for the field of study. Although past achievement are motivational, it is hardly enough to propel newer contributions on its own.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, so, thus, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 33.0505617978 136% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2660.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 491.0 442.535393258 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41751527495 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70728369723 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18656157521 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566191446029 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 840.6 704.065955056 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.9116068052 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.833333333 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4583333333 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.45833333333 5.21951772744 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.159466576454 0.243740707755 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0475231476063 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0588460105233 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113276758571 0.150359130593 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0716869919245 0.0667264976115 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.1392134831 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.1639044944 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 100.480337079 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.