In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
“Experience is the best teacher”. Despite the assertion that it is sometimes possible to make a significant contribution to any field of endeavor without being strongly influenced by past achievements in that field, it is imperative that most of the times significant contributions to a field are impossible without being strongly influenced by past achievements in that field first. I believe that most of the times it is impossible to contribute significantly without being strongly influenced by past achievements in that field but sometimes it is possible.
One of the chief reasons for my fundamental agreement with the author is that a lot of advances are improved versions of past achievements. For instance, the first computer was as huge as a room with vacuum tubes running all over it. But, with advances of technology, having the knowledge of principles on which computer works and its requirements, the first Desktop PCs were made by Apple and IBM individually. The faults in IBM PCs later influenced Michael Dell to create customized PCs. Later with advent of MEMS technology, the CPU chip became smaller and smaller influencing achievements like Laptops, Palmtops, etc. Thus, most of the times, it is impossible to contribute significantly to a field without being influenced by past achievements in that field.
Another reason for my view is that past achievements in a field can also act as important components of a new invention, thus, indirectly influencing the product. For example, Tata Nano might have been directly influenced by affordability of automobiles, economics, and road conditions in India. But this definitely led them to think about how to accommodate all automobile components in a cheaper price. Hence, they had to improve upon the past automobile technology to accommodate all parts in a small space thus reducing the cost. Even the leap from Charles Babbage computer to the desktop PC was impossible without being influenced by the invention of FETs (Field Effect Transistors) which were used in the electronics of the first desktop PCs. Thus, an influence from past achievements is needed for making a significant contribution to a field.
Some might argue that Benjamin Franklin who invented electricity was purely influenced by nature and there are few more examples of such people. Yet we know that the number of such people is very low compared to the number of people who were influenced by past achievements. Also, people like Benjamin Franklin didn’t have any relevant past achievements in their field to get influenced from. After weighing both sides, we can conclude that, although sometimes not, most of the times influence by past achievements is necessary for making a significant contribution to that field.
For all the reasons stated above, I believe that most of the times it is impossible to make a significant contribution to a field without being strongly influenced by its past achievements first.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 107, Rule ID: NEW_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'invention'.
Suggestion: invention
...n also act as important components of a new invention, thus, indirectly influencing the produ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, so, thus, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 93.0 58.6224719101 159% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2506.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 476.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26470588235 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17638999942 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.445378151261 0.4932671777 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 774.0 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.8037628909 60.3974514979 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.222222222 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4444444444 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.55555555556 5.21951772744 68% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.590726313488 0.243740707755 242% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.208231124213 0.0831039109588 251% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.241619064662 0.0758088955206 319% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.409936176666 0.150359130593 273% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.193251483451 0.0667264976115 290% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.5 11.8971910112 139% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.7820224719 144% => 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.