The issue discusses that a beginner has a much higher likelihood of making important contributions as compared with an expert in any field of inquiry. While being aware of the experts' contribution in a number of fields to be noteworthy and irreplaceable, there is no escaping the fact that these experts were once beginners and that a beginner's mind is second to one while exploring. This brings me to believe that someone just starting out in any field of inquiry might have much higher chances of adding substantially to it than someone who's been immersed in that field for years.
While there are countless personas in history revered for their achievements and discoveries, almost all of them account for not more than a couple of breakthroughs. What's even more evident is that, these discoveries were a precursor to them being regarded as experts, the occurrences of which were preceded by them being little known and their efforts in the field being hardly considered as contribution. This leads us to believe that every discovery, every small contribution, has, in its core, an eccentricity that makes it one of a kind. A beginner is characterized by behavioral traits as enthusiasm, novelty, and explorer's temperament, and the insatiable hunger for new discoveries. Each one of these characteristics go a long way in defining the individual's outlook and approach to things. As against this, an expert has their name derived from years of work and continuous study of the same field; they have been exposed to the same problems and the same option pertaining to their field. In a certain sense, their imagination of the elements of their field has stabilized and subsequently, their cognitive growth in them has saturated to a great extent. In such cases, it proves to be less probable that one would conjure a completely new solution to a problem or would devise something that was never seen before.
A fresh mind is what a beginner possesses, and it is no fairy tale that a fresh mind has more to offer than a hackneyed one. To make things clearer, we must look at the field of astronomy, that studied the Earth to be the center of the universe and a static body in its complete sense. This belief brought forward by revered experts in field was thought to be the ultimate knowledge for many years until Galileo came along and suggested a helio-centric solar system, which eventually was corroborated with evidence and was put on the pedestal replacing the earlier theory. The point we are trying to make is that with a new mind, comes a new way of perceiving situations, a new set to psychological tools to deal with problems, and more often than not, the belief that one shall make a difference.
As against this, an expert, after being established in the field of inquiry, rarely comes across new ideas pertaining to matters at hand. They strive more to achieve perfection and a higher, better version of the currently existent models in their own fields. While proving to be of utmost importance, their ideas of improving something makes not as big a difference as would a new method of doing something.
In conclusion, it would be fair to state that an expert is satisfied with their contributions and would rarely ever look beyond what years of the same study has pointed them to, and the conclusions that they achieve, they are bound to stick to them, most times without trying to imagine a new, radical set of methods. A fresh beginner's mind would take the whole information given to it, analyse it and then apply their thoughts and ideas to the situation without previous bias or opinion.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 177, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'experts'' or 'expert's'?
Suggestion: experts'; expert's
...ld of inquiry. While being aware of the experts contribution in a number of fields to b...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 540, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: who's
...adding substantially to it than someone whos been immersed in that field for years. ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 167, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...ot more than a couple of breakthroughs. Whats even more evident is that, these discov...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 755, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'individuals'' or 'individual's'?
Suggestion: individuals'; individual's
...teristics go a long way in defining the individuals outlook and approach to things. As agai...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, second, so, then, thus, while, as to, in conclusion, to a great extent
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 19.5258426966 159% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 58.0 33.0505617978 175% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 93.0 58.6224719101 159% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3003.0 2235.4752809 134% => OK
No of words: 619.0 442.535393258 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85137318255 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98795655647 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81079512103 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 306.0 215.323595506 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494345718901 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 931.5 704.065955056 132% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 6.24550561798 224% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 4.99550561798 220% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 30.0 23.0359550562 130% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 54.3908080469 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 150.15 118.986275619 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.95 23.4991977007 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.25 5.21951772744 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => 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: 0.169758610212 0.243740707755 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0558052689599 0.0831039109588 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0482658817635 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101829146026 0.150359130593 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0531829198765 0.0667264976115 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 14.1392134831 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.44 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 100.480337079 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.8971910112 160% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.2143820225 125% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.