The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things.
It may be a common belief that ideas arise only from the most quiddities of things, but I think its only a misconception. Ideas, that may transform societies or germinate masterpieces, can fledge from even the tritest of items.
A bird is flying in the air. This observation is as simple as it can be. It is so banal that if you are found pondering on that, people will take you as an inane. But, the same observation is what inspired the Wright brothers to invent their first aeroplane. Similarly, Mona Lisa, as we know it, is the masterpiece painted by Leonardo Da Vinci during the Renaissance period. This simple lady, not even the most beautiful of a woman, ended up inspiring one of the most beautiful paintings the world has ever witnessed.
If ideas develop from simple common items, then why is it that we don't see so many unique ideas striking in people? It's a question sceptics may pose. But, it needs to be understood that it is not just plain hackneyed items than develops into beautiful ideas. There need be passion. Only a passionate person can see every nuance of difference in even the most similar items. Only an aficionado will know every minutia of that which he loves.
It is true that ideas arise from non-common things too. We can't ignore the various complicated inventions brought up by the scientists or such arts known for their own distinctivity and oddity. However, the best of them, and the most practical of them, almost always arise from the quotidian world, sculpted to precision by their own zealous practitioners.
To sum it all up, unique ideas don't always germinate from unique items. That which is required is to have a genuine interest in the subject, and a desire to do something new. With that, only true zealots see what normal people don't and formulate ideas that normal people can't.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 67, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...le common items, then why is it that we dont see so many unique ideas striking in pe...
^^^^
Line 5, column 117, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: It's; It is
...o many unique ideas striking in people? Its a question sceptics may pose. But, it n...
^^^
Line 7, column 60, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...as arise from non-common things too. We cant ignore the various complicated inventio...
^^^^
Line 9, column 32, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ners. To sum it all up, unique ideas dont always germinate from unique items. Tha...
^^^^
Line 9, column 186, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...a desire to do something new. With that, only true zealots see what normal people...
^^
Line 9, column 229, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...nly true zealots see what normal people dont and formulate ideas that normal people ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 273, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
... and formulate ideas that normal people cant.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, similarly, so, then, i think, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 58.6224719101 58% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1517.0 2235.4752809 68% => OK
No of words: 320.0 442.535393258 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.740625 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22948505376 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59227932704 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 215.323595506 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5625 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 470.7 704.065955056 67% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.2490522758 60.3974514979 63% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.85 118.986275619 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0 23.4991977007 68% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.21951772744 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.221815333513 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0581978319053 0.0831039109588 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0734861593534 0.0758088955206 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120942294593 0.150359130593 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0673779355984 0.0667264976115 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.9 14.1392134831 63% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.8420337079 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.1743820225 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.92 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 100.480337079 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.