The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree
with the statement above 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 those considerations
shape your position.
The origin of ideas is a topic of much discussion. It would serve society a great service if one was able to determin the source of innovative, best-in-class insights. The discussion tends to boil down into one of two forms: are ideas best sourced from the common or the uncommon. It is the case that the best ideas, whether they belong within the domain of Science or Art, are the byproduct of passionate study of the common.
Important, innovative scientific discoveries has historically found their roots in the study of common-day occurances. Take, for example, the discovery of Maxwell's equations of magnetism. These invaluable equations describing the connection between electric and magnetic fields helped were the byproduct of careful observations made by a blacksmith with no formal scientific training. The sheer attraction by Maxwell to seemingly strange occurances in nature, specifically the correlation between a wire's movement while in the presence of a common iron magnet, was enough to birth an entire new, foundational branch of Physics. Clearly, the observation of commonplace interactions between elements in nature was enough to spark a truley "great" idea.
Beyond the domain of Science, ideas at the forefront of art have also have their roots in the passionate study of the common. During that 1960s, artists whose work would form the central body of work we today call "modern art" were inspired by their obsession with the quotidian. For example, consider Andy Wharhol's famound Camble Soup collection of paintings; this artwork was innovatite in its commentary on the explosion of mass consumption production in a post-war world. This artwork, and others like it at the time, are considered the best expressions of a hightened artistic style. Only through the careful study of common items and their place within society by artists could such meaningful artistic expression have emerged.
Although it may be said that the study of the eccentric can lead to offer new perspectives that lead to the elevated insights, this is not necessarily true. Consider the ideas of the Chatholic Church durring the Dark Ages of European society. While various circles among the clergy allocated scarce time and resources to the study of the supernatural, famously debating how many angles could dance on the head of the pin, efforts into novel scientific and literary innovations were stiffled. By no means did the study of the uncommon at this time generate ideas that one would classify as "best."
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 500, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'wires'' or 'wire's'?
Suggestion: wires'; wire's
... specifically the correlation between a wires movement while in the presence of a com...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 71, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'had'.
Suggestion: had
...ideas at the forefront of art have also have their roots in the passionate study of ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, may, so, well, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 58.6224719101 119% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2146.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 405.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2987654321 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48604634366 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96717190768 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.585185185185 0.4932671777 119% => OK
syllable_count: 667.8 704.065955056 95% => 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: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.1519917828 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.222222222 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.38888888889 5.21951772744 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0735847661649 0.243740707755 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0267529544259 0.0831039109588 32% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0244786534829 0.0758088955206 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0477777903741 0.150359130593 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0246034035627 0.0667264976115 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.76 8.38706741573 116% => OK
difficult_words: 129.0 100.480337079 128% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.