"The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition."
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The claim that the best way for society to prepare its young people for leadership in governmnet, industry, or other fields is by instilling the sense of cooperation in them and not competition appears to be reliable from the surface. However, when one looks deeper into this claim, they will find that it is flawed due to the following reasons.
First, if society were to only instill cooperation into its young people, it would fail to motivate them to be above average reach for the highest goals. If they were simply cooperative, they would settle for what society tells them who they should be. By a society preparing its young people by solely being cooperative and not competitive, it would cause people to conform to the norm and not challenge them to be the best they can possible be. For example, if a young woman was trying to run for a leadership positition at her job, but being cooperative and following the norm had been instilled in her from a young age, without being competitive, she would not take a risk to become a leader at her company.
Furthermore, competition is a key part in what makes us stand out and be set apart. Without competition, we would simply settle for what society tells us and not strive to be the best we can be. It is human nature to want to be better than the people around us. For instance, if one looks at graduate school applications, competition is a characteristic that makes a studnet stand out. The competitive students are the ones who have high GPAs, are involved in research, and are going above and beyond the tasks they need to complete so they have a competitive application. If a students were cooperative and not competitive, the application pool would have similiar students and the baord would not be able to distinguish between the driven hard-workers and the ones who settle into the norm. While, one is reviewing applications, they want someone who is competitive, because it shows that they will work hard in graduate school and their field of study after.
Finally, some may argue that competition is what makes humans passoniate. This is demonstrated over a plethora of different situations. For instance, when one is seeking a relationship with another human being, they do not want to settle for anything. People want what they cannot have and if someone is given what they want, it does not add value to that person. This can also be seen in atheletes. If an athlete was not competitive, they would not the drive to win which is what makes them passoniate about their sport. They want to be the best and win and without competition driving this, people would be cooperative and settle.
In conclusion, from the points stated above, one can see that humans excell and are driven by competition. If one were to be cooperative and not competitive, they would not succeed and become better than average. For the author to make this claim valid, they must have data that supports their claim.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 241, Rule ID: NOUN_AROUND_IT[1]
Message: Consider using 'the surrounding people'?
Suggestion: the surrounding people
... human nature to want to be better than the people around us. For instance, if one looks at graduate...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 577, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a student' or simply 'students'?
Suggestion: a student; students
...they have a competitive application. If a students were cooperative and not competitive, t...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, so, still, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 41.0 19.5258426966 210% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 21.0 12.4196629213 169% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 55.0 33.0505617978 166% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2454.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 516.0 442.535393258 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.75581395349 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.76609204519 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70189514333 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.432170542636 0.4932671777 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 761.4 704.065955056 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 3.10617977528 322% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.0848537644 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.695652174 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4347826087 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.30434782609 5.21951772744 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.164481812723 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0568430736531 0.0831039109588 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0835627180542 0.0758088955206 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123122350301 0.150359130593 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0917398003156 0.0667264976115 137% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.27 8.38706741573 87% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 100.480337079 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.