Claim: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future.
Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
The author claims that for the sake of later prove of falsehood of current fact it should be accepted. He also reasons that the majority of the true facts during the time gets false. I fundamentally disagree with this claim and its supporting reason. In what follows, I will list my convening clues to cast doubt on the accuracy of them.
First of all, it should be considered any scientific fact is based on the arduous and insistence effort of each scientific or scholar. Each idea is considered for evaluation over the thousand times till ends with desired outcomes. In this case, the probability of mistake by the presented fact is not that much high that could be ignored outrightly. For instance, the fact of vaccination by the cowpox could immune the body over the smallpox is presented by the Edward Jenner. This fact during its period was hardly accepted by the people, which lead him to examine his idea secretly over one small kid. However, he had his potent evidence over the effectiveness of the cowpox which leads the body releases the antibody against the lease deadly disease cowpox, to get immune against smallpox. According to his observation and belief, his innovative fact rescued thousands of people from fatal smallpox.
Although, the facts are released by the scientists who are ordinary people with the possibility of erring; it should be overgeneralized toward all fact presented by the scientists especially in current times. Nowadays, according to the advancement of the technology and its accomplishments by the scientific activities, there is more accurate and precise subject presented in the scientific world. Based on the remarkable statistical fact released by the Medicine Science Journal in Iran, the precision and accuracy of the medical facts in this decade is 64 percent more reliable than the last decades. In addition, this 80 percentage of reliability is for the sake of technological advancement and control over the medical activities which enhances the astuteness of the tasks.
Finally, the writer adduces the reason which all current true fact will get untrue over the times. By this reason, it should be assumed that since all facts will face the fault in the future, there should be the repetition of checking the rightness of the initial idea. In this case, the scholar will not have this chance to think out of the box. Indeed, every novel fact is based on the truth of previous fact. If we are skeptical over the first fact, the presentation of further and new ideas will be halted. A lucid example of this idea is the fact of the earth motion by the Galileo Galilei according to the fact released by the Nicolaus Copernicus. If he has a doubt over the initial fact of heliocentric, the rotation of the earth and its effects over the formation of day and night will not be formed.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned facts illustrates that being doubtful over the fact will not be beneficial for the scientific developments. Since each fact is released by the hardworking of scientific which assets by the technological advancement. And each fact is an initial step for further exploration.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 146, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ficial for the scientific developments. Since each fact is released by the hardworkin...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 312, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n initial step for further exploration.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, so, for instance, in addition, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 85.0 58.6224719101 145% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2621.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 530.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 4.94528301887 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.79809637944 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79761697403 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.464150943396 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 818.1 704.065955056 116% => 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: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.38483146067 228% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.029880763 60.3974514979 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.84 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.12 5.21951772744 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213775866409 0.243740707755 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0717537925351 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0657329553688 0.0758088955206 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138872512634 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0374233689044 0.0667264976115 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 100.480337079 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.