Claim: Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.
Reason: We are not able to make connections between current events and past events until we have some distance from both.
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 knowledge over the past is not beneficial for current curtail decisions. The writer further reasons that the relation of past events with now happening is more lucid while there is some gap from both times. I fundamentally do not concur with this disposition. In what follows, I will list my cogent arguments to cast doubt on the accuracy of its accuracy.
The first striking fact that should be considered is the crux role of past financial reports from the past on the decision-making process of the economists for the future. Indeed, in the field of economic, no one invests the money on the project without informing about its previous financial income. Thus, the possibility of the profits or losses is anticipated based on the numerical graphs and tables from at least one decade ago. Although there will not be the repetition of the identical situation in the future, this reliance over the past reports makes a more guaranteed and safe investment.
Another crucial field which undeniably relies on the past is science. Actually, in the field of science, most of the exploration and invention take place base on the previous either achievement or failures. If the previous activity at the science ends to success, the current scholar will go one step further than the previous one and flourished the succeed topic. On the other hand, if the today's research is shaped by the consideration of past mistakes and shortages, the current invention or explorer will not redo the same faults and the chance of having a successful innovative outcome is increased. A lucid example which clarifies my stand is the arrangement of Periodic Table. This arrangement took approximately a century to gain the current and acceptable order. During this long period, lots of chemists worked on this table who possessed different attitudes; however, all of them assented on the main scheme of the table. This agreement and consideration of the previous efforts lead to enhancement of the table at this period; and illustrates at the field of science how the achievement and activities of previous scientists are important for current ones.
Finally, the reason for the author in which the existence of distance from both periods for having a better understanding of both situations is a shaky clue. From my perspective, at this adhesive reason, the writer overlooks the cognitive, investigative, and inductive ability of human-being. While we look for the past to gain a lesson, we do not seek the identical situation. However, the purpose is finding the analogous condition, and get some idea to implemented in the current situation. This is far away from finding an identical situation in the past and execution of whole details dimensions at today’s problem. For instance, the probability of occurrence of World War I and II in so rare in modern life. Nevertheless, the famine and scanty of workforce and productivity at that period should be bolded in nowadays’ life to prevent any kind of combats and conflict which halt the enhancement of the society.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned arguments illustrates my status toward the issue, in which I do not agree with the claim of helplessness of the past events in the current decision making since there is no cogent understanding of their past and now’s link.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 599, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... a more guaranteed and safe investment. Another crucial field which undeniably r...
^^^^
Line 3, column 347, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...er than the previous one and flourished the succeed topic. On the other hand, if the todays...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 194, Rule ID: MAKE_SINCE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'sense'?
Suggestion: sense
...t events in the current decision making since there is no cogent understanding of the...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 268, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ding of their past and now's link.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, thus, while, at least, for instance, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 96.0 58.6224719101 164% => OK
Nominalization: 31.0 12.9106741573 240% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2798.0 2235.4752809 125% => OK
No of words: 553.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05967450271 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84932490483 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95660091467 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 277.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.500904159132 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 877.5 704.065955056 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.6092018854 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.583333333 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0416666667 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.25 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
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: 0.24376567314 0.243740707755 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0636264129909 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0613239418428 0.0758088955206 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145213024873 0.150359130593 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0415061580677 0.0667264976115 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 158.0 100.480337079 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.