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 question if the past can help people make important decisions today is an intricate one. Some believe we are not able to make connections between current events and past events until we have some distance from both and thus the past cannot help people make important decisions today. However, knowing about the past can help people learn from mistakes and expand on existing knowledge leading them to make important decisions in the present day.
First, the past illustrates err that does not have to be necessarily repeated once an individual learns about it. Take into consideration the holocaust led by Adolf Hitler in Germany. The unethical events and practices that occurred during that era is taught in all schools in the United States today. The idea behind teaching the children of today about the genocide of Jewish people that happened in the past is to share the history but also to introduce them to ethics and teach the immoral practices that have been used in the past. By illustrating the unfortunate happenings of the past for these children, it aids in learning about ethics. In schools, the past is used to teach about practices that are presently forbidden, like the genocide of certain individuals based on their outward appearance or personal beliefs. Teaching the past is beneficial because it allows for certain errors to come to light and ensures the same errors will not be made again.
Furthermore, learning about the past helps build upon existing knowledge. For example, the Rutherford experiment concluded the spatial arrangement of subatomic particles stating protons and neutrons are found at the core of an atom, whereas electrons are found in a cloud around the atom. This discovery added to the learning of subatomic particles, atoms and the interaction between each other, leading to other important theories and models. One such existing model is the Bohr Model which draws out the arrangement of subatomic particles in an atom for others to physically perceive and understand how these particles are arranged around each other. Theories and models like these broaden understanding and break down complex ideas for others. These ideas can then be set as a foundation for other arising scientific questions and aid in the expansion of even further complicated ideas. If a problem today included the knowledge of the basic knowledge of spatial arrangement of subatomic particles, it is accessible for use and move forward with the issue. In other words, the theories discovered in the past can help us understand the mechanism of a certain subject and allow us to expand on basic knowledge to help us further solve an issue.
Though those that argue that the past cannot directly be experienced in the present so it is an inaccurate representation of history has valid points, these claims do not outweigh the opposing side. Learning about the past aids us in learning from mistakes and expanding our knowledge. Thus, learning about the past can help us make important decisions of today.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, then, thus, whereas, as for, for example, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 90.0 58.6224719101 154% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2539.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 499.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08817635271 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72634191566 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66807609443 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 241.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482965931864 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 796.5 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.4701703508 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.904761905 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7619047619 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95238095238 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.352034097607 0.243740707755 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114147444432 0.0831039109588 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.161144450465 0.0758088955206 213% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.264478386213 0.150359130593 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.22244438269 0.0667264976115 333% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => 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: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 100.480337079 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.