Today's world is more complex than ever in human history. The world gets more and more intricate so do the relations between peoples living in it. There are different opinions on the current peoples' relations and the main purpose behind them. Some people hold the idea that no one does an act for the sake of others neither in his or her closest relations, such as family members and intimate friends, nor superficially relations, such as a co-worker or a neighbour. In other words, they maintain that selfless good deeds do not exist at all. However, others with whom my standpoint is aligned believe that there are innumerable actions that people do in both profound and sketchy relations that can be deemed purely selfless. In what follows, I will delineate my viewpoint on the ground of two persuasive reasons.
Without a doubt, the most consequential point corroborating my stance on this subject is the relations that people create with their nearest circle, such as family members and intimate friends. Close friends and family members, most of the time, put aside their own desires and interests in their relations with each other. They do a thing and make a choice that benefits other family members or other friends more than themselves. For instance, consider a father of a family. He works industriously from early in the morning until late at night just to be able to create a promising future for his family. He knows that all the money he acquires does not belong to him but rather will spend on the things that his children or his wife desire. However, knowing this not only does pull him back, but it also stimulates him to put in more effort every day since he wants to see the happiness of his family. This is a very tangible example of selfless-good deeds that is evident to even the most parochial eyes.
Although the previous reason is the first one crossing the mind at first glance, another remarkable point deserving some words here is charitable actions. No one enjoys giving his or her own money freely to others. Nevertheless, many people, wealthy or not, allocate some of their annual income to charities. A low-minded one may assume that people help charities and others since they feel satisfied and happy deep inside. So they do this for their own good, not others. On the other hand, to fully understand the main purpose behind charitable deeds, one must see this action through more meticulous spectacles. The most apparent purpose is that, of course, people do these actions to cause a feeling of contentment in themselves, but they give their money, for which they have worked hard, and the feeling of losing money, regardless of its amount, is more powerful than only the superficial feeling of self-contend. Something more powerful must be in charge to make people give off their money. The happiness they create in those whom they help only can overcome the adverse feeling of losing money. People would not ever contribute money or other things to charities if nor for the sake of self-less inherit of this action.
To make the long story short, and reflecting upon all the aforementioned grounds, one soon realizes that there are so many examples, only two of which are mentioned above, that people do decent deeds purely for the benefit of others.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 331, Rule ID: NEITHER_NOR
Message: Use 'nor' with neither.
...t for the sake of others neither in his or her closest relations, such as family m...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, for instance, of course, such as, in other words, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 11.3162921348 159% => OK
Pronoun: 62.0 33.0505617978 188% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 12.9106741573 15% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2734.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 564.0 442.535393258 127% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8475177305 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87326216964 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52609488628 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 215.323595506 129% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492907801418 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 846.0 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9874368671 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.153846154 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6923076923 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.65384615385 5.21951772744 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.232790206375 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0627107022261 0.0831039109588 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518380047508 0.0758088955206 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.144096278489 0.150359130593 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.022897223838 0.0667264976115 34% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
automated_readability_index: 12.3 14.1392134831 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 100.480337079 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.