Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation must be the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.
Reason: Great achievements by a nation's rulers, artists, or scientists will ensure a good life for the majority of that nation's people.
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 the successes of the leaders, artists, and science people are the indicator of the greatness of a nation. The writer further reasons that the ruler, artists, or scientists’ achievements in a society illustrate the welfare of majority of its national. I fundamentally do not concur with this claim and its adherence. In what follows, I will list my potent arguments to cast doubt on the accuracy of this disposition.
First of all, although the content of society is important for the flourishment of its citizens; weighing of all responsibility and role over the nation is not a wise and logic action. Actually, the success or achievement of any person depends on the various factors; none which is not ignorable. For instance, an individual’s ingenuity, family rearing, talent, educational background, resistance, and practice are an indicator of his success in his activities, which are irrelevant from the greatness of the nation. I prefer to give an example from my own country, Iran. According to the statistical table about the Happiest Country released by the Sustainable Development Solution Network, Iran among the 155 countries is listed in 108. This data depicts that Iran does not prepare a good environment for its denizen. On the other hand, there is a long list of successful Iranian scientist, surgeon, engineer, artist, and athlete. Is it logic to link their success to welfare and greatness of the society?!
Another striking factor which should be considered is that not all national achievement should be considered as the benchmark of greatness. It is possible that a society and its governor support an activity; furthermore, they allocated all financial, educational, and natural sources for the thrive of that activity. However, the outcome and achievement of that activity are not beneficial for that nation and its citizen. A lucid example which verifies my stand is North Korea and its attempt for possessing nuclear energy. Whole support from the government and public were devoted to this aim. They scarify all their property for this task and they achieve their desired outcome; nevertheless, they become isolated and separated society from other countries. Does this separation match with the modern globalized world? Or a better and specified question is, does all this ransom of financial and efforts worth to become an isolated country with nuclear energy?!
Finally, the author uses the logic of the magnificent success by a group of the society is the representer of welfare of the majority of public to support his claim, which I feel is a shaky reason. Actually, the writer overlooks the ration of successful people to the public. The consideration of success by the one-hundredth of public and privilege of this success to the whole is not cogent logic. For instance, Gandhi is an Indian, famous and well-known ruler, who inspired the whole people in the world to seek their right to freedom and civil rights. Does his achievement as an Indian citizen represent the entire 1.2 billion Indian people welfare?
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned argument illustrates my opposite perspective toward this claim and its supportive reason.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 289, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...l, educational, and natural sources for the thrive of that activity. However, the outcome ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 128, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d this claim and its supportive reason.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, well, for instance, i feel, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.4196629213 24% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 33.0505617978 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2697.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 518.0 442.535393258 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20656370656 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77070365392 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96271421112 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 215.323595506 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.492277992278 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 840.6 704.065955056 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.7146416105 60.3974514979 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.375 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.625 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => 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: 0.230944671387 0.243740707755 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0695513827793 0.0831039109588 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.078127939555 0.0758088955206 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140181014442 0.150359130593 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0845245386 0.0667264976115 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 158.0 100.480337079 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.