Critical judgment works as an impetus in the creation and development of quality work. No man are subject to create a masterpiece in his first attempt. Appropriate judgments are necessary in order to flourish his creation. At first, when we think of the kind of judgment that actually matters may come from experts. It can’t be denied that the judgments that come directly from experts are valuable. At the same time, anyone who is not an expert in that particular field may also help to feed valuable judgments from his perspective of the subject matter. Considering this, I cannot completely agree with the given statement. Anyone who can present both positive and negative aspects of view should be equally considered no matter if he is an expert or not.
When it comes to critical judgment, people usually assume that only an expert can identify the hole in the subject matter. Only he has a better understanding and therefore can provide important feedback. However, this is not the only case. Let us consider a science fiction movie called interstellar, for instance. This movie is completely based on the concept of time and space, black hole and space travel which is completely obscure to common people like myself and might be, as well, to the movie directors, producers, animation creators, movie characters, etc. If the movie producers have produced the movie based on their expertise, the movie might have been ordinary to entice. But the movie has presented the concept and visual effects so enticingly that people with little or no scientific curiosity reach to the movie theater. Had they not consulted with the scientist who are non-expert in movie industry, this movie would have been a complete flop.
Secondly, the opinions of the experts and non-experts on the same subject matter might vary. In the development projects I have worked, there always used to be a conflict of interest between two government agencies. Both of them would think, oneself an expert and without consulting one another, they would go forward with their project. Therefore, projects worth of millions would be wasted away. Had there been consensus between these two authorities from the begining, those projects would have earned them profit. Therefore, it is important to validate the judgments from all sides.
However, there are some fields where the critical judgments from experts in the same field are substantial like science. Science is a recondite subject; data and theories are too hard to interpret by common people. In this case, someone who is working in the particular can only make substantial critical judgments. Since science is itself a broad field, even within this, an expert in one field can also provide his judgments to another field. For example, a biologist can interpret and present his views regarding life on astronomical units.
Expertism is important for better judgment of the work. It will lead to betterment of the creation. But at the same time, critical judgment from someone who is non-expert or someone who will be directly influenced by that work will also help to enhance the quality of work. Though there are some field in science where it cannot always be true but for this, someone whose works depend on the same principle can always help each other.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 137, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e subject to create a masterpiece in his first attempt. Appropriate judgments are...
^^
Line 3, column 880, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...d they not consulted with the scientist who are non-expert in movie industry, this movi...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 107, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...xperts in the same field are substantial like science. Science is a recondite sub...
^^^
Line 9, column 297, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'fields'?
Suggestion: fields
... quality of work. Though there are some field in science where it cannot always be tr...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, for example, for instance, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.5258426966 149% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 24.0 12.4196629213 193% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2768.0 2235.4752809 124% => OK
No of words: 546.0 442.535393258 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0695970696 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.83390555256 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62743604017 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 215.323595506 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470695970696 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 854.1 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 31.0 20.2370786517 153% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.2908754352 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.2903225806 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6129032258 23.4991977007 75% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.1935483871 5.21951772744 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => 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: 0.192542515024 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0517768758254 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496907695389 0.0758088955206 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114573561609 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0479710035026 0.0667264976115 72% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.1392134831 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.04 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 100.480337079 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.