Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Every day, people are leaving comments on other person’s post, news article, published research paper written by respected psychologist and new album made by a band. Literally, people are making their personal judgments on everything stepping aside either it is healthy feedback or just a crucial verbal attack. The statement is contending that only the expert of the field could make a critical judgment of the work. I agree that the judgment from the expert is quite critical but it doesn’t mean the comments of non expert is meaningless or has less value.
The proponents of the argument would say from the word “critical”, it means the judgment should make people convince and understand the work, not just at ostensible area, but also in deeper area. Only the master of the field could do this job. It seems true when the judgment of the work needs profound knowledge and acute insight. For example, when the candidates of the science Nobel prize are announced, we can always find out that we have never heard of the names of the candidates. Sometimes, we couldn’t understand a single thing about what they’ve done and how they earned such prize. However, we could trust that those candidates’ achievements are plausible because experts of the field agree and explain why they should get such an honorable prize, how their achievements affected our lives or extended the boundary of knowledge of humanity.
However, not all fields need such knowledge and insights. Fields that are related to mass media such as POP music or movies, on the other hand, is quite different from the field that was mentioned above. Such field which are mainly directly aimed to normal people is estimated by how many people like or dislike it. Because the main evaluation point of the field is popularity, the critical judgment of the field would be made by the audience, not by the expert. It is true that there are critics who wrote quotes and comments about how the movie was good or why the music should be blamed, it doesn’t mean the movie or the music should be unpopular. The exemplar would be the Caribbean’s Pirate series. As the series go on, the critics scarcely commented the storyline is too messy. However, the people still love to watch Jonny Depp’s acting Jack Sparrow, leaving “critical” judgment that series would leave its mark on the history of movie.
In conclusion, I recommend adjusting the statement from “any given field” to “most fields” as some fields which are mostly related with mass media has subtle different aspect of critical judgment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 538, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...Sometimes, we couldn't understand a single thing about what they've don...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, still, for example, in conclusion, such as, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2210.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 433.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.103926097 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56165014514 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89719342908 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538106235566 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 668.7 704.065955056 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.9989551345 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.315789474 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7894736842 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.31578947368 5.21951772744 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211089987851 0.243740707755 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0734562430363 0.0831039109588 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.069689758689 0.0758088955206 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15035096419 0.150359130593 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0449991606867 0.0667264976115 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.1392134831 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => 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: 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.