Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
The author argues that assessment of works is meaningful only if done by people from certain field. In some cases, author’s state might hold true, however, there are other aspects that author failed to consider.
Admittedly, the idea that critisism held by professional from specific field has large value is reasonable in following situation , since experts occupy vast knowledge in their field than others. For example, Martin Luther, known as first protestant, was Catholic priest. He knew corruption of Catholic at that period, so he progressed protestant reformation, with enormous effect in future. Additionally, Kurt Godel, mathmatician in 20th century, severly criticized Hilbert’s effort for forming complete math system, with his genuine idea, incompleteness theorums. For this reasons, existence of these cases bolster the author’s claim that critical analyze from given field is generally assessed, can be valid.
On the other hand, the idea that judgement from other field has little value, may be challenged. In contemporary era, works are not decided solely; they involve multifactoral aspects, and multifacet views are often evaluated as virtue in many cases. Space project, the paragon of multidisciplinay research, is complicated works done by group, contains faculties from several groups. In this case, specific project requires vast sights, such as physics, engineering, chemistry, and even biology. Also, cryptocurrency, the hot-trending novel fintech, originally applied computer science, however, had significant impact to economics, solving traditional problem of credit among individual. Therefore, contrary to author’s asserts, critisism from other field is also necessary.
Furthermore, neglecting warning from out of the area even can be dangerous. Sokal’s hoax, made clear that a number of socialogy researchers have abused ambiguous scientific terms wrongly without single verification, utilizing fake papers. Natural Science, also blamed for the idea of meme, which is called as cultural gene, by Lichard dokins. Many sociology shcolar censured that for narrow scope, only interpret complicated social phenomenon as biological aspects. Hence, it is plausible to disagree that only weighs opinion from specialist from certain field.
In conclusion, while the author’s claim might hold true in certain conditions, the author’s claim cannot be agreed fully. Further analysis is imperative to validating it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 131, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...lue is reasonable in following situation , since experts occupy vast knowledge in ...
^^
Line 2, column 382, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...stant reformation, with enormous effect in future. Additionally, Kurt Godel, mathmatician...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 576, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...uine idea, incompleteness theorums. For this reasons, existence of these cases bolst...
^^^^
Line 4, column 349, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun sociology seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much sociology', 'a good deal of sociology'.
Suggestion: Much sociology; A good deal of sociology
...ed as cultural gene, by Lichard dokins. Many sociology shcolar censured that for narrow scope,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, such as, in many cases, in some cases, 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: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 14.8657303371 13% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 58.6224719101 73% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2120.0 2235.4752809 95% => OK
No of words: 356.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.95505617978 5.05705443957 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06289424498 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.691011235955 0.4932671777 140% => OK
syllable_count: 648.9 704.065955056 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.0951083897 60.3974514979 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.85 5.21951772744 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.194415589552 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0561212242359 0.0831039109588 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0712765136216 0.0758088955206 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.095921159405 0.150359130593 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587069707734 0.0667264976115 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 48.8420337079 76% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.99 12.1639044944 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.82 8.38706741573 129% => OK
difficult_words: 143.0 100.480337079 142% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.