The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar.
The author depicts that to gain knowledge for oneself, it is important that we repudiate the common usual notions of the society and the surrounding. The knowledge we gather from our close vicinity only provides the minimal and the regular facts, but the world is limited to such minimalistic reach; it is vast and expands beyond territories of man and so is the art of knowledge. It is vital and necessary to step out of the comfort zone of familiarity in order to expand our wisdom and knowledge. It can be illustrated by some humble examples.
A student who is good at studies will by obvious reasons focus and incline more towards it, spending hours of day in books and informations about minute stuffs. Some book worms reach out to books even if the matter is of common sense; it is because they restricted their talents within the papers and writings instead than discovering themselves from the living resources. They can never feel the beauty of a flower blossoming beacuse they have only seen it in pictures and images and have memorised their scientific process. their knowledge is limited to bookish ideas and what people have interpreted from their own visual observations, they follow the known norms of the society to look for any answer is only in books.
The scientific field is repleted with facts and examples of how most eminent novel laurets shunned the norms and followed the idea of expanding their knowledge in doing outside their protocols. It is therefore not surprising to see that a biochemistry scientist knows the tricks and methods of a microbiologist. If Sir Alexinder Fleming had discarded the plates seeing a negative result and contamination, today penicillin would have been an evasive term. He crossed his limits of just studing on bacteria, he expanded his reach towards those contamination which gave him a vital discovery known to the man.
It is important to sometimes forget our basic knowledge to indulge in a diversity of information, being a narrow-minded typical Indian in any foreign land like United States or UK will only make us feel home-sick and long for those familiar food. We at the same time will lose the opportunity to enjoy and explore the extravagant diversity of various cusinies. Hence, our knowledge of food is constrained to only our culture and nation, we can never adapt to any other society if we do not cut ties temporarily with the old ancient norms.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 527, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Their
...ave memorised their scientific process. their knowledge is limited to bookish ideas a...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 538, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this contamination' or 'those contaminations'?
Suggestion: this contamination; those contaminations
...bacteria, he expanded his reach towards those contamination which gave him a vital discovery known ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...porarily with the old ancient norms.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, look, so, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 42.0 33.0505617978 127% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2020.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 411.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91484184915 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50256981431 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76400097664 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 240.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583941605839 0.4932671777 118% => OK
syllable_count: 637.2 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 6.24550561798 240% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.6849630729 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.666666667 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.4 23.4991977007 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.33333333333 5.21951772744 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0931228248099 0.243740707755 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0296866139976 0.0831039109588 36% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0386907631097 0.0758088955206 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0581782970473 0.150359130593 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0404648086038 0.0667264976115 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.