The first step to self-knowledge is rejection of the familiar
The recommendation puts forward that the first step to the self-knowledge is the rejection of what we are familiar with. If we interpret the word familiar as merely knowing something, then I would higlight that rejecting what we are familiar with might not be the first step towards knowing oneself; it can be step after first but not first.
The rejection of the familiar is very absurd, as then, what we are going to accept; what we are unfamiliar with. Undoubtedly, familiarity helps a lot in diatribing our misconceptions about any thing and internalizing that what we value and want to achieve. For example, the self-knowledge about which profession to choose, e.g. research or field work, can only be achieved once we have practiced some works in both and not just being familiar with it. Then we can reject one and select other. In otherwise case if we have rejected research profession just because we are familar with it and accepted the field work, it might happen that we feel remorseful about decision for not being properly adjustable to the chosen profession working style or environment etc, in later on stages of our life. There could be plenty of reseasons becasue we did not researched deeper before decison making.
The familiarity might be the first step towards better knowing one self. For instance, in every Indo-European religous scriptures, people are invited to gain knowledge and ponder about the world and God's creations, thereby allowing them to not start with rejecting but first to gain the knowledge and then connect it your existence. However, had they been rejecting what was not true of God and themselves, just because those are familiar to be untrue, without deeper research, their faith would not share deeper connection with their intern self, because they are believing precisely what is dictated and not themselves involved in it.
Therefore, without the deeper inspection, it is not possible to be self aware. and mostly, the first step towards it it to be familar with things around and wonder about their existence, and not the rejection as first step to what is familar. Only when the things, on deeper pondering are proved wrong they must be rejected and excised from the self knowledge and right things to be internalized
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 190, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'anything'?
Suggestion: anything
... in diatribing our misconceptions about any thing and internalizing that what we value an...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 352, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to choose, e.g. research or field work, can only be achieved once we have practi...
^^
Line 3, column 852, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'research'
Suggestion: research
... plenty of reseasons becasue we did not researched deeper before decison making. The ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 562, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...on with their intern self, because they are believing precisely what is dictated and not them...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 80, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...n, it is not possible to be self aware. and mostly, the first step towards it it to...
^^^
Line 9, column 115, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: it
...are. and mostly, the first step towards it it to be familar with things around and wo...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, e.g., first, however, if, so, then, therefore, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1902.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.00526315789 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70743819997 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 215.323595506 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489473684211 0.4932671777 99% => OK
syllable_count: 576.0 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 81.3795905317 60.3974514979 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.857142857 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1428571429 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.21951772744 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.397089270711 0.243740707755 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.177204347619 0.0831039109588 213% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.152776065779 0.0758088955206 202% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.320440726267 0.150359130593 213% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.140778433604 0.0667264976115 211% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.1392134831 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.53 48.8420337079 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.6 12.1743820225 103% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 100.480337079 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.