The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lies the value of each.
The author claims functions and purpose based on the art and science, which are reassurance and subversion. In my view, these claims are somewhat represent the spirits of them, however, they are too dogmatic and narrow that overlooks other aspects of the science and the art.
As far as I am concerned, the science serves as several function from prediction through control then end up with improvement. The claim of the author, namely, to reassure human beings is merely a portion of it. With the accumulating knowledge of science, it first provides humans with the ability of prediction. For example, in the past, weather and climate are deemed as preternatural power that is beyond the knowledge of human being; ancient people were afraid of it due to the ignorance. With the advance of the science discipline, humans now have been reassured by it due to the predicability of weather.
However, the functions of science far beyond the realm of predicability. Today, by virtue of the sophistication of weather, we can, to some extent, control the weather in local region and improve our quality of life. For example, we now know the rain is result from accumulative droplet of water, by spreading the tiny particle through the air, we can make artificial rain to assuage the aridity of certain areas.
Accordingly, subversion is just a property of arts. The purpose of art can be attributed to entertain, please, and enlighten people. Undeniably, by subverting the thoughts and prospects, people can be amused by the feeling of contradiction between their senses and the content of arts. For example, when I first looked at the painting of Van Gogh, I am amazed by the unique strokes presenting the flow of light, which provide me a new aspect to appreciate the beauty of nature.
Nevertheless, the arts can serve as different purposes, far more than subversion. Art can please people; whenever you feel sorrow or pain, a lyrical music always can be a balm to cheer you up or ameliorate your unfavorable moods. The literature can enlighten public; by virtue of novels or essays people can acquire knowledge and fulfill their lives. Also, from the inspiration of art work, people can conjure up new ideas, which act as a power for our society to innovate and growth.
To sum up, although reassurance and subversion are important aspects of science and art, asserting they are the only value of the science and the arts is inappropriate. There are many different values underlying the science and arts.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 147, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'represented'.
Suggestion: represented
.... In my view, these claims are somewhat represent the spirits of them, however, they are ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 49, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun function seems to be countable; consider using: 'several functions'.
Suggestion: several functions
...s I am concerned, the science serves as several function from prediction through control then en...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 11, column 180, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...nd the arts is inappropriate. There are many different values underlying the science and arts....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, however, if, look, nevertheless, so, then, for example, in my view, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => 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: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2099.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 421.0 442.535393258 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98574821853 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83016402806 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 223.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529691211401 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 648.9 704.065955056 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.5381005688 60.3974514979 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.95 118.986275619 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.05 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.4 5.21951772744 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200740929584 0.243740707755 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0693306607028 0.0831039109588 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0814809827441 0.0758088955206 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12206147766 0.150359130593 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0974001423507 0.0667264976115 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 14.1392134831 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.