Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
In a democratic society, it is vital that government officials carry out the will of the people they serve. Many circumstances do not require inquiries with regards to the needs and desires of society, such as progression in the economy and well-being of citizens. Therefore, I agree that government officials should not question the will of people. However, I can only agree to the extent where the judgment of government officials is needed in situations where the will of society may not always be beneficial.
In many circumstances, to carry out the will of the people does not always need to be questioned, which can ultimately benefit the economic state of a society. Government officials should know that what people postulate for in a society can ameliorate the nation. For instance, in the 1920s of the United States, the urgency to pass equal rights for women played a crucial part in the progression of the American society. Government officials questioned whether women would play a vital role in society. However, if government officials did not take long to rely on their judgment to support equal rights for women, then the nation would have progressed sooner. Since the establishment of equal rights for women, women have been able to contribute to the economy during wartime and filled in jobs where employment was needed. Hence, not questioning the welfare of society would have benefited the economy sooner. Therefore adopting the recommendation is vital in progressing the state of a nation.
On the other hand, some desires do not need to be questioned as it can improve the livelihood of humans. For instance, the need to provide free education for all should not be questioned. Citizens with a low-income status would have an equal opportunity to obtain an education that would lead them to a job and remove them from the burden of debt. Therefore, if government officials adopted the recommendation, then it would improve the livelihoods of citizens. The economy would flourish as citizens would receive a higher education and have the potential to work and remove themselves from a low-economic status.
While adopting the recommendation has an advantage of improving the state of a nation, it can be quite onerous for government officials to carry out. The desires and wants of civilians may need the judgment of government officials. For instance, if adolescents argued that the drinking age should be lowered to the age of sixteen rather than twenty-one, then it would be necessary for governments to question and provide insight to the wants of adolescents. Lowering the drinking age may be desirable, but it comes with consequences as adolescents are more apt to take risks, especially when drinking and driving accidents are at a higher risk for young adults. Therefore, if government officials did not question the desires of society, it can ultimately backfire and increase unsafe measures for society.
Furthermore, I agree that in some circumstances, to carry out the will of society should not be questioned as it can benefit the state and well-being of a nation. However, I can only agree to an extent as the will of society may call for judgment in cases where risk is involved.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 914, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...ould have benefited the economy sooner. Therefore adopting the recommendation is vital in...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, then, therefore, well, while, for instance, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 36.0 12.4196629213 290% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 12.9106741573 217% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2691.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 532.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05827067669 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80261649409 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94440052639 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.389097744361 0.4932671777 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 859.5 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.7086393832 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.125 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1666666667 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181428779486 0.243740707755 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0677425250805 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0619097938132 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1234804427 0.150359130593 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0625701711964 0.0667264976115 94% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 100.480337079 110% => 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?
---------------------
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.