Governments 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.
The world today is suffering a lot of crime and accordingly the field of judgement is enhancing day by day. The judgement must be impartial or impassionate, where no one can be considered guilty if he or she did not actually make a crime. The arbiter must rely on their own decision rather than the will of other people. In response, the prompt in the argument suggests that the judgement official (or government official) must rely on their own decisions in spite of depending on the will of people, which make judge to take a side in decision making process. I mostly agree with the prompt and suggest government body to take a decision - make judgements - according to their will and not depend on others opinion in case of judgement by giving following two reasons.
The judicial system today is becoming the favor of most wealthy or most powerful person. The one who is success in acquiring the money or material things today are now buying the decisions with money. They are start thinking that they can do anything by showing the opulent life they are enjoying. For example, if someone has acquired a lot of money and thus, he is connected with all the lop level judiciary, then he can hide or dismiss the case by giving the judge - perhaps his friends - amount he demanded. By accepting the offer by the culprit friend, the arbiter can favor the offend of the case. This case is somehow related to corruption. If the decision maker is not listening anything from anyone, then the decision might have fair. The innocuous might get justice and the one who is culprit might have learned a lesson. Thus, the government officials must take a decision on his own rather than relying on the will of the person they serve. The judgement system must be free from the bias.
Today persons in the world are making too many excuses in order to exonerate. They can do anything for erasing the blight of wrongdoing. In parallel world, someone in its corner is still full of emotions. If such personality takes the chance in government official, then the judgement sure contains some emotions. For illustration, if the arbiter from the government side is mercurial, he might take a decision regarding the emotion he or her is made to indulge in. If such scenario might occur, the decision of the arbiter may take a side. He or she is likely to take a side whose efforts can make the arbiter to involve too much in emotion. if this is the case, in order to make the judgment fair, the official should not relay on the will of serve of the people rather they must rely on their own judgement.
The either of the scenario suggest that the government official rely on their own, however, if the case involve too many things or persons, it is better to listen each of them and according take a decision. But isn't there anyone who is lying? there is no guarantee that the people will not lying in such milieu, in order to exonerate from crime or other tags. Hence, all this scenario suggests that the government official, who have the power to make a fair decision, judgment must be made depending on their own and should not make a decision by becoming mercurial about the will of the people they serve.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 240, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...e or she did not actually make a crime. The arbiter must rely on their own decision...
^^^
Line 1, column 700, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'others'' or 'other's'?
Suggestion: others'; other's
...cording to their will and not depend on others opinion in case of judgement by giving ...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 386, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...oney and thus, he is connected with all the lop level judiciary, then he can hide or di...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 580, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...e culprit friend, the arbiter can favor the offend of the case. This case is somehow relat...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 643, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...arbiter to involve too much in emotion. if this is the case, in order to make the ...
^^
Line 4, column 211, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...them and according take a decision. But isnt there anyone who is lying? there is no ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 243, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: There
...on. But isnt there anyone who is lying? there is no guarantee that the people will no...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 290, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'lie'
Suggestion: lie
...s no guarantee that the people will not lying in such milieu, in order to exonerate f...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, actually, but, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, still, then, thus, for example, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 28.0 12.4196629213 225% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2622.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 569.0 442.535393258 129% => OK
Chars per words: 4.60808435852 5.05705443957 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.88402711743 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4591073065 2.79657885939 88% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.409490333919 0.4932671777 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 833.4 704.065955056 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 13.0 4.99550561798 260% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.247544206 60.3974514979 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1111111111 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0740740741 23.4991977007 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.11111111111 5.21951772744 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178904874545 0.243740707755 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0523728520177 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0772707854173 0.0758088955206 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12493812862 0.150359130593 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0300823712559 0.0667264976115 45% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 14.1392134831 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 48.8420337079 120% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.46 12.1639044944 78% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.18 8.38706741573 86% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => 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.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.