The cliché presents progeny with the opportunity to contemplate on the cardinality of their ancestors rather than ancestors themselves. Men of the same age are incapable of deciding on the greatness of their peers because they are limited to predicting after-effects of works only, whereas progeny are only able to determine the true nature of effects of their ancestors' works by experiencing them. Additionally, posterity is free from the then existing bias against the works of potentially great men and is unassociated from the norms of the previous times, essentially providing an unbiased review of the works of great men. As is often concomitant to great works, they overshadow the sins of the men who stand behind them and captivate the people of that time in awe. However, progeny is not enthralled in the works of these men and can evaluate a person as a whole both on his breakthroughs and bad deeds, to decide on his greatness as a whole.
As is usual with potentially great people, they break the norm with their works. Consequently, which shocks the then time society and contemporaries into rethinking its existing notions, something they are usually not fond of, leading to oftentimes straight-up rejection or mocking. It is only with how these works affect societies they begin accepting or rejecting them. On the other hand, progeny is free of all such pre-existing notions and is already enjoying or regretting the works of great or not so great men, making them much more deserved to decide on the greatness of men born before them. Ramanujan was a great mathematician born in colonial India. His works in the field of mathematics were not given much regard by the then society; it is only 80 years after his death his contributions are being valued as they help understand the most complex mysteries of the universe.
The contemporaries in a domain are biased towards their own goals and have no liking in recognizing others no matter the significance of their works. Moreover, they see their peers as potential threats and anybody that dares to enter their circles as a parvenu. Hence, contemporaries are not the right people to be the judge of others achievements as their most bound to undermine and deny them their much-deserved recognition. It was in the financial meltdown of the 1960s when John Macaulay was mocked by his peers for buying majority stakes in an ailing oil business, despite having a great record as a businessman. It was not until ten years later when he had turned the tables that he was accepted as a great visionary. Therefore, we can infer that contemporaries are more likely to undermine their peers achievements, whereas progeny free from protecting their status as stakeholders in a field can fairly assess someone as great.
Interestingly, contemporaries do provide an immediate critical perspective even though jaundiced. We find that this critical perception of the then works is largely neglected if the works produce better results in the short term. Progeny on the other hand is not swayed by the works and is already experiencing their effects, making them the definite party to criticize or appreciate such works. In the 1960s, many preferred the new radiation-assisted hair removal and the voices of critics regarding potential health dangers went unheard. Eventually, several individuals who took such procedures went on to develop cancers. Initially, deemed a breakthrough however turned out to be a public health issue.
In conclusion, it can be said that all major works of men are a Pandora’s Box and their true effect on society can only be truly judged with time to come. Further, determining the greatness of men associated with such works should rest with progeny, not with the contemporaries of the then time.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, hence, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, whereas, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 33.0505617978 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 90.0 58.6224719101 154% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3163.0 2235.4752809 141% => OK
No of words: 627.0 442.535393258 142% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04465709729 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00399520894 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96808964669 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 308.0 215.323595506 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491228070175 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 966.6 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9320461321 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.52 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.08 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => 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: 0.322272031108 0.243740707755 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.085787615025 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587569256156 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178947911205 0.150359130593 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0441767807299 0.0667264976115 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.8420337079 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 100.480337079 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, hence, however, if, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, whereas, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 54.0 33.0505617978 163% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 90.0 58.6224719101 154% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3163.0 2235.4752809 141% => OK
No of words: 627.0 442.535393258 142% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04465709729 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00399520894 4.55969084622 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96808964669 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 308.0 215.323595506 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491228070175 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 966.6 704.065955056 137% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.9320461321 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.52 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.08 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.88 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => 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: 0.322272031108 0.243740707755 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.085787615025 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587569256156 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178947911205 0.150359130593 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0441767807299 0.0667264976115 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.8420337079 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.25 12.1639044944 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 149.0 100.480337079 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.