it is primarily through identification with social groups that people define themselves. do you agree or disagree?
The author of the issue highlights that social groups can provide fertile ground for people to define themselves vigorously. Due to the controversial nature of this question, there is not a general argument on this issue. However, the popular sentiment to which I vehemently cling is that in today's hectic city of life, social groups and social media are not reliable and hardly can human beings define themselves. The underlying aim of this essay is to put forward some cogent reasons to shed light on a number of issues in this framework.
To commence with, social groups play a consequential role in every given society owing to the fact that people have inevitable tendency to join these groups and communicate with each other. Generally phrased, vast majorities of people find these groups the best means of entertainment but rarely can individuals identify themselves. As a palpable example, nowadays there are myriads of social groups or social media like Facebook, telegram, Instagram, tweeter and so forth, which people have various and different accounts with diverse attitudes. So, in this situation, people should not be gullible toward these spurious and fake accounts due to the fact that hardly people represent their true characters in these groups. To elucidate more on this issue, if we want to identify and define ourselves, we have to be careful about hallmarks and characteristics we share in social groups. Otherwise, we should witness a drastic decline in trustworthy throughout the society.
Another equally salient point in corroborating my stance is that if we want to identify and define people, it is necessarily needed to spend some time with others. If we take a minute to ponder over it, spend some time to identify people in social groups will provide an opportunity for us to realize every fact meticulously without doing something wrong. People's personal lives change day in day out, so, it would not be the easy task to define people just taking social groups into consideration. It can be deduced from a combination of breadth of coverage and depth of detail that people should try and bend over backward not to be gullible and phlegmatic toward any fact. If to do so, it might have deleterious effects on their future lives.
However, what was alluded to above can't be overgeneralized to all contexts. Alongside with the innumerable benefits it has, indisputably, myriads of people define their characters and hallmarks in social groups and social media. So, we could easily and quickly get some information about different people. For instance, many people define their habit, manner, mood, taste, favor and so forth in social groups which are really informative and helpful to identify. That being so, social groups will help us to introduce ourselves completely. However, it was a story in a nutshell; actually, there are more reasonable grounds that can lend weight to my personal perspective.
In light of reasons elaborated, I reiterate that
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 599, Rule ID: TRY_AND[1]
Message: "Try and" is common in colloquial speech, but "'try to'" is recommended for writing.
Suggestion: try to
... and depth of detail that people should try and bend over backward not to be gullible a...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 36, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
.... However, what was alluded to above cant be overgeneralized to all contexts. Alo...
^^^^
Line 9, column 49, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... of reasons elaborated, I reiterate that
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, if, really, so, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 33.0505617978 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 75.0 58.6224719101 128% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2511.0 2235.4752809 112% => OK
No of words: 488.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14549180328 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79022145416 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 253.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518442622951 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 793.8 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.6259291889 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.136363636 118.986275619 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1818181818 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.36363636364 5.21951772744 45% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 17.0 10.2758426966 165% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => 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: 0.279540620244 0.243740707755 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0848517969594 0.0831039109588 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769473421527 0.0758088955206 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.149328920371 0.150359130593 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0767005296594 0.0667264976115 115% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 14.1392134831 98% => 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: 12.59 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => 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.