It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves.
The statement suggests that we can understand our personality through our identificantion. However, identifying a group does not always indicate we are a member of it, and agree with the movement of a certain group, also, does not mean we are going to do what they have done. Thus, I generally disagree with author’s claim and we cannot successfully find out who we are through our identification with social groups.
People do really define their personality by their identification with groups. There are so many different groups in our society. We can be so many groups at the same time. A person can be in a group of championing democracy while he is a member of environmental protection association. By finding groups we belong, we can know what kind of people we really are.
However, we cannot successfully define ourselves by searching social groups that we agree with. First of all, we tend to agree with the group that members in it do what we want to do mentally but never take the first step in reality or have a noble spirit that we do not have. As a result, when we agree with certain people, it does not mean we are the same with them. On the contrary, it actually points out that we are just totally opposite people who stand in the antithetical place to them. For example, we adore the group of protecting environment and appreciate what they have done. But do we really join them to canvass the parliament? All we do is just support them to do things we think that is right, which fails to define who we are.
Secondly, it is actually by disavowing certain groups that we can truly fine who we are. If we disparage what the group that we do not like has done, it means that deep down inside our principle of being a human just not the same with them; thus, through this way, we can know ourselves by recognizing who we are not and who we do not want to be. Examples abound in our society. A group of people who are abstemious will abhor what those dissolute people who do not cherish every resource of the earth do.
In sum, I fundamentally disagree with the argument of what the author said. People are able to draw a clear picture of their personality by groups which they do not respect, instead of seeking groups they agree with.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-20 | jason123 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | samruddh_shah | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-07 | skylarzjy | 58 | view |
| 2019-11-25 | Kutumba kasyap | 83 | view |
| 2019-10-30 | Vaibhav Panchal | 58 | view |
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing a 50
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts—especially at a great cost in money and jobs—to save endangered animal or plant species.(Wrire a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the s 50
- The following appeared in an editorial in a business magazine. "Although the sales of Whirlwind video games have declined over the past two years, a recent survey of video-game players suggests that this sales trend is about to be reversed. The survey ask 82
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. 50
- There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts—especially at a great cost in money and jobs—to save endangered animal or plant species.(Wrire a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the s 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 93, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...dentification with groups. There are so many different groups in our society. We can be so man...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, thus, while, for example, kind of, as a result, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 69.0 33.0505617978 209% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1861.0 2235.4752809 83% => OK
No of words: 410.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.53902439024 5.05705443957 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65242192313 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 215.323595506 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.434146341463 0.4932671777 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 581.4 704.065955056 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.2531774902 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.619047619 118.986275619 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5238095238 23.4991977007 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04761904762 5.21951772744 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.39231736257 0.243740707755 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.149932764542 0.0831039109588 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0871580738538 0.0758088955206 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261198773185 0.150359130593 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0923549461663 0.0667264976115 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.7 14.1392134831 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 69.11 48.8420337079 141% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 12.1743820225 68% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.05 12.1639044944 74% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.97 8.38706741573 83% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 100.480337079 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.