Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.
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 and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position
The arguer claims that it is useless to learn about the past for people to make significant decisions nowadays. I tend to disagree with this argument.
Firstly, the past events can provide plenteous experience when making vital decisions not only in personal life, but also in governing nations. For instance, the Chinese government learned from the evolution in 1910s-1940s, thus the power chose to apply a structure of community as a bedrock of governing, which was suitable for the nature of the society at that time-a farming society without advanced industrialization. Moreover, with the strict the one-kid policy in China after 1980s, couples nowadays prefer to take more time to consider whether to have another baby. Because giving birth cursorily can lead to an adverse punishment in fine and even in their jobs according to related cases in the past, the novice couples will not disobey the roles in having children.
Secondly, considering about the past when making decisions can reduce and even avoid the unnecessary loss. For example, before launching a new product, companies require to check the selling performance in various markets in the past, as well as their competitors’. If they failed to make a great profits in several market, it is necessary to think it twice whether to sell the new products in those places due to their previous unsatisfying performance, otherwise it might face a similar situation again. In this case, learning from the past contributes to saving the cost efficiently.
However, we cannot ignore the flaws in depending on the experience in the past. On one hand, when focusing too much on the past, it is likely that we will be trapped in didactic thoughts, which means there is less flexibility our decision. For instance, if a food company insists on putting most of the advertising budgets in radio programs due to the past situation, then the outcome might be dramatically less than before, since today, most consumers are more into using social media to glean information before purchasing. On the other hand, the circumstances are extremely different between the past and now. That is to say, the factors may be more intricate. In todays’ world, companies in all fields should pay attention to showing the society responsibility as one of the business strategies, since people are more concerned about the sustainable development, while in the past, the majority of consumers only take prices and qualities of the products into consideration. Without mentioning these circumstances, we cannot simply make crucial decisions with the help of the past.
To sum up, we are supposed to make good sides of the past when making decision, instead of rejecting to learn from it or completely depending on it.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 171, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'checking'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'require' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: checking
...nching a new product, companies require to check the selling performance in various mark...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 309, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun market seems to be countable; consider using: 'several markets'.
Suggestion: several markets
... they failed to make a great profits in several market, it is necessary to think it twice whet...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 648, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... now. That is to say, the factors may be more intricate. In todays’ world, compan...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, then, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, as well as, to sum up, on the other hand, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 94.0 58.6224719101 160% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2317.0 2235.4752809 104% => OK
No of words: 451.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13747228381 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60833598836 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8724967716 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 215.323595506 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569844789357 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 723.6 704.065955056 103% => 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: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.7123106498 60.3974514979 132% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.722222222 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0555555556 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.2777777778 5.21951772744 197% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191662178842 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0619960255791 0.0831039109588 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0443600474147 0.0758088955206 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112132042763 0.150359130593 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0491574142715 0.0667264976115 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.43 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.