The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.
A frequent matter of debate is whether conveniences of today are causing us to remain in an invirtuous state, oblivious of what real hardship is like, and ultimately not becoming strong individuals. Below I will argue that while this line of though has its merits, it is ultimately unpersuasive.
The main argument for luxuries spoiling the capacity to develop strength is that the people who have never experienced a certain set of problems have the tendency to take their solutions for granted. For instance, a person that has never had to perform hard physical labor to satiate her hunger might not know what it is truly like to desire food, merely by the accident of being born into a society affluent enough to accommodate for those needs no matter what she does. However, this should be viewed as a blessing rather than a curse. The fact that humanity has made progress in its strides such that the most acute problems of the population are eradicated is ultimately good for all of us.
Furthermore, we should not rule out that a new society allows us to grow as individuals in other ways, channeling the effort that previously would have gone into survival into other creative activities that require the same sense of fatique and responsibility that was previously necessary for performing tasks of a more mundane nature. While people today might not starve if they fail to take responsibility, their negligence still have a negative impact on them if they act weak or dependable. A person who neglects his or her duties will suffer the consequences through loneliness, unemployment, or poor health. There is still a lot of potential suffering in the world, even for the privileged, if they do not shoulder their responsibilities -- it is merely manifested differently than it has before.
Finally, some human problems never change no matter the technological leaps. The interaction between friends, family members or even lovers cannot be altered significantly by technology, nor reduced to numbers. Maintaining healthy relationships to other people is a struggle that we all have to deal with, no matter our societies or limitaitons, and in these domains the capacity to develop strength and character will always persist as long as there are human beings to interact with. In some domains, we all have to deal with virtually similar struggles no matter our societies or circumstances.
Hence, we should ultimately not equivocate technological progress as removing the need for human virtues – only as tranforming their concrete manifestations. A person’s character will always have a profound impact on her life, and while the problems do not look exactly the same as they always have, technology or the luxuries of our times should not be viewed as detrimental to neither the capacity nor the necessity to develop into a strong individual.
- A jazz music club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise. At present, the nearest jazz club is over 60 miles away from Monroe; thus, our proposed club, the C Note, would have the local market all to itself. In addition, there is ample evi 66
- The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals. 66
- “Governments are justified in circumventing civil laws when doing so is vital to the protection of national security.”Write an essay in which you take a position on the statement above. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider w 66
- a 16
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. 66
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, furthermore, hence, however, if, look, so, still, while, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 33.0505617978 136% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 53.0 58.6224719101 90% => 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: 2398.0 2235.4752809 107% => OK
No of words: 470.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10212765957 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65612321451 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98304281783 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536170212766 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 764.1 704.065955056 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.1161873054 60.3974514979 131% => OK
Chars per sentence: 149.875 118.986275619 126% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.375 23.4991977007 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114419160184 0.243740707755 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.030791496759 0.0831039109588 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0413727398855 0.0758088955206 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0648241632405 0.150359130593 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0268975194107 0.0667264976115 40% => 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: 17.3 14.1392134831 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.1639044944 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 112.0 100.480337079 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.