The main benefit of the study of history is to dispel the illusion that people living now are significantly different from people who lived in earlier times.
It’s commonly accepted that the study of history is necessary for every person who wants to have an all-around development. The statement holds the view that people learn history to reveal that people living now are virtually similar with the people living in earlier times. While this claim might initially sound somewhat plausible, I can not totally agree with it.
To begin with, I must express my appreciation for this perspective. It’s true that we can learn a lot from the events before. History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes, says Kempe. We can always find that the most significant events remembered by people have something in common more or less. Just like a dynasty would be overthrown because of their last incapable emperor. Therefore, the later leaders acknowledged that some behaviors would be deadly to their authority. By doing so, the emerging head can always reflect their own words and performances to bring a more robust country. That being said, I have to point out that the problem is overly simplified in above discussions.
However, as time go through, things are bound to change. I believe that everyone, even my opponents, wouldn’t deny that contemporary life has changed significantly compared with earlier times. In such a mercurial era, we may have a outright different lifestyle with few years ago. For example, it may be discountable for people to imagine the life with a phone only ten years ago. However, with the invention of mobile payment, we almost forget to take some cash around. In most cases, we can deal with all of the things with our phone only. The same logic applies to the military field. The government might have to worry about their message passenger’s credit at first, but we may concern more about the technology to guarantee our message transmitted by internet nowadays. From this point of view, it seems redundant to learn people’s behavior in earlier times in some situations.
Consequently, while both of the views above have merit. I argue that they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. We can get not only some specific methods but also some general thoughts from history. It’s no doubt that we can learn something useful from the monarchy, although all of us acclaims for democracy at present. However, the significance of history learning depends on the way we choose, but not the history itself. We should always base on our own situations, and get the helpful information from the written history. With this mind, we will get a huge amount of example to study. Not only the ways we should emulate, but also the mistakes we should avoid.
To sum up, it will be oversimplified to decide the history learning’s main benefits. Since the study of history is comprehensive, the advantages of it requires more deliberation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 236, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...s. In such a mercurial era, we may have a outright different lifestyle with few y...
^
Line 5, column 509, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...around. In most cases, we can deal with all of the things with our phone only. The same lo...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, may, so, therefore, while, for example, no doubt, in most cases, more or less, to begin with, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 53.0 33.0505617978 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2377.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 469.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06823027719 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65364457471 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81996464825 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550106609808 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 743.4 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.5879020442 60.3974514979 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 79.2333333333 118.986275619 67% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.6333333333 23.4991977007 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.93333333333 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194079417747 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0461155471791 0.0831039109588 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0847241948253 0.0758088955206 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128460067932 0.150359130593 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.104682489462 0.0667264976115 157% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 14.1392134831 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.8420337079 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.83 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => 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.