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.
Stating that 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, the author asserts that we can get realization about similarity between our ancestors and present people and this similarity can give chance to learn from history. In some senses, it is true that, human history, approximately 0.7million years, are too short for our nature, body, characteristic to be changed. In my point of view, however, considering that human being is largely affected by developed technology and culture or politic system, it is proper to say that there are deep between us contemporary people and previous people.
Of course, few would disagree that we are included a species Homo sapiens sapiens. Considering that basic desires of people is not changeable and have been continued since human history began, comparing with our life and their life and getting some lessons seems reasonable. For example, whether a woman wears clothes made from unrefined animal leather or wears artificial leather jacket, she wants to eliminate hungry and marry good man and raise cute children well. This shows that we originally have similar nature whether we are in modern society or in ancient society.
However, can we always say that modern people are absolutely same with people who live without technology? My answer is no. Considering that technology is pervaded in every parts of our life, we cannot say that the slow life style and lessons of that time cannot be fully applied to modern technology based society. For example, there have been many wars in human history and many generals have made their own tactics and teach them to next generations. At that time, soldiers fight with enemies with sword hand-to-hand, otherwise, in modern society, we can even eliminate a country from map with pushing one button. This shows that we cannot fully understand previous people.
Moreover, considering that our thought come from not only our own nature but media, culture and political system, we could be totally different from our previous generations. For example, political system of ancient nations were based on kingdom and empire or partial democracy and their leader was inherited following a royal blood. However, most of modern country are democratic and their leader are elected by general citizens. Then, can people who lived in kingdom can elect their leader with their own hands and understand these political systems?
To summarize, most people would agree that there are lots of common things in contemporary people and previous people. Considering that, however, technological and political development has changed tremendously our life and make some differences in us, only foolish people would claims that history can completely reflect our modern life, and reverse is also same.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 17, column 280, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'claim'
Suggestion: claim
...rences in us, only foolish people would claims that history can completely reflect ou...
^^^^^^
Line 17, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ish people would claims that history can completely reflect our modern life, and ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, moreover, so, then, well, for example, of course, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 26.0 14.8657303371 175% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.3162921348 194% => OK
Pronoun: 55.0 33.0505617978 166% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 12.9106741573 15% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2437.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 463.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26349892009 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63868890866 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60555023951 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 237.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.511879049676 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 771.3 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.38483146067 251% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.4872633433 60.3974514979 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.263157895 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3684210526 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42105263158 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.268656486554 0.243740707755 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0755939196131 0.0831039109588 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.137921495175 0.0758088955206 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.160222462104 0.150359130593 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.132949209959 0.0667264976115 199% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 14.1392134831 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.1639044944 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.