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.
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.
Technology has proven to be an evolutionary tool in changing the livelihoods of many civilizations. In a world that is continuously globalizing, people are living differently than they have years ago. Therefore, I can neither agree nor disagree with the claim that the main benefit of history is dismissing the illusion that people living now are significantly different from people who lived in early times. History has a way of significantly proving that humans are not that different from their ancestors in the past. However, because the world continues to change at a rapid pace with the help of technology, our livelihoods are quite disparate.
When studying history, historical events prove evidential in how people are not that different from humans in the past. For instance, when taking a look at the current state of the world today, the coronavirus is a virus that has not been introduced in the past. However, pandemics are not new to society at large. During the 1700s, the Black Plague was a pandemic that infected and decimated the lives of many civilians. In the early 1900s, the Spanish flu infected millions worldwide. Hence, historical events of diseases have proven that that humans in the past and present are susceptible to illness, which makes us no different.
On the other hand, modern day protests of the Black Lives Matter movement are not that different from the past. For example, the peaceful protests of the movement resemble what Martin Luther King promoted in the past in regards to racial equality. On the flip side, the violence in the protests today resemble the protests during the late 1900s when Rodney King was inquetiably killed by a police officer, which sparked burnings of buildings and stores in Los Angeles. Thus, human revolts throughout history are not quite different from modern day protests. Furthermore, it is undeniable that history shows how people are not that different from people in the past.
However, with the rise of technology, modern day citizens are quite different than people in the past. Due to technological advances in transportation and communication, people are living different lifestyles. In the past, history has shown that people had to walk miles to a location. Today, many people take modes of transportation, such as cars, trains, and even bikes. Additionally, our ancestors could only communicate with others by delivering messages or even through face-to-face contact. Today, smartphones and tablets are used to communicate with people from across the room to across the globe. Therefore, we are not the same as our ancestors in the past.
Furthermore, I conclude that history does have a major benefit in proving that humans are not that different from humans in the past. However, with the rise of technology that changes the livelihoods of many people, it changes the way civilizations are compared to in the past. Therefore, I can neither agree nor disagree with the statement.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 217, Rule ID: IN_REGARD_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'regarding' or 'with regard to'.
Suggestion: regarding; with regard to
...Martin Luther King promoted in the past in regards to racial equality. On the flip side, the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 79, Rule ID: RATHER_THEN[2]
Message: Did you mean 'different 'from''? 'Different than' is often considered colloquial style.
Suggestion: from
...modern day citizens are quite different than people in the past. Due to technologica...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, hence, however, if, look, so, therefore, thus, for example, for instance, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.4196629213 24% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 11.3162921348 212% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2485.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 484.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13429752066 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69041575982 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85921375657 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.448347107438 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 782.1 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.9101719257 60.3974514979 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5769230769 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6153846154 23.4991977007 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.34615384615 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.83258426966 269% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296227128084 0.243740707755 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0845129836474 0.0831039109588 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0945935703489 0.0758088955206 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173560573188 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0813143707186 0.0667264976115 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 100.480337079 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.