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.
Whether 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 could be weighed in many aspects. However, the argument is flawed because it relies on various dubious assumptions.
Admittedly, the argument appears to have considerable merit. Studying history does provide us details about the past, and many of the similarities between ancient and current human society’s characteristics can be found in those documents. For example, not different from the past, people still use vessels to trade between continents and still cultivate lands nowadays.
However, the author fails to take the influence brought by technologies into account. Modern technologies may change or have already affected people’s life and mind. In ancient times, when people wanted to communicate with others who lived far away from them, they wrote letters. When they were writing letters, they usually needed to provide enormous details because the receiver could not respond to them immediately, but for people in modern society, they use e-mail or phones, which allow them to get a direct response immediately so they do not need to spend extraneous time to think of the context in their messages. In this case, we can not assure that the people living now are similar to those who lived in earlier times.
Moreover, the author falsely assumes that the history is impeccable. Yet history is written by winners, the authority prevails at the time mostly doesn’t allow to know it’s faults. Also, some parts of history might be missed due to its lack of usage of texts. Despite all of the records show that ancient life and behavior are similar to the people nowadays, there still should be some disparities hidden below the surface.
While on the surface the author’s claim appears to have some logical sense, it lacks information that is integral to identifying the statement is immaculate. If the author can ensure the correctness of the history, or that despite using different ways to communicate, what actually occurs in their mind are still tantamount to those in ancient times, the argument can be strengthened. Therefore, I fundamentally disagree with the conclusion the statement provides.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 161, Rule ID: TO_VB_ITS_NN[26]
Message: Did you mean 'to know its faults'?
Suggestion: to know its faults
...evails at the time mostly doesn’t allow to know it’s faults. Also, some parts of history might be m...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 161, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'knowing'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: knowing
...evails at the time mostly doesn’t allow to know it’s faults. Also, some parts of histor...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 269, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... to its lack of usage of texts. Despite all of the records show that ancient life and beha...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, then, therefore, while, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1930.0 2235.4752809 86% => OK
No of words: 368.0 442.535393258 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24456521739 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73221500225 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 215.323595506 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.567934782609 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 600.3 704.065955056 85% => 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: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.6919825821 60.3974514979 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.529411765 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6470588235 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.58823529412 5.21951772744 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.305375545417 0.243740707755 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0861023696695 0.0831039109588 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120874037202 0.0758088955206 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166940083896 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.135713019214 0.0667264976115 203% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 100.480337079 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.