No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.
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.
I agree that the contributions of outsiders can be crucial for advancing a field of study, but it is important to recognize that insider perspectives also have valuable knowledge and expertise that should be respected and utilized. In this response, I will discuss the extent to which I agree or disagree with the statement and explain my reasoning for the position I take.
First, it is important to note that the input of individuals with diverse backgrounds and perspectives can lead to new ideas and approaches. Outsiders, who may not be as entrenched in the current paradigms of a field, can bring fresh perspectives and question assumptions that insiders may take for granted. This can lead to breakthroughs and the identification of previously unseen opportunities for advancement. For example, the field of computer science has greatly benefited from the input of individuals from various fields such as physics, biology, and psychology.
However, while the contributions of outsiders can be valuable, they should not be seen as the sole drivers of advancement in a field. Insiders, or individuals who have dedicated their careers to a specific field of study, also have important knowledge and expertise that should be respected and utilized. They have a deep understanding of the field's history, current state, and future directions. Additionally, they have the skills and resources necessary to implement new ideas and approaches. Therefore, it is important for outsiders to collaborate and work with insiders in order to fully realize the potential of their contributions.
Additionally, it is important to acknowledge that not all fields are equally open to outsider input. Some fields, such as those with strong established hierarchies or gatekeepers, may be more resistant to outside perspectives. Furthermore, the process of incorporating outside perspectives and ideas must be done in an inclusive and respectful manner, avoiding tokenization or appropriation of others' work.
Moreover, it is also important to remember that not all fields of study have the same needs and requirements. Some fields may be more dependent on outside perspectives while others may not. For example, fields such as mathematics and fundamental physics, where the laws and principles are independent of the observer, may not require as much outsider input. In contrast, fields such as sociology and anthropology, which study human behavior, may require more diverse perspectives.
In summary, I agree that the contributions of outsiders can be crucial for advancing a field of study, but it is important to recognize the value of insider perspectives and ensure that any outside input is incorporated in an inclusive and respectful manner. Furthermore, it is important to consider that not all fields have the same needs and requirements and some fields may be more dependent on outsider perspectives than others. Therefore, it is essential to strike a balance between the two and collaborate in order to achieve the best results.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 344, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'fields'' or 'field's'?
Suggestion: fields'; field's
.... They have a deep understanding of the fields history, current state, and future dire...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, while, for example, in contrast, in summary, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 31.0 14.8657303371 209% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2566.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 475.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.40210526316 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.66845742379 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26623556053 2.79657885939 117% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.418947368421 0.4932671777 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 804.6 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.7201987909 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.19047619 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.619047619 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.21951772744 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.27025757443 0.243740707755 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908560582728 0.0831039109588 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629903841163 0.0758088955206 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164334767143 0.150359130593 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0720317565294 0.0667264976115 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 100.480337079 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.