People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
A survey in 2018 suggests that roughly 55% of young adults would enjoy risky outdoor activities in Log Angels. However, when it comes to some decisions relevant to their life patterns, would they still enjoy these thrills? Some people even make the prompt that everyone should carefully consider the consequence of one thing before they actually undertake its potential risks. However, from my point of view, I have to admit that sometimes it is necessary for us to prepare prudently, yet we might need some unpredictable risks to challenge ourselves.
To begin with, there is no doubt that we should carefully consider the possible ramifications of our actions, of our decisions, especially when it involves not only ourselves but also the interests of others. We all know that the establishment of nuclear plants would have more or less influence on people living nearby, albeit to its steady supply of electricity. However, what happened in Chernobyl is a typical example where the authority did not fully consider the potentially catastrophic results. In order to celebrate the upcoming anniversary, the administrator took risks to cutback the backup electricity to pass one security test. However, they hadn’t fully thought about the possible risks such as the possible nuclear leakage and exploration afterwards and imprudently cut down the supply, and then a disaster effecting both local dwellers and the whole Europe happened. What if the officials could consider more beforehand and try to fix the flaws in nuclear reactors firstly? Perhaps, then, such a terrifying exploration might be forestalled. In short, it is absolutely necessary to fully consider the following risks and results before taking action if it has any entanglement with other people.
On the other hand, if what we would undertake would only affect ourselves, maybe it is not that unjustifiable to rush into action. To be specific, our life cannot be completely predicted, and there are millions of possibilities caused by one single action as what the Butterfly Effect depicts, so risks can never be absolutely ruled out. For example, when choosing a major for undergraduate study, entering student would often spend days or even months ruminating on its future prospects or its career opportunities in order to avoid risks such as facing a dilemma that they could not find jobs in the future. However, this seems not so exigent to think about so many factors since everything is capricious: one ‘hot’ field of study might lose its advantage a few years later. Therefore, students may only need follow their heart and choose whatever they like to pursue the pure enjoyment of study without too much consideration.
In conclusion, it is difficult to criticize whether wary consideration before taking risky actions is positive or negative since every situation has its uniqueness. From my perspective, it is not a prerequisite when things would not entangle with others, but otherwise, a necessity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1079, Rule ID: ABSOLUTELY_ESSENTIAL[1]
Message: Use simply 'necessary'.
Suggestion: necessary
...n might be forestalled. In short, it is absolutely necessary to fully consider the following risks a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, however, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, in short, no doubt, such as, more or less, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2524.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 479.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26931106472 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9272393287 2.79657885939 105% => OK
Unique words: 279.0 215.323595506 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582463465553 0.4932671777 118% => OK
syllable_count: 798.3 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6710935388 60.3974514979 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.842105263 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2105263158 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1052631579 5.21951772744 194% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151300215834 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.044937116991 0.0831039109588 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.039171295165 0.0758088955206 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0958158061435 0.150359130593 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00959016894891 0.0667264976115 14% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 100.480337079 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.