People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also the most critical of it.
People who are deeply committed to an idea are also the most critical to it. At a first glance, it seems to have some elements of truth, but one needs to evaluate this in the lights of various different scenarios. There are people who will argue against this assertion, with concrete examples where it’s not true. For most of such examples, a close examination will reveal that the commitment itself is in question, and not the hypotheses.
First, let us examine this for cases where the commitment is indubitable. The most obvious example is the parent-child relationship. It’s considered as the most selfless relationship in the nature. There is no doubt that parents fully commit themselves to their children, may be with very few exceptions. Now when it comes to the child’s progress, it’s the parents who are most critical about it. They look after every report card from the school, every movement in the playground, and will advise the child on how it could be improved. They do it because they aspire their child to be the best in everything, and not from any enmity. While they will expect their child to follow these advices, they will also make their lives difficult by being a part of it, by investing ore hour to take him to tuitions, proving with healthier food and many other such endeavors.
Similarly, when a scientist works on a theory or research, he tries to find error in everything until he thinks his point is well-proven, or nobody else can disprove it. When a sportsman tries hard to perfect himself, he criticizes him for slightest mistakes, toils hard in the gym or playground, because he want his mistakes to be exposed only to himself and not to the opponent in during the game. This happens is because these people have made commitments to themselves and not to anyone else.
On the other hand, there are opposite viewpoints as well, with most popular example being that of the politicians. People think they will any time go in reverse direction of what they committed earlier, if that direction is more lucrative in their career in current scenario. But a close look will reveal that the pooliticians do not commit to themselves as a sportsman or a scientist would do. They commit to people. Therefore if they renege on that later, our hypotheses has nothing to do.
There is only one very strong example, about religiousness. This is a question of belief and not logic, hence our assertion may not hold true here. People who are religious are committed, and are never critical to it, because they restrict themselves from using logic in it.
So to summarize, except may be a very small number of cases, the hypotheses seems to be agreeable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 309, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'he' must be used with a third-person verb: 'wants'.
Suggestion: wants
...rd in the gym or playground, because he want his mistakes to be exposed only to hims...
^^^^
Line 7, column 419, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...entist would do. They commit to people. Therefore if they renege on that later, our hypot...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, look, may, similarly, so, therefore, well, while, no doubt, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 57.0 33.0505617978 172% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2247.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 464.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84267241379 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69080072726 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508620689655 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 693.0 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.4720530879 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.625 118.986275619 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.41666666667 5.21951772744 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.282987486521 0.243740707755 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.09662215791 0.0831039109588 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.178046387702 0.0758088955206 235% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14183536705 0.150359130593 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.128098865819 0.0667264976115 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 14.1392134831 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.