People who are most deeply connected to an idea or a policy are the most critical of it.
According to me ther are people who recognize an idea and stay adherent to it in a way so that they can state the pros and cons of the same. Criticizing an idea needs some prerequisite knowledge about it. This is obtained only if you study about the subject or research about it.
It is human behaviour to circumspect about any given topic in all ways possible. This can usually seen when one needs to take up a new thing in an unknown field. For example if someone is paying for a investment then the general prudent person would inspect all the possible flaws in the policy. A person criticizes a notion only if he/she knows about it in depth. Thus the more deeply an individual connected to an idea the more cautious or in this case critical he/she will be.
Also it can be said that as the people who are siding to a policy would know more about it would also know more about the flaws in the same. So basically criticizing is pointing out those flaws in any thing. The case of any security system can be taken into account where the security supplier would know all about the system’s vulnerability. So if a policy criticized about by a person who is known to it, the policy can be defended well against attackers. In this example, the policy being highly analogous to the security system.
But this can not always be taken as a general postulate. There are people who follow people blindly. So accepting an idea without criticizing it can be possible. People who are unorthodox and believe in rules and customs made by their ancestors without questioning the validity of their origin never criticize about it. For instance in India there are tons of beliefs such as not scraping the nails after sunset as it brings bad omen. But the true reason for that to be believed by their ancestors is that in earlier days people couldn’t see properly in night time due to no electricity. Thus people indubiously follow these beliefs.
But as the percentage of these kind of people in severly plummeting it is possible that the above statement could be considered mostly true. So in near future it could be said that people adhereing to an idea of policy would criticize it most.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: ACCORDING_TO_ME[1]
Message: This phrase can sound awkward in English. Consider using 'in my opinion' or 'I think'.
Suggestion: In my opinion; I think
According to me ther are people who recognize an idea a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...d. For example if someone is paying for a investment then the general prudent per...
^
Line 3, column 366, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...only if he/she knows about it in depth. Thus the more deeply an individual connected...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... in this case critical he/she will be. Also it can be said that as the people who a...
^^^^
Line 4, column 197, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[2]
Message: Did you mean 'anything'?
Suggestion: anything
...ticizing is pointing out those flaws in any thing. The case of any security system can be...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 26, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
...se beliefs. But as the percentage of these kind of people in severly plummeting it is p...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, so, then, thus, well, for example, for instance, kind of, 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: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 2235.4752809 81% => OK
No of words: 391.0 442.535393258 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.6189258312 5.05705443957 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44676510885 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5444241451 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 215.323595506 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483375959079 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 590.4 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.8871688144 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.0909090909 118.986275619 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7727272727 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.63636363636 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.344830366928 0.243740707755 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101568364231 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0967399995557 0.0758088955206 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.198935777855 0.150359130593 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669954061961 0.0667264976115 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 14.1392134831 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.22 12.1639044944 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.51 8.38706741573 90% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 100.480337079 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.