Some people believe that in order to thrive, a society must put its own overall success before the well-being of its individual citizens. Others believe that the well-being of a society can only be measured by the general welfare of all its people.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented
The author claims that there are two different views toward requirements for the thrive of a nation. While there is some group that believes that the progress of a society is mostly depended on its overall achievements; another group adheres the role of all individuals’ welfare at the prospers of society. In what follows, I will list the possible clues which support both groups attitude; and finally, I will mention my viewpoint.
The group that emphasizes to national success and achievement and underestimates the wellbeing of denizens may adherent this view with the reason that any thrive requires the sacrifices. The welfare of all individuals can be overlooked if there is the possibility of achievement at the national level. For instance, this group of people assumes that the construction of the dam over a river a crucial if this construction makes that nation becomes independent of other countries for fulfilling their electricity demand. In this process, the probability of homelessness or joblessness of some people who lives or works close to that river is underestimated by this group, since the ultimate outcome makes the society an independent and self-sufficient country.
As mentioned, there is another group of people who weigh the well-being of the whole citizens instead of crux achievement in the national scope. This group may hold this perspective that any achievement is accessible by the accomplishment of nationals. In addition, there is a correlated link between the individuals’ well-being and endeavors to access success in society. Indeed, this group believes that if the citizens of society are fulfilled by their initial requirements, they are stress-free and possess more arenas for further creative and interesting activities. The chance of achieving a striking success by these creative affairs is so high. Consequently, a nation with a good stand national has more chance of shining.
I should say that this is the second attitude with which I mostly concur. First of all, from my point of view, the reason for which the second group relies on to support their opinion is sensible and plausible. Furthermore, I have one more example which depicts why the first group's view is incorrect. A lucid instance of dominate success by a society which totally overlooks the welfare of its denizens is the success of North Korea for the empowerment of its military force. Actually, the powerful and invincible military is one of the initial demands of each country to feel safe and secure; however, does this empowerment cost to the welfare of individuals of that society?! North Korea possesses a great force; on the other hand, its denizens are in poverty and adversity since they cut their relationship with other countries and have an isolated lifestyle. Does the value of this achievement is that much high to become isolated?!
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned arguments illustrates that the important achievement of any society is based on its public and citizens.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 78, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...different views toward requirements for the thrive of a nation. While there is some group ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 144, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ty is based on its public and citizens.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, second, so, well, while, as for, for instance, in addition, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 11.3162921348 186% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 33.0505617978 136% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2538.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 487.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21149897331 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69766713281 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07244501504 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 215.323595506 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47227926078 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 800.1 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.7941588962 60.3974514979 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.578947368 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6315789474 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.84210526316 5.21951772744 169% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229000317695 0.243740707755 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0715029486209 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0727829208868 0.0758088955206 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135611908823 0.150359130593 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0154711958161 0.0667264976115 23% => 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: 15.9 14.1392134831 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 100.480337079 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.