The study of history has value only to the extend that is relevant to our daily lives
The issue of whether history has value only to the extent that is relevant to our daily lives has engendered controversy and can be divided into two schools of thought. On the one hand, staunch defenders promote the magnanimous role of history, as the motivation for our development and dominance. On the other hand, opponents contend that history should be used and studied only to the themes that are pertinent to our daily lives. Personally speaking, I deem the former argument sound, rejecting the latter one as an ambiguous and dubious premise.
First and foremost, history always helps individuals to learn from the past. People have the unique chance to explore incidents and circumstances that have happened in the past and therefore be motivated to face adverse situations of the future. Additionally, studying history may also inspire people to go one step further and pursue greatness, comparing themselves with the great personalities of the previous years. For example, in Greece during the previous century many notable archeologists and historians have discovered the ruins of the temple of Hermes in Athens. Consequently, that achievement has triggered a strong interest and motivation for recent scientists to explore and determine their role about new findings. It is clearly illustrated, in the Northern part of the country where some excavations are considered to have discovered the grave of Alexander the Great.
Moreover, history encapsulates all these elements that individuals need in order to determine themselves and discern them from others. Admittedly, each nation or religious group has its own commons, mores and values. In particular, Christians around the world can learn from the study of history what does it mean to be Christian and what is their common scope. They could also adjust their values and disciplines according to the standards of Christianity. Most important, they can fathom to the way of their social and religious life as well as learn to respect other religious groups. Hence, not only does history suggest the scope of human beings but also implements the fundamentals for thriving and determination.
According to the other school of thought, history should be regarded only to the extent that is relevant to our daily lives. Such a perception may dismiss important elements that have helped people prosper during the centuries. It is clearly illustrated at the case of the industrial revolution. Even by visiting a factory today we could easily estimate how many different and frustrating technological advances, have improved our daily lives the last years. All these may seem ambiguous and extraneous to the common mind, strongly criticizing them. On the contrary, they have shaped our daily lives with abundance and conspicuous benefits.
In conclusion, although history constitutes the motivating power for humans to go forward and thrive in terms of social and financial aspects, many tend to disregard its role. I wholeheartedly believe that history was always the path for people to prosper and create equal societies. The common sense that unites people and makes them peacefully coexist. History ensures the past, aspires the present and leads forward to a brilliant future.
Comments
good
good
good
good
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 359, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...tory today we could easily estimate how many different and frustrating technological advances,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, may, moreover, so, then, therefore, well, for example, in conclusion, in particular, as well as, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 27.0 14.8657303371 182% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2750.0 2235.4752809 123% => OK
No of words: 513.0 442.535393258 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36062378168 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75914943092 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85700030532 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 276.0 215.323595506 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538011695906 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 846.9 704.065955056 120% => 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: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.5687936233 60.3974514979 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 105.769230769 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7307692308 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.69230769231 5.21951772744 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 20.0 10.2758426966 195% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.297245960306 0.243740707755 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0722223477696 0.0831039109588 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100569692477 0.0758088955206 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166578895559 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.119311373426 0.0667264976115 179% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 14.1392134831 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 48.8420337079 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 100.480337079 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.