"There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is
always guided by the observer's expectations or desires."
The debate between the two sides one favouring objectivity and the other favouring subjectivity have been prevalent. Same goes for the characterization of any observation. Profound thinkers and philosophers ranging from all domains of academia as well as outsiders to academia have been in severe exchange of polemics but in vain. To this day the contention prevails. My views align with the claim that there is no definite character to an observation. My views are explored are as below.
The characterization of an obervation relies heavily on the observer and are a subject to the whims and wishes for him or her. The character a observation will adore will be influenced by the characters that are habiliments to the observer. For example if the observer is unable to provide explanations or address a question or concern in the form of black and white, the observer will have a limited options to provide something meaningful which he might acheive by discerning the matter in a subjective perspective. This is one of the salient reason for the ambiguity of the nature of an observation. A person interpreting the same observation made by the observer but from a outsider point of reference might be able to distinguish the answers dweilling at the extremeties at the spectrum and thus, rendering the observation objective in particular to him.
Subjectivity renders profundity to some observations which are other wise termed as objective. This can be explained by a brief example of political biases. We can simply relate someone to a particular political organisation based on his inclination or similarities towards the idealogies the party or organization preaches. But such an objective observation blinds us to the nuances in the idealogical musings that person might have. Interpreting it subjectively, we can understand the asperity of his inclination oir alignment with those political views how much in accord he is with the political organisation's actions. This might result into us discovering that the person might possibly stand a more middle ground than what objective observation had initially posited.
Objectivity has it's own advantages in circumscribing the roundabout explanations in some aspects that soon turn bromide. For example the very debatable topic of whether homosexuality is immoral or moral, is observed and interpreted in objective perspective and thus renders homosexuality amoral based on two determining factors agaisnt which homosexuality fails to stand. The two factors being whether, one has the choice to opt out, and whether someone's action, disposition or state affects other's well being directly or indirectly. This helped pacifiy a contentious debate.
In sum, observations are not always objective neither subjective but having both kinds of interpretations ready at our disposal arms the observer to seek understanding of these observatiions. Had it been that either one of them was proscribed it would reduce in many observer's losing their interests to think and interpret the observations they had made, by manifolds.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 141, 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
...nd wishes for him or her. The character a observation will adore will be influenc...
^
Line 2, column 676, 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
...servation made by the observer but from a outsider point of reference might be ab...
^
Line 3, column 64, Rule ID: OTHER_WISE_OTHERWISE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'otherwise'?
Suggestion: otherwise
...ofundity to some observations which are other wise termed as objective. This can be explai...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 677, Rule ID: MIGHT_PERHAPS[1]
Message: Use simply 'might', 'possibly'.
Suggestion: might; possibly
...ult into us discovering that the person might possibly stand a more middle ground than what ob...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 677, Rule ID: MAY_COULD_POSSIBLY[1]
Message: Use simply 'might'.
Suggestion: might
...ult into us discovering that the person might possibly stand a more middle ground than what ob...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, thus, well, for example, in particular, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2595.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 483.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37267080745 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.26794001616 2.79657885939 117% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 215.323595506 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534161490683 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 843.3 704.065955056 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: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 68.1907421553 60.3974514979 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.826086957 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.73913043478 5.21951772744 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.313718343085 0.243740707755 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808668836504 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.088020378633 0.0758088955206 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171811140083 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0995709899588 0.0667264976115 149% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.8420337079 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 136.0 100.480337079 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.