To be loyal is very important in this day and age where trust can be hard to find. However, sometimes, loyalty can become a bad influence and lead to a darker path than one in which peace is found. Ofcourse, how a person is influenced by loyalty depends on the person themselves, but I like to agree with the statement that loyalty is atleast as detrimental an influence as it is a beneficial one. The three main reasons why I have that belief. The first reason is that loyalty can lead to blind trust. Next history has shown that loyalty always acts like two-sides of a coin. Finally, loyalty can cloud our ability to judge a person's character as time progress and they change.
The first reason why I believe that loyalty can be a negative influence as a beneficial is that at times when we are loyal to someone we forget about the true nature of humans. For example, take a workplace where an employee works for their employer with all their might; however, when time comes, and someone has to be chosen to take the credit the employer takes it for themselves. Why does this happen? In majority of the cases this sort of event happens because the employee is too loyal to the employer and does not notice that they are only being used. This is a perfect example of how the employer’s loyalty, while beneficial as it pays the employee’s salary, was a detrimental influence.
History has shown that loyalty can lead to blind trust especially during the time period where kings used advisors. In the past when advisors were appointed by the kings, the king’s trust in the advisors was completely blind. From various history books we know how smart king and advisor pairs like Akbar and Birbal improved their kingdoms. However, there are examples of other pairs in which the advisor was blindly trusted by the king and led the kingdom to ruins. History shows that depending on human nature loyalty of an advisor can at least as beneficial as it can be a detrimental of an influence.
The final reason why I believe that loyalty can be as negative of an influence as a positive one is that, as time progresses how disadvantageous or advantageous of an influence is loyalty changes. When we meet a new person, we are not loyal to them as they are strangers to us; however, as time progresses, and we get to know them the loyalty in between each other increases. This increase in loyalty clouds our ability to judge the changes in the other person's character overtime. Some people might stay good, while others might lead onto a more mischievous path; without proper judgement of a person's character we are easily influenced to do any task as we believe them to be the good and loyal person they were once before.
It is obvious that there are multiple examples of situations where loyalty comes with only benefits. These especially occur between people who have no ulterior motives or only wish for the good of you. However, there are also many people in the world who lack the ability to be a beneficial influence on you. This occurs mainly because loyalty clouds our ability judge people even when their nature changes, and loyalty makes us take blind trust in peoples’ words. As history shows even too much loyalty can act as two sides of a coin.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 628, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...oyalty can cloud our ability to judge a persons character as time progress and they cha...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 76, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[2]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
... loyalty can be a negative influence as a beneficial is that at times when we are loyal to s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 455, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...ility to judge the changes in the other persons character overtime. Some people might s...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 596, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'persons'' or 'person's'?
Suggestion: persons'; person's
...ous path; without proper judgement of a persons character we are easily influenced to d...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, so, while, as to, at least, for example, sort of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 11.3162921348 221% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 56.0 33.0505617978 169% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2689.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 578.0 442.535393258 131% => OK
Chars per words: 4.65224913495 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90322654589 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4892610672 2.79657885939 89% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.425605536332 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 842.4 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3049348821 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.423076923 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2307692308 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.23076923077 5.21951772744 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 24.0 10.2758426966 234% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.397782341489 0.243740707755 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117958964873 0.0831039109588 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103846674947 0.0758088955206 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240643256833 0.150359130593 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0653686180659 0.0667264976115 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.99 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.38 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => 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.