Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Nowadays people are more willing to help people they don't know (for example, by giving clothing and food to people who need them) than they were in the past.
From a general point of view, human has always been caring about their fellowmen, probably intrinsically. Mankind generosity's magnitude and the ways to prompt it are among the most controversial subjects which often provoke many discussions. Some people keep endorsing the claim that humans were more generous and careful about each other in the past decades, or even centuries, whereas others dismiss this idea. Personally, it is my firm conviction that people have exposed more tendency to help the ones who are unknown recently. In what follows, I will aptly elucidate what rationale my perspective is based on.
To commerce, recent widespread communications by means of boomed technology has directly contributed to both detecting the needy and facilitate helping. To put it in a vivid picture, todays, all people, even from the outermost part of the world and regardless of their social class, have been in touch by social networking. Furthermore, there have shaped many online charity and NGOs which detect and introduce people who need help to fulfill their household needs readily by sending a post on Instagram or an email to interested people. Consequently, this has yielded result in occupying people's attention to the poor condition of their life and requirements and tempting them to help them as much as they can.
The second pivotal reason that bears in mind is that many centralized associations has been intended to advertise generosity and inducing people to help others which were all virtually unheard of centuries ago. Let me provide my own experience as a compelling example to illustrate this. When I was working in a consulting firm, a group of my coworkers had shaped a charity group called EB disease awareness, made up of hundreds of devoted individuals who traveled to various companies and give information about the aforementioned disease. Particularly, they expressed the cost of curing and the drugs and introduce the patients to people and tantalized them to cover part of this money. Needless to say that hardly were we familiar or even heard of this disease and for the sake of their awareness almost all of us adopted a part of the costs.
To put in a nutshell, the aforementioned reasons subscribe my perspective that these days generosity and helping unknown people is more appealing than past. This is not only the advanced technology has accelerated the act of helping and people are more prone to know the poor people since they all in touch in social networking, but also do many people participate in introducing various type of beggars by giving information about their needs in person.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 163, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...tys magnitude and the ways to prompt it are among the most controversial subjects w...
^^^
Line 3, column 847, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... all of us adopted a part of the costs. To put in a nutshell, the aforementioned...
^^^
Line 4, column 86, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'days'' or 'day's'?
Suggestion: days'; day's
...ons subscribe my perspective that these days generosity and helping unknown people i...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, if, second, so, whereas
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 9.8082437276 31% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 13.8261648746 145% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 43.0788530466 88% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 8.0752688172 74% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2202.0 1977.66487455 111% => OK
No of words: 432.0 407.700716846 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09722222222 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88394341651 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.56712962963 0.524837075471 108% => OK
syllable_count: 702.0 618.680645161 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.6003584229 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.1344086022 134% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 56.7676184105 48.9658058833 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.625 100.406767564 137% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 20.6045352989 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8125 5.45110844103 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.294365745772 0.236089414692 125% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0877513569609 0.076458572812 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0831621956956 0.0737576698707 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.188901659684 0.150856017488 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0802491781903 0.0645574589148 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 11.7677419355 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 58.1214874552 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 10.1575268817 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 10.9000537634 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.01818996416 119% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 86.8835125448 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.0537634409 127% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.