As history goes, the achievements in the field of technology made it able for us today to face problems not only about the present but also the future. Nevertheless, these problems were never dealt with before, thus we must seek solutions ourselves. Under this circumstance, many argue that we should learn from our ancestors’ wisdom. From my perspective, I would say that learning from the past is not the only way to overwhelm today’s problems.
Admittedly, the past provides us with abundant examples and methods for almost all kinds of problems. Though time and place might change, fundamental principles and methods may still apply. Let us take the foundation of the United States for example. The founding fathers of the nation created one of the youngest republics in the world, with barely any forerunners to guide them. Yet, they looked back to ancient Rome and gained the principles and methods from Rome’s structure of a republic. Until today, the United State’s democracy is still one of the nation’s pride.
However, the high rate of change in today’s society requires a lot more than learning from the past. Learning from the past alone can be a barrier to progressive ideas and inventions. A tradition from ancient times might be able to last for more than a thousand years without being obsolete in the past, but not in today’s world. Empires and dynasties in ancient China had been exploiting Confuciusm in ruling the country for thousands of years successfully, yet finally collapsed with the prevalence of democracy and industrial revolution. That is why we should not simply hold the past without reforming.
Therefore, one of the most needed perspectives is critically reviewing the past, and reforming traditions into new forms that can be adapted to today’s world. As mentioned above, the founders of the United States who did this brought the nation with prosper in the following centuries till now. On the contrary, also in the 18th and 19th centuries, the rulers of China who did not think of reforming existing ideas led China into the darkness of poverty and backwardness for over a century.
In conclusion, learning from the past is a good way to solve today’s problems, but not the only way. The wisdom of our ancestors might still work today, only by being combined with our new ideas considerating the tide of history.
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, look, may, nevertheless, so, still, therefore, thus, for example, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 43.0788530466 51% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1987.0 1977.66487455 100% => OK
No of words: 394.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04314720812 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73953822757 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545685279188 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1738114051 48.9658058833 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.35 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7 20.6045352989 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.45110844103 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => 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: 0.131546903676 0.236089414692 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0408017599176 0.076458572812 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0305384977689 0.0737576698707 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0734856937014 0.150856017488 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198479798776 0.0645574589148 31% => 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: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 86.8835125448 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, look, may, nevertheless, so, still, therefore, thus, for example, in conclusion, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 15.1003584229 79% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.0286738351 54% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 43.0788530466 51% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1987.0 1977.66487455 100% => OK
No of words: 394.0 407.700716846 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04314720812 4.8611393121 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45527027702 4.48103885553 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73953822757 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 212.727598566 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545685279188 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 618.680645161 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 9.0 3.08781362007 291% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.1738114051 48.9658058833 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.35 100.406767564 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7 20.6045352989 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.45110844103 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 11.8709677419 76% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => 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: 0.131546903676 0.236089414692 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0408017599176 0.076458572812 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0305384977689 0.0737576698707 41% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0734856937014 0.150856017488 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0198479798776 0.0645574589148 31% => 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: 12.2 11.7677419355 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 10.9000537634 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 86.8835125448 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.002688172 80% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.