It is more important to keep your old friends than it is to make new friends.
Friends, are not just an integral part of our social life but also of our personal life. It is widely believed that our close peer circle defines our behavior; a good one makes us progressive while the other causes degression. However, close observation into the life of successful people communicates the insight that success of an individual is defined by his/her ability to make new friends, the good ones who can help one learn and grow. Therefore, I believe that it is always better to make new friends rather than adhering to the old ones. While the excessive reliance on old friends takes a form of status quo that impedes the progess, making new friends makes one ebullient and opens innovative gateways in life.
Making new friends is the way of adding more people to our social list; it is actually the way of expanding our network. In the 21st century, the moment of an individual is defined by his network, as it opens more possibilities, more opportunities and more support in life. To justify this reasoning, we can consider an example of a CEO of a multinational company. If the CEO has wide friend circle, he/she can expand the business to new areas, thereby increasing the success of the firm. Unlike the CEO with narrow social exposure, the former can learn about more business possibilities and can raise the company to apex very quickly. The same idea applies to professionals in every field: politics, science, business or arts.
While limiting the self with only old friends causes the stagnation of knowledge and lifestyle, making new friends overts our mentality to the new culture, lifestyle and perceptions. In the group of same old friends, we tend to think and act the same way. What does it do more than hindering our exploration of ideas, risks and opportunities? We can consider an example of a person from India being a friend with a person from the USA. It is obvious that both get an opportunity to learn about the apparently different lifestyle and way of thinking. It is undoubted that it makes one more creative and seasoned.
Those who are receptive to new people in their life are the most adaptive ones. They are the ones who can stay comfortable in a wide range of social situations. Moreover, they are more likely to contribute to the betterment of the world. For instance, the friendship between James Watson and Francis Crick, two people from different fields of study and nationalities, solved the greatest mystery of molecular biology, the structure of DNA. Their different specializations, when conversed on the same goal, produced a miraculous outcome. It is their openness, respect and welcomes to new people in their life, that made them preemptive than rest of the world.
It is evident from the above reasonings that new friends make one more abreast to the dynamics of the society in addition to revealing innovative possibilities in career and life. Thus, it is always better to make new friends as compared to staying steadfast to old friends.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 209, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'causes'' or 'cause's'?
Suggestion: causes'; cause's
...ne makes us progressive while the other causes degression. However, close observation ...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to staying steadfast to old friends.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, apparently, but, however, if, moreover, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 15.1003584229 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 68.0 52.1666666667 130% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2502.0 1977.66487455 127% => OK
No of words: 511.0 407.700716846 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.89628180039 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76160955555 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 212.727598566 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481409001957 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 797.4 618.680645161 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 17.0 9.59856630824 177% => OK
Article: 7.0 3.08781362007 227% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.94265232975 61% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.6003584229 121% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.378296332 48.9658058833 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.08 100.406767564 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.44 20.6045352989 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.36 5.45110844103 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 11.8709677419 160% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.331993611563 0.236089414692 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0986582185849 0.076458572812 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0934184559709 0.0737576698707 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213396854285 0.150856017488 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0901887515828 0.0645574589148 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 11.7677419355 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.14 10.9000537634 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.49 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 86.8835125448 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.