Law can change human behavior. Do you agree or not?
The substantial influences of law have sparked a controversy among the luminaries around the globe. While specific argument claimed that law is bound to change individuals behaviour, a group of intellectuals debate otherwise and hold an opponent's view. I am highly inclined to believe that legalization of human behaviour has a serious effect on social justice in society. The agenda of this article is to refine both sides of natural law impacts on social communities, which will lead to a legitimate conclusion.
At the outset, there are numerous reasons why law enforcement is inevitable. The most remarkable one is rooted in the fact that the law declaration polices criminal interactions. For instance, an outcome of a recent longitudinal study by a group of profound social activists in a prominent university revealed that 15% of lawbreakers had changed their attitudes after the legalization of a series of restricted acts. Hence, law declaration on humans behaviour relates to natural behaviour, social behaviour, political behaviour, criminal behaviour, as well as general behaviour.
Secondly, there remain drawbacks, which can unquestionably overwhelm the potential influences of legalized individual interaction, but the most alarming one lies in the fact that a law enforcement might lead to the aggressive social reactions. Moreover, recently it is alleged that verbal communication has decreased significantly by activists in a society with higher political laws. Therefore, the importance of controlled social interaction and its detriments which have adverse effects on social inequality, law education, lawyers community, legal processes, social achievements, human needs, as well as human rights is notable.
To recapitulate, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, my sentiment is that the benefits of establishing law on a human communication level far outweigh its drawback.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 444, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'humans'' or 'human's'?
Suggestion: humans'; human's
...tricted acts. Hence, law declaration on humans behaviour relates to natural behaviour,...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.5418719212 85% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 6.10837438424 49% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 8.36945812808 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 20.9802955665 67% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 31.9359605911 119% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.75862068966 260% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1640.0 1207.87684729 136% => OK
No of words: 287.0 242.827586207 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71428571429 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11595363751 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30832154437 2.71678728327 122% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 139.433497537 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.592334494774 0.580463131201 102% => OK
syllable_count: 527.4 379.143842365 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.6157635468 43% => OK
Article: 6.0 1.56157635468 384% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 1.71428571429 233% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.931034482759 107% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.65517241379 55% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.5024630542 112% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.236788572 50.4703680194 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.666666667 104.977214359 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9166666667 20.9669160288 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.25397266985 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 6.9802955665 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 2.75862068966 72% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 2.91625615764 69% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.172486300802 0.242375264174 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0623569893111 0.0925447433944 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0266447593067 0.071462118173 37% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107643958058 0.151781067708 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0141344880183 0.0609392437508 23% => 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: 17.4 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 53.1260098522 59% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.9458128079 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.61 8.32886699507 127% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 55.0591133005 193% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.94827586207 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.3980295567 108% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.5123152709 105% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 77.7777777778 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 70.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.