People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.
When decisions are based on emotion, the odds of decision favouring us are no more than 50% but when rational thinking is put into decision making, the odds of propitious outcome can increase. Decisions made in a hysterical situation are categorically poor decisions.
For instance consider the Indo-Pak war of 1971. The win of Indian side can be ascribed to rationalized logical thinking rather than emotion. The then Indian prime minister wanted to start the war in summers and was greatly derived by emotion. But thanks the Field Marshal Sam Manikshaw who considered the support China can give to Pakistan iin summer. He urged the prime minister to wait till winters when the himalyas are covered with snow and any assistance from chinese side would be difficult. Had the Prime minister not agreed to suggestion of Manikshaw, India would have lost the war to Pakistan because of assistance from China.
Although there can be cases where emotion based decision making have not gone wrong but that can be attributed to pure chance and actions that were taken after the decision was made. For instance, consider the case of surgical strike carried out by India in 2018 in response to attack on Indian military base. It was very fortunate for Indian side that pakistani army was notaware of planning and the outcome was in favor of India. Had the Pakistani army known about the attack and reataliated the surgical strike, it would have lead to casualities on Indian side. Similar case study of Air strike by India in response to Pulwama attack can easily conclude that the decision could have led to tremendous chaos if India had not been backed by international pressure on Pakistani side.
A good decision should include proper assessment of possible outcomes of that decision where as an emotion based decision is done in haste and without due considerations and can lead to equal odds of propitious as well as unfavorable outcomes.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-28 | AC1990 | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | lcosenza | 54 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | mrigimunjal | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-25 | likhithae | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-22 | yashincontrol | 50 | view |
- A recent study indicates that children living in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal have lower levels of tooth decay than children living in suburban areas in the United States, despite the fact that people in the Himalayan mountain region in Nepal re 26
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 50
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 50
- Company management should conduct routine monitoring of all employee e-mail correspondence. Such monitoring will reduce the waste of resources such as time and system capacity, as well as protect the company from lawsuits. 50
- The following is a letter from the parent of a private school student to the principal of that school:Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meal 69
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 88, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
...t of possible outcomes of that decision where as an emotion based decision is done in ha...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, then, well, for instance, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 33.0505617978 27% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1613.0 2235.4752809 72% => OK
No of words: 325.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96307692308 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24591054749 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59289151152 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 215.323595506 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.544615384615 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 529.2 704.065955056 75% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.1466972499 60.3974514979 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.214285714 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2142857143 23.4991977007 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.21428571429 5.21951772744 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24580928606 0.243740707755 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0804383047252 0.0831039109588 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0998150103767 0.0758088955206 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179290864618 0.150359130593 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106394929822 0.0667264976115 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.38706741573 103% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 100.480337079 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 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: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.