Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Over the years, humans have come to judge ideas across fields as to their viabilty or logical soundness. Our judgements have generally not always been in fields we are experts in. As someone aptly puts it; "As regards every matter, everyone usually has an opinion". However, the question here is how much of value can be placed on people's judgement, especially when they are not experts in the fields they are applying that judgement to. Critical judgement as reagrds any given work in any given field should be given by those who are experts in the field. Little value should be placed on any other opinions for three significant reasons.
First, to critically judge any work or subject matter, one has to have adequate knowledge of that subject matter. For example, it is not logical for a surgical operation about to performed to be termed impossible or even careless ny an engineer. While an engineer is a professional in his/her own right and should be treated as an expert in that field of study, it makes no sense for any substantial value to be placed on his/her judgement when the field of study changes. Even if the opinion is to be given by a dentist, as closely related to a surgery as the field may be, the opinion is still of little significance. Every field have their nuances and thus for any work in that field to be critically judged, it has to be an expert in that field. This would ensure that the judgement is as objective and factual as possible.
Second, apart from the esoteric knowledge individual fields have, the question of experience in that field in also important. For example, when Doctor Ben Carson wanted to attempt to seperate the siamese twins for the first time in known human history, the entire medical world and by extension, the society thought he was being overly ambitious and careless. However, his supervisor who had the experience in the particular set of surgical principles that Ben wanted to employ believed it was possible and rest, as they say, is history. There are also several other examples in history where not just the knowledge of the field was important to critically judge the work in that field butalso the experience in that field. Thus, to critically judge the work in a field both the knowledge of that field and relevant experience is important.
It might be argued that critical thinking is a skill that is not field specific. While this assertion may be true for general topics that everybody is fairly familiar with, it is simply not true for judging works that are very field specific. Critical thinking is an exercise that is very much based on the amount of knowledge one has in that subject matter. Without the adequate amount of knowledge, one runs into the errors of hasty generalization, correlation-causation misappropraition among other logical fallacies. Placing too much value on non-expert opinions would only cause avoidable harm in the long run.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-19 | jason123 | 83 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | cnegus | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-04 | tg763622253 | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-22 | ghazalsaed1995 | 16 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | Dipu2012 | 33 | view |
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers. 66
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals."In a laboratory study of liquid antibacterial hand soaps, a concentrated solution of UltraClean produced a 40 percent greater reduction in the bacteria population than 52
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 66
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers. 66
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader, it is not as important as a leader’s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers. 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 23, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Over the years, humans have come to judge ideas across fields a...
^^
Line 1, column 539, Rule ID: WHO_NOUN[1]
Message: A noun should not follow "who". Try changing to a verb or maybe to 'who is a are'.
Suggestion: who is a are
...ny given field should be given by those who are experts in the field. Little value shou...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 384, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...us and careless. However, his supervisor who had the experience in the particular...
^^
Line 5, column 695, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lly judge the work in that field butalso the experience in that field. Thus, to c...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, still, thus, while, apart from, as regards, as to, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 37.0 19.5258426966 189% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 11.3162921348 203% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 58.6224719101 109% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2442.0 2235.4752809 109% => OK
No of words: 502.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.86454183267 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.7334296765 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71163541421 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 232.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.462151394422 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 781.2 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.5979282771 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.0 118.986275619 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8181818182 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.276984472089 0.243740707755 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0942387674443 0.0831039109588 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.071658135075 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.18542050885 0.150359130593 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0464876794419 0.0667264976115 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 100.480337079 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.