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 claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
The prompts suggests that a work in any given field only merits value if it is proposed by an expert in that sphere. I mostly agree with this thesis for two main reasons.
First, the knowledge and skills required to produce a given work can only be sufficiently and holistically evaluated by an expert in the same area. For example, one can admire an aesthetically pleasing piece of furniture, however, only a person with an acumen for woodwork would be able to fully appreciate the amount of skill and training needed to produce a given piece.
Moreover, an expert community not only needed to evaluate the professionalism of a work’s author, but also to properly analyze the quality of a given work. For instance, if a new vaccine is developed, the medical community is to implement a number of procedures and reviews in order to evaluate the safety and health benefits of the proposed treatment. While the public might be vary of getting treated with a new drug, people at large do not possess enough professional knowledge to act as disinterested judges on the matter.
However, the public in general is an interested party which gains benefits from the processes of production. Maybe the most illustrative example for the role the public plays is contemporary art. This is one area where the expert evaluations depart greatly from the public ones. While many people argue that contemporary art is completely bogus, the experts tend to have ways to spotlight the quality artistic work. Nonetheless, art has a role to play in the society, so does it really fulfill its purpose when people do not understand what they are looking at? On the other hand, one can imagine a co-existence of an art valued highly by the experts and the publicly acclaimed works as well.
All in all, an expert opinion is needed to properly evaluate the knowledge and skill put into a given work, as well as the quality of the produced piece. However, public opinion should be taken into account in cases when the public has an interest in a given work.
| 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 |
- The following appeared in a memo to the board of directors of a company that specializes in the delivery of heating oil."Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel f 77
- 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 claim. In developing and supporting your pos 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 13, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'suggest'.
Suggestion: suggest
The prompts suggests that a work in any given field only mer...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 389, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e experts tend to have ways to spotlight the quality artistic work. Nonetheless, ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, may, moreover, nonetheless, really, so, well, while, for example, for instance, in general, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 33.0505617978 30% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1709.0 2235.4752809 76% => OK
No of words: 352.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85511363636 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33147354134 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72546696848 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 215.323595506 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.528409090909 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 704.065955056 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 43.1704631535 60.3974514979 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.933333333 118.986275619 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4666666667 23.4991977007 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5333333333 5.21951772744 202% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.171361135324 0.243740707755 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0662096292964 0.0831039109588 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.055900755901 0.0758088955206 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110969974739 0.150359130593 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524003440215 0.0667264976115 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
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: 11.2 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 81.0 100.480337079 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.