Some people think historical sites should be open to the general public but others think historical sites should be only open to experts and researchers, which one do you prefer?
In the modern era, with the distribution of knowledge in different areas, discovering the history through the relics of ancients become more crucial to the academic societies in order to achieve momentous outcomes. Most of the academician contends that the historical sites should be cushioned from any public activities but academics. However, the ordinary people may take issue with this argument. From my vantage point, I, personally, believe the historical sites should be preserved from any disruptive actions except for academicians. In what follows I will delve into my most outstanding rationales to clarify my opinion.
First and the foremost reason is that the human beings need to know about traditions and it may assist us to recall the forgotten knowledge. Unfortunately, if visiting the historical sites will allow to the public before heuristics of mentioned knowledge, may have hazardous effect and eliminate some evidences. Moreover, some visitors and tourists may not be aware enough about the importance of these places. Take a personal experience as an example, there was a time I visited one the traditional castles in the east of Iran and I face some horrible evidences which are recently occurs by humans such as devastating some towers and drawing on the walls. Consequently, that place was useless to research and discovery.
The second reason which coming to my mind is that the discovered parts of these places should be convey to Museum after the research period. Undoubtedly, coinciding the research and discovery with the public visiting may cause defects on the evidences. It should be note that one of our duties is preserve these relics for the future generations and it is their rights to see tangible remains of the previous traditions. For instance, in Iran we had Takhte-Jamshid which was the mainstay of our history but it collapses and eliminated by some unaware (or villain) people. Nowadays, only some of the remarkable relics of this precious place may found in the France and England museums.
To make a long story short, this is our duty to protect our history and especially historical places which are the oceans of knowledge and may survive our pride to the country. It should be done because the next generations will ask us and we have to prepare a legitimate response in addition to the importance of preserving such place to discovering the knowledge. To conclude, I highly suggest that the universities and academician should intensify the pressure to the governments to hold these place only to academic institutions and therefore, the brilliant outcomes may come as surprise.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-04-15 | Roya Ebrahimi | 90 | view |
| 2020-04-15 | Roya Ebrahimi | 90 | view |
| 2020-04-15 | Roya Ebrahimi | 90 | view |
| 2019-12-06 | woeiz | 93 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 98, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'conveyed'?
Suggestion: conveyed
...covered parts of these places should be convey to Museum after the research period. Un...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 267, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'noted'?
Suggestion: noted
... defects on the evidences. It should be note that one of our duties is preserve thes...
^^^^
Line 5, column 586, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...aware or villain people. Nowadays, only some of the remarkable relics of this precious plac...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, so, therefore, except for, for instance, in addition, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 9.8082437276 184% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 43.0788530466 84% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 52.1666666667 111% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2210.0 1977.66487455 112% => OK
No of words: 427.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1756440281 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90025635548 2.67179642975 109% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 212.727598566 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529274004684 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 719.1 618.680645161 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 9.59856630824 52% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2220113276 48.9658058833 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.777777778 100.406767564 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.7222222222 20.6045352989 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.83333333333 5.45110844103 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 11.8709677419 51% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.85842293907 207% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.235425355492 0.236089414692 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0729263951722 0.076458572812 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0651834610788 0.0737576698707 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143569881682 0.150856017488 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0263525919476 0.0645574589148 41% => 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: 14.8 11.7677419355 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 10.9000537634 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.01818996416 117% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 86.8835125448 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.