Claim: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future.
Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate.
Fact is the information derived after the careful evaluation of the premises. Hence, anything can be considered as fact once there is evidence to believe in its authenticity. The claim suggests that information referred to as a fact should not be trusted because it will be proved false in the future. In my opinion, I do not agree with the recommendation because of the following reasons.
First, the reason states that people assume most of the information as factual will be proven inaccurate in the future. Indeed, we cannot trust any random information as it is evident that there is no reasoning given to prove random information. We must ensure the validation of the presented information through careful scrutinization before confirming it. If we believe in any specious information, it is likely to be proved wrong in the future. For example, many years ago, people believed that the earth is in the center and sun is revolving around it, without asking for the evidence. The assumption proved unwarranted when some scientists proved using the logical explanation that the sun is in the center and earth is revolving around it. Since then, no one question the validity of the latter fact because it proved using the logical explanation which cannot be denied. The above example demonstrates that the spurious information without logical evidence should be mistrusted, but people should trust on the fact which is derived from the logical and valid explanation.
Furthermore, if we mistrust all the facts just because it can be proved false in the future, humans cannot develop. As human beings, we can think intellectually and prove the present phenomena right or wrong, which helps us in development. For many years, scientists presented many theories and proved their validation, in the development of the latter theory, scientists use the formal proven theory. It may happen that a particular theory will be nullified in the future because it consists of certain logical fallacies or unproven assumptions due to a lack of data. However, it is not feasible to assume that every fact will be proven wrong in the future. Hence, it is essential to trust the previously proven facts for human development; otherwise, humans would remain stuck on one point and never be able to grow as it is today. For example, Newton proves the theory of gravitational force and presented that each element has gravitational force according to their mass. Some of the newton theories proved false because Newton assumed it and did not provide the data needed. However, if no one had believed him and reject his gravitational theory, then maybe there is no space exploration possible today. Nevertheless, people trusted his theory and used it as the primary background in solving other complex problems, which drastically enhanced human life. Like, using newton's third law and measuring the earth's gravitational law, we can launch the rockets in space. The above example illustrates that the proven facts can be trusted and should not be rejected just because it may be unwarranted.
All things considering, we can say that any assumed factual pieces of information are likely to be proven wrong in the future because it is based on the unproven assumption rather than calculated logic. However, the logical and scientifically proven facts remain valid in the future as it is derived from the calculated logic. Hence, we should always trust the proven facts.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-12 | HAN YEBIN | 50 | view |
| 2023-09-21 | Dipesh1234 | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-05 | wopona8219 | 66 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | Kamnele | 33 | view |
| 2023-08-18 | IshaanN | 50 | view |
- The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of Butler Manufacturing During the past year workers at Butler Manufacturing reported 30 percent more on the job accidents than workers at nearby Panoply Industries where the work shifts are one hou 47
- The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of human minds 50
- The well being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority 54
- Some people believe that corporations have a responsibility to promote the well being of the societies and environments in which they operate Others believe that the only responsibility of corporations provided they operate within the law is to make as mu 54
- Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 977, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: Some
...tational force according to their mass. Some of the newton theories proved false because Ne...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 376, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e should always trust the proven facts.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, third, for example, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 55.0 58.6224719101 94% => OK
Nominalization: 28.0 12.9106741573 217% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2892.0 2235.4752809 129% => OK
No of words: 566.0 442.535393258 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10954063604 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87757670434 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83391344958 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 242.0 215.323595506 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427561837456 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 918.9 704.065955056 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.2370786517 133% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.1516799537 60.3974514979 58% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 107.111111111 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.962962963 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.96296296296 5.21951772744 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347493198361 0.243740707755 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108722531066 0.0831039109588 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.109825780794 0.0758088955206 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.244557578498 0.150359130593 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.03804824286 0.0667264976115 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.1392134831 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 100.480337079 114% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.