Claim Though often considered an objective pursuit learning about the historical past requires creativity Reason Because we can never know the past directly we must reconstruct it by imaginatively interpreting historical accounts documents and artifacts W

Essay topics:

Claim: Though often considered an objective pursuit, learning about the historical past requires creativity.

Reason: Because we can never know the past directly, we must reconstruct it by imaginatively interpreting historical accounts, documents, and artifacts.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which the claim is based.

History of something is as important as the present. Understanding it will allow, to improve upon the mistakes, or to get some completely new viewpoint on a particular problem which the ancient people had inorder to solve it. It sure does need brilliance but is best understood only through creative application of mind.

Firstly, being empathetic towards a historical figure/entity is very important. Putting ourselves in their shoes really helps understand, why a particular design of building was chosen. What was the motive behind a particular move done by a dictator be it for good or a bad reason. For e.g. in some Asian countries doctors criticized use of herbs to treat complex body problems but rather prescribed tablets with heavy side effects. But historians have identified that ancestors have indeed use these herbs to cure similar problems without having any harmful side effects. This knowledge indeed has branched from their needs, which we could simply apply in our times if we just take time to understand it. This requires a creative mind, think of all possibilities and to analyze why the ancient overlords did a particular move.

History is so profound, “how it happened” varies from person to person. This is because each person interprets a scenario in different ways. For e.g. An art with a profound meaning has always multiple meaning in the eyes of artistic minds. Each person paints their own mental picture from a description. This critical thinking requires us to be very creative, rather than just applying logic and being rational. Being irrational sometimes helps people to identify the hidden message which is not so conspicuous on plain sight.

However, there are lots of 3D designing tools that helps us visualize historical landmarks and scenes as a movie. But these technologies are only put to better use when the humans are creative and decides to do something with it. Storyboarding a historical act and publishing it to laymen will in fact improve their creative skills and in turn help them imagine how this is relevant to the current life.

To sum up, Logical thinking, Technological tools help making the job of understanding history easier but is of no use without creativity on the side. Other tools simply leverage on creativity to be of any good use.

Votes
Average: 1.6 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2024-04-12 guozhishan 58 view
2023-07-07 KruthiHK 50 view
2023-07-06 KruthiHK 50 view
2023-03-12 ramaand 83 view
2022-12-28 srr4 66 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Rajagopalan Ga… :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 492, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'used'.
Suggestion: used
...e identified that ancestors have indeed use these herbs to cure similar problems wi...
^^^
Line 9, column 55, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to make' or 'make'.
Suggestion: to make; make
...ical thinking, Technological tools help making the job of understanding history easier...
^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, e.g., first, firstly, however, if, really, so, in fact, to sum up

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1936.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 381.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0813648294 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80819779985 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 226.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.593175853018 0.4932671777 120% => OK
syllable_count: 601.2 704.065955056 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.2812166362 60.3974514979 57% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 92.1904761905 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1428571429 23.4991977007 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.33333333333 5.21951772744 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0918215853727 0.243740707755 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0259999009994 0.0831039109588 31% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0263854510819 0.0758088955206 35% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0477731132302 0.150359130593 32% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.027143073938 0.0667264976115 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: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.

Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.