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.
Those who are well established in a field are having high values than those who are fledgling. This type of situtation occurs every now and then, those who regards themeselves as scholar of that given field never give value to one who are inexperienced. This statement may not prove right every time. After all, we all are humans everybody has some jealousy or some resitnment against someone if you have found some mistake or an error if you are not backed by an expert the error may be become pointless for them as, it is not proven or backed by an expert yet.
A small but highly talked example for this statement is, Prof. Nambi Narayan (who during this example was a student) had found out an error in an equation related to principle of discharge of rocket. He pointed out the mistake to his professor but, his professor laughed and told him that you have no concrete proof for this error, the equation was proofread by many scientists so, you claims are baseless. Nambi was knowing that his claims were not baseless so, he wrote a letter to the author of the book pointing out the mistake and solution for it. After a few days, Nambi got reply from the author stating that "Nambi" was correct and the solution he sent was accurate. Nambi read this reply to his professor and professor was in an utter shock.
On contrary of the statement we can know by example of 'Ramanunjam'. He was a great mathematician who was unparalled to his peers, he was always ten steps ahead of his collegues and huble to the ground. Ramanujam although was young and inexperienced but his mathematical abilities were on par with professors in 'Oxford University'. Ramnujam had gift from god that whatever mathimatical equation he used to write on paper were always correct but he was not able to prove them yet. His unproven mathematical equations were able to solve many problems or they were able to make such problem's dimintivue. On the contrary Ramanujam was gifted by god but he was not accepted for P.H.D in Maths in oxford university because he was not backed by an expert. All the experts thought that he is just kid who just solved some equations based on whim, this was happening due to the unproven equations not a single professor thought of giveing him a chance to prove them but, one professor did. This one professor who was head of department for statistical mathematics believed in ramanujam, made him prove all his unproven equations. Once ramanujam's all equations were proved and passed all the test cases of the professors he was celebrated at Oxford University and was awarded his fellowship. After his discovery in Wave particle duality for light and photons Ramnujam was hailed everywhere.
"Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field" is true cause it is those people who have studied, has erudited themeselves of everything that is available during that time or critical judgment of any work is valued only when it has backing from an expert. We can see this statement proven with example of Prof. Nambi Narayan and Ramanujam (if we are backed an expert).
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-16 | Jeyodi123 | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | Anil2044 | 50 | view |
| 2023-04-16 | AtharvaKale | 66 | view |
| 2023-02-21 | HSNDEK | 83 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | avidwriter1771 | 50 | view |
- Claim Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today Reason We are not able to make connections between current events and past events until we have some distance from both Write a response in which you discuss the extent to w 50
- 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 posi 58
- Claim Major policy decisions should always be left to politicians and other government experts Reason Politicians and other government experts are more informed and thus have better judgment and perspective than do members of the general public 66
- The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers artists or scientists but the general well being of all its people Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing an 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 127, Rule ID: EVERY_NOW_AND_THEN[1]
Message: Use simply 'now and then'.
Suggestion: now and then
...edgling. This type of situtation occurs every now and then, those who regards themeselves as schol...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 385, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[4]
Message: The pronoun 'you' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'claim'
Suggestion: claim
...as proofread by many scientists so, you claims are baseless. Nambi was knowing that hi...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 412, Rule ID: NON_ACTION_CONTINUOUS[2]
Message: The verb know is usually not used with a continuous form, use the simple form instead. Suggestion: 'knew'
Suggestion: knew
...ists so, you claims are baseless. Nambi was knowing that his claims were not baseless so, h...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 412, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...ists so, you claims are baseless. Nambi was knowing that his claims were not baseless so, h...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 675, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: D
... by god but he was not accepted for P.H.D in Maths in oxford university because h...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, then, well, after all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 42.0 19.5258426966 215% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 20.0 11.3162921348 177% => OK
Pronoun: 64.0 33.0505617978 194% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 65.0 58.6224719101 111% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2617.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 551.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74954627949 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84493438435 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64680369699 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 215.323595506 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446460980036 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 843.3 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 6.24550561798 256% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.9200191199 60.3974514979 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.782608696 118.986275619 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9565217391 23.4991977007 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.4347826087 5.21951772744 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => 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: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169924964892 0.243740707755 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513911268161 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0798732767187 0.0758088955206 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15581099804 0.150359130593 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.122655255554 0.0667264976115 184% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.8420337079 116% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.57 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => 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: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.