The claim seems at first too absolute, and one can say that philosophy and natural sciences like mathematics can advance in the absence of knowledge and experience from other field of study. And they certainly could, in the childhood of human civilization, when such disciplines developed without any help from other areas, for they are the very first disciplines we studied. However, despite the fact that they could develop in the very early period, it still is the fact that their significant advancing does require knowledge and experience from outside their fields. So, in my opinion, there is not a field of study which can advance significantly without incorporating knowledge and experience from outside that field.
It is true that the generating of a field of study might need no other helps from outside that field, as I have already said above; but to advance significantly goes further than the early recognition and rather skin-deep consideration on problems. Also take mathematics for example: besides some very first axioms which can be said to come from people's common sense and intuition, other conclusions almost [always] came out after some people had taken some suggestive experience from other fields, for instance, probability theory is highly developed with the help of gamblers' knowledge. And I think an important reason why a field of study needs help from outside that field to advance significantly is that there is quite a narrow space for a discipline to develop without incorporating knowledge from other areas. Knowledge from outside a field sometimes acts as a flush of new blood, which can give people in that field a broader horizon, help them to see new problems, and enlighten them with new ideas.
Opponents may argue that knowledge and experience from outside a field may be disturbing, even misleading information which can distract people who devote themselves to that field; thus, it is highly possible that a field can advance significantly and better without any outside help. I agree that there does exist a kind of risk in incorporating with knowledge and experience from the outside, but it does not mean that the incorporation is unnecessary. As a matter of fact, when a discipline is developing, what it treasures most is different ideas, or even ideas that contradict its own and facts that can place some of its conclusions into doubt. Only in this way can the discipline find out its faults, and only after knowing its defects, can it have the chance to improve to a more advanced level.
Thus, without incorporating knowledge and experience from outside a field, I think it is almost impossible for that field to advance significantly.
- Asthma 85
- Productivity and rewards 70
- Productivity and Rewards 73
- When old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. 66
- GRE Issue:Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation must be the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.Reason: Great achievements by a nation's rulers, artists, or scientists will ensure a good life for the majority of that nation's people 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 250, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...er skin-deep consideration on problems. Also take mathematics for example: besides s...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, however, if, may, so, still, thus, for example, for instance, i think, kind of, as a matter of fact, in my opinion, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 11.3162921348 212% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 12.9106741573 163% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2255.0 2235.4752809 101% => OK
No of words: 443.0 442.535393258 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09029345372 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85789479115 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467268623025 0.4932671777 95% => OK
syllable_count: 703.8 704.065955056 100% => 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
Interrogative: 3.0 0.740449438202 405% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.77640449438 450% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => OK
Sentence length: 34.0 23.0359550562 148% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.0164340542 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 173.461538462 118.986275619 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.0769230769 23.4991977007 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.7692307692 5.21951772744 225% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.43099537861 0.243740707755 177% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.195562878476 0.0831039109588 235% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.14274720552 0.0758088955206 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.313361757066 0.150359130593 208% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.043800012342 0.0667264976115 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.6 14.1392134831 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.97 48.8420337079 76% => It means the essay is relatively harder to read.
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 12.1743820225 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 100.480337079 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 15.6 11.2143820225 139% => OK
text_standard: 20.0 11.7820224719 170% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.