People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
It is debatable whether people should exert dangerous actions only after they have premeditated its consequences. To create the most ideal outcome, it is desirable for people to ponder deeply before they undertake risky actions.
To begin with, making a risky decision without prudence can breed detriments and even exacerbate current situation. People are especially vulnerable to make decisions with myopic perspectives and narrow-mindedness when are about to make risky decisions. Thus, premeditation and serious discussions about the situation is required to prevent worsening the situations. Enron Scandal is a pellucid example of this argument. Enron was one of the most successful American energy company before it went downhill with failed deals and projects. The company eventually had to declare bankruptcy; however, executives of the company denied to do so since they were only interested in retaining their immediate fame and wealth. They failed to ruminate and analyze to predict possible results of their decisions. Consequently, the company's subterfuge was revealed, thereby being charged with even more debt and recovery was impossible at that point. Had executives of Enron had serious speculation of probable consequences of their risky decisions not to declare bankruptcy, their company might have had better chance to recover their damage. Since tho
Moreover, undertaking dangerous actions without consideration could yield unintended, negative outcomes. A certain demeanor may not seem so harmful at first glance, but one has to look deeper and further to realize that such action could actually yield deleterious impacts. Take a renowned Psychology study of Little Albert as an example. Researchers conducted the study to find out if fear and phobia could be learned after a series of classic conditioning experiments. The study utilized a baby named Albert as a participant, and successfully showed that fear and phobia could be learned. Besides it successful outcome, researchers could not predict harm exerted on the baby Albert. He had to suffer from his learned phobia for the rest of his life, and it brings up serious ethical issues of the study. Researchers lacked intensive consideration of all aspects of the study, therefore failing to anticipate possible detriments of the study. Had researchers pondered deeply about the subject matter, they could have came up with other methods to prove their hypothesis without risking one's life.
Admittedly, some impulsive risky actions are conducive to amelioration of a society. Susan B. Anthony, for instance, voted when it was illicit for women to vote. She, therefore, ended up getting arrested. Nevertheless, her brave act facilitated the passing of women's suffrage on the Nineteenth Amendment. However, such is an exception. It is difficult to expect the same results with every risky actions done without consideration.
All in all, it is desirable if risky decisions are made after serious rumination of the problem. Aforementioned instances cogently illustrate that there is higher possibility of negative outcome if dangerous decisions are made without intensive analysis of possible results.
- The following appeared in a health newsletter A ten year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets whereas today that number i 78
- The following appeared in a memo from the director of a large group of hospitals. "In a controlled laboratory study of liquid hand soaps, a concentrated solution of extra strength UltraClean hand soap produced a 40 percent greater reduction in harmful bac 63
- As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and mysterious. 73
- The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment complex to its manager."One month ago, all the showerheads in the first three buildings of the Sunnyside Towers complex were modified to restrict maximum water flow to one 69
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position 77
Comments
e-rater does not have to
e-rater does not have to grade this. Thanks.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 624, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'denied doing'.
Suggestion: denied doing
...tcy; however, executives of the company denied to do so since they were only interested in r...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1132, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... better chance to recover their damage. Since tho Moreover, undertaking dangerous ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1019, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'come'.
Suggestion: come
...out the subject matter, they could have came up with other methods to prove their hy...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1088, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
... prove their hypothesis without risking ones life. Admittedly, some impulsive ris...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'besides', 'but', 'consequently', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'moreover', 'nevertheless', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'as to', 'for instance', 'to begin with']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.240223463687 0.240241500013 100% => OK
Verbs: 0.175046554935 0.157235817809 111% => OK
Adjectives: 0.109869646182 0.0880659088768 125% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0521415270019 0.0497285424764 105% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0465549348231 0.0444667217837 105% => OK
Prepositions: 0.113594040968 0.12292977631 92% => OK
Participles: 0.0409683426443 0.0406280797675 101% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.98663903975 2.79330140395 107% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0391061452514 0.030933414821 126% => OK
Particles: 0.00744878957169 0.0016655270985 447% => OK
Determiners: 0.0670391061453 0.0997080785238 67% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0186219739292 0.0249443105267 75% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00372439478585 0.0148568991511 25% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3186.0 2732.02544248 117% => OK
No of words: 485.0 452.878318584 107% => OK
Chars per words: 6.56907216495 6.0361032391 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.58838876751 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.447422680412 0.366273622748 122% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.367010309278 0.280924506359 131% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.251546391753 0.200843997647 125% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.179381443299 0.132149295362 136% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98663903975 2.79330140395 107% => OK
Unique words: 272.0 219.290929204 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560824742268 0.48968727796 115% => OK
Word variations: 69.1718955871 55.4138127331 125% => OK
How many sentences: 28.0 20.6194690265 136% => OK
Sentence length: 17.3214285714 23.380412469 74% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.4384692546 59.4972553346 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.785714286 141.124799967 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3214285714 23.380412469 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.607142857143 0.674092028746 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.21349557522 77% => OK
Readability: 54.0224594993 51.4728631049 105% => OK
Elegance: 1.44217687075 1.64882698954 87% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.246761646616 0.391690518653 63% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0883573809361 0.123202303941 72% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0856036999739 0.077325440228 111% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.424055981006 0.547984918172 77% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.170886276362 0.149214159877 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0808056213305 0.161403998019 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.053450837395 0.0892212321368 60% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.245432979106 0.385218514788 64% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0680624446333 0.0692045440612 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159429455493 0.275328986314 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578335528563 0.0653680567796 88% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.4325221239 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 18.0 5.30420353982 339% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88274336283 61% => OK
Positive topic words: 7.0 7.22455752212 97% => OK
Negative topic words: 10.0 3.66592920354 273% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 18.0 13.5995575221 132% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.