The author asserts that our behavior is primarily determined not by forces of our own making. While the assertion sounds determinism, it might well be right about some points. Admittedly, outside forces unquestionably affect a significant portion of our behaviors -- the way we feel, think, and act. However, the author bases his conclusion on an erroneous presumption that these important external forces comprise no or few human making forces. Thus, I strongly disagree with the statement and would argue that anthropogenic influences equally, if not chiefly, determine the ways how we behave.
If we look at the issue at a broad level, it is not difficult for us to notice that outside forces such as laws passed by a country or traditional culture of a community govern our daily life. Laws instill senses of legitimacy into our minds, by determining which kinds of activities are allowed and which kinds of activities are forbidden. Although a traditional culture does not explicitly express itself in the way like what laws do, it nonetheless controls our behaviors by awarding its adherents with respect from other members and punishing eccentric members through alienation.
Furthermore, these forces don't just act alone. They usually tend to interact with each other to form a seamless web so thorough that it comprises every aspect of a person living in a given country or community. As time passes, the interweaving forces also become so strong that we have to evolve a particular mindset, an appropriate system of feelings, and corresponding responses, to adapt. Consequently, because they have already become part of us, when we are behaving according to these prescriptions, we might not even notice such influence but believe that we are acting at our own discretion -- according to our internal forces. Of course, there are always exceptions. Criminals and heroes come to mind. But as long as statistical outliers are not considered, we are safe to say that it is mainly these outside rules that responsible for managing our behaviors.
However, in stating his/her conclusion, the speaker unreasonably presumes that most of these significant outside forces which determine our behaviors are not human-made. The preceding examples of external forces -- laws and culture -- are all examples of artifacts. The speaker might argue, of course, that it is the nature of the earth decides how we can survive, and, in turn, how we form our societies, enact laws, and develop cultures. Although I concede that these natural conditions are fundamental to all other anthropogenic forces, they might not influence us the most; after all, we, as social animals, live in a world surrounded by other individuals and our products, and it is these adjacent people and objects chiefly affect us. And one shall not forget that a considerable part of the physical world today is not in its natural state, meaning it is at least semi-anthropogenic. In fact, we have transformed the physical world to the extent that we now strive to preserve it. Thus, there is no base for the author's presumption.
To conclude, while it is external forces which significantly determine our internal forces and, as a result, our behaviors, these influential external forces might include not only natural ones. In my view, it is those anthropogenic external forces principally responsible for deciding how we feel, think and act.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 416, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: now
...hese important external forces comprise no or few human making forces. Thus, I str...
^^
Line 5, column 27, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...lienation. Furthermore, these forces dont just act alone. They usually tend to in...
^^^^
Line 5, column 227, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...en country or community. As time passes, the interweaving forces also become so s...
^^
Line 7, column 1020, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...erve it. Thus, there is no base for the authors presumption. To conclude, while it i...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, look, nonetheless, so, still, thus, well, while, after all, at least, in fact, of course, such as, as a result, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 77.0 33.0505617978 233% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2869.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 551.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20689655172 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.84493438435 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96651988705 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 285.0 215.323595506 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51724137931 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 901.8 704.065955056 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 14.0 6.24550561798 224% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 12.0 3.10617977528 386% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 11.0 4.38483146067 251% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.3647198568 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.541666667 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9583333333 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.20833333333 5.21951772744 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => 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: 0.124670074512 0.243740707755 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0400804369823 0.0831039109588 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0376243395869 0.0758088955206 50% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083595616794 0.150359130593 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0276866823751 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: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 100.480337079 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.