Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership.
As the well know saying goes "History repeats itself", the past has a habbit of recurring. Hence a through understanding of the past will be a significant advantange to those in current positions of leadership for planning.
An understanding of past events could prove to be crucial for future as they bring forth the knowledge which was perviously unknown. Gorvenments analysing the past disaster responses and their shortcomings can formulate new disaster response strategies are more effective. In all these scenarios the knowledge about the past is crucial to make decisions.
Furthur the past events can help the leaderships to get context for current situations. Taking the example of feminism, the goverment needs to understand the past plight of women, to make informed decisions and policies regarding gender equality. Same applies to racial equality. Without the context from past events, the government would not be able to understant why the current sitution exixsts and what steps it should take to assauge it.
Though a point could be made for situations or events which has not taken place before. Like the dawn of social media. Never before was there a time when people across the globe were so inter-connected and the flow of information was so seemless. To tackle the problems arising from this new era, fake news etc, the past cannot provide any effective insight.
The past provides a great opprtuinity to learn. It can help the leadership to better understand the shortcomming of past events or get context about why the current situtaion exists.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-31 | rahatumar9072 | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-23 | Ruhani | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-22 | prathiba_n | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | jayauen | 66 | view |
| 2023-03-08 | Shubhan Mital | 58 | view |
- The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville Over the past three years there has been a marked increase in cases of sidewalk rage similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road but instead among sidewalk walkers The resul 60
- Those who see their ideas through regardless of doubts or criticism others may express are the ones who tend to leave a lasting legacy 58
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 102, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...s;, the past has a habbit of recurring. Hence a through understanding of the past wil...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 110, Rule ID: THROUGH_THOROUGH[1]
Message: Did you mean 'thorough' (accurate, exhaustive)?
Suggestion: thorough
...past has a habbit of recurring. Hence a through understanding of the past will be a sig...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 120, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[1]
Message: The adverb 'Never' is usually not used at the beginning of a sentence.
... before. Like the dawn of social media. Never before was there a time when people acr...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, if, regarding, so, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 33.0505617978 27% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 58.6224719101 77% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1335.0 2235.4752809 60% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 255.0 442.535393258 58% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23529411765 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99608801488 4.55969084622 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89448958766 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 215.323595506 72% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.603921568627 0.4932671777 122% => OK
syllable_count: 399.6 704.065955056 57% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.2980494562 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.0 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0 23.4991977007 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 5.21951772744 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.293138361424 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0932240461128 0.0831039109588 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.106202643193 0.0758088955206 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174908567774 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.100218567702 0.0667264976115 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 100.480337079 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.