Human is naturally gregarious. Human lives together with others, and when people started to live in clusters, the hierarchy naturally formed. In order to enhance the function of the community, some people acquire authority. However, many side effects are entailed by the authorities. Some argue that in order for a society to be well-functioning, the engagement of the layperson is necessary. Without checking those in power, the welfare of society can not be obtained. Expanding on this convention is the statement on society's wellbeing and people's function and their questions on authorities. Though I acknowledge that the extreme case for the statement might not hold true, I mostly agree with the statement. [Though any absolute claim should be perused with suspicion, I mostly agree with the statement.]
One could suppose that the questioning can result in disobedience of rules and regulation, thus leads to chaos in society. Tales often have it that when laborers of a company often unite to challenge those in power, lots of drawbacks become tangible. The laborers' strike ultimately puts at halt of production and diverts otherwise productive attention of society to negotiation, damaging the social welfare as a whole. In other words, people disobeying their authority vehemently enfeebles the society for their own interest, not pondering the social damages. What is more, society can go further to the lawlessness as it was. In this light, rather than skepticism, firm belief in their authorities' decision may be required to guarantee the well-being of society.
Nonetheless, my view is that for social progress, society should put up with the abovementioned damages caused by questioning the authorities. As an old proverb says, "the failure is a father of success". In order for a society to progress and become more sturdy, robust, and even well-established, the society should endure ongoing change and disputes. The examples above reveal that when many people question the authorities, only disruption is followed. Disruption, however, is a precursor of progress. Consider the rise of Democracy in South Korea during the 1980s. Before the 1980s, the South Korea president have domineering power over the citizen, which forfeited the layperson of most freedom. Evidently, some citizens followed the authority and take those persistently questioning the power as "society's carcinogen". However, people were tenacious enough to make Korea truly "Democratic" by questioning the authorities and the spring of democracy eventually followed. In this way, doubting the authorities can be beneficial for society, as it enhances the motivation, civic engagement, and accountability of people for their society. As a result of such participation, the goals and practices of society are re-examined.
In support of the statement above, a society's well-being can be at risk when people do not question the authority. The privileged person are easily corrupted, and they are prone to serve self-interest and abuse their authority for their own rather than for society. On reflection of the example of Adolf Hitler, a prior governor of Nacchi reveals the possibility of corruption. Without being pre-empted by the Deutch, he continuously chases his own interest, which led to the great havoc, World War 2. If he readily accepted the criticism and addressed the doubt about the policy from the society member, why would he keep adhere to the destructive ideas? The injustices may be perpetrated by authorities that rationalized and even legitimized such exploitations. It follows, then many people must keep the authorities on their toes so that they can design and implement works that actually advance the overall good, not their private good.
In all, the statement on the relationship between society's well-being and its people's active check of the authorities earns my support.
- The well being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority 83
- 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 third of what it used to be Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not 73
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes 94
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper Your recent article on corporate downsizing in Elthyria maintains that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship o 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 574, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...dering the social damages. What is more, society can go further to the lawlessnes...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, then, thus, well, as a result, in other words, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.5258426966 128% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 14.8657303371 121% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3317.0 2235.4752809 148% => OK
No of words: 607.0 442.535393258 137% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.46457990115 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.96360453597 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18348130539 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 313.0 215.323595506 145% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.515650741351 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 1038.6 704.065955056 148% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 14.0 4.99550561798 280% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 33.0 20.2370786517 163% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.688721834 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.515151515 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3939393939 23.4991977007 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.15151515152 5.21951772744 60% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.441609965882 0.243740707755 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0974290901147 0.0831039109588 117% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0898079623575 0.0758088955206 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.266784416114 0.150359130593 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0393122330884 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.1639044944 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 175.0 100.480337079 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.