agree or disagree people used to be happier in the past
The amount of happiness one perceives is one of the most crucial factors in life; as satisfaction leads one to sense calmness and perfection and shape the ensuing life. Hence, one of the highly controversial issues amongst many individuals is to enhance life quality. As far as I am concerned, in a state of ambivalence, I might lean toward disagreement. Conceivably, some people believe that people used to feel better in the past, however, many reasons such as the heath care enhancement and communication feasibility, which are paramount in wellness, can declare the higher beneficiary of technology and today's life. I will interpret my response in the following essay.
First, health care improvement is advantageous due to the valuable sense of calmness that included medical enhancements. Doubtlessly, such relief help to broaden the happiness level and satisfaction. Consequently, this will enrich one's mind. To survive illness civilizations need to improve knowledge and medical equipment; equipment such as monitors, health-check devices, etc. which were not available many years ago. Granted, people suffered from less illness in the past, but insufficient medical knowledge in the past was not enough to find a cure for them. As an illustrative example. Some years ago, during my high school at Beheshty high school in Iran, there was a girl, named Sara, Sara had brain cancer and struggling to survive. In the beginning, everyone thought she is going to die but this was true. Fortunately, Sara's cancer got cured, thanks to the enhanced medical devices, and we were able to spend our whole school journey together. Although she was meant to die if she was born many years ago, she would not survive because of technology improvement and mesmerizing health care reinforcement. As one can see, to survive, one needs sufficient medical care which associates with the time.
Also, it is not presumptuous to judge happiness according to the communication devices' feasibility. No man can ever truly understand another's need for interaction, but a can communicate easier using the new devices such as cell phones and the internet. Two people who appear as best friends may have built their relation through the internet. There are times when technology makes the connection. A person needs to make a social connection and the technology directly influences the communication easiness reinforcement that is imperative for communication most of the time. Surely, it must be wiser to respect the technology than to deny that and stick with the past.
I am of the conviction that everybody needs medical-care and interaction with whom might live far away brought thanks to the changing time. This is a personal preference and the effect can be seen in less suffering due to illness and social connection improvement. Regarding the aforementioned reasons, I conclude that our life is much happier compared to our ancestors. All in all, a coin has two sides and an edge to connect them; so, I suppose we have our happiness thanks to the past.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-25 | pezhmanlamei | 73 | view |
| 2023-12-13 | jimHsu | 76 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 80 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 66 | view |
| 2023-12-07 | butterflyluo | 66 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 564, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
...was not enough to find a cure for them. As an illustrative example. Some years ago...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, regarding, so, well, i suppose, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 15.1003584229 126% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.0286738351 109% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 43.0788530466 74% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 52.1666666667 113% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 8.0752688172 322% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2554.0 1977.66487455 129% => OK
No of words: 494.0 407.700716846 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17004048583 4.8611393121 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71445763274 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03141893004 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544534412955 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 802.8 618.680645161 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 9.59856630824 104% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 20.6003584229 131% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.1344086022 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3118668966 48.9658058833 103% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.5925925926 100.406767564 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2962962963 20.6045352989 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.55555555556 5.45110844103 65% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 11.8709677419 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.117619534107 0.236089414692 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0260660911231 0.076458572812 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0481305935947 0.0737576698707 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0725827630836 0.150856017488 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.020882919029 0.0645574589148 32% => 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: 12.1 11.7677419355 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 58.1214874552 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.1575268817 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 10.9000537634 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.01818996416 107% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 86.8835125448 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 10.002688172 155% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.0537634409 92% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.