Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Telling the truth is always the most vital contemplation in any relationship. Ironically speaking, it is undoubtedly rare to find someone who would refute this statement, yet in reality he is untruthful because he is psychologically disturbed. Scrutinizing the problem`s roots, parent and society are both held accountable for any inadequacy in one`s personality.
To start with, many hearts are broken because of unjustified dishonesty. In fact, human beings intuitively desires to be liked and loved. To be more specific, for example, for any healthy intimate relationship, partners would initially use their charm, social status, or their intellect to impress and to attract each other. More importantly, they are righteous to each other because honesty here matters for both parties. On the other hand, if we looked closely at an unhealthy intimate relationship, we would come up to one conclusion: it must be devoid of many qualities mainly truthfulness. Psychologically speaking, in this relationship, the deceiving partner`s intention is to have power over the other one, taking advantage financially and emotionally of his partner. However, in reality he is cowardly powerless. More than that, he is psychologically unbalanced because in this mutual affinity everything can be shared out of love, and not out of defrauding. Accordingly, it is hard for unhealthy relationship to survive and most likely it ends up tragically.
Secondly, Dishonesty is one of the recurrent defect which devalue one`s humanism. Here the question that pose itself is what make this imperfection to happen. Taking into account parent as their child`s first instructor, what they have been engraving in his mind would stay with him till adulthood when maturity and wisdom is expected by society. A child learns truthfulness or untruthfulness at home, it depends on the complexion of parent child relationship. Some parents are a real dictators: in a sense that they rule the house with total power over their child; they set very strict rules and they are careless about their child`s feelings and needs. Accordingly, when a child`s needs are not met, he learns not to trust adults including his caregivers, and thus deceiving them is a rebellious reaction. Other parents who are authoritarian: this category resemble the dictator caregivers in applying strict rules, but it is credited for caring about their child`s feelings and needs; consequently, winning his trust and respect. More than that, society is more likely to gain a balanced individual whose emotions, desires, and intellect live in harmony and would be shameful to mislead his fellow citizens.
To sum up, dishonesty is not a genetic defect, however, there are some circumstances which bring this rejected characteristic out. No matter what the reason that makes one diverge from the agreed norms and values, either selfishness or escaping one`s own reality, he is regarded as unstable by society. Nevertheless, isn’t it society held here accountable for his imperfection when parents `s role was not perfect.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 496, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'dictator'?
Suggestion: dictator
...d relationship. Some parents are a real dictators: in a sense that they rule the house wi...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1238, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...hameful to mislead his fellow citizens. To sum up, dishonesty is not a genetic d...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, consequently, first, however, if, look, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, for example, in fact, to start with, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 31.0 15.1003584229 205% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 13.8261648746 145% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 43.0788530466 107% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 52.1666666667 102% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.0752688172 87% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2648.0 1977.66487455 134% => OK
No of words: 482.0 407.700716846 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49377593361 4.8611393121 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68556276237 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.20455816354 2.67179642975 120% => OK
Unique words: 269.0 212.727598566 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558091286307 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 826.2 618.680645161 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.86738351254 321% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.6003584229 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8543436077 48.9658058833 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.130434783 100.406767564 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9565217391 20.6045352989 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.17391304348 5.45110844103 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 3.85842293907 311% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0971745532219 0.236089414692 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368288201666 0.076458572812 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.079346515888 0.0737576698707 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0743641431779 0.150856017488 49% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643951693198 0.0645574589148 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 58.1214874552 74% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 10.9000537634 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.01818996416 117% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 86.8835125448 166% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.002688172 110% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => 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: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.