Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.
Development of technology has led to an increase in the amount of complexity of the communities, and individuals are struggling with contrasting aspects of human lives to a larger extent. Thus, governments should establish laws in order to oversee society. While a portion of people maintain that young people were under strict rules in the past, I hold a different view, believing that the legislation of today's world is overly inflexible for youngsters. This essay will explore a couple of reasons supporting my perspective in the following paragraphs.
First of all, due to the fact that today's communities contain people holding diverse schools of thoughts, government regulations seem considerably strict to young adults. In fact, having been faced with an extremely large population, societies are overrun by a plethora of various opinions and outlooks towards life. Thus, it is not trouble-free to try to rule all people exploiting a handful of established laws. For instance, several years ago, the majority of people in my country had a tremendously profound perspective towards Hijab, and all the girls and women accepted this kind of clothing. On the other hand, nowadays, there are individuals with a wide variety of attitudes regarding their clothes. Therefore, it is significantly difficult for them to accept the regulations that the government has developed to limit people to a given style, which has resulted in serious colliding views between young people and the government.
Secondly, people of the past times did not have ample tasks to do, and virtually all of them even were bound to a specific destiny; hence, it was not difficult to organize their future and supervise them. On the contrary, in today's advanced communities, it is substantially more arduous to direct young people in a particular way. They all choose their paths and set out their goals. They also are provided with remarkable facilities and implements offered by this progressive and sophisticated world that can propel them to pave their ways in the direction of success. For example, there is an excessively solid rule in my country to force young people to attend the military service, and avoiding this issue has several serious outcomes for young men including preventing them from leaving the country, having a driver's license and so forth. Young people are immensely upset about this rule since in this data-driven world, they have enormous pieces of work to accomplish and, this two-year program hinders their plans.
On the whole, taking all the aforementioned reasons and examples into account, I am of the opinion that young people are exposed to overly strict laws compared to the past. Not only do they have non-identical beliefs, but they also can perform plenty of things that are overshadowed by these regulations and hamper their speed to achieve their dreams.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-10-04 | hamiddelbari | 76 | view |
- TPO41 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Successful people try new things and take risks rather than only doing what they know how to do well. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 76
- TPO43 78
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours. Use specific reasons and examples to suppo 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The rules that societies today expect young people to follow and obey are too strict. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 85
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, if, look, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, in fact, kind of, first of all, on the contrary, on the whole, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 9.8082437276 41% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 13.8261648746 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 42.0 43.0788530466 97% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 52.1666666667 142% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.0752688172 111% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2419.0 1977.66487455 122% => OK
No of words: 464.0 407.700716846 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.21336206897 4.8611393121 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64119157421 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86205598252 2.67179642975 107% => OK
Unique words: 258.0 212.727598566 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556034482759 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 745.2 618.680645161 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 9.59856630824 115% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.51792114695 28% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.86738351254 268% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.94265232975 101% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.6003584229 87% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 55.7813190554 48.9658058833 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.388888889 100.406767564 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7777777778 20.6045352989 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.0555555556 5.45110844103 203% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.85842293907 130% => 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: 0.195914637091 0.236089414692 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0604878735599 0.076458572812 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436624637509 0.0737576698707 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123596406778 0.150856017488 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0276844666533 0.0645574589148 43% => 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: 16.0 11.7677419355 136% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 10.9000537634 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.3 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 86.8835125448 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => 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.