Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily.
Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer
As modern society sees the ever-increasing human migration triggered by people's desire to pursue a better life, they are more likely to lose connection with old friends and to make new friends. This migration raises the question of whether maintaining old friends is more crucial than making new friends. In my viewpoint, maintaining old friends should be attached more importance, and I will illustrate my point from two sides.
First and foremost, it is much easier to get practical assistance from old friends. The purpose of a friendship is to help each other so that both can mutually benefit. Since the relationship with an old friend is much deeper than the one with a new friend, people tend to ask help from an old friend while only exchange information with a new friend. My experience is an excellent example of this. I have an old friend who grew up with me when I was only seven years old since we have been playing together for a long time, both of us understand each other deeply, so nothing could stop us from discussing problems we meet in the daily life. We are not afraid to share our dilemmas, invite the partner to discuss the difficulty faced so that we could help each other practically. There was a time when my mother was sick and needed to go to the hospital, but I was on a business trip by chance and could not go back immediately to take care of my mother, so I called my old friend, and he asked for one day off to take my mother to the hospital. This practical help is only possible for an old friend as we hesitate to ask a new friend a favor to take one day off from work.
Besides, maintaining old friends is more time-effective. In recent years, people have a life much busier than the past, so the free time slot on people's hands becomes more scarce. However, making new friends will consume more time than maintaining old friends, so maintaining old friendships will give people more free time to spend with family. People in big cities typically work eight hours a day. For many industries, especially information technology, it is not uncommon to work twelve hours a day and six days a week. As a result, people usually only have a handful of free time. Making new friends will start a relationship from scratch, which is time-consuming, which will make employees feel much pressure. Nevertheless, maintaining old friends is far time-effective: speeding dozens of minutes on communication with old friends every week is sufficient to sustain the relation.
In a nutshell, because old friends could provide more meaningful assistance and the fact that keeping in touch with an old friend is time effective, I believe that maintaining old friendship is more important than starting a new friendship.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-03 | sonyeoso | 80 | view |
| 2023-04-10 | KimiaKermanshahian | 76 | view |
| 2023-03-15 | MichelleGAOOO | 70 | view |
| 2022-12-14 | HSNDEK | 73 | view |
| 2022-11-24 | AT2G38040 | 70 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 217, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: whether; the question whether
...make new friends. This migration raises the question of whether maintaining old friends is more crucial...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, so, while, as a result, in my view
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 15.1003584229 139% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 52.1666666667 109% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.0752688172 149% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2274.0 1977.66487455 115% => OK
No of words: 478.0 407.700716846 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.75732217573 4.8611393121 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.48103885553 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80258217249 2.67179642975 105% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 212.727598566 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.47489539749 0.524837075471 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 684.9 618.680645161 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.51630824373 92% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.94265232975 81% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.2646030573 48.9658058833 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.7 100.406767564 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9 20.6045352989 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.1 5.45110844103 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 18.0 11.8709677419 152% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 3.85842293907 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.88709677419 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252053955184 0.236089414692 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0934870725304 0.076458572812 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.072426927795 0.0737576698707 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190897038347 0.150856017488 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414424198598 0.0645574589148 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 11.7677419355 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 58.1214874552 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.1575268817 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.62 10.9000537634 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.55 8.01818996416 94% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 86.8835125448 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.247311828 107% => 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: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.