Critical judgment of work in any given fields has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
Are critical judgments important to us, even if they are not from specialists? According to the claim, the answer is negative. Despite the fact that most people’s opinions are not of the same value as those experts, I still insist that it is valuable for anyone to make a critical judgment.
In science and technology area, it has been an undeniable truth that most great innovation comes from critical thinking. Einstein would not established a new theory of relativity if he accepted the basic rules of physics without doubt. At that time, he was not eligible enough to challenge the position of Newton, but he managed to do it by critical ideas. During the industrial evolution, Watt invented stream engine, and created Jenny Spin, while they could not be compared with those physical experts at all. Or if they were contend about the speed and production efficiency of the machines at their ages, they would not come up with brand new ideas. Thus, it could be easily drawn that critical judgment can contribute much to the scientific area, regardless of where they are from.
It is the same in other fields such as arts, literature and history. Artists have displayed tremendous various forms of art works since the ancient times, the later generation sometimes just copied the former artists’ works, but more created their own style based on the inspirations suddenly crossed their minds when they appreciated the former artifacts from a critical perspective. Even amateurs like us could appraise a picture from different angles, and these different views may broaden the horizons or expand the later artists’ thinking range. In historic or literature area, the proprieties of the former famous experts may even deny their views and raise their own opinions. Although the young are deemed too foolhardy , being derided by others for the lack of value in their opinions, they do work as a catalyst for the development of that area.
For a nation, it is especially essential for the people to keep critical eyes towards the policies in order to improve the welfare of the whole people.Some so-called economists or politicians usually assert that their theories are absolutely right, while the policies they advocate are likely to fail in obtaining their original goals. Though they are specialists in certain areas, their theories may not correspondent to the practical situations. Therefore, common people, who are the victims of the potential negative consequences, should view these policies critically before carried out, or protest them if their rights are intruded. In democratic countries, there are many methods for the mass to participate in politics, as everyone is responsible for a thriving nation, they are encouraged to take different sides and make their own analysis.
In sum, although the different opinions from common people are not equal to those from the experts, their values could not be undermined. Only by critical thinking from various people can the society develop in a more prosperous way.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-26 | jinjer | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | jason123 | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-11 | __annabelle__ | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | cnegus | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-18 | ken10091995 | 50 | view |
- People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making. 70
- The primary goal of technology advancement should be to increase people s efficiency so that they have more leisure time 83
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry ,or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 83
- Critical judgment of work in any given fields has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field. 70
- The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and the women that the society chooses as its heroes or its role models. 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 141, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'establish'
Suggestion: establish
...m critical thinking. Einstein would not established a new theory of relativity if he accept...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 529, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'contended'.
Suggestion: contended
...hysical experts at all. Or if they were contend about the speed and production efficien...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 535, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...he horizons or expand the later artists’ thinking range. In historic or literatu...
^^
Line 5, column 567, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...artists’ thinking range. In historic or literature area, the proprieties of the ...
^^
Line 5, column 730, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hough the young are deemed too foolhardy , being derided by others for the lack of...
^^
Line 7, column 152, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Some
...improve the welfare of the whole people.Some so called economists or politicians usu...
^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'if', 'may', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'thus', 'while', 'such as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.216513761468 0.238963963785 91% => OK
Verbs: 0.135779816514 0.154291517835 88% => OK
Adjectives: 0.121100917431 0.0886310499679 137% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0587155963303 0.0506014161523 116% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0642201834862 0.0449626384858 143% => OK
Prepositions: 0.132110091743 0.123526278965 107% => OK
Participles: 0.0293577981651 0.0379742944744 77% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.69008996542 2.82910677849 95% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0238532110092 0.0316879551592 75% => OK
Particles: 0.00366972477064 0.0014075125626 261% => Less particles wanted.
Determiners: 0.0954128440367 0.0950106342287 100% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0220183486239 0.0245489744465 90% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00550458715596 0.0157978311181 35% => Some subClauses wanted starting by 'Which, Who, What, Whom, Whose.....'
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3041.0 2899.98275862 105% => OK
No of words: 495.0 478.390804598 103% => OK
Chars per words: 6.14343434343 6.0591788892 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71684168287 4.65681771538 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.373737373737 0.369966551584 101% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.292929292929 0.285172536893 103% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.222222222222 0.207245337619 107% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.135353535354 0.136322040163 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69008996542 2.82910677849 95% => OK
Unique words: 273.0 234.298850575 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551515151515 0.492565540709 112% => OK
Word variations: 67.7456467685 56.8184620615 119% => OK
How many sentences: 20.0 21.1264367816 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.75 23.7468607788 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.4147711776 62.0618507366 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.05 143.81877709 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.75 23.7468607788 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.45 0.728815259664 62% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.87931034483 102% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.71264367816 78% => OK
Readability: 54.0429292929 52.2641144681 103% => OK
Elegance: 1.4609929078 1.64547068916 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.185288245335 0.39480681544 47% => More coherence wanted between essay topic and essay body.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.113383435243 0.11556216369 98% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0620770979039 0.0736162880345 84% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.558402965603 0.531340600358 105% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.137491055165 0.15197228837 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0859079313146 0.158818324754 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0632719888112 0.0851127212816 74% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.367614522939 0.388921930462 95% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0376331125946 0.0677916285025 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132448271303 0.28015025965 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0207559266561 0.0610219844235 34% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.8591954023 111% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.30459770115 132% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.96264367816 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 11.0 8.10632183908 136% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.93390804598 127% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 3.04597701149 33% => OK
Total topic words: 17.0 15.0862068966 113% => OK
--------------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay E-rater: 4.0 Out of 6