Only by questioning accepted wisdom can we advance our understanding.
Authorities already have their accepted and justified wisdom and obeys according to the established beliefs. But by challenging or questioning this established wisdom we can develop, transform and advance the world with new theories proved logically and practically. However, there is a twist in questioning these accepted wisdom, not everyone who has went against these authorities has received respect and treated fairly.
Moreover, these authorities try to punish the ones who have questioned the accepted wisdom because, people are always inert to accept change and evolution from what they already believe. Authority feels like it's an attack to their ego and would lower down their value and status in society if they are proved wrong by new theories, the restraint to reform the accepted wisdom is because it feel like going against the ancestral cherished belief which they have been following since centuries.
Firstly, Nicolaus Copernicus was an Italian scientist who has challenged the church's credible wisdom that earth is in the center of solar system. But, Copernicus had questioned this established wisdom and proposed that sun is in the center. Not only, the authority reject this proposed theory but also he was house arrested for his entire life and had to face many atrocities for entire life. But eventually, the truth can never be hidden and society had accepted Copernicus theory which leads to advancement in science and helped to solve many mysteries.
For development and advancement of mankind evolution by surmounting accepted wisdom by new knowledge is necessary. But for advancement overruling accepted wisdom is not the only method, sometimes taking old wisdom and combining it with new developed knowledge results out in new concepts. Similarly, for example, Quantum theory of mechanics which was already put forth by Sir Isaac Newton has been modified by new Quantum Mechanics, the base of old wisdom is the result new concept which helped in simplifying more complex problems which ultimately leads to advancement.
Thus, I somewhat agree with the author's point that question accepted wisdom of authority is necessary for advancement, but it not the only path of advancement, using old concepts and synchronizing it with new knowledge also leads to advancement.
ok,, here i want to give some corrections particularly in grammar.
However, there is a twist in questioning these accepted wisdom, not everyone who has went against these authorities has received respect and treated fairly.
here u have to put Verb3 since the formula Present perfect is S+have/has+V3+O
so your sentence become like this
However, there is a twist in questioning these accepted wisdom, not everyone who has gone against these authorities has received respect and treated fairly.
Firstly, Nicolaus Copernicus was an Italian scientist who has challenged the church's credible wisdom that earth is in the center of solar system.
you have to put articles in this case, so become like this :
Firstly, Nicolaus Copernicus was an Italian scientist who has challenged the church's credible wisdom that the earth is in the centre of the solar system
For development and advancement of mankind evolution by surmounting accepted wisdom by new knowledge is necessary
i guess the correct one for preposition is "of"
For development and advancement of mankind evolution of surmounting accepted wisdom of new knowledge is necessary
- I think your introduction could ease into the topic a little less abruptly; perhaps using an introductory sentence that considers the general topic a little more broadly could help.
- When you introduce your paragraph on Copernicus, it is a good idea to introduce how Copernicus's experience supports your thesis. For example, start with a vaguer sentence such as: "Successful scientists are commonly forced to think against convention in order to research and innovate." This will provide a smoother connection between your first and second paragraph.
- You begin with "Firstly" in your second paragraph, but it isn't evident that you have a second point. It's always good to have a second, obvious supporting paragraph to strengthen your argument that leads off of your first support. In this case, the paragraph on Isaac Newton could be a little more direct when it is introduced.
- It's better to go either extreme in persuasive essays--saying you "somewhat agree" weakens your argument and shows lack of decisiveness.
