Could anyone score my GRE essay?

Hi. I wrote a response to the GRE analytical writing issue prompt below:Imagination is more important than knowledge. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.Could someone please score my essay and provide some constructive feedback? I'd be appreciative of whatever insights or tips you can offer.--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The disputed proposition echoes Albert Einstein's famous dictum: "Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." Einstein was referencing intuition's role in scientific research when he made this observation. Within this context, "imagination" suggests creative problem-solving. By contrast, "knowledge" means information and skills gained through experience. Einstein's message comes through clearly: Unlike finite facts, imagination is a perpetual reservoir of new ideas. To build on his argument, we become blind to other views when we treat accepted wisdom as absolute truth. Unchecked orthodoxy would ironically stifle the creative genius that Einstein symbolizes. Admittedly, practical considerations remain nontrivial, and hasty generalizations about "most" or all fields remain vulnerable to criticism. However, his aphorism undoubtedly contains fundamental truth in its original context: ingenuity catalyzes scientific progress by generating new knowledge. Indeed, science owes many significant contributions and achievements to those who have dared to think and act differently.In The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas Kuhn suggests that innovation depends on the capacity to think freely, unencumbered by presuppositions. Indeed, the most significant scientific breakthroughs have marked sharp discontinuities from prior knowledge. Scientists usually view reality through the filter of accepted theory. Nonetheless, free thinkers can see beyond blind spots in established views. Science, therefore, develops through consecutive revolutions rather than incremental change. Punctuating "normal" scientific periods are episodes of revisionism when fact and theory collide. The resulting discrepancy creates a "crisis." While undergoing ad hoc modifications, the old paradigm becomes increasingly convoluted. However, progress does not always come through veteran experience. Sometimes, it arrives on the wings of epiphany. To be sure, sudden insight can facilitate fundamental changes in approach or underlying assumptions.From the Copernican Revolution to Darwinian theory, Western civilization has seen many "paradigm shifts." However, relativity theory remains prototypical. In the annals of scientific history, Einstein himself stands out as the ultimate renegade. His defiance and idiosyncratic perspective enabled him to see the world anew. Specifically, he found that moving objects defy Newton's predictions when approaching light speed. Einstein did not merely extend his predecessor's ideas. He radically altered our conceptual universe. The Newtonian and the Einsteinian worldviews are incompatible, as basic concepts take on new meanings in a relativistic universe. Space is not flat but curved. Einstein also demonstrated that time is not standard throughout the universe. Instead, it bends or protracts depending on the observer's reference frame.Einstein's work had profound consequences. It stimulated discoveries in astronomy that Copernicus could never have foreseen. Moreover, physicists now view our world as five-dimensional. They describe the fifth dimension mathematically in terms of "imaginary" numbers, which no one can directly observe. Einstein's heterodoxy inspired change. Small wonder that, with his wild uncombed white hair, he epitomizes intellectual freedom and rebellion.Some might argue that Einstein needed background knowledge to develop his theories. Nevertheless, "creativity" does not suggest creating something out of nothing per se but combining existing ideas to produce something new. Further, Einstein shook his field's foundations before becoming entrenched in academia, pointing to the power of a fresh set of eyes in problem-solving.Skeptics also claim that imagination without knowledge invites ignorance. Arbitrarily disputing empirical research could lead to absurd conclusions. Yes, Einstein's gravitation theory replaced Newton's--but the notion that apples might suspend themselves in mid-air does not merit equal attention in school curricula. Admittedly, ideas rarely materialize spontaneously. We must temper idealism with pragmatism lest we entertain sheer fantasy. Of course, knowledge has a significant role to play in anchoring theory.Nevertheless, suggesting that innovation is "more important" than raw data does not mean the latter is unimportant. Nor does it imply mutual exclusivity. Still, the crux remains that every invention began with an idea requiring creative reflection. Therefore, creativity is more critical to advancing human understanding than facts alone.Therein lies the need for a bold vision: to see the world anew while rejecting stubborn constraints and outmoded conventions cloaked as wisdom. Progressive thought is imperative in the physical sciences, even though we often associate them with cold logic. Further, what holds in an analytical realm likely holds still more in areas known more commonly for creativity. Across disciplinary borders, great ideas often originate as striking deviations from-- if not violent assaults on—sacred canons. Iconoclasts frequently inspire progress. Call them quixotic or even profane, but they play a crucial role in jolting our unshakable convictions. Thus, the world should welcome young stargazers who hasten progress through flashes of intuition. Let us encourage the next Mozart, Jane Austen, Pablo Picasso, Steve Jobs, Albert Einstein. Until a Promethean prodigy arises once more, though, we can rest assured. Within the limits of institutional thought, conventional thinkers will continue to supplement previous insight and the work of others.​​View Poll