Government should place few, if any restriction on the research and developmental activities
Scientific research and developments have helped to better the lives of the human kind and is ever evolving and progressing. While widely aimed at wellbeing of the society, history does have some counter examples to learn from and to be careful of. Here, a governmental supervision of the activities comes into consideration. But together with it is the peril of such an intervention hobbling the research activities. While it would be better for the government to stay out of the scientific research and development activities, a completely hands off policy from the government side can lead
to unexpected consequences.
Creativity is at the center of Research and development activities, clearly flourishes when it is easy to try out new ideas. Number of innovative discoveries in the scientific fields can be seen to be more in US than in Europe, partly due to the less intervening red tape. Requiring scientists to report on everything about their progress considerably reduces their time which they could have used for conducting research.
Not only does that hobbles the researchers from committing more of their resources, international collaborations will need to pass through screenings based on existing policies. Even when it appears to a reasonable person that the countries have to safeguard their interests, science truly has no borders and its outlook is global. Examining in the context of Medical research, delaying or denying the fruits of a scientific collaboration to a lot of people, simply because they are citizens of another nation, is totally unreasonable.
While it is true that the differences among political leadership of various countries should not unfairly put a large group of population in disadvantage, it could be argued that the way in which the results of the study will be used should be ensured non-detrimental to the human kind at large. For example collaboration in nuclear technological research might help a country overcome its abject energy problems, it is to be ensured that the technology will not be used for destructive ends such as making bombs. This could be applicable to some fields whereas fields such as construction technologies, disaster warning systems etc are less likely to be manipulated to achieve a destructive end.
It seems that the Governments while keeping a hands off policy in general, would do good by ensuring that the ends of the research does not put the safety and wellbeing of the human kind in menace.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 290, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'activities'' or 'activity's'?
Suggestion: activities'; activity's
...Here, a governmental supervision of the activities comes into consideration. But together ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 593, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...policy from the government side can lead to unexpected consequences. Creativit...
^^^
Line 10, column 45, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a hand' or simply 'hands'?
Suggestion: a hand; hands
...eems that the Governments while keeping a hands off policy in general, would do good by...
^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'if', 'look', 'so', 'well', 'whereas', 'while', 'for example', 'in general', 'such as', 'it is true']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.22969837587 0.240241500013 96% => OK
Verbs: 0.176334106729 0.157235817809 112% => OK
Adjectives: 0.092807424594 0.0880659088768 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0440835266821 0.0497285424764 89% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0371229698376 0.0444667217837 83% => OK
Prepositions: 0.141531322506 0.12292977631 115% => OK
Participles: 0.0580046403712 0.0406280797675 143% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.12155356846 2.79330140395 112% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0417633410673 0.030933414821 135% => OK
Particles: 0.00696055684455 0.0016655270985 418% => OK
Determiners: 0.0974477958237 0.0997080785238 98% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.030162412993 0.0249443105267 121% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0092807424594 0.0148568991511 62% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2490.0 2732.02544248 91% => OK
No of words: 402.0 452.878318584 89% => OK
Chars per words: 6.19402985075 6.0361032391 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.47771567384 4.58838876751 98% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.36815920398 0.366273622748 101% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.300995024876 0.280924506359 107% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.216417910448 0.200843997647 108% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.166666666667 0.132149295362 126% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12155356846 2.79330140395 112% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 219.290929204 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544776119403 0.48968727796 111% => OK
Word variations: 62.1508777699 55.4138127331 112% => OK
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6194690265 73% => OK
Sentence length: 26.8 23.380412469 115% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.7878135723 59.4972553346 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 166.0 141.124799967 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8 23.380412469 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.733333333333 0.674092028746 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.94800884956 121% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.21349557522 58% => OK
Readability: 56.8995024876 51.4728631049 111% => OK
Elegance: 1.66666666667 1.64882698954 101% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198260750796 0.391690518653 51% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.109731922148 0.123202303941 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0714340672067 0.077325440228 92% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.627744400857 0.547984918172 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.168509449936 0.149214159877 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0981889345201 0.161403998019 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0594840098567 0.0892212321368 67% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.241637853373 0.385218514788 63% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.112906903598 0.0692045440612 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118086475796 0.275328986314 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0738566318176 0.0653680567796 113% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.4325221239 96% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.30420353982 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88274336283 20% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 9.0 7.22455752212 125% => OK
Negative topic words: 2.0 3.66592920354 55% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.70907079646 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 11.0 13.5995575221 81% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.