The advances in technology have had a profound impact on the types of activities that humans spend their time performing. Instead of having to spend days or even weeks travelling from one city to another, mankind can now make use of vehicles that only require hours. Thus technology has certianly made our lives easier by simply relying on that technology, but has it also affected the ability of humans to think for themselves? No in fact, the advancements in science have ushered in more complex problems that require a greater ability for mankind to solve problems than ever before.
With the rapid advances in many fields of science, problems that once seemed impossible to solve are now dealt with everyday. Diseases that once baffled doctors can now be treated at home with a few doses of medicine. Computations that in the past required teams of mathmaticines to work for weeks can now be solved in seconds with advanced supercomputers. As such these advances instead of deteriorating the ability of humans to think actually remove the mundane, time intensive work, and they allow mankind to instead focus their attention on solving additional issues. As such, technological advancements have worked to save time that is then able to be spent on thinking about solutions to further problems.
Additionally technology has not only saved time for humans to focus on other pressing issues, it has also caused problems that will require even greater problem solving and planning than ever before. With the rise of factories to mass produce items and vehicles to transport both those items and humans around the world, greenhouse gases have been increasingly pumped into our atmosphere. As such, these gases threaten our global ecosystem by causing global climate change. Climate change threatens to cause more severe storms around the world as well as increase the sea level. Both actions will result in possibly millions of deaths around the world. As such, mankind now must use its problem solving abilities to create, test, and implement solutions to this growing problem. Thus the rise of technology has not resulted in a decay of thinking but a requirement for further discovery.
On the other hand, critics might argue that technology such as social media has resulted in a deterioration of our thinking abilities. They might point out the growing frequency of fake news articles that are continuing to circulate on the internet. In fact, they might further contend that the fact that people are believing obviously false reports, simply because their friends on social media shared the article, points to a lack of critical thinking by humans. While there certainly are instances of people believing fake articles instead of thinking about the issue for themselves, those critics are focusing on a small group of individuals instead of the many benefits that social media and the internet have brought. When combined, social media and the internet have allowed for more people than before to stay up to date with the news and issues facing the world. As such, the overall effect of technology in this case was positive because more people are thinking and learning about the world and its issues.
Advances in technology have resulted in mankind suffering from fewer problems than previous generations; however, technology has also allowed harder problems to be attempted than ever before. While there certainly are cases of technological advances resulting in groups of people less able to think for themselves, the cumulative effect has been a positive one. Technology is a tool that can be and has been used to further problem solving, and as such, it cannot be blamed for people using it as a crutch.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 268, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...se of vehicles that only require hours. Thus technology has certianly made our lives...
^^^^
Line 1, column 430, Rule ID: NOW[2]
Message: Did you mean 'now' (=at this moment) instead of 'no' (negation)?
Suggestion: Now
...lity of humans to think for themselves? No in fact, the advancements in science ha...
^^
Line 3, column 117, Rule ID: EVERYDAY_EVERY_DAY[3]
Message: 'Everyday' is an adjective. Did you mean 'every day'?
Suggestion: every day
... impossible to solve are now dealt with everyday. Diseases that once baffled doctors can...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Additionally,
...about solutions to further problems. Additionally technology has not only saved time for ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 780, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...ment solutions to this growing problem. Thus the rise of technology has not resulted...
^^^^
Line 7, column 313, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...rther contend that the fact that people are believing obviously false reports, simply because...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, second, so, then, thus, well, while, in fact, such as, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 97.0 58.6224719101 165% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3116.0 2235.4752809 139% => OK
No of words: 611.0 442.535393258 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.09983633388 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.97176167858 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62671836393 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 275.0 215.323595506 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.450081833061 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 981.0 704.065955056 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 3.10617977528 258% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 20.2370786517 124% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.541318308 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.64 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.44 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.56 5.21951772744 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183657952379 0.243740707755 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0591184205596 0.0831039109588 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0385952559677 0.0758088955206 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111773736608 0.150359130593 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0180289429924 0.0667264976115 27% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.6 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 142.0 100.480337079 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.