As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of
humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
The statement linking technology negatively with free thinking plays on recent human
experience over the past century. Surely there has been no time in history where the
lived lives of people have changed more dramatically. A quick reflection on a typical
day reveals how technology has revolutionized the world. Most people commute to
work in an automobile that runs on an internal combustion engine. During the
workday, chances are high that the employee will interact with a computer that
processes information on silicon bridges that are .09 microns wide. Upon leaving
home, family members will be reached through wireless networks that utilize satellites
orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurences would have been inconceivable
at the turn of the 19th century.
The statement attempts to bridge these dramatic changes to a reduction in the
ability for humans to think for themselves. The assumption is that an increased reliance
on technology negates the need for people to think creatively to solve previous
quandaries. Looking back at the introduction, one could argue that without a car,
computer, or mobile phone, the hypothetical worker would need to find alternate
methods of transport, information processing, and communication. Technology short
circuits this thinking by making the problems obsolete.
However, this reliance on technology does not necessarily preclude the creativity
that marks the human species. The prior examples reveal that technology allows for
convenience. The car, computer, and phone all release additional time for people to
live more efficiently. This efficiency does not preclude the need for humans to think for
themselves. In fact, technology frees humanity to not only tackle new problems, but
may itself create new issues that did not exist without technology. For example, the
proliferation of automobiles has introduced a need for fuel conservation on a global
scale. With increasing energy demands from emerging markets, global warming
becomes a concern inconceivable to the horse-and-buggy generation. Likewise
dependence on oil has created nation-states that are not dependent on taxation,
allowing ruling parties to oppress minority groups such as women. Solutions to these
complex problems require the unfettered imaginations of maverick scientists and
politicians.
In contrast to the statement, we can even see how technology frees the human
imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advent of the internet has
allowed for an unprecedented exchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internet portal for
medical information, permits patients to self research symptoms for a more informed
doctor visit. This exercise opens pathways of thinking that were previously closed off
to the medical layman. With increased interdisciplinary interactions, inspiration can
arrive from the most surprising corners. Jeffrey Sachs, one of the architects of the UN
Millenium Development Goals, based his ideas on emergency care triage techniques.
The unlikely marriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflation
environments from South America to Eastern Europe.
This last example provides the most hope in how technology actually provides hope
to the future of humanity. By increasing our reliance on technology, impossible goals
can now be achieved. Consider how the late 20th century witnessed the complete
elimination of smallpox. This disease had ravaged the human race since prehistorical
days, and yet with the technology of vaccines, free thinking humans dared to imagine
aworld free of smallpox. Using technology, battle plans were drawn out, and smallpox
was systematically targeted and eradicated.
Technology will always mark the human experience, from the discovery of fire to the
implementation of nanotechnology. Given the history of the human race, there will be
no limit to the number of problems, both new and old, for us to tackle. There is no
need to retreat to a Luddite attitude to new things, but rather embrace a hopeful
posture to the possibilities that technology provides for new avenues of human
imagination.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 26, column 68, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Likewise,
...able to the horse-and-buggy generation. Likewise dependence on oil has created nation-s...
^^^^^^^^
Line 45, column 85, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s, free thinking humans dared to imagine aworld free of smallpox. Using technolog...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'but', 'however', 'if', 'likewise', 'look', 'may', 'so', 'for example', 'in contrast', 'in fact', 'such as', 'in contrast to']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.28818443804 0.240241500013 120% => OK
Verbs: 0.146974063401 0.157235817809 93% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0922190201729 0.0880659088768 105% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0389048991354 0.0497285424764 78% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0100864553314 0.0444667217837 23% => Some pronouns wanted.
Prepositions: 0.110951008646 0.12292977631 90% => OK
Participles: 0.0432276657061 0.0406280797675 106% => OK
Conjunctions: 3.09246568566 2.79330140395 111% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0374639769452 0.030933414821 121% => OK
Particles: 0.0028818443804 0.0016655270985 173% => OK
Determiners: 0.112391930836 0.0997080785238 113% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0158501440922 0.0249443105267 64% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.021613832853 0.0148568991511 145% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 4155.0 2732.02544248 152% => OK
No of words: 626.0 452.878318584 138% => OK
Chars per words: 6.63738019169 6.0361032391 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.00199880112 4.58838876751 109% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.44249201278 0.366273622748 121% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.361022364217 0.280924506359 129% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.268370607029 0.200843997647 134% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.172523961661 0.132149295362 131% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09246568566 2.79330140395 111% => OK
Unique words: 354.0 219.290929204 161% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565495207668 0.48968727796 115% => OK
Word variations: 75.9133637394 55.4138127331 137% => OK
How many sentences: 35.0 20.6194690265 170% => OK
Sentence length: 17.8857142857 23.380412469 76% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.1516813284 59.4972553346 54% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.714285714 141.124799967 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.8857142857 23.380412469 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.371428571429 0.674092028746 55% => OK
Paragraphs: 51.0 4.94800884956 1031% => There are something wrong with the essay format.
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 53.9879507074 51.4728631049 105% => OK
Elegance: 2.25735294118 1.64882698954 137% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.412570451017 0.391690518653 105% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.0716704167508 0.123202303941 58% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0662545017652 0.077325440228 86% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.715963007947 0.547984918172 131% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.27130831915 0.149214159877 182% => Sentences are changing often in a paragraphs.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130523242114 0.161403998019 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0716681408575 0.0892212321368 80% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.0844641181616 0.385218514788 22% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0834650229149 0.0692045440612 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109736675194 0.275328986314 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0757656662088 0.0653680567796 116% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 19.0 10.4325221239 182% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.30420353982 132% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.88274336283 184% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 13.0 7.22455752212 180% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.66592920354 136% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.70907079646 148% => OK
Total topic words: 22.0 13.5995575221 162% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.