Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Today’s world is the world of research and scientific achievements. Everyday, there are thousends of new discoveries and new phenomenon in various fields, that scientists succeed to understand and find them.The main goal of all of them is to make world a better place to live. However, many believe that scientists should focus their researches on subjects that are beneficial for larger part of people, but I take side against this attitude, because of some reasons that will be elaborated in the following.
To begin with, some people advocate the idea that , researchers should dedicate their potentials to areas which can bring advantages to the greatest number of people. They state that the ultimate goal of each scientific resaerch is serving people, and facilitating various aspects of life for human being . So, it is reasonable that one of the criteria that should be considered in prioritization of a scientific activity, should be the number of people whom are benefited by that activity. More individuals, higher priority.
But on the contrary there are some negative aspects of implementation of such recommendation that invalidate it. First, it should be pointed that there are some problems that involve small groups of people, but their negative impacts are more serious than other fields which can serve larger number of people. If they receive scant attention because researchers are focused on other areas, they can result in disastrous outcomes for involved people. For example, about recent virus Ebola that got spread in some African countries, this disease threats only a part of earth population, but if scientists have not worked on the ways to treat and control it , the virus would have killed all of the infected peole in African countries. In this case, it was not fair that scientists focus on the impacts of global warming on human health and prefer working on this issue because it global warming poses threats to all earth population but only a part of earth residents suffer from Ebola. Thus only the number of individuals that a scientific resaerch aim to serve can not be a reliable factor to select an area as focused subject.
As what is mentioned above, regardless of the number of people who are beneficiary of a research, scientists should consider that how crucial is the field that they research on it.
should be the number of people whom are benefited by that activity.
should be the number of people who are benefited by that activity.
Sentence: Everyday, there are thousends of new discoveries and new phenomenon in various fields, that scientists succeed to understand and find them.The main goal of all of them is to make world a better place to live.
Error: thousends Suggestion: thousands
Sentence: They state that the ultimate goal of each scientific resaerch is serving people, and facilitating various aspects of life for human being .
Error: resaerch Suggestion: research
Sentence: For example, about recent virus Ebola that got spread in some African countries, this disease threats only a part of earth population, but if scientists have not worked on the ways to treat and control it , the virus would have killed all of the infected peole in African countries.
Error: peole Suggestion: people
Sentence: Thus only the number of individuals that a scientific resaerch aim to serve can not be a reliable factor to select an area as focused subject.
Error: resaerch Suggestion: research
flaws:
The following content is duplicated. and more arguments wanted in the second paragraph:
'However, many believe that scientists should focus their researches on subjects that are beneficial for larger part of people, but I take side against this attitude, because of some reasons that will be elaborated in the following.
To begin with, some people advocate the idea that , researchers should dedicate their potentials to areas which can bring advantages to the greatest number of people. They state that the ultimate goal of each scientific resaerch is serving people, and facilitating various aspects of life for human being . So, it is reasonable that one of the criteria that should be considered in prioritization of a scientific activity, should be the number of people whom are benefited by that activity. More individuals, higher priority.'
-----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 14 15
No. of Words: 389 350
No. of Characters: 1917 1500
No. of Different Words: 193 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.441 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.928 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.657 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 140 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 67 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 42 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 27.786 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 12.096 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.643 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.336 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.533 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.087 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5