As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Time and time again my parents have told me how our society does not know how to think for ourselves because we rely on technology too much to gave us all the answers. I agree with them. I think the dependence on technology nowadays is decreasing a person’s ability to think for themselves. For me, thinking for yourself involves having the ability to think creatively, have independent thoughts, bounce around ideas with other peers, and think critically. With technology there for you at a touch of a button, you can easily use Google to research anything you want, which can knock out the need for you to have an original thought or communicate with others in person for ideas.
On the other hand, it is true that technology has brought many advances. It allows for humans to be more efficient, have a longer lifespan, and communicate with those far and wide. Some may say that the advancement of technology is never ending; therefore, you must always be creatively thinking and critically thinking when making adjustments to a program or advancing the ability of what a cell phone can do. I think this is definitely true to an extent. The small group of highly qualified inventors and researchers are certainly creatively and critically thinking when testing new equipment or technology. They are using past knowledge and applying new ideas they thought of on their own. However, this is the small group of people and not the majority of people.
From my observation, the majority of people use technology to snoop on some else’s social media or watch the latest episode uploaded to Netflix. For example, when I am on the bus at my University I see many uses of technology. The bus itself is fantastic technological transportation advancement. However, most of the people on the bus have their eyes glued to their phone. Looking up what a celebrity is doing on social media or sending pictures to a friend.
Overall, technology is a double-edged sword. It can be used for good in expanding your knowledge like when you need to research articles when typing up an essay for class; oppositely it can be used negatively by making you lazy and not have to think for yourself.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | tarun9927 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-22 | pranav_kanth | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | vivek2upad | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | sefeliz | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-13 | jason123 | 54 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
- The best ideas arise from a passionateinterest in commonplace things.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagreewith the statement above and explain yourreasoning for the position you take. In developingand supporting your position, you should consi 54
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 191, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'saith', 'says'.
Suggestion: saith; says
...icate with those far and wide. Some may say that the advancement of technology is n...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, for example, i think, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => 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: 1822.0 2235.4752809 82% => OK
No of words: 375.0 442.535393258 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85866666667 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8373834582 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.522666666667 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 577.8 704.065955056 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 61.8783992043 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.8947368421 118.986275619 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7368421053 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.230454566359 0.243740707755 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0680617833183 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0542052156313 0.0758088955206 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131414694006 0.150359130593 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0484917420865 0.0667264976115 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.1392134831 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 12.1639044944 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 100.480337079 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.