As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shapes your position.
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 drastically. A quick reflection on a typical day reveals how technology have 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 the computer that processes information on Silicon Bridge that are .09 microns wide. Upon leaving homes, family members will be reached through wireless networks that utilizes satellites orbiting the earth. Each of these common occurrences would have been inconvincible 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 increase 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 circuit 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 reveals that technology allows for convenience. The car, computer, and phones all release additional time for people to 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 scientist and politicians.
In contrast to the statement, we can even see how technology frees the human imagination. Consider how the digital revolution and the advert of the interest has allowed for an unprecedented exchange of ideas. WebMD, a popular internet portal for 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. Jeffery Sachs, one of the architects of the UN Millennium Development Goals, based his ideas on emergency care triage techniques. The unlikely marriage of economics and medicine has healed tense, hyperinflation environment from South America to Eastern Europe.
- Summarize the points in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific points made in the reading passage. 76
- Summarize the point made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific details made in the reading passage. 70
- Summarize the points made in the lecture that you have just heard, discussing how they cast doubt on parts made in the reading, you can refer the reading passage as you write. 3
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 90
- Books can be divided into two main types; fictional (novels & stories) and non-fictional (histories, biographies, & self –help books, for example). Which of these two types of book do you generally prefer to read? Use specific reasons & deta 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 444, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uring the workday, chances are high that the employee will interact with the comp...
^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cible at the turn of the 19th century. The statement attempts to bridge these d...
^^^^
Line 3, column 131, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[2]
Message: You should probably use 'reveal'.
Suggestion: reveal
...s the human species. The prior examples reveals that technology allows for convenience....
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 648, 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-st...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of maverick scientist and politicians. In contrast to the statement, we can eve...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
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 on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 13.8261648746 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.0286738351 118% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 43.0788530466 53% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 52.1666666667 115% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 8.0752688172 322% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2524.0 1977.66487455 128% => OK
No of words: 443.0 407.700716846 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69751693002 4.8611393121 117% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.58776254615 4.48103885553 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08586051964 2.67179642975 115% => OK
Unique words: 278.0 212.727598566 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.627539503386 0.524837075471 120% => OK
syllable_count: 797.4 618.680645161 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.51630824373 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 3.08781362007 324% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.6003584229 126% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.1344086022 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.7946136795 48.9658058833 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.0769230769 100.406767564 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0384615385 20.6045352989 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.88461538462 5.45110844103 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.5376344086 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 11.8709677419 126% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.88709677419 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234633274604 0.236089414692 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0566486242807 0.076458572812 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0535068000461 0.0737576698707 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.135280868769 0.150856017488 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0354157081018 0.0645574589148 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 11.7677419355 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 58.1214874552 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.48 10.9000537634 142% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.47 8.01818996416 131% => OK
difficult_words: 168.0 86.8835125448 193% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.002688172 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.0537634409 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.