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 occurrences could 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 a world 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.
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 50
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government industry or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation not competition 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and suppor 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and suppor 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...give proper reasoning for 2 questions. Firstly, he needs to compare the genres,...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...alls, the movies are experiencing now. Secondly, he needs to find out if the in...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 511, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'watching'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'encourage' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: watching
... the people motives are not encouraging to watch the movies in theatres. On prov...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...aging to watch the movies in theatres. On providing a proper reasoning for the ...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 333, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...through OTT to cater to wider audience.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 19.6327345309 36% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 13.6137724551 29% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 28.8173652695 66% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 55.5748502994 79% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 16.3942115768 49% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1496.0 2260.96107784 66% => OK
No of words: 292.0 441.139720559 66% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12328767123 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64893220166 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.571917808219 0.468620217663 122% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 705.55239521 66% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.1389571847 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.666666667 119.503703932 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 5.70786347227 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219176538814 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0710584863432 0.0743258471296 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0614059786158 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121336956407 0.128457276422 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0507996645645 0.0628817314937 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.5979740519 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 98.500998004 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.