Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
Research and development (R&D) are undoubtedly one of the most crucial parts to embrace progress for the community. It has been widely believed that the government can play a significant role to the embellishment of the scientific accomplishments. The prompt as outlined here argues that government should not enforce restrictions at all or few if any to the path of scientific research. I strongly agree with the statement and argue for it for two specific reasons.
To begin, legal impediments on R&D may hamper the growth of learning which consequently make the country less competent globally. On the other hand, being lenient to the research community may bring some novel outputs to the country people. For example, Tomas Alva Edison in his journey to discover the bulb, often criticized by the federal government to obtain funds. Nonetheless, when he left his motherland and applied for foreign grants, his contribution was greatly acknowledged and all logistical supports were provided. This paved the way to brighten the world with the invention of light bulb, although Edison always expressed his disappointments not to get help locally and contribute to his country people. From this illustration, it can be safely affirmed that government should be flexible and give the researchers ample opportunities to gain more achievements to the country.
Furthermore, international collaboration and coordination might be hampered in case of being a rigid government. It has been widely believed that no satisfactory solutions can be achieved in case of a country's pressing problem without the intervention of foreign collaboration. If researchers can get all the necessary supports from the local government to buy equipment from the foreign traders, jointly co-author research findings in the top-notch journals and of course, get the required fund from the government agency, they certainly can contribute to the country's welfare. For instance, if a country doesn't allow letter of credit (LC) or not pliable to the foreign business for research purpose, most of the researchers will not be eager any longer to conduct researches for the society. In that case, the country will actually encounter the darks without the light of sun and become a technologically laggard nation.
To summarize, because of some negative consequences like nuclear reactors or atomic bombs, many people tend to establish that government should be stringent enough about scientific discovery. However, I strongly urge that with the necessary support, it is possible to discover alternatives to these questionable innovations and gain other accomplishments. In my opinion, government should provide plethora of opportunities and flexibilities to ensure the growth of scientific research and development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 607, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...rys welfare. For instance, if a country doesnt allow letter of credit LC or not pliabl...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, consequently, furthermore, however, if, may, nonetheless, so, for example, for instance, of course, in my opinion, 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: 14.0 12.4196629213 113% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 12.9106741573 170% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2363.0 2235.4752809 106% => OK
No of words: 429.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50815850816 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.21817138387 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.550116550117 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 712.8 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.1409966199 60.3974514979 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.277777778 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8333333333 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 5.21951772744 156% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.267656951351 0.243740707755 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0819098708735 0.0831039109588 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10965651901 0.0758088955206 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.180290710312 0.150359130593 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101822951802 0.0667264976115 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 12.1639044944 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.56 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.