Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development
Scientific research and development expands our knowledge of the universe. For centuries, they have helped take the human civilisation forward. From life saving drug discoveries which have enhanced human life expectancy to discovery of new and efficient energy resources, which help a nations economy, scientific discoveries has always put the present generation a step ahead of the previous ones. But, as much as it has helped humanity, it can also be used for destructive purposes. Discovery of atomic bomb and other deadly chemical weapons have wiped out innocent human lives from the face of the earth. The rise of Artificial Intelligence powered tools have led to various people loosing jobs. Chemical pesticides which were developed for increasing the yield of crops is known to have negative side effects on people. Therefore, the question comes, how much freedom should we provide to scientists to conduct experiments without any consequences for negative side effects? In my opinion, Governments should place enough restrictions so that scientific research does not create any negative elements and is only used for betterment of humanity.
In the recent years, we are seeing rapid advancements in Artificial Intelligence. There has always been concerns of AI taking over the world and being a threat to humanity, but now the time has come to take this seriously. AI has become so advanced that it can already replace most of us from our jobs. And we have already started to see its effects with mass layoffs taking place across industries. There are also concerns regarding AI generated text and images on copywright infringement, where a lot of publicly available data was used to train the artificial neural networks, without taking permission from its authors. In such cases, it is important to ensure that these kind of technologies are not used for harmful purposes. With proper regulations, we can ensure that people use these technologies responsibly. Easy access to such technology and lack of proper regulations can lead to more harm than any good to the society.
On the other hand, placing too many restrictions might hamper development of even the essential things. The best example is the development of vaccine during the coronovirus pandemic. Vaccine discovery is a laborious process, involving years of research and development followed by a number of trials on animals and humans, before it can be approved for mass usage. Governments have implemented very strict regulations so that the safety is ensured and there are no side effects. However, during the pandemic, we saw a rapid increase in the infection, spreading all across the world and killing millions of people. There was a need for rapid vaccine development, and strict regulations from the government would only delay the process and result in more deaths and economic loss. In such a situation, it was important for the Governments to easen the regulations, so that a vaccine could be developed and approved on time.
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate my point that there is a need for regulation of scientific research and development to ensure that nothing harmful comes out of the research activities. Lack of regulations can lead to development of harmful technologies which destroy our lives and planet, without doing any good. However, it is also important to note that placing too many restrictions can hamper the discovery of useful and life saving technologies. The question then remains where to draw the line. The Governments should be in touch with the latest research and developmental activities that are taking place and consult top scientists to assess the risks invloved. They must then take informed decision which would allow the scientifc community to make important discoveries but also limit the potential threats.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-19 | Celestina Asantewaa | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 75 | view |
| 2024-07-01 | MMoksha | 66 | view |
| 2024-06-29 | sefeliz | 83 | view |
- During the past year Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on the job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on the job accidents is 73
- Twenty years ago Dr Field a noted anthropologist visited the island of Tertia Using an observation centered approach to studying Tertian culture he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by the 63
- Several years ago Groveton College adopted an honor code which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated Groveton s honor code replaced a system in which te 54
- Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development 66
- Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student s field of study 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 286, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'nations'' or 'nation's'?
Suggestion: nations'; nation's
...fficient energy resources, which help a nations economy, scientific discoveries has alw...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 671, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this kind' or 'these kinds'?
Suggestion: this kind; these kinds
...h cases, it is important to ensure that these kind of technologies are not used for harmfu...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, regarding, so, then, therefore, in conclusion, kind of, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 79.0 58.6224719101 135% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3227.0 2235.4752809 144% => OK
No of words: 616.0 442.535393258 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.23863636364 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98190197535 4.55969084622 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89183073531 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 296.0 215.323595506 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.480519480519 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 1019.7 704.065955056 145% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 12.0 4.38483146067 274% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 30.0 20.2370786517 148% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5926675204 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.566666667 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5333333333 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.73333333333 5.21951772744 72% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.250349299094 0.243740707755 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064095512406 0.0831039109588 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0864397932958 0.0758088955206 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164565721716 0.150359130593 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0859511618631 0.0667264976115 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.11 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 100.480337079 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.