As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
The dependence of humans on technology has been on the rise, however I do not agree with the statement that this deteriorates human capacity for thinking. Technology has impacted our lives in many positive ways. One aspect of technology that has affected almost all industries is the automation of boring and repetitive tasks. Tedious jobs like assembly of parts in manufacturing or handling accounting for businesses can now be achieved much faster, efficiently and accurately by machines. In fact, this is the ultimate goal of technology - making things work faster, more efficiently and with higher accuracy.
There was a time when NASA employed teams of people whose sole task was to perform precise calculations. It was an intensive task - breaking down large datasets into groups, dividing the calculations among teams, performing hand calculations on each dataset, shuffling around the results for rechecking and finally compiling all the results. Later on, they were replaced with IBM's huge calculating machines, which would do the same thing, albeit much faster.
One would argue that having a ready solution for all our small problems has affected our ability to think for the solutions ourselves. For example, having a calculator with us at all times will eventually hinder our ability to perform calculations in the absence of it. However, we need to ask if we still need to solve everything from scratch? What a calculator has done is not stunt our ability to perform mathematical operations, but it has freed up our time to focus on the more complex problems. We now have more time to focus our mental energies on bigger challenges, and technology has enabled us to focus on them by taking care of the menial tasks that anyone can do.
Historically, society as a whole has been improving and advancing towards a better future. We have sent people to space. We have found the cure to many erstwhile incurable diseases. All this would not have happened if it were not were for the pioneering minds of each successive generation. We now have higher standards of living as compared to just a few decades ago. We have come a long way not just because of technology, but because of the genius minds that make the best use of it and think for the future.
| 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 |
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of WLSS television station."Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news. During the s 29
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 29
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 83
- Productivity and Rewards 63
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 231, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
... would not have happened if it were not were for the pioneering minds of each succes...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, so, still, while, as to, for example, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 33.0505617978 100% => OK
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: 1886.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 381.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9501312336 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76920246629 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57217847769 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 609.3 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.3996388359 60.3974514979 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.2631578947 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0526315789 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.78947368421 5.21951772744 73% => 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 : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19179380003 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0531023345495 0.0831039109588 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431648278094 0.0758088955206 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103033766946 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0643782560272 0.0667264976115 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.52 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => 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: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.