As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate

Essay topics:

As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate

As more and more technology becomes accessible, humans find themselves inversely capable of thinking especially with respect to memory and problem solving. It is rare today that a person can go to a store without first writing down their grocery list, but deeper than that, it is uncommon to find individuality and original creativity with modern access to the internet, social media, and forums. My arguments are generationally and scientifically apparent.

Before this technology generation, most information was transferred and processed via the written or spoken word with a necessary commitment the memorization of details and memos. Today's millennials and Gen Z's outsource their brain storage to hard drive storage. While some may argue that the external placement allows room for expanded critical thinking, the technology also reduces the need for self-processing and creativity. According to Harvard Research Center, 85% of high-school-age millennials admitted to using online sources as inspiration for analytical writing and problem-solving in the past year. And of those who answered, 95% admitted that it hindered their ability to think creatively. The cost of increased access to technology is really a loss of originality and individuality. As millennials have ever more access to technology, the need for unique and individual thinking is replaced by silicon chips.

To expand on this point, technology does not make problem-solving obsolete because there is always a need for creativity and original thought. The prior examples indicate that technology allows for convenience and release additional time for people to act efficiently. Reality argues that very few millennials who use technology frequentyl use that extra time for self-improvement and critical thought. Instead, many use technology for a quick solution to homework problems and inspiration, as a means to and end so-to-speak. The convenience of modern life does not preclude a decreased dependence on creativity.

There was once a time when people dedicated time to curating their memories and faculties because there was no other way to go about problem-solving and analytic thought. In ancient Greece, there was once a poet named Simonides who left a banquet party just before the banquet hall collapsed and mangled all persons inside beyond recognition, but Simonides was able to identify the bodies because he remembered exactly where each person sat. This is because he marked the people and tables with the emotions and impressions from his poem as he recited is poetry. To recall their locations, he simply recalled the poem in reverse. This is the same method Cicero and Homer used to recall their works. Nowadays, the ubiquity of technology has made this ability rare, and the ability largely seems alien. Only a handful of people still use this technique and they compete at an annually at the World Memory Championship. At this competition, all technology is banned as it distracts the players and hinders their ability.

Thus my argument stands that the accessibility of technology limits the mental capacity for memorization. Modern generations with the highest access to technology, have a reduced need for memorization and analytical thinking. The expanded number of brain nodes has been replaced with the world wide web and smartphones which make intellectual plagiarism common and have thus removed individuality from the academic landscape. This stands in stark contrast to the days without silicon-powered technology and portable brains. In ancient times, a carefully maintained memory was necessary and unsurprising as a computer is in a technology worshipping world.

Votes
Average: 6.6 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2024-02-01 jahot 66 view
2024-02-01 jahot 66 view
2023-11-03 Mithil 58 view
2023-11-02 Mithil 66 view
2023-10-26 topeibisanmi@gmail.com 66 view
Essay Categories

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 10, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...players and hinders their ability. Thus my argument stands that the accessibili...
^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, really, so, still, thus, while, with respect to

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 35.0 14.8657303371 235% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3120.0 2235.4752809 140% => OK
No of words: 567.0 442.535393258 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50264550265 5.05705443957 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.87972968509 4.55969084622 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.131775585 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 305.0 215.323595506 142% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537918871252 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 996.3 704.065955056 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.659902007 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.428571429 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.64285714286 5.21951772744 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 16.0 10.2758426966 156% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.216347958993 0.243740707755 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0561793907336 0.0831039109588 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621189303581 0.0758088955206 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121827965343 0.150359130593 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0429739242729 0.0667264976115 64% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 14.1392134831 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.8420337079 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.1743820225 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.62 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.42 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 172.0 100.480337079 171% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

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.