As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Technological advancement is changing people’s lives significantly over the past decades, and since the industrial revolution. While some argue that using technology for problem-solving might deteriorate humans’ ability to think for themselves, I strongly disagree.
As technology gets better, we are able to do much more than in the past. Technological advancement in aviation, for example, allows us to travel great distances swiftly. In science, technology now enables artificial intelligence to win at games, understand and parse images, and even read and understand language. With those new forms of technology in hand, there is a lot of human brain power needed, that cannot be emulated by computers. Since there is no current replacement for human problem-solving, people still need to think for themselves, arguably even more than before modern technology. Thus, not only does technology not deteriorate our thoughts, but it might as well do the opposite.
In addition to thinking and problem-solving regarding new forms of technology, we are also left with older, more crude forms of technology that do solve problems, but do not affect the amount of thinking we have to do. For example, although computers often perform tasks that lower the amount of thought required from humans, computers also do tasks that were impossible before. Computers now enable implementation of intricate algorithms that can, for instance, sort millions of numbers in a brief period of time. Computers can also “remember” vast amounts of data with very high precision, which humans could have never achieved. Therefore, technological problem-solving does not replace human thinking, and hence definitely cannot deteriorate it.
One might claim that computer usage in math, for example using calculators for arithmetics, might make humans less agile in doing arithmetic calculations. While this is true, it does not mean that the ability of humans to think for themselves will deteriorate. As knowing how to perform challenging arithmetic calculations numerically turns redundant, humans can now devote much more time to developing and researching higher levels of knowledge in various fields, for example math, physics and computer science.
While technology might indeed decrease or completely nullify the need for human problem-solving in certain fields, it definitely does not mean humans will not think anymore. Thinking will still be needed for high-level problems, and furthermore, technology even increases the amount of thinking needed to get technology to new grounds.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-22 | pranav_kanth | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | sefeliz | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-12 | shuocurity | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-05 | Mridul | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-31 | chrissyready | 66 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 499, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ce, sort millions of numbers in a brief period of time. Computers can also 'remember&apos...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, hence, if, regarding, so, still, therefore, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2196.0 2235.4752809 98% => OK
No of words: 396.0 442.535393258 89% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54545454545 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46091344257 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02549703064 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 215.323595506 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545454545455 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 683.1 704.065955056 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6976181337 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.0 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.94444444444 5.21951772744 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.294712850497 0.243740707755 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102094112727 0.0831039109588 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.06480191812 0.0758088955206 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183646411743 0.150359130593 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0191210573221 0.0667264976115 29% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.7 14.1392134831 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.91 12.1639044944 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.99 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 100.480337079 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
---------------------
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.