Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
Some believe that scientists should concentrate on some parts of their fields that are more beneficial for people, while others maintain that all the area of knowledge, useful for immediate usage for people or not, are necessary to investigate. Though it seems both sides have their reasons for their claim, I strongly agree with the latter one that scientists should not be restricted in the area of knowledge that more likely to benefit individuals.
First of all, some fields of knowledge are the base for others such as Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry. The scientists of these knowledge may could not present an innovation that immediately can employ for people. But their findings are useful for other knowledge that serve more inventions to people such as engineering, medical and etc. Thus, restricting the scientists in some specific fields may lead to decrease innovations in long term. For a specific example, the Mathematicians improve theoretical methods of Machine learning while engineering use them for implementing in devices such as cell phones and autonomous vehicles.
Moreover, the capacity of research in different fields is becoming wider by increasing the number of scientist every day. So, if we limit them into specific area, in fact, we waste this capacity. Instead, they can work on some knowledge and broaden the horizon of knowledge in some area that may be useful in the future. For example, some may think space craft investigation does not have any promotion for individual people. However, the improvement in engine of the spacecrafts, which was invented decades ago, are implemented in our cars these days.
However, some claim that final goal of all knowledge is serving to people and all of the scientists should just focus on serving to people. They exemplify some usage of knowledge that lead to killing people like atomic bomb or chemical gas bomb. Although there are some abuses of knowledge in the world, it is not correct to generalize them to all of the knowledge that have not immediate benefit for people. Thus, their reasons could not be cogent.
In conclusion, though some people believe the scientists should be restricted to some parts of knowledge that have immediate benefit for people, I strongly reckon we should take them free to investigate in all parts of knowledge. Because they may not have immediate advantage for us but could provide base knowledge for future benefits.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-01 | Sagar1234567890 | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-25 | TiOluwani97 | 66 | view |
| 2023-02-01 | wikoxa7293@ekcsoft.com | 50 | view |
| 2023-01-03 | abhikhanna | 62 | view |
| 2022-10-31 | raghavchauhan619 | 83 | view |
- Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.Write a response in which you 50
- Some people believe that it is helpful to view a challenging situation as an opportunity for personal growth Others believe that reimagining challenging situations this way occupies too much of the focus one needs to face challenges effectively 54
- The following appeared in a health magazine published in Corpora Medical experts say that only one quarter of Corpora s citizens meet the current standards for adequate physical fitness even though twenty years ago one half of all of Corpora s citizens me 66
- “Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.” Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, b 50
- Some people think that the best way to resolve environmental problems is to increase fuel and vehicles prices Do you agree or disagree with the statement 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 125, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this knowledge' or 'these knowledges'?
Suggestion: this knowledge; these knowledges
...hysics and Chemistry. The scientists of these knowledge may could not present an innovation tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 333, Rule ID: AND_ETC[1]
Message: Use simply 'etc.'.
Suggestion: etc.
... to people such as engineering, medical and etc. Thus, restricting the scientists in som...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 508, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
..., the Mathematicians improve theoretical methods of Machine learning while engine...
^^
Line 4, column 79, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
... all knowledge is serving to people and all of the scientists should just focus on serving...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 344, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...it is not correct to generalize them to all of the knowledge that have not immediate benef...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2040.0 2235.4752809 91% => OK
No of words: 397.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13853904282 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46372701284 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7450141513 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 215.323595506 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.476070528967 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 642.6 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.7751549169 60.3974514979 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.333333333 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0555555556 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.38888888889 5.21951772744 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
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: 0.132211509224 0.243740707755 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0499869236665 0.0831039109588 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0454245878359 0.0758088955206 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0895731482072 0.150359130593 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0429799809448 0.0667264976115 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.1392134831 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.31 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.