Technology, while apparently aimed to simplify our lives, only makes our lives more complicated.
While modern technology has solved many of the mundane problems that, throughout history, had taken much of humanity's time, nonetheless it has created an abundance of nee and more complex issues with which people must cope.
One primary issue with which modern technology seems to contend is communication. Over the last century, the development of the telephone, the cell-phone, and the internet, have ameliorated conditions for communication across the board. Indeed, while in the 19th century one would have written letters, waiting days, weeks, or months in order to receive a reply, today we can easily communicate with people on the other side of the world instantaneously. Such an advancement seemingly improves the lives of all people. However, rather than bringing people closer together, the evolution of communication technology has often brought them further apart. It is not uncommon to see groups of people on the street, perhaps even groups of friends, who are each gazing blankly at the screens of their cell-phones, making little to no personal contact. Thus, while enabling communication across long distances, such technology is slowly eradicating the personal, human connections between people. The results of such limited social interaction can often be catastrophic. Indeed, such limited personal interaction can have highly deletrious effects on children's development of social skills, a complex issue brought on by technological innovation, and most significantly the internet.
A similar by-product of the advent of the internet is open access to virtaully infinite information. Rather than be forced to pour over thick encyclopedeias, one can find the answer to a question in seconds, by pressing a few keys on the keyboard. Such easy and quick access to information simplifies people's lives in infinite ways. Hiking through a forest, one can easily check whether a certain berry is poisonous; pondering the meaning of life, one suffering from an existential crisis can easily look up philosophers' differing perspectives on humanity's purpose in the universe. Acess to infromation provides a remedy to problems big and small. At the same time, however, the juggernaut of information that crashes like a wave as a result of a simple google search also raises many complex issues. One result the facility in which one can find an answer to a question is, paradoxically, that people's knowledge becomes very limited, as it is no longer necessary to retain information--it is availale online at any given moment in time. The abundance of information, which is often constituted by an amalgamation of fact and fiction, can also lead to great difficulty discerning valid, veracious information, from inaccurate, distorted, or simply false information. Indeed, this issue has become increasingly conspicuous over the last year, a period characterized most aptly by the term "fake news".
While technological advancements have therefore provided solutions to many of humanity's day to day problems, it has also raised complex issues regarding the place of personal communication in society, and the value of truth.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-17 | Siddiqur Rahman | 66 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | phajaygv | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-03 | Evil-wasp | 75 | view |
| 2019-10-10 | raolitesh@gmail.com | 66 | view |
| 2019-09-29 | xipaheje | 16 | view |
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, nonetheless, regarding, second, so, therefore, thus, while, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 12.0 33.0505617978 36% => OK
Preposition: 77.0 58.6224719101 131% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2663.0 2235.4752809 119% => OK
No of words: 486.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47942386831 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69525374022 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14417094584 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 273.0 215.323595506 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561728395062 0.4932671777 114% => OK
syllable_count: 845.1 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.6703129553 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.15 118.986275619 112% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8 5.21951772744 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => 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: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0454584925679 0.243740707755 19% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0151962137552 0.0831039109588 18% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0242988124722 0.0758088955206 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0329714243401 0.150359130593 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0129570311577 0.0667264976115 19% => 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: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.64 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 100.480337079 147% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.