In the contemporary world, technological advancements play an indispensable role in humans’ lives. Therefore, many individuals assume that joblessness is attributable to them. From my observation, I disagree with this statement for the following reasons.
On the one hand, it is undeniable that state-of-the-art machinery does to blame for the rate of unemployment. Doubtlessly, machines are clearly superior to human labor in terms of productivity, precision and endurance, thereby leading to dispensable occupations requiring the copious number of physical demands, repetition in nature that do not involve much creativity such as construction workers or waiters. To illustrate, worldwide factories are currently prioritizing automation over manual labor as it can exponentially fabricate mass production without any suffocation from productivity. Thus, they will swiftly yield their products and make them accessible to the masses easily.
On the other hand, notwithstanding the aforementioned evidence, modern devices and equipment do not solely trigger the deprivation of people’s jobs. Firstly, there are other factors that take away humans’ professions besides digital gadgets, namely individuals’ ability. Consequently, that problem will marginalize human labor without any participation in power-driven machinery. Secondly, undermining humans’ place in the workforce has gradually grown during the past century despite the industrial revolution because technology is not utterly capable of swapping out humans at every work aspect and its job is to foster productivity, give people greater flexibility and eliminate unnecessary, repetitious tasks related to humans’ workloads. Hence, the inventions that humans have conceived are not the only reason that makes people redundant from their occupations.
To sum up, digital devices do have the potential to deprive humans of their jobs. Nevertheless, it is over-simplification to say that technology is the cause of the number of jobless individuals. There are other factors that result in losing people’s professions and technology has existed only to assist human workers, not to substitute them.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, consequently, first, firstly, hence, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 7.85571142285 38% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 10.4138276553 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1870.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 309.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 6.05177993528 5.12529762239 118% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.44440271996 2.80592935109 123% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 176.041082164 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647249190939 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 80.3424891048 49.4020404114 163% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.666666667 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6 20.7667163134 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.66666666667 7.06120827912 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0888887202218 0.244688304435 36% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0311950352154 0.084324248473 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.031310267593 0.0667982634062 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.063967303791 0.151304729494 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0307918265584 0.056905535591 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 13.0946893788 133% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 25.8 50.2224549098 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.81 12.4159519038 143% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.91 8.58950901804 127% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 78.4519038076 157% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.