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
We are living in the heyday of technology, and we owe the scientists and researchers because of all their endeavors. It’s correct that it will be more profitable for most of people, if scientist conduct their studies on the areas that will help people to have better lives. However, scientists should follow their interests as well.
To begin with, there are lots of scientific breakthroughs in the history that in the time of their research, the researchers would have not thought that their outcome will profit the majority of people. For instance, Galileo Galilei used his telescope to discover the sky. He argued that the earth rotates the sun and not vice versa. In that time, he did not think that his discoveries will change the future’s perspective toward the astronomy. Many astronauts have followed his discoveries until today that humans nurture the dream of living on Mars. Each researcher should follow his passion and interest to reach the achievements. Otherwise, if an area is likely be profitable for most of people but is not attractive for a researcher, it’s possible that he gets bored and reluctant to continue the research.
On the other hand, considering the areas that possibly benefit most of people would motivate the novice researchers to reach an achievement that could help people to have easier and healthier lives. For example, in the Isfahan University of Technology (IUT), in the graduate programs, supervisors encourage students to choose fields that their research could solve a problem in the industries. Students are told that if their research helps the issue from the industries to be solved, they will have an opportunity to be hired in those industries. This encouragement helps the graduate students to put their efforts on their research to reach a solution or an advancement.
Some might argue that it will waste of time and resources if scientist focus on the areas that do not benefit the majority of people. This idea has some merit on the surface. However, any research’s outcome will ultimately benefit some areas of science. It’s like a chain. Other scientists will continue the previous ones’ work and finally they will reach a breakthrough. Each scientist that work on a meticulous area in NASA will help the whole group of scientists to achieve their desire goals. In the future, it will be clearer that this research will be beneficial for humankind as a whole not just a few.
| 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 |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Providing Internet access is just as important as other services such as building roads so governments should offer Internet access to all of their citizens at no cost Use specific reasons and examples 71
- Summarize the points made in the lecture being sure to explain how they challenge the specific points made in the reading passage 70
- Evidence suggests that academic honor codes which call for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated are far more successful than are other methods at deterring cheat 43
- The following appeared as a memorandum from the Human Resources director at Dexter Gorman Instruments a company that manufactures saxophones On this year s survey about work habits our employees tended to strongly agree with the idea that if they took les 58
- Claim Though often considered an objective pursuit learning about the historical past requires creativity Reason Because we can never know the past directly we must reconstruct it by imaginatively interpreting historical accounts documents and artifacts W 50
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 167, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...ect that it will be more profitable for most of people, if scientist conduct their studies on ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 684, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
... if an area is likely be profitable for most of people but is not attractive for a researcher,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 64, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the people') or simply say ''most people''.
Suggestion: most of the people; most people
...idering the areas that possibly benefit most of people would motivate the novice researchers t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 611, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...or humankind as a whole not just a few.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, so, well, for example, for instance, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.5258426966 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 33.0505617978 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => 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: 406.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.02463054187 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74803563867 2.79657885939 98% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 215.323595506 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.477832512315 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 618.3 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.712921958 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.1428571429 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3333333333 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.57142857143 5.21951772744 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.2111927302 0.243740707755 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0713484903322 0.0831039109588 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0477074590167 0.0758088955206 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142747260721 0.150359130593 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0113215900926 0.0667264976115 17% => 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: 11.9 14.1392134831 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 100.480337079 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.