Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
Any scientific research is conducted with a specific purpose in mind, and often this purpose is strongly related to the need for change in the prevailing situation. In fact, some outcomes of research have genuinely changed not only the country that carried out the research but also the entire ambiance of the Earth. Therefore, this powerful fact should not be left unrestrained or exploited. The prompt recommends that governments should impose some restrictions on scientific research and development, as it may play a pivotal role in creating a healthy society and a better world. In my point of view, I mostly agree with this opinion and argue that scientific research and development should be controlled by governments for two reasons.
To begin with, the outcomes of many research projects can act as a source of duress for the public as well as national security. This is particularly important in sensitive areas such as biomedical research, genetic engineering, and nuclear technology. For instance, research on atomic energy can provide us with a grandiose source of energy that can bring about economic and social change. However, the detrimental effects of this kind of research and development cannot be denied, and the world has already witnessed several accidents, such as the Chernobyl disaster and its subsequent effects. Therefore, accidents are a common occurrence in many research and development endeavors, and governments can establish regulations and ethical guidelines to protect the welfare of individuals, communities, and the environment.
Furthermore, research and development can be an integral part of a government's long-term planning, and any haphazard decision in a particular field can result in a loss of investment in terms of both money and intellectual resources. For instance, a government of a third-world, agriculture-based developing country may have a plan to invest money and expertise in researching genetically improved crops to address food scarcity. However, if private sectors conduct research solely based on their own interests, such as in aeronautical hypotheses, it would be a total failure for that specific country. The findings would not be applicable in their sphere, and it would not contribute to the country's long-term success. This hypothetical example illustrates that research and development must have strong government influence so that scientists can focus on strategic areas with long-term benefits for society, such as renewable energy, healthcare, or space exploration, even if the short-term profitability may be uncertain.
Of course, some argue that the government itself can be biased and introduce the risk of political interference or manipulation of scientific findings. This can undermine the pursuit of unbiased knowledge and compromise the objectivity of scientific investigations. However, the government is also accountable and subject to the fear of being overthrown by the system or society, which imposes some level of control. Ultimately, anything, be it research and development or the government itself, without any guidelines or control, can be susceptible to being misled at any time. Therefore, research and development require guidelines or control, and the government is the ultimate body responsible for carrying out this important task in a responsible manner.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-19 | Celestina Asantewaa | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 75 | view |
| 2024-07-01 | MMoksha | 66 | view |
| 2024-06-29 | sefeliz | 83 | view |
- 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 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study under the same national curriculum 50
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 66
- 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 50
- Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and Development 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 66, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'a government' or simply 'governments'?
Suggestion: a government; governments
... development can be an integral part of a governments long-term planning, and any haphazard d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 735, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a responsible manner" with adverb for "responsible"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...le for carrying out this important task in a responsible manner.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, therefore, third, well, for instance, in fact, kind of, of course, such as, as well as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 34.0 14.8657303371 229% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 12.9106741573 194% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2847.0 2235.4752809 127% => OK
No of words: 511.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57142857143 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.240500055 2.79657885939 116% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512720156556 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 889.2 704.065955056 126% => 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
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => 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: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.5544145359 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.35 118.986275619 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.55 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35 5.21951772744 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.309159290359 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101455324792 0.0831039109588 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655183976494 0.0758088955206 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207032246009 0.150359130593 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.07554385527 0.0667264976115 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 48.8420337079 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 12.1743820225 117% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.1639044944 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.67 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 155.0 100.480337079 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => 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: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.