The most important aim of science should be to improve people’s lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
The debate regarding whether the development of science should prioritize the well-being of human beings is a topic of common discussion. Some argue that scientists should focus solely on scientific breakthroughs and not be influenced by any factors outside of their field of study. However, this essay contends that all scientific experiments should prioritize enhancing the quality of human lives, and any science that is detrimental to people should be discontinued.
Firstly, it is often suggested that scientists should be encouraged to pursue any scientific progress. Imposing limitations that require their achievements to benefit the public would greatly restrict their potential to make significant discoveries. Additionally, those who believe that science does not necessarily need to aim at improving lives argue that advancements in science represent progress for mankind, regardless of the negative consequences. For instance, from ancient cold weapons to modern atomic bombs, despite their destructive capabilities, they represent major advancements in human military technology.
However, upon closer examination, these statements reveal flaws. Aiming to improve human lives does not limit scientists; rather, it serves as a motivating factor. In contemporary times, many scientists in the field of medicine are conducting experiments aimed at combating various diseases. During the COVID-19 pandemic, top medical institutions worked tirelessly in the hope of finding a cure and vaccine. They were driven by the belief that their discoveries could save millions of lives threatened by the deadly virus. Furthermore, despite the initially detrimental effects of nuclear power, scientists have optimized its use and it is now widely employed in power plants for electricity generation. Therefore, even in cases where scientific discoveries may have adverse effects on people, the ultimate goal is for scientists to continue experimenting and find ways to harness their advantageous aspects.
In conclusion, the goal of scientific research to improve human lives serves as a motivating factor rather than a limiting one. Scientists should always prioritize this aim, considering the well-being of people in their scientific endeavors.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-20 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
| 2024-11-14 | trpg143 | 84 | view |
| 2024-11-12 | Giang Tran | 67 | view |
- The maps below show an industrial area in the town of Norbiton and planned future development of the site Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- It is important for people to take risks both in their professional lives and their personal lives Do you think the advantages of taking risks outweigh the disadvantages 78
- Many manufactured food and drink products contain high levels of sugar which causes many health problems Sugary products should be made more expensive to encourage people to consume less sugar Do you agree or disagree 89
- The government s investment in arts music and theatre is a waste of money Governments should invest these funds in public services instead To what extent do you agree with this statement 56
- some university students want to learn about different subjects in addition to their main subjects Others feel it is more important to give all their time and attention to studying for their qualification Discuss both views and give your opinion 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, regarding, so, therefore, well, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1929.0 1615.20841683 119% => OK
No of words: 327.0 315.596192385 104% => OK
Chars per words: 5.89908256881 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.25242769721 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14132334424 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 176.041082164 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.599388379205 0.561755894193 107% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 506.74238477 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7629010782 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.5625 106.682146367 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4375 20.7667163134 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.625 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19879442362 0.244688304435 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.06871953178 0.084324248473 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0655030553885 0.0667982634062 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.136459793629 0.151304729494 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0523336516441 0.056905535591 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.0946893788 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 50.2224549098 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.94 12.4159519038 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.37 8.58950901804 121% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 78.4519038076 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.