Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
Whatsapp is the number one chatting app in the world, being able to send messages, send hilarious stickers back and forth, audio messages, video conferences and much more. All of this is possible because technology has been pushing communication in this direction, a relatively safe zone where people can chat in real time, with almost zero delay. Therefore, in my opinion, I strongly believe that technology has helped human interaction, and the reasons are as follows.
To begin, there has never existed in history a technological gadget that enables people to talk to one another in real-time. The internet made exchanging information very easy and the technological industry took advantage of this emerging technology with the creation of personal computers and smartphones. Before the internet boom, people would have to write letters to love ones so that they could transmit what they were feeling at the time. If you, for instance, live in Brazil and you send a letter to someone in europe, the message could take up to weeks until it reached its final destination. By the time, the reader would understand the past feelings of the writer. So many things could have happened in this time window, maybe he fell and broke his leg, or maybe he won in the lottery and is now a millionaire. It is safe to say that internet made our lives more public through the lens of smartphones.
Furthermore, technology made long distance chatting cheaper. The price for international phone calls has become what both individuals pay for their internet providers. For instance, I have been sending e-mails to a professor in New York about my interest in working with him and having him as my supervisor. We started sending e-mails back and forth and we realized that the communication was starting to become garbled. He suggested a live video chat in order to elucidate some topics. I thought that it would be a 10 minute conversation given his overly packed agenda, but, for my surprise, the conversation flowed so well that it lasted 50 minutes, jumping from topic to topic and even having some laughs. Letters and e-mails most certainly would not have the same impact in both of us if it wasn’t for the live stream.
Of course, some argue that communicating through smartphones and computers made us less aware of the people next to us, resulting in a faulty human interaction. Some would point out to the fact that people in bus stops or metro stations are less likely to start a conversation with the individuals in their surroundings, preferring their selfish gadgets. Although this is true, especially in big cities where there are numerous amounts of people trying to go from one place to another with minimum social interaction as possible, we must not forget that many years ago, people did not have smartphones, but they had newspapers and books that they used to block social interaction and to learn something new. Thus, one can not blame technology for the lack of human interaction nowadays, it just showed the other side of humans, and that is: they just don’t want to talk.
In conclusion, technology has had a tremendous impact in social interaction, providing us with ways to talk to people from all around the world with one seamless press of a button.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-18 | jason123 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-16 | Siddiqur Rahman | 16 | view |
| 2019-12-01 | Caveira meyona | 94 | view |
| 2019-11-13 | Adebisi01 | 83 | view |
| 2019-11-13 | Adebisi01 | 83 | view |
- The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist."Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire villag 55
- Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the mo 58
- 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. 75
- 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. 16
- Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and s 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 377, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...ple would have to write letters to love ones so that they could transmit what they w...
^^^^
Line 5, column 452, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... garbled. He suggested a live video chat in order to elucidate some topics. I tho...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, may, so, therefore, thus, well, for instance, in conclusion, of course, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 56.0 33.0505617978 169% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 76.0 58.6224719101 130% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2730.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 554.0 442.535393258 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92779783394 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.85151570047 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.759146166 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 295.0 215.323595506 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.532490974729 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 850.5 704.065955056 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.9236074967 60.3974514979 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.090909091 118.986275619 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 23.4991977007 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86363636364 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => 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: 0.290452621191 0.243740707755 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0766210310985 0.0831039109588 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0640806711745 0.0758088955206 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17292682175 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0637779572017 0.0667264976115 96% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.8420337079 112% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.61 12.1639044944 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.3 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.