As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Some people agree with this statement and some other people disagree with this statement. I strongly believe that people rely more on technology yo solve the problem and the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. These are the reasons in the following paragraphs.
First of all, too many people chat with the app, when they have any questions and search it on Google. Long time ago, some people choose to look for some keywords in their family library. I heard that a famous psychologist Carl Jung always read books in his house. He knew how to look for a keyword in books. A France famous philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre always to look for an answer in his grandfather’s library. Although this why always spend more time but also make them more think the answer of their question. The research snows that people think more and they will have more ideas to solve questions.
Secondly, some people always read books on a phone, some research indicates the cell phone screen radiate will affect people’s brain and vision. These are worrying effects. The mobile phone just likes drugs made too many people addicted. I found my classmates always play their phone when I leave the classroom. Even if when they handwrite some words and forgot how to spell them because they always type them on phone and their phone has a function calls auto-correction. When we make lunch, they always play their phones and have not any communication. This is a serious problem. Five years ago, we can calculate from our brain but today many people are forgetting how to calculate them and they will open their calculators on their phones.
To sum up, we can found that people always rely more technology to solve their problems, for example, my classmates, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-29 | tarun9927 | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-22 | pranav_kanth | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-19 | vivek2upad | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | sefeliz | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-13 | jason123 | 54 | view |
- Some people believe that allowing children to make their own choices on everyday matters ( such as food, clothes, and entertainment) is likely to result in a society of individuals who only think about their own wishes. Other people believe that it is imp 56
- Those who treat politics and morality as though they were separate realms fail to understand either the one or the other 50
- The following report appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces A study reports that in nearby East 50
- To reverse a decline in listener numbers our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock music format The decline has occurred despite population growth in our listening area but that growth has resulted mainly from people moving here 50
- To reverse a decline in listener numbers our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock music format The decline has occurred despite population growth in our listening area but that growth has resulted mainly from people moving th 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, look, second, secondly, so, as to, for example, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 19.5258426966 20% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 58.6224719101 49% => More preposition wanted.
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: 1535.0 2235.4752809 69% => OK
No of words: 313.0 442.535393258 71% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.90415335463 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58413726717 2.79657885939 92% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 215.323595506 73% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501597444089 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 466.2 704.065955056 66% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.5233646747 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.7894736842 118.986275619 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4736842105 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.368774168903 0.243740707755 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.120593315225 0.0831039109588 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.209314530175 0.0758088955206 276% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.339036598712 0.150359130593 225% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.221382809694 0.0667264976115 332% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.1392134831 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.8420337079 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.1743820225 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.84 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.31 8.38706741573 87% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 100.480337079 57% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.