As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to
think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
With the development of modern technologies, people's lifestyle has been significantly changed. One can now easily do things that previous people even could not imagine. Currently, people cannot live at all without these technologies. Given this, some people claim that the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely be deteriorate. I cannot stand with this viewpoint, however. Because the modern society is not comparable with the previous one.
Admittedly, with convenience brought by modern technologies, many processes have become unnecessary. Think about the flourishing of the online search engines like Google. Just a simple mouse click, one can get the extensive answers of his questions immediately from the website. However, in the convenient process the searching for the reality are skipped as well. Thus, people may become lazier to really think about the answers and to prove it. This could be the evidence for the statement that people's ability of thinking will be harmed.
However, my argument if that the technologies make our life become more efficient so that we could stand on the shoulder of previous people's efforts and explore the further boundary of the objective world. For instance, in the field of artificial intelligence, we don't need to do some experients by ourselves sometimes since the datasets from the previous experiments are directly accessible and could be used to train the models. Thus, the problems we need to think about is to use the existed resources more efficiently.
Furthermore, in order to get access to modern technologies, modern people have to study interdisciplinary knowledge. Just have a look at the total working time of modern people, we are not having more leisure time because of the flourishing of technologies. Obviously, the time that we have to think is not decreased. In addition, as the modern society is a much more complex system compared with the old time, actually we are facing the most thorny problems than ever before. In fact, the technologies have created more problems at the same time. We are having to face with the explosion of populations, the global warming, the threat of nuclear weapons, etc. All of them could not be imaged by people living in the previous society. We have invented vehicles, and created, at the same time, the emission problems. Which requires more effort to be solved. Our society is in such dynamics.
Overall, we are enjoying the convenience from the technologies but at the same time trying our best to solve the thorny issues caused by them, which require us human beings to have higher cognitive level and better thinking ability and knowing about our planet than before. The modern scientific world is also more developed so that our generation could explore further on the basis of previous researchers. From this perspective, I disagree that our thinking ability will be deteriorate since we need to think more.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-12 | Kshitij Kasabekar | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-12 | Kshitij Kasabekar | 50 | view |
| 2021-09-03 | sdvf | 100 | view |
- 16
- 16
- People s behavior is largely determined by the forces not their own making 50
- It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves 50
- The following is a letter to the editor of the Waymarsh Times Traffic problems here in Waymarsh are obviously reaching record levels While just three months ago it would take me 15 minutes to get to work it now takes closer to 25 Waymarsh should follow th 59
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 389, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...not stand with this viewpoint, however. Because the modern society is not comparable wi...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 265, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...he field of artificial intelligence, we dont need to do some experients by ourselves...
^^^^
Line 7, column 817, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...t the same time, the emission problems. Which requires more effort to be solved. Our ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, however, if, look, may, really, so, thus, well, for instance, in addition, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 58.6224719101 118% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2465.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 478.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15690376569 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67581127817 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81646294886 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 235.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.491631799163 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 777.6 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 28.0 20.2370786517 138% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.2833058676 60.3974514979 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0357142857 118.986275619 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0714285714 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.14285714286 5.21951772744 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.83258426966 228% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.292660235717 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0785795714646 0.0831039109588 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0867753464064 0.0758088955206 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164682709991 0.150359130593 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036814926902 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.8420337079 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.1639044944 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 119.0 100.480337079 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 11.8971910112 46% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.