Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
The author argues that the government should advocate the scientific researches with the guaranteed outcomes. This is claim with which I generally disagree. In fact the lists of reasons give support to my favorable attitude toward the subject. In the following paragraphs, I will delve into the most outstanding reason to illustrate my perspective.
The first reason, which gives adherence to my idea, is that financial supporting is a decent motivation to invoke the scientists. Unfortunately, the monetary shortcomings of scientific researches lead to end the subject without the expected outcomes. Besides, most of the scientists suffer the economic deficient, and most of the times these conditions pave the path to failure in the scientists' researches. However, with the cogent support by the government, they can allocate all their concentrations on their researches instead of the monetary problems. This situation, leads to more flourished and elaborated outcomes, which benefits both the scientist and the government. On the other hand, if the scientists located their notices in two various subjects in the same time, it can influence their scientific results. Thus, the financial support inclines their success ratio.
The second exquisite reason, which advocates my viewpoint, is that any failure in the scientific research paves the path to the ultimate success. It is lucidly obvious that all tasks and occupations require the series of tries and examination; moreover, it is rarely occur that an incident happen with the appropriate outcome in the first time. The scientific researches are not exceptional from this fact too. All achievements are shaped based upon the series of experiences and tries, and all pervious failures help to acquire the success sooner. In consequence, there is no guarantee that all researches will be accurate and successful in the first try; however, they will be effective in the future researches and their successes. By restricting these failures the process of improvement extends slowly. Since, those failures will be examined in the future. Hence, by trying them sooner, the valid target appears sooner.
Nonetheless, what I alluded in the two paragraphs of the body should not be overgeneralized. The government possesses very critical responsibility and he or she should be affordable of all society requirements. The scientific researches formed just the tiny portion of these requirements. In this case, it is one of the vital and undeniable duties of the government to schedule all these requirements based upon their priorities in the society; in addition, to be affordable of all these options. In some cases, which there are some financial crisis, the government can limited the secondary requirements, to meet the more fundamental demands. However, this situation rarely occurs and it does not last forever. In consequent, this recommendation should not be defined forever.
To wrap it up, all aforementioned reasons and examples lead us to the conclusion that although there some demands which own the priority toward the scientific researches, as they mentioned the economic advocacy stimulates the scientists and all failures are non-separated parts of the success. Actually, there are bulks of reasons which give confirm to the accuracy of my perspective, which are not mentioned above. However, I listed the most conspicuous ones to depict the subject lucidly.
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects than to specialize in one specific subject. 80
- It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours. 60
- Some people believe that college students should consider only their own talents and interests when choosing a field of study. Others believe that college students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field.Writ 66
- Your school is going to improve the teaching quality of the teachers of their high school students(ages 14-18), which of the following methods do you think is better:1. To choose a group of excellent teachers; the teachers will attend an additional traini 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In the past young people depended on their parents for making decisions. Today, young people are better able to make decisions on their own. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 268, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'occurred'.
Suggestion: occurred
...and examination; moreover, it is rarely occur that an incident happen with the approp...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 809, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Since” 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.
... process of improvement extends slowly. Since, those failures will be examined in the...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['actually', 'besides', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'nonetheless', 'second', 'so', 'thus', 'in addition', 'in fact', 'in some cases', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.225375626043 0.240241500013 94% => OK
Verbs: 0.116861435726 0.157235817809 74% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0901502504174 0.0880659088768 102% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0517529215359 0.0497285424764 104% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0484140233723 0.0444667217837 109% => OK
Prepositions: 0.103505843072 0.12292977631 84% => OK
Participles: 0.0200333889816 0.0406280797675 49% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 3.07749651386 2.79330140395 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0267111853088 0.030933414821 86% => OK
Particles: 0.0016694490818 0.0016655270985 100% => OK
Determiners: 0.14858096828 0.0997080785238 149% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0183639398998 0.0249443105267 74% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0150250417362 0.0148568991511 101% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3435.0 2732.02544248 126% => OK
No of words: 532.0 452.878318584 117% => OK
Chars per words: 6.45676691729 6.0361032391 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80261649409 4.58838876751 105% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.40977443609 0.366273622748 112% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.345864661654 0.280924506359 123% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.270676691729 0.200843997647 135% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.18984962406 0.132149295362 144% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07749651386 2.79330140395 110% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 219.290929204 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.488721804511 0.48968727796 100% => OK
Word variations: 58.1074652514 55.4138127331 105% => OK
How many sentences: 29.0 20.6194690265 141% => OK
Sentence length: 18.3448275862 23.380412469 78% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.5868059304 59.4972553346 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.448275862 141.124799967 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3448275862 23.380412469 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.51724137931 0.674092028746 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.21349557522 38% => OK
Readability: 52.9312937516 51.4728631049 103% => OK
Elegance: 1.60769230769 1.64882698954 98% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0549219264969 0.391690518653 14% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.100452160106 0.123202303941 82% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0729206996022 0.077325440228 94% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.532430844077 0.547984918172 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.159926312059 0.149214159877 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0309145781451 0.161403998019 19% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422931736325 0.0892212321368 47% => The sentences are too close to each other.
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.563533153371 0.385218514788 146% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0707040611931 0.0692045440612 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.045662827709 0.275328986314 17% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0211790040273 0.0653680567796 32% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.4325221239 105% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.88274336283 205% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 6.0 7.22455752212 83% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.66592920354 136% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 2.70907079646 37% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 13.5995575221 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.