Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
While the slow and steady march of progress is fuelled primarily by breakthroughs in the sciences and their applications, I am firmly of the opinion that governments must maintain some degree of control over what research takes place in a country.
It is easy to anthropomorphise science. It is indeed a very human tendency to do so. And in doing so, we often assign a morality to science on the whole or certain sciences. Things like genetic research and nuclear technology are frowned upon by many, while electric vehicles, for example are largely looked upon positively by most. The truth is technology is morally neutral. Genetic research could help eliminate all congenital diseases and improve crop yield, while nuclear technology is an excellent source of clean, green energy if used wisely, and will make our transition away from fossil fuel-based power much smoother. Electric vehicles, while having no carbon footprint in theory, can still cause severe ground and water pollution through the irresponsible mining of lithium and cobalt, vital components of their battery packs. Similarly, using electricity generated by fossil-fuel based power plants to charge up electric vehicles defeats their whole purpose. Since science is devoid of any morality, good or bad, it is fair to assume that it will take up the morality of whoever maintains control over it.
Thus, I’m of the opinion that the government must have a degree of control over scientific research. This ensures that the scientific research largely will be directed for the good of the people, since, all things considered, the good of the people is in the best interests of most governments across the world. This however does not mean the government must exercise absolute authority over science. This will most definitely give rise to lobbying and favouritism, where research houses will lobby to curry favour with the people in charge, thereby inadvertently stifling scientific progress heavily and possibly giving those who gain political favour free reign, defeating the purpose of regulation in the first place. On the flipside, an absolute lack of government control will most definitely give rise to an ethical nightmare. Breaking free from the practice of testing drugs on animals first, then humans might lead to faster development and breakthroughs, but it will come at a serious human cost. Rapid and large-scale implementation of AI and complete automation might lead to an exponential rise in productivity, at the cost of millions of jobs, potentially causing catastrophic social upheavals.
Thus, do I feel the government must place few/no restrictions of scientific R&D? No, but at the same time, it is wrong to place too many restrictions. The right answer, like most things, is finding a fine balance.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-10-19 | Celestina Asantewaa | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 83 | view |
| 2024-10-03 | shivamzala17 | 75 | view |
| 2024-07-01 | MMoksha | 66 | view |
| 2024-06-29 | sefeliz | 83 | view |
- Governments should offer college and university education free of charge to all students 70
- Teachers salaries should be based on their students academic performance 79
- As humans rely more on technology the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 50
- In any field of inquiry the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important contributions 50
- Governments should place few if any restrictions on scientific research and development 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 402, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ercise absolute authority over science. This will most definitely give rise to lobby...
^^^^
Line 2, column 654, Rule ID: FREE_REIGN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'free rein'?
Suggestion: free rein
... giving those who gain political favour free reign, defeating the purpose of regulation in...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, look, similarly, so, still, then, thus, while, for example, i feel, on the whole, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.9520958084 116% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 55.5748502994 117% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2350.0 2260.96107784 104% => OK
No of words: 448.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.24553571429 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60065326758 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85934276356 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 204.123752495 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584821428571 0.468620217663 125% => OK
syllable_count: 728.1 705.55239521 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 77.980446267 57.8364921388 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.5 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4 23.324526521 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 5.70786347227 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 5.15768463074 58% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212940022266 0.218282227539 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0581645452031 0.0743258471296 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0850979904866 0.0701772020484 121% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152861386668 0.128457276422 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0635369582351 0.0628817314937 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.2 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 98.500998004 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.