Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement an

Essay topics:

Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

It is really amazing to see that many interesting achievements in science or technology appear while no one expected them before. But such cases are far from usual trend of these enterprises. In fact, discoveries in sciences or new technologies are the result of close scrutiny of thousands of scientists and experts in areas of knowledge or technique. This is my line of reasoning to reject the argument in the prompt.

Science and technology usually proceed by organized attempts towards a clear or defined aim. They want to increase our knowledge of the world and our ability to control it. Such an aim is not possible simply by accidental, blind attempts. Scientists use well-known methods, do demanding process of experimentations, and watch the results very meticulously. This is far from a whimsy enterprise in which just the mere chance suggests new achievements. In technology, we have magnificent creations that progress along years of hard planning and competition, and this is just for introducing a new device, better than previous ones. Such demanding task, handled by groups of engineers and managers, in by no mean an accidental step in human life. There are, however, many cases in science and technology that go contrary to this process; for example, Kekule’s discovery in chemistry, or discovery of the rings of planet Uranus, which were not based on expectable events or studies. But these are only few examples in history of science that cannot refute the dominant trend in majority of everyday scientific enterprise.

If it is just accidental steps and answers that produce important results in our life, then why don’t we come to create or discover a new craft or theory every day morning after waking up? I believe that the answer is clear: discoveries need goal-oriented efforts, research, and planning. One cannot find a valuable theory just by chance. Even in arts, one cannot depict a masterpiece just by chance. Any important achievement needs long term activity towards a definite goal. Therefore, accidental outcomes in any activity cannot suppress the main goal-oriented ways of human activities.

Votes
Average: 7 (2 votes)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2024-10-25 batterylow_123 50 view
2023-10-15 Omar Ibna Nazim 16 view
2023-08-02 okazaki11 80 view
2023-07-26 jayauen 83 view
2023-02-10 Yam Kumar Oli 58 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Amin :

Comments

Sentence: There are, however, many cases in science and technology that go contrary to this process; for example, Kekule's discovery in chemistry, or discovery of the rings of planet Uranus, which were not based on expectable events or studies.
Error: expectable Suggestion: No alternate word

flaws:
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 346 350
No. of Characters: 1741 1500
No. of Different Words: 204 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.313 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.032 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.883 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 132 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 104 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 48 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.211 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.212 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.368 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.269 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.417 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.068 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 5