As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
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.
Does reliance of technology equal an inability to think for yourself? I believe that this depends on the context in which technology is being employed.
In areas like politics, where people’s votes can be decided by the contents of their Facebook feed, reliance on technology may very well mean we fail to think for ourselves if we don’t employ the requisite scepticism. On social media, you can always find your niche of people with similar views. Thus, relying on technology to make medical or social decisions can lead people to make dubious ones – just look at the resurgence of “flat-earthers”, people who are convinced the earth is flat, or “anti-vaxxers”, people who believe vaccines are bad and cause autism. Reliance on technology to solve these types of issues is definitely akin to putting blinders on your eyes, and serious limits your ability to think independently.
Also, recent studies have shown that there is one major problem for which our reliance on technology is extremely detrimental – boredom. Humans look for constant stimulation, especially in childhood, and with technology at our hands we can almost eliminate boredom. But if a young child is never bored, they never get the opportunity or motivation to invent their own entertainment, be it imaginary friends or games. This is greatly detrimental to the development of their imagination, and is projected to have a major impact on areas such as arts.
However, looking at the claim from the viewpoint of STEM research, one has to disagree with the statement. In those cases, people’s reliance on technology to solve problems does not mean the stop thinking, but rather that the nature of their thought changes. A theoretical physicist can now create computer models to obtain their results, rather than pages and pages of similar calculations that they will be forced to triple check. In that case, the mathematical drudgery of repetitive calculations is removed, but the researcher engages in more thought concerning constructing the model, coding it, and evaluating its results.
Lastly, consider the areas in which relying on technology can actually teach humans to think down new avenues. Learning new information, a new language, or a new skill has never been more accessible and is often only one google search or an app download away. All of these encourage new kinds of independent thought and provide a wider perspective than the individual could have gained before technology, especially for those with limited resources.
Therefore, whether people’s increasing reliance on technology to solve their problems impairs their ability to think for themselves is dependent on what context it is being used in. In this essay, some ways in which social media and gaming apps can be detrimental to thought while computer modelling and easy information access can be beneficial are explored to show that a blanket statement is insufficient to explore the complex impact technology has on our lives.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-22 | pranav_kanth | 50 | view |
| 2020-01-17 | sefeliz | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-12 | shuocurity | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-05 | Mridul | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-31 | chrissyready | 66 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. 83
- In surveys Mason City residents rank water sports (swimming, boating and fishing) among their favorite recreational activities. The Mason River flowing through the city is rarely used for these pursuits, however, and the city park department devotes littl 86
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permi 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, lastly, look, may, so, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 12.9106741573 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2557.0 2235.4752809 114% => OK
No of words: 483.0 442.535393258 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29399585921 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.68799114503 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1577524096 2.79657885939 113% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 215.323595506 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538302277433 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 792.9 704.065955056 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 9.0 1.77640449438 507% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.1614172197 60.3974514979 100% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.578947368 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.4210526316 23.4991977007 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.31578947368 5.21951772744 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.236955384658 0.243740707755 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0752510034716 0.0831039109588 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0468468009308 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119572740058 0.150359130593 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0250197310101 0.0667264976115 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.7 12.1639044944 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.38706741573 113% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 100.480337079 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.