Some people believe that governments should only fund scientific research that will
benefit human lives, e.g. lead to a curve for a disease or to an increase in food
production. Others disagree.
Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
The distribution of government funds to scientific research is a subject of ongoing debate. Some argue that resources should be exclusively allocated to research with direct human benefits, such as curing diseases or increasing food production. Others contend that a wider range of research topics should be supported. This essay will examine both perspectives and present my personal opinion.
One side of the debate suggests that government funding should be solely channelled into scientific research that provides immediate benefits to society. This involves directing resources towards practical outcomes, like finding cures for illnesses or improving food production. Advocates of this viewpoint stress the significance of directly solving urgent societal problems. They argue that investing in research that delivers concrete results can lead to significant enhancements in human well-being. This targeted approach ensures efficient utilisation of public funds to address pressing needs.
Others have a different opinion. They think that it's not a good idea for governments to only support research that has immediate benefits for people. Instead, they believe that a wider range of research topics should get funding. They argue that unexpected and valuable discoveries can come from different areas of research. For instance, even if a study doesn't seem to have an obvious connection to people's lives right now, it could lead to big changes in the future. By supporting a variety of research subjects, they think governments encourage the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake. This way, they promote a diverse and rich pool of ideas.
To conclude, the discussion on government funding for science tells us that both quick solutions and surprising discoveries matter. In my opinion, I think we should find a middle ground. While it's good to focus on quick results, we shouldn't ignore other types of research. So, it's smart for governments to support both practical and less obvious research. This way, we can make progress in different ways and explore interesting ideas.
- the diagrams below show the water supply system in australia at the present and in the future 73
- the charts below show the percentage of people using public transport and that ofpeople using private cars in five austrlian cities between 2000 and 2010 78
- Some people say that in the modern world getting old is entirely bad Others however say that life for the elderly nowadays is much better than it was in the past Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 61
- Some people who have been in prison become good citizens later and it is often argued that these are the best people to talk to teenagers about the dangers of committing a crime to what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- the plans below show how the community centre looked like ten years ago before it was redesigned and how it looks now 11
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 377, Rule ID: PERSONAL_OPINION_FRIENDSHIP[1]
Message: Use simply 'opinion'.
Suggestion: opinion
...xamine both perspectives and present my personal opinion. One side of the debate suggests tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...research. For instance, even if a study doesnt seem to have an obvious connection to p...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
... its good to focus on quick results, we shouldnt ignore other types of research. So, its...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, well, while, for instance, i think, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1771.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51713395639 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82844084948 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588785046729 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 525.6 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 5.43587174349 294% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.2541635415 49.4020404114 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.3333333333 106.682146367 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2857142857 20.7667163134 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.38095238095 7.06120827912 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334994473637 0.244688304435 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0895163249793 0.084324248473 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0550561444112 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196297977364 0.151304729494 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0510962245418 0.056905535591 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.0946893788 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 50.2224549098 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.3001002004 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.14 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 377, Rule ID: PERSONAL_OPINION_FRIENDSHIP[1]
Message: Use simply 'opinion'.
Suggestion: opinion
...xamine both perspectives and present my personal opinion. One side of the debate suggests tha...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 356, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...research. For instance, even if a study doesnt seem to have an obvious connection to p...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 233, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
... its good to focus on quick results, we shouldnt ignore other types of research. So, its...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, well, while, for instance, i think, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 13.1623246493 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 24.0651302605 145% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1771.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 321.0 315.596192385 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51713395639 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82844084948 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.588785046729 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 525.6 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 16.0 5.43587174349 294% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 16.0721442886 131% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 20.2975951904 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.2541635415 49.4020404114 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 84.3333333333 106.682146367 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2857142857 20.7667163134 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.38095238095 7.06120827912 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.67935871743 150% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 3.4128256513 176% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334994473637 0.244688304435 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0895163249793 0.084324248473 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0550561444112 0.0667982634062 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.196297977364 0.151304729494 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0510962245418 0.056905535591 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.0946893788 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 50.2224549098 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.3001002004 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.14 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.58950901804 108% => OK
difficult_words: 99.0 78.4519038076 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.1190380762 79% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.