ISSUE ESSAY: As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
As more and more technology becomes accessible, humans find themselves inversely capable of thinking especially with respect to memory. It is rare that a person can go to a store without first writing down their grocery list, but deeper than that it is uncommon to find individuality and original creativity with modern access to the internet, social media, and forums. My arguments are generationally and scientifically apparent.
Before the advent of smartphones, and easily transportable technology, most information was transferred and processed via the written or spoken word with a necessary commitment the memorization of details and memos. Today's millennials and Gen Z's outsource their brain storage for hard drive storage. While some may argue that the external placement allows room for expanded critical thinking, the technology also reduces the need self-processing. According to Harvard Research Center, 85% of high-school-age millennials admitted to using online sources as inspiration for analytical writing and problem-solving in the past year. However the cost of this practice is really a loss of originality and individuality. As millennials have ever more access to technology, the need for unique and individual thinking is replaced.
Even earlier there was once a time when people dedicated time to curating their memories and faculties because there was no other way to go about problem-solving and analytic thought. In ancient Greece, there was once a poet named Simonides who left a banquet party just before the banquet hall collapsed and mangled all persons inside beyond recognition, but Simonides was able to identify the bodies because he remembered exactly where each person. This is because he as he recited is poetry he marked the people and tables with the emotions and impressions from his poem, and to recall their locations, simply recalled the poem in reverse. This is the same method Cicero and Homer used to recall their works. Nowadays, with the ubiquity of technology this ability is all but rare. Only a handful of people still use this technique and they compete at an annual competition called the World Memory Championship. At this competition, all technology is banned as it distracts the players and hinders their ability.
Thus my argument stands that the accessibility of technology limits the mental capacity for memorization. Modern generations with the highest access to technology, have a reduced need for memorization and analytical thinking. The expanded number of brain nodes has been replaced with the world wide web and smartphones which make intellectual plagiarism common and have thus removed individuality from the academic landscape. This stands in stark contrast to the days without silicon-powered technology and portable brains. In ancient times, a carefully maintained memory was necessary and unsurprising as a computer is in a technology worshipping world.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2020-01-29 | tarun9927 | 50 | view |
2020-01-22 | pranav_kanth | 50 | view |
2020-01-19 | vivek2upad | 66 | view |
2020-01-17 | sefeliz | 58 | view |
2020-01-13 | jason123 | 54 | view |
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 66
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 70
- ISSUE ESSAY: As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 83
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate 79
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 630, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...g and problem-solving in the past year. However the cost of this practice is really a l...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...e players and hinders their ability. Thus my argument stands that the accessibili...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, really, so, still, thus, while, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 14.8657303371 195% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2485.0 2235.4752809 111% => OK
No of words: 453.0 442.535393258 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.48565121413 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61343653406 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.12517453669 2.79657885939 112% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578366445916 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 791.1 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2579000679 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.333333333 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5714285714 23.4991977007 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95238095238 5.21951772744 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.157124418871 0.243740707755 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0472534457617 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0656258841567 0.0758088955206 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0971901516937 0.150359130593 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0378954170184 0.0667264976115 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 48.8420337079 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.1743820225 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.56 12.1639044944 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.01 8.38706741573 119% => OK
difficult_words: 153.0 100.480337079 152% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 11.8971910112 134% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.