As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
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.
The author claims that the use of technology is having a negative impact on the ability of humans to think for themselves. Though it is true that technology comes with its own set of cons I beg to disagree with the author’s argument. The author is highly opinionated and inclined towards the cons of technology, totally ignoring the pros and thus failing to provide a coherent case for the impact of technology.
Firstly, as the author said, the reliance on humans on technology is because of the technology’s ability to solve human problems. Now technology has been equipped with that ability by humans itself. In fact, technology is a brainchild of human beings and their thought process and this completely disagrees with the author’s argument that technology is deteriorating the ability of human beings to think.
Also, when you look at the timeline of technological improvement, you can also simultaneously observe improvement in other fields like science and healthcare. With better technology comes better information which can be used to produce even better results. For example, technological improvements in the field of microscopy led to better imaging of human cells thereby providing a better understanding for scientists. This led to a clearer thought process among scientists and allowed them to go nano and micro level of particles. This proves that better technology and more reliance on technology does not always lead to a weakened human thought process.
Next, as technological developments take place and as humans adopt these better technologies, the standard of living and quality of life improves thus leading to heightened awareness about various things. This increased awareness translates to a better tapping of opportunities thereby encouraging humans to think outside of the box for such opportunity tapping which again contradicts the author’s claim.
The author is considering technology as a replacement for the human thought process. However, all the above examples and many more suggest that technology only complements the human thought process by providing better inputs to humans. After all, human thoughts are a result of inputs given to the brain in terms of prior experience, awareness or other absolute feeds. Therefore I disagree with the author’s argument which holds false in all the above examples
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 370, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...nce, awareness or other absolute feeds. Therefore I disagree with the author's argum...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, look, so, therefore, thus, after all, for example, in fact, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.5258426966 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 12.4196629213 16% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 33.0505617978 64% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2013.0 2235.4752809 90% => OK
No of words: 370.0 442.535393258 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.44054054054 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38581623665 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10543363194 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 215.323595506 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510810810811 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 630.9 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.6905721504 60.3974514979 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.411764706 118.986275619 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7647058824 23.4991977007 93% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.17647058824 5.21951772744 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.240705475339 0.243740707755 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0915732943056 0.0831039109588 110% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0482229860516 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140521276567 0.150359130593 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0421126958816 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 14.1392134831 107% => 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: 14.27 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.56 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 100.480337079 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.