Some people believe that scientific discoveries have given us a much better understanding of the world around us. Others believe that science has revealed to us that the world is infinitely more complex than we ever realized.
Many people would think modern science has given us a better understanding of the world around us. In some senses, it is true that scientists discover unknown aspects of our world. In my point, however, when it comes to how many facts to discover remains and the method of science work that a new theory refutes previous results, the more progressive the researches about nature is, the harder we can understand nature.
Of course, it is deniable that through scientific research, we can understand how our world organize and work. In researching organisms, new scientific researches enlighten our view about living things. For example, the research about honeybees' dance, we can know their language, signals. Even now we can control their behavior using robot mimicking their dance. This implies that scientific achievement widen our perception of rule of nature.
Nonetheless, science show us how small we are comparing with extremely large the universe. After human has the civilization, we have tried to understand organisms, rule of physics, all environment which surround us. However, as science and technology develop, we realize that there are many thing that we have not known and have to try to know. For example, after taxonomy came birth in biology, biologist have collected specimens and classify them. However developed technology told them there are many fallacies in their classification and unknown species until now. This show that the key role of science is not give information of nature, but give us questions about how many things we even don't know their existence.
Moreover, trait of science made our thought more complex than before. New theories refute old theories and if old theories are incorrect, the theories would be thought as only history of science. Or, if old theories are though as proper, controversial would occurred. And this course will be repeated again when another new theories came out. This shows that science cannot give us definite answer to our curiosity but gives us complexity
To summarize, foolish people would deny that scientific is helpful for us to raise our knowledge about world. However, about how science works and many questions to solve and many things to discover, we cannot always says that the subject give us ample explanation about our world.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-24 | salamikehinde | 66 | view |
| 2019-11-10 | Cursed God | 66 | view |
| 2019-11-08 | roudabehvm16 | 54 | view |
| 2019-11-01 | shahryar2222 | 54 | view |
| 2019-08-23 | gbhardwa | 33 | view |
- The citizens of London have adopted more healthful lifestyles. Their responses to a recent survey show that in their eating habits they conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. Furthermore, there has been 46
- the best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things 66
- The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals. 58
- The best way to understand the character of a society is to examine the character of the men and women that the society chooses as its heroes or its role models. 62
- The following report appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council. "An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearb 55
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 287, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun thing seems to be countable; consider using: 'many things'.
Suggestion: many things
...logy develop, we realize that there are many thing that we have not known and have to try ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 292, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'things'?
Suggestion: things
...develop, we realize that there are many thing that we have not known and have to try ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 451, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
... collected specimens and classify them. However developed technology told them there ar...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 696, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...questions about how many things we even dont know their existence. Moreover, trai...
^^^^
Line 7, column 259, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'occur'
Suggestion: occur
...e though as proper, controversial would occurred. And this course will be repeated again...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 293, Rule ID: REPEAT_AGAIN[1]
Message: Use simply 'repeated'.
Suggestion: repeated
...would occurred. And this course will be repeated again when another new theories came out. Thi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 359, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...r new theories came out. This shows that science cannot give us definite answer t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, moreover, nonetheless, so, for example, of course, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 33.0505617978 157% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 58.6224719101 70% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1948.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 375.0 442.535393258 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19466666667 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6494457282 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 215.323595506 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.530666666667 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 591.3 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.4086720792 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4 118.986275619 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.75 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.95 5.21951772744 76% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 5.13820224719 39% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 14.0 4.83258426966 290% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.283378705547 0.243740707755 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0930264989684 0.0831039109588 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103304604676 0.0758088955206 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170159045519 0.150359130593 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0734054289578 0.0667264976115 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 100.480337079 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.