As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, our ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Humans will always need technology to make our lives better but this does not mean we would have to trade the capacity to think for ourselves.
Firstly, there is need to clarify the basis of comparison and what it means for humans to be able to think for themselves. In the days of old, man relied on the stars for navigation but the advent of the GPS system has precluded this tedious and inaccurate endeavor. Yes, the average man may have lost the ability to read the stars, but the final goal has been achieved in a much better way. Being able to use this GPS device will also require a certain level of cognition and as such, the users of such devices would still need to employ their thinking faculty. Hence, to say that the GPS device has precluded the user from thinking for himself is a very vague premise and cannot be taken with assertion.
The advancements and innovations in technology of today shows that man has indeed increased his ability to ponder new developments. If indeed we have lost the ability to think for ourselves, then the most innovative mobile device should still be the Nokia 3310 and we shouldn't have smartphones. The fact that more inventions spring out every year only means that we are getting better at thinking and that our technological creations are only an indication of how deeply we can think at a certain point in time.
In conclusion, an increase in the use of technology would serve us better and would also force us to think better so as to improve on the current technology.
| 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 |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 269, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...e should still be the Nokia 3310 and we shouldnt have smartphones. The fact that more in...
^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 115, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...and would also force us to think better so as to improve on the current technology.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, if, may, so, still, then, as to, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 58.6224719101 60% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1267.0 2235.4752809 57% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 273.0 442.535393258 62% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.64102564103 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.55969084622 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49183884404 2.79657885939 89% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 215.323595506 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545787545788 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 704.065955056 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 20.2370786517 49% => 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: 27.0 23.0359550562 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 26.3417918905 60.3974514979 44% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 126.7 118.986275619 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.3 23.4991977007 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 5.21951772744 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223510602848 0.243740707755 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0865605382038 0.0831039109588 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0483320279868 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13325467131 0.150359130593 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524452996818 0.0667264976115 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.99 48.8420337079 125% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.93 12.1639044944 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 100.480337079 52% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 11.8971910112 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.2143820225 114% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 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.