Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society’s problems.
Perhaps the primary goal of technology is to eradicate problems faced by the citizens of today. For example, the creation of the internal combustion engine allowed people to drastically alter the way they commute, travel, and, ultimately, live. This invention revolutionized life as we knew it and solved a cornucopia of logistical problems, allowing more time for further endeavors. However, in the case of the automobile, and many other inventions, science and technology has helped to overcome many problems previously considered insurmountable by the human race.
While the benefits of technology and science are irrefutable, they have left considerably negative implications in their wake. Perhaps the most significant unintended consequence of the invention of the automobile, for example, is the accumulation of greenhouse gases. The scientists of the late 19th century could not have been aware of the adverse effects their invention would engender almost 150 years later. However, today climate change is perhaps one of the most passionately argued topics in today's news, politics, and daily conversation. Does this mean Otto and Lenoir should have never conceived the idea of the internal combustion engine? I think most would argue that the answer to that question is "no."
The automobile is not the only example that supports this argument. Throughout history, the creation of new technology has caused unintended consequences. New chemical processes that were initially discovered and applied to create new medicine or industrial processes, were later used to attack and destroy the very scientists that discovered them. In turn, more futuristic, destructive weapons were created in an attempt to negate the devastating effects of the weapons that came before them. Very frequently, new discoveries and inventions create unintended consequences that must then be alleviated by new scientists and technology.
Because it almost universally creates new complications after solving old ones, science will never be able to solve all of society's problems. Techonology is simply unable to anticipate the aftermath of the butterfly effect in which it enacts. This results in an unceasing ripple of events that can never be predicted, and therefore, must be solved as they occur by the scientists of tomorrow.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-30 | rahatumar9072 | 33 | view |
| 2023-10-31 | qwertyy | 83 | view |
| 2023-09-28 | David Okenwa | 54 | view |
| 2023-08-16 | najaf | 50 | view |
| 2023-08-12 | hello_kratnesh101 | 33 | view |
- Paleo diets in which one eats how early hominids human ancestors did are becoming increasingly popular Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food especially bone broth a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours They believe 66
- The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville Over the past three years there has been a marked increase in cases of sidewalk rage similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road but instead among sidewalk walkers The resul 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 66
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 66
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complain 77
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, then, therefore, while, for example, i think
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 24.0 33.0505617978 73% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 58.6224719101 72% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1980.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 355.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57746478873 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34067318298 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07926881729 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583098591549 0.4932671777 118% => OK
syllable_count: 632.7 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => 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: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.3672954113 60.3974514979 45% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 116.470588235 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8823529412 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.88235294118 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
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: 0.213134523649 0.243740707755 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0575926774832 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0891227527335 0.0758088955206 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.123955473223 0.150359130593 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102789714279 0.0667264976115 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.8420337079 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.5 12.1743820225 111% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.88 8.38706741573 118% => OK
difficult_words: 118.0 100.480337079 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.