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.
While it can be said that reliance on technology make humans lazy, It is not largely true that it makes human ability to think deteriorate. Take the GPS for example. Most mobile devices come equipped with GPS, and unfortunately, people misuse it. My neighbor is a good example of how lazy reliance on technology can make human. We reside in a 20 minutes walking distance from Walmart, but he cannot drive to Walmart without his GPS turned on. It should be an undisputed fact that not all humans thinking. Some actually will prefer someone else or something to think on their behalf. It will be a wild generalization that reliance on technology in whatever capacity to solve problems will diminish human ability to think for themselves. Search engines have increased people's thirst for knowledge and problem solving abilities. Individuals now think of ways to solve their problems because they know where to get help. As an individual the advent of the World Wide Web has increased my thinking greatly. There are problems I create for the fun of finding solution to them, and technology has helped to achieve that. The other day, I messed up my electric sewing machine and I had to find a way to fix it using my knowledge of the complexity of the part.
The jet age has also brought a lot of problems with it that people have to really use their brains, if we are going to find solution. Cryopreservation is one of such. Because of technology, some people think that reviving a dead person technologically is possible. Cryogenics is a problem in my opinion, and people have to think if those people frozen at -195 degrees in a tank of Nitrogen are ever going to have a second shot at life.
Technology believe that technology has afforded people the opportunity to do with their brains what was once impossible. There are incurable diseases that scientists and medical personnel are having breakthroughs on because some people dare to think. Some forms of cancer, like breast and cervical cancer used to be incurable, but now with people thinking hard and aided by technology, new treatments and early detection machines are made possible.
In conclusion, reliance on technology will not make human ability to deteriorate, rather it will help sharpen and inform it. By the way, technology will not possible if humans were not thinking.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 918, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ms because they know where to get help. As an individual the advent of the World W...
^^
Line 2, column 437, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...er going to have a second shot at life. Technology believe that technology has a...
^^^^
Line 3, column 13, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'believes'.
Suggestion: believes
...e a second shot at life. Technology believe that technology has afforded people the...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 50, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to people'
Suggestion: to people
...gy believe that technology has afforded people the opportunity to do with their brains...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, if, really, second, so, while, for example, in conclusion, by the way, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1939.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 399.0 442.535393258 90% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85964912281 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77039754247 2.79657885939 99% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551378446115 0.4932671777 112% => OK
syllable_count: 624.6 704.065955056 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.077532014 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.1363636364 118.986275619 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1363636364 23.4991977007 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.77272727273 5.21951772744 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.20521530024 0.243740707755 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0645025844411 0.0831039109588 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0469039540086 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132783824794 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038721327001 0.0667264976115 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.1392134831 74% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.8420337079 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.61 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.09 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.