Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Scientists should be responsible
for the negative impacts of their discoveries.
In today's convoluted and sophisticated world, it becomes a highly charged and debatable topic whether scientists should take the responsibility of what they invent or not. Therefore, some people are the leading proponents of the claim that it is a mandatory task for scientists to take the responsibility for their discoveries. However, others may take an opposite point of view and believe that they are not responsible for their inventions or discoveries. If I have to face these two choices, I tend to choose the latter idea. In what follows, I will pinpoint some irrefutable reasons.
To begin with, all scientists discover important things with the purpose of making people lives convenient. To elaborate on, nowadays, people are overwhelmed with plenty of problems from their personal to public aspects of their lives. Hence, these problems people facing them motivate a scientist to resolve them in the ways that make their lives more comfortable without all sorts of problems that they encountered previously. Let me give you an example might make this viewpoint much more evident. Nuclear power was discovered in order to provide cleaner energy for civilization, progress in drug and laser industry, but it was abused against people living in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. For this reason, I do believe that Albert Einstein discovered it makes people live more facilities.
Apart from making people's lives convenient, the second debatable point is that some people believe that scientists should ensure that their discoveries will not bring a negative effect on one's life. However, others contend that it is an obligatory task for governments to control all aspects of discoveries, and therefore, this is not the main task of people inventing them. I take the former viewpoint with a pinch of salt and claim that the latter viewpoint is much closer to the reality. To elucidate on, since governments have the power to impose it on everything and everyone, they should be responsible for the detrimental effects of discoveries. By way of illustration, a recent empirical study conducted by the University of Tehran, which catch you off guard, reveals that a high percentage of university professor believe that if the government control the negative effects of discoveries, nothing threaten people.
To wrap it up, by considering all aforementioned reasons, one soon realizes that scientist is responsible for the negative effects of discoveries inasmuch as in the first place, they make new ways or find new materials in order to provide better and convenient life for people, as in the second place, not only do scientist are not responsible for the detrimental effect of discoveries, but also they all people know that this is compulsory that of governments to make people live safer and secure towards the negative effects of discoveries.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 487, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of governments to make people live safer and secure towards the negative effects ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, therefore, apart from, to begin with, in the first place, in the second place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 15.1003584229 93% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 13.8261648746 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.0286738351 145% => OK
Pronoun: 51.0 43.0788530466 118% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 52.1666666667 121% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 8.0752688172 37% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2398.0 1977.66487455 121% => OK
No of words: 458.0 407.700716846 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23580786026 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94071977628 2.67179642975 110% => OK
Unique words: 219.0 212.727598566 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478165938865 0.524837075471 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 756.9 618.680645161 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 2.0 3.08781362007 65% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => 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: 26.0 20.1344086022 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 108.091208443 48.9658058833 221% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 141.058823529 100.406767564 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.9411764706 20.6045352989 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76470588235 5.45110844103 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183724047073 0.236089414692 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0626320255031 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.040848180571 0.0737576698707 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.120395840535 0.150856017488 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0241373388235 0.0645574589148 37% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 11.7677419355 142% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 58.1214874552 63% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.1575268817 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.41 10.9000537634 123% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.01818996416 108% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 86.8835125448 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.002688172 90% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.0537634409 123% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.247311828 88% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.