The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.
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.
New, brilliant technologies are already in daily lives and significantly changed many people’s lifestyles. For example, in the morning, a smartphone rings to wake up a user and brief the weather outside and the news like a private secretary. How luxurious and convenient! There are various views on how this luxurious and convenient life affected on strength and independence of individuals. However, in order to evaluate whether the luxurious and convenient life positively or negatively affected one’s strength and independence, the definitions of them have to be presented first.
Firstly, the range of independence is broad: it can be simply resolving a problematic situation without other human being’s help, or more strictly, it can be doing all oneself without any help even from smartphones or other devices. To be specific, when a tourist is finding a restaurant with an exact location, all she needs to do is put the address on Google map. Then, the application will suggest public transportations such as buses or subways. If she is so tired to transfer buses three times as suggested by Google map, she might open another application, Uber, to call a cap. Although she might not speak the language where she visited, there is no matter to use the application. In this luxurious and convenient life, reaching a destination wherever one’s current location is, or however one can speak a language in a certain country is not a big problem anymore. One might judge this situation as independently resolved the problem while one judges it highly relied on the technologies, so not independent.
Secondly, strongness also includes various meanings. Strong individuals can be either physically or mentally strong. Contemporary luxurious and convenient technologies allowed people to be more physically strong: suggest nutritional supplements depending on individuals’ health states, detect cancers far earlier than 100 years ago, and schedule a gym routine. However, the technologies reduced the time to contact others face-to-face and share one’s story with others. It has resulted in detrimental effects on individuals’ mental health such as increased depression and increased suicide rates as reported by research. Thus, the assertation that contemporary life resulted in stronger individuals can be partially right in terms of physical health and partially wrong in terms of mental health.
No one will deny luxuries and conveniences of contemporary lives have significantly changed how individuals live their lives. However, evaluating whether the new life affected independence and strongness of individuals either positively or negatively seems controversial. Thus, clear definitions are required to discuss the statement.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, thus, while, for example, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 23.0 14.8657303371 155% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 11.3162921348 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 58.6224719101 75% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2340.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 419.0 442.535393258 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.58472553699 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52432199235 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22043807561 2.79657885939 115% => OK
Unique words: 238.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568019093079 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 727.2 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2660706511 60.3974514979 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.0 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.95 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.8 5.21951772744 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162422083346 0.243740707755 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0499564736673 0.0831039109588 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.042163169904 0.0758088955206 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.111513295131 0.150359130593 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0430846180464 0.0667264976115 65% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.15 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.