Claim: Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate, practical application.
Reason: It is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty
There has been an ongoing dispute among several university department faculties and foundations whether researches should be funded in terms of immediate outcome or by a respect of the long-term imagination of humanity. The statement claims that researches should not depend solely on its practicality because of the uncertainty of results. I stand at the point of full agreement, regarding the essence of the existence of academia.
To begin with, some argue that one of the major challenges of any field of research is to get a sufficient amount of research funds from affiliated foundations. Looking at the long-term gains does not fulfill the immediate requirements that the foundations of supplementary funding might ask for. That is, there needs to be a specific goal that can be attained within a limited period of funding, thereby resulting to seek for immediate and practical application. This is understandable, when we look into the current phase and condition of academia throughout the world. The tendency of most studies rely on practicality, so that numerous researches consist of handful surveys or experiments together with the short-term results that are likely to be shown in the studies. As a result, studies in Humanities with philosophical approaches which are likely to be esoteric than the practical ones tend to fall short in number compared to the earlier decades. However, this severely threatens the essence of study as researches are not about writing short reports in order to clarify the raw profits of a single corporation.
Assume that there are two candidates who are looking for research fundings in order to support each of their studies. One, who is working for a corporative program which targets on heightening the efficiency of its activity, might submit a research plan that persuades the panels how efficient and practical the program might be once initiated. The candidate would be likely to induce them by saying that the research funding might be a practical investment for immediate creations of financial value. On the other hand, the other candidate, who is studying art theories of a French philosopher, might apply for funding by assuaging the panels how valuable the study might be in long-term history. It is likely that the former candidate has a bigger chance to be selected. But at this point, we need to reconsider the extant of research based studies.
In the era of the ever changing culture and economy, researches may be the only ones who might be able to initiate an in-depth investigation on several types of fields. Ensuring the researchers to investigate within a stable and sound atmosphere is a necessary condition in order to discover valuable findings. Furthermore, not a single field of study is made solely by practical approaches, since it may harm the essential ethics and long-term directionality of each academia. For example, the Nobel winning chemist Ei-ichi Negishi, who had just passed away several weeks ago, he has, in one of his interview, admittedly noted that his studies might not have successfully done if he had not investigated in a fully supportive environment, which may consist of a full funding, sufficient materials, and a bountiful amount of time to do research. Although this may the case only for a handful privileged researchers, it is unquestionable that limiting the researches to areas of pragmatism and short-term is not a prerequisite, but even an obstacle for sound studies.
Thus, considering the uncertainty of the results of researches, researchers need to inquire their studies based on thorough care and effort.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 327, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ht ask for. That is, there needs to be a specific goal that can be attained withi...
^^
Line 2, column 911, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: short
...ic than the practical ones tend to fall short in number compared to the earlier decades. Howeve...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, look, may, regarding, so, thus, for example, as a result, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 11.3162921348 194% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 92.0 58.6224719101 157% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3040.0 2235.4752809 136% => OK
No of words: 585.0 442.535393258 132% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19658119658 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9180050066 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04500539518 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 293.0 215.323595506 136% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.500854700855 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 956.7 704.065955056 136% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.8403703495 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.181818182 118.986275619 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.5909090909 23.4991977007 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.5 5.21951772744 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.2198312935 0.243740707755 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0698326681879 0.0831039109588 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0480655407308 0.0758088955206 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13166140556 0.150359130593 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0365930201662 0.0667264976115 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 48.8420337079 92% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.3 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 162.0 100.480337079 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.