Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
According to Hesienberg, the only thing certain is uncertainity. Jumping into the unknown and culminating at the end of it has been the human spirit. The prompt says that governments shouldn't fund research programs that don't have an established outcome. In my opinion, i disagree with the statement for two reasons.
To begin with, human beings have always ventured into the unknown to quench their thirst for knowledge. In the early part of 19th century, there was a rat race in the development of Nuclear science for weapons, fuel etc. The field was novel and not many had idea regarding the magnitude of impact it would have in the future. This was only possible, with the relentless hardwork of scientists and equal support from the government. To this day, we are able to harness electricity from nuclear fuel because of the foundation laid down by the physicists. Had the government withdrawn support owing to lack of relevant outcomes, we wouldn't have fully functioning nuclear power plants. The above example illustrates, how important government support is and how it helps in understanding our World better!
Further, research programs don't yield outcome immediately. Most of the fields take time to understand it's dynamics and how it can applicable. For example, the field of cancer reasearch is a very popular among medicine professionals. Over the last century, people have been coming up with various techniques to cure cancer or reduce it's impact, such as radiation therapy, etc. To reach that stage, the drug or the treatment needs to have a trial run, it's efficiency to be noted down, any side effects or symptoms should be considered to be covered in the next phase. This process continuous till the efficiency increases and the side effects are nill. Had the funding been cut down , then all the development done over years would be null.
One might argue that if the research program isn't yielding suitable outcomes, then it has matured it's reasonable to stop further development in that domain. Looking at the wide horizon of the topics, one cannot have a plausible conclusion. Research varies across the globe and it all comes down to how much important that particular field is and how much impact it's gonna have on the development of the human race.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
According to Hesienberg, the only thing ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 192, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...pirit. The prompt says that governments shouldnt fund research programs that dont have a...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 229, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ts shouldnt fund research programs that dont have an established outcome. In my opin...
^^^^
Line 1, column 278, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
... an established outcome. In my opinion, i disagree with the statement for two rea...
^
Line 3, column 631, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
... owing to lack of relevant outcomes, we wouldnt have fully functioning nuclear power pl...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 29, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... better! Further, research programs dont yield outcome immediately. Most of the ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 682, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
... are nill. Had the funding been cut down , then all the development done over year...
^^
Line 7, column 47, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ight argue that if the research program isnt yielding suitable outcomes, then it has...
^^^^
Line 7, column 364, Rule ID: IT_IS[7]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...particular field is and how much impact its gonna have on the development of the hu...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, regarding, so, then, for example, such as, in my opinion, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1905.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 380.0 442.535393258 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.01315789474 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7130526573 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 215.323595506 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578947368421 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 704.065955056 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.980907236 60.3974514979 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.25 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.05 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 7.80617977528 115% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.0855376137642 0.243740707755 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0243785079975 0.0831039109588 29% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0212931135098 0.0758088955206 28% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0527005441802 0.150359130593 35% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00217225862039 0.0667264976115 3% => 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: 11.7 14.1392134831 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.1639044944 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 100.480337079 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.8971910112 55% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => 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.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.