Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The scientific research requires resources commensurate to the benefits which it brought upon the society, thus requires a funding. Since the resources of the governments are limited, some believes governments should not fund any research which lacks significant consequences. However, researches which lack significant foretold results should be also funded due to two specific reasons.
First of all, the scientific research supposedly having unclear consequences can lead to unexpected discoveries. Obviously, it is not possible to know absolutely whether a research would have great impact or not before the research has been made. The best way to estimate the consequences of the research beforehand is to make an educated guess based on the cumulative knowledge pertaining to the field of interest. However, it is certainly possible that the consequences of the research are beyond the scope of the level the field is on. Therefore, the research may have great impact on its respective field although it was estimated to have insignificant consequences. For instance, the research that proved the existence of the positron has engendered a new branch of physics, the elementary particle physics, was made to determine which way the cosmic energetic particles were coming from the core of the earth or from the space. If the research hasn’t been made just because there are not any clear consequences, the general consensus was that the particle come from the space which is true, maybe the physics wouldn’t be advanced as much as it did today.
Moreover, the main purpose of the scientific research is to understand the world around us, and understanding is always, sooner or later, beneficial to the mankind. Let’s think about the current state of our species. Every advancement we made, every shard of power we hold, every advantage we have over another species are extant thanks to our capability to understand the rules governing the world. Thus, every research that contributes to this understanding is important, even the research that seems like it would not have important results. As an example, the research about the relativity may seem irrelevant at the first glance, so called relativistic effects are negligible as long as speed of an object is not comparable to the speed of light and no man made device have never been close to that. Despite this fact, the research has been made, and we are able to use GPS thanks to its contributions to our understanding since the effects of relativity can be felt at orbit.
To conclude, the scientific research is an essential requirement for humankind to advance. Even though the resources are limited, and not allocating our resources to seemingly inconsequential research seems logical, history indicates this is not the case since it is possible that our current understanding is not advanced enough to understand prospective benefits or benefits would be prominent at the long-term. Therefore, the research should be funded, doesn’t matter if it is seemingly insignificant or not.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-29 | shahajan999 | 66 | view |
| 2023-09-29 | seoul_milk | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-07 | sark | 60 | view |
| 2023-07-27 | cringelord | 79 | view |
| 2023-07-27 | cringelord | 45 | view |
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take 66
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues Over the past year the Crust Copper Company CCC has purchased over 10 000 square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia Mining copper on this land will in 79
- The following appeared in a letter from a homeowner to a friend Of the two leading real estate firms in our town Adams Realty and Fitch Realty Adams Realty is clearly superior Adams has 40 real estate agents in contrast Fitch has 25 many of whom work only 60
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim In developing and supporting your position be su 50
- The best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 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 supporti 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1023, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'consensus'.
Suggestion: consensus
...ere are not any clear consequences, the general consensus was that the particle come from the spa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, thus, for instance, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 34.0 19.5258426966 174% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 14.8657303371 61% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2577.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 488.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28073770492 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00409486614 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 236.0 215.323595506 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483606557377 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 800.1 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 12.0 4.99550561798 240% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.4565470888 60.3974514979 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.631578947 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6842105263 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.89473684211 5.21951772744 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151233087355 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0585850898108 0.0831039109588 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0473406367462 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.107453339721 0.150359130593 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0646927713852 0.0667264976115 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 14.1392134831 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.37 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => 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: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.