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.
Scientific research is being conducted in plethora of various fields nowadays. Many scientists or researchers working diligiently in their institutions look forward to government's subsidies and funds. The prompt suggests that the government should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear. I mostly agree with this recommendation in favor of following couple of reasons.
There might be some institutions whether academic or non-academic like corporations, longing for funds because they do not have enough money to initiate a research. Also, their proposal of research might not have been delineated, or prepared a congent, lucid description of its consequences. In such cases they have to find out, materialize the consequences of their research after they conducted the research and have some progress of it. However, this seems to be an inapporpriate, unjustified way to conduct a research and especially for receiving governmental funds, this should be distanced.
Indeed, for numerous, versatile kinds of research being conducted, there is modicum proof that the research will lead to a beneficial result. Sometimes the research could turn out to be malignant and harmful to human society. For example, recent development and study of AI(Artificial Intelligience) has brought many disputes regarding on its consequences and its effects toward mankind between most professional gurus. Some, who are amiable towards the technology believe that its progress will be beneficial and it will be a breakthrough for our society in many different fields, solving most inscrutable problems. On the other hand, however, there are people who worry about its desruptive prowess and concern the outcomes when such a technology is used against human. To obviate such harmful consequences being resulted by an obscure research, governments should be meticulous in choosing subjects to fund on.
Furthermore, governmental funds are limited to certain amount of bugets. This could be disparate for each nations, but it is mostly likely that there isn't a nation which can spend arms and legs only on scientific research. Government utilizes funds for many other kinds of subsidies and factors as well. Indeed, even if the government can spend stupendous amount of money on scientific research, there should be a priority list on where to divide it. For instance, because of deteriorating climate changes nowadays, there are exigency demanded by some research trying to overcome this. Renewal energy like solar, water energy is being focused. Rather on spending budgets on research where consequences are unclear, would not it be better to invest on these urgent, highly-demanded technology and research?
It would be ideal to fund every kinds or research being conducted. However, because of the obstacles abovementioned, I claim that governments should prioritize and fund translucent research which has obvious and clear consequences first, and then if there are any buget remaining, support scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 155, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[1]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'research'.
Suggestion: research
...ey do not have enough money to initiate a research. Also, their proposal of research might...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 559, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...ll be a breakthrough for our society in many different fields, solving most inscrutable proble...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 151, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ons, but it is mostly likely that there isnt a nation which can spend arms and legs ...
^^^^
Line 4, column 645, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Rather,
...e solar, water energy is being focused. Rather on spending budgets on research where c...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 729, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
... consequences are unclear, would not it be better to invest on these urgent, highl...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, look, regarding, so, then, well, for example, for instance, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2593.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 465.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57634408602 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06931523865 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524731182796 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 785.7 704.065955056 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => 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: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.4137273045 60.3974514979 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.739130435 118.986275619 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2173913043 23.4991977007 86% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.26086956522 5.21951772744 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211728271338 0.243740707755 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.075191973299 0.0831039109588 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0709258572077 0.0758088955206 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.157188762605 0.150359130593 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0682393291917 0.0667264976115 102% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.1392134831 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.8420337079 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.1639044944 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.04 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 130.0 100.480337079 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.