Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
Science is the main deriving force of any nation to reach prosperity and its velocity of development is in direct relation but not limited to authorities’ restrictions. Some believe that political power should determine the circumscribe in which scientific researches should be developed, however this rather myopic viewpoint is dismissed by others by stating that curiosity of main kind knows no boundary for its advancement. With a logical approach to this controversial topic, I am of the conviction that legal controlling damage scientific and technological advancements beyond repairable, especially given free and critical spirit of scientist and brain drain danger.
Free and critical spirit of scientist implies that scientific innovation and breakthrough can only happen in a free of confinement environment. One reason for this is that the essence of is entangled with free movement in any direction, putting any rustication on free movement of this advancement under any excuse including national security could easily parish it, not to say if not futile. For example, North Korea nuclear science is a good case in point. If this country with its dictator leader had a free country with freedom for every citizen including its scientist may flourish their county in many filed not just hostile ones. However, the contrasting opinion holds that restriction like for national security is important for preventing data bridge, which could be refused by simply saying that under rampant espionage it is unlikely any secret remains a secret for long.
Brain drain danger illustrates the fact that not only limitations could ruin the creativity of scholars, but also if it exceeds the comfort zone of the science men may make them to seek refuge in more free countries. The mentioned fact is based on the observation that one of the major immigration of high-IQ people are from restricted countries toward free world. For instance, I recently have read a paper that how incremental limitations of the government in developing countries like Iran has accelerated this phenomenon. Those who disagree think that patriot people never bail their homeland just for science; nevertheless, it could be easily dismissed by the notion that scientists mainly believe their knowledge is for humanity and not for a specific country.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the mindset favoring placing few governmental restrictions on science research and advancement can actually do more harm than good, because should an idea be effective, it would at least consider the scientists’ free spirit and danger of brains drain. Moreover, this gives me the impression that any prevention on the path of science is not acceptable. Furthermore, sight must not be lost of national security matters.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 221, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...e that political power should determine the circumscribe in which scientific researches should b...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, nevertheless, so, at least, for example, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 33.0505617978 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2349.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 440.0 442.535393258 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33863636364 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.57997565096 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96717493015 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565909090909 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 720.9 704.065955056 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 23.0359550562 126% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 68.8426224563 60.3974514979 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 156.6 118.986275619 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.3333333333 23.4991977007 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.66666666667 5.21951772744 166% => 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 : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186173881499 0.243740707755 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0543792280532 0.0831039109588 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516751238204 0.0758088955206 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113850931952 0.150359130593 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0493676777054 0.0667264976115 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 14.1392134831 130% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 48.8420337079 86% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 100.480337079 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 21.0 11.8971910112 177% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 11.2143820225 121% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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: 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.