Governments should place few if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
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 topic can be interpreted from different angles before arriving at the effects of the recommendation for placing very few restrictions on scientific research and development. Indubitably, the government is responsible for the wellness of its citizens, thus it should make sure they are safe from different types of hazards that a scientific research might cause during experimentation. Nevertheless, restricting research due to predictable harmful outcomes will destroy the whole point of research. All the risks involved are worthy to take if it is developing the nation to grow in several aspects. Hence I believe that the governments should place few if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.
First of all, the concept of doing scientific research emerged from the need to become a developing nation from an under-developed one and a developed nation from a developing one. To illustrate, thirty years ago, India was considered as a non-developed country in military sector as it lagged from the United States and China due to unavailability of any nuclear weapons. But the research department of Indian military developed their own nuclear bomb and more importantly, they were successful in testing those bombs in Pokhran Village. If Indian government had restricted this kind of potentially hazardous experimentation, then India might have become prey for the United States or China during the period. Furthermore, restricting scientific research and development will lead to monotonous survival of the nation. A nation would never become capable to establish a better way of living for its citizens. Apparently, the government should take risks in placing no restrictions on the research and development institutions of the country.
Admittedly, few restrictions such as banning experimental research on humans and performing private research without getting permission from the government are necessary. Without these restrictions, the greed of people would lead to enormous destruction and unnecessary hazards. However, it should not be claimed that the government should not give permission to the legit and the deserving research fellows to perform research. Because, if every risk is taken into consideration and the equipment, environment, and skills for performing a research are well tested, development in the targeted field is not far away.
In conclusion, although government should impose strict restrictions on actions that will harm people, there should be no restrictions placed on the scientific research and the risk factor involved in that particular research. The outcome of such research will lead to a development of the overall nation and thus the risk is worth taking.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 604, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
... the nation to grow in several aspects. Hence I believe that the governments should p...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 341, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tion and thus the risk is worth taking.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
apparently, but, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, then, thus, well, in conclusion, kind of, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.3162921348 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 12.9106741573 147% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2315.0 2235.4752809 104% => OK
No of words: 415.0 442.535393258 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57831325301 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.51348521516 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.236366157 2.79657885939 116% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.50843373494 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 703.8 704.065955056 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.4584835219 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.611111111 118.986275619 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0555555556 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44444444444 5.21951772744 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 10.2758426966 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.209460386607 0.243740707755 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.086064957182 0.0831039109588 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0791396938137 0.0758088955206 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1532423196 0.150359130593 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0648338746602 0.0667264976115 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.38 12.1639044944 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 100.480337079 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => 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: 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.