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 statement breifly stated that government should place few restrictions on the scientific research and development of the various fields. This statement is valid in order to guarantee innovative researches and science developments. Whereas, it could be investigated through a set of evidences.
For instance, governemental interferance on the scientific researches would limit researches innovation regarding some perespective of science that would either slow down the development progress in another adjacent science field or limit the researchers efforts, which could be benificial effort of other fields that is under the governemental concern at a certain time. Thus, free unconditionally innovation should be warranted and free of any political interferance to reach high levels of development.
Futhermore, the intended restriction development efforts might overshade new strategies that need implimentation and further investigation in order to achieve a promising development of a field that is adjacent to the fields under concern by the governement. Then, the researches would be blindered, as researchers would only allow their thoughful ability to be concerned with a limited fields of science rather than thinking to achieve real development in any science fields.
For example, if researchers are intended to do research work to improve agricultural profits through increasing the amount of crops yielding by applying some liquified nutrition to the soil, as it is guided by the government. Perhaps, the researchers could be reached to a result during their study to increase crops yielding by applying some nutrition in it’s solid state beneath the cultivated soil, and not a liquified state, as liquified state would need much more complicated knowledge of science that need futher experimentals and longer period to be safely developed. Then, in this case, this govermental restrictions did not lead to science progressive and practicle development. But it is slowing down the wheel of development of the crops profit. Thus, the statement is not valid.
These previously developled evidences and example is a same of a set of evidences that is properly evaluating this addressed statement validation. Whereas, it could be portrayed the statement invalidation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 236, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ve researches and science developments. Whereas, it could be investigated through a set...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...vestigated through a set of evidences. For instance, governemental interferance...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...e to reach high levels of development. Futhermore, the intended restriction dev...
^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eal development in any science fields. For example, if researchers are intended...
^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fit. Thus, the statement is not valid. These previously developled evidences an...
^^^
Line 5, column 150, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ng this addressed statement validation. Whereas, it could be portrayed the statement in...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, regarding, so, then, thus, whereas, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 19.0 33.0505617978 57% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 58.6224719101 85% => OK
Nominalization: 35.0 12.9106741573 271% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1950.0 2235.4752809 87% => OK
No of words: 342.0 442.535393258 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.70175438596 5.05705443957 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.55969084622 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27908561166 2.79657885939 117% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 215.323595506 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.505847953216 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 592.2 704.065955056 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 104.097481786 60.3974514979 172% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.285714286 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4285714286 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.21951772744 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.101158925207 0.243740707755 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0377891610496 0.0831039109588 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0513019759202 0.0758088955206 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0625256566135 0.150359130593 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0457997029006 0.0667264976115 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 14.1392134831 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.08 12.1639044944 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.12 8.38706741573 109% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.