The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.
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 supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The world we live in changes every day, it keeps evolving and getting better each day with new technologies and inventions. The amount of human involvement in many tasks has been reduced greatly by new technologies which provide faster and efficient results. A lot of things that in the past would have treated as just chimeric have indeed been achieved. Companies vie for excellence and provide better services by spending resources that would provide better solutions and technologies to ease the daily activities that we are involved in.
Some people are of the opinion that the conveniences and luxuries that these new technologies, this new life provides us stymies our growth as independent and strong individuals. They believe that we are so used to getting things done quickly with minimal effort in a short span of time that we have become too dependant on them. We use calculators for doing simple multiplication that we too can do without the help of a calculator, but we abstain from putting an effort to do it ourselves. While it is true that we may have become dependent, less actively involved in the work we do I do not fully agree that these conveniences hinder our growth as individuals.
The conveniences that we have today were not easily given or obtained by us. There has been a lot of efforts involved to make these tasks simple and consume less amount of our time. The time and efforts that are saved indeed help us spend it on something new. It breaks the cycle of repetitive work and affords a chance to explore new challenges. If we were to measure development not just from our ability to do basic work but also from how innovative we can be, how we could develop something that works independently and is scalable, we will realize that we have a lot of opportunities to learn and grow. We could also say that in today’s world the quality of a strong individual should not be measured only by his ability to do something but also by his ability to develop/invent something that works on its own. These things have made us dependent, but isn’t this the whole objective of development? That we spend less effort and time on some work.
Some might consider mobile phones and the internet a mere luxury but look at the opportunities that it has provided us. Colleges have started distant education programs in which students can learn from any part of the world they are in. For people who cannot afford to shift to a new country, this is an excellent opportunity as it helps them develop and enhance their skills. Thus, I think that, although we can argue to some extent that we have become dependent on the luxuries of our contemporary lives, this does not mean that we have stopped being independent individuals, instead the way we live has changed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 312, Rule ID: DEPENDENT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'dependent' on?
Suggestion: dependent
...rt span of time that we have become too dependant on them. We use calculators for doing s...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 665, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ences hinder our growth as individuals. The conveniences that we have today were...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, so, thus, while, i think, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 11.3162921348 212% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 78.0 33.0505617978 236% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2304.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 486.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74074074074 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69525374022 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71211836739 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 215.323595506 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479423868313 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 733.5 704.065955056 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9098351846 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.2 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.1 5.21951772744 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => 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: 0.0954365164218 0.243740707755 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0319313191923 0.0831039109588 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0320759714072 0.0758088955206 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0648387241206 0.150359130593 43% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0253749679055 0.0667264976115 38% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 14.1392134831 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 12.1639044944 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.38706741573 94% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 100.480337079 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => 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: 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.