The issue that people relying on technology to solve problems deteriorates the ability for human to think for themselves or not is a contentious one. While both sides having their own strengths and weaknesses. I am with the opinion that the people relying on technology to solve problems will not deteriorate the ability for human to think for themselves.
The chief reason for my view is that the use of technology will free us from mundane activities and allows us to work on more qaundring issues that require more of our attention. For example the telecommunication technology uses the networks to allow us to make distant conversations through mobiles without wasting time on writing letter or mailing or even travelling. This gained time can be productively used in solving other complex problems. Hence the time for productive thinking is further enhanced.
Another reason for my view is the advancement in technology is brought through by extensive research and they certainly have new issues that need to be resolved. This opens the doors for problem solving skills. For instance the use of automobiles, their phase has been changing since 19th century. The use of automobiles has created a demand for fuel in the global markets but now with the environmental concerns by problem solving skills new modes of transportation are being developed. So there is always a need for problem solving skills and that requires the human thinking.
In contrast, some might say that the people relying on technology to solve problems reduce the ability for human to think for themselves. This point is flawed, since upon adopting technology one can only become lazy but not stupid and more over laziness is corporeal but not mental. Also the use of technology depends on one’s cognitive skills and how he is uses it. However in the final analysis, the view that relying on technology to solve problems reduces the human thinking levels is not true.
From all the reasons stated above , I therefore believe that people relying more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves is not deteriorate but rather ameliorating.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 447, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...used in solving other complex problems. Hence the time for productive thinking is fur...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 283, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...r laziness is corporeal but not mental. Also the use of technology depends on one&ap...
^^^^
Line 4, column 372, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...cognitive skills and how he is uses it. However in the final analysis, the view that re...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 34, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...true. From all the reasons stated above , I therefore believe that people relying...
^^
Line 5, column 177, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'deteriorated'.
Suggestion: deteriorated
...f humans to think for themselves is not deteriorate but rather ameliorating.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 12.4196629213 56% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1811.0 2235.4752809 81% => OK
No of words: 357.0 442.535393258 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.07282913165 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81985280886 2.79657885939 101% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 215.323595506 83% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.501400560224 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 704.065955056 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 21.0 23.0359550562 91% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.0893319627 60.3974514979 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.529411765 118.986275619 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 23.4991977007 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.11764705882 5.21951772744 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0209686819773 0.243740707755 9% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00853089234153 0.0831039109588 10% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0103776614128 0.0758088955206 14% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0148297164299 0.150359130593 10% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00396886810819 0.0667264976115 6% => 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: 12.9 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.8420337079 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.1639044944 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 100.480337079 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.2143820225 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.