As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
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.
There is a belief that as humans continue to rely on technological progress to proffer solutions to human problems, that our critical thinking capacity will drop. However, perhaps technology has given us more time and ability to dedicate thoughts to more lofty and critical issues via eliminating physical labor and delimiting tedium. With the recent advent of social networking technology, one could see where having too much freedom and openness has led to the information bubbles that feed people information they already agree with, but as will be shown, this conclusion is not a result of the technology itself but rather from our own inherent problematic behavior.
Since the beginning of American mass-manufacturing era, new tools have been touted as time saving devices. Refrigerators, dishwashers, washing machines and all sorts of domestic appliances were sold on the by-line that it would liberate women from the backbreaking time consuming work they performed in order to maintain a comfortable home. This led to women having more time to involve themselves with matters other than domesticity and from being merely a laborer. This would be an important first step at the home front for the appearance of feminism. In this way, limiting the amount of physical labor humans perform means that it became possible for people to consider revolutionary ideas.
But technology has also lessened the amount of mental exertion we apply to tedium. Long form written financial accounting has been replaced by Excel spreadsheets and even more advanced business intelligence analytical tools. Accountants moved beyond their role as pencil-pushers to learn new skills and move up the ranks. When we let technology do things like number-crunching, perfunctory tasks that require no deep thinking, we have time to employ our critical thinking towards learning.
Both of the previous ideas are regarding how technology gives us more freedom, but can technology also delimit it? We can point to recent developments in the meddling of the 2016 American Presidential election as an example of how outside interests were able to exploit the lack of diversity in our newsfeeds and social media to encourage their preferred outcome. Certainly, domestic laborers and pencil pushers would have had little time to engage in "flame-wars" on the internet. While it is true that with increased time on our hands, many of us expend it wastefully, it is our own choice to do so, and fundamentally not technology that left it as our only option. If anything, technology has only hastened the speed with which we reveal our sometimes unfortunately solipsistic nature.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, regarding, so, while, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 33.0505617978 124% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2245.0 2235.4752809 100% => OK
No of words: 422.0 442.535393258 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31990521327 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.53239876712 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07610777992 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 215.323595506 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.60663507109 0.4932671777 123% => OK
syllable_count: 711.0 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 0.0 4.99550561798 0% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => 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: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 63.8741734553 60.3974514979 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.058823529 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8235294118 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.70588235294 5.21951772744 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.16774144506 0.243740707755 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0522195908763 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487475669614 0.0758088955206 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0996682512286 0.150359130593 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0578898071693 0.0667264976115 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => 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: 13.87 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.58 8.38706741573 114% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 100.480337079 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.