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 reasoni

Essay topics:

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.

It is not uncommon to hear someone mourning that people today go dumb as they are more dependent on technology. Many people agree with it and think that they have to do something to prevent the negative effect of technology on making people stupid. However, I do not think that it is an appropriate way of thinking about technology. What is behind this misunderstanding is, I think, their misconception of the problem.

First, what is the ability of humans to think for themselves? The term is too vague. There are at least two different meanings. The first one is the ability to be reflective. When someone can think reflective, that is, think what he did himself, we say he is able to think himself. However, following this meaning, the problem is not clear. Although people are getting used to technology, there would be little difference in reflection. Another meaning of thinking themselves is: facing a problem, they can solve it by themselves. This meaning fits well with the reason why the problem above is suggested. As technology become a bigger part of people’s life, they tend to depend on the technology. For example, when someone asks you where the capital city of South Korea, you might take your smartphone out of your pocket and open the searching application. Only do a few people try to think themselves without relying on technology.

Yet I do not think that it does hold water. True, we do not tend to think ourselves when we have faced a problem like “where is the capital city of South Korea?” However, if we were asked more abstruse and abstract questions such as “why you think that philosophy is needed for humanity?”, you would not search on the internet. Instead, you would think yourself. What it shows is that: people today are tuned to think themselves only for difficult and hard-to-solve-problems. We today are forced to solve so many problems that we have not enough energy for the easy problems. Were we not an energy and time-limited creature, we would not search on the internet.

Another problem of the claim above is: it ignores the progressive trends in education. As technology develops, more people could access to education. 10 years before, it was a silly idea for those living in India to take MBA courses of a university at the states. However, today, what is considered as silly is that idea. Noting the fact that the more educated people are, the better they do abstract thinking, this trend shows the exact opposite of the claim: people are better at thinking themselves.

In sum, contemplating on our ritual behavior and the trend in education, I conclude that we human beings get more ability of thinking ourselves. I showed it by using (1) contrast of abstract problems with simple ones, and (2) accessibility of higher education.

Votes
Average: 5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories

Comments

Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, so, well, at least, for example, i think, such as

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 66.0 33.0505617978 200% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 58.0 58.6224719101 99% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2341.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 477.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90775681342 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67336384929 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91886845906 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 231.0 215.323595506 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48427672956 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 725.4 704.065955056 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 19.0 6.24550561798 304% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => 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: 29.0 20.2370786517 143% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 53.5669649916 60.3974514979 89% => OK
Chars per sentence: 80.724137931 118.986275619 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4482758621 23.4991977007 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.37931034483 5.21951772744 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 5.13820224719 234% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.83258426966 207% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.249223249451 0.243740707755 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0680938109609 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0572941725346 0.0758088955206 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142648909194 0.150359130593 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0355173326432 0.0667264976115 53% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.1392134831 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 48.8420337079 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 12.1743820225 69% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.9 12.1639044944 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.38706741573 91% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 11.8971910112 50% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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.