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 a documented fact that technology has the potential to revolutionize different aspects of human life. The most conspicuous way is how humans depend on their thinking ability to address the issues commonly raised in their lives. The writer of the issue contends that there will be an adverse impact of technology if people use it too much in order to confront areas of difficulty in their lives. Although this is an argument with which I generally agree, I nevertheless believe that this issue has two sides going with it. The following essay will illuminate my perspective.
First, there is a growing body of research studies shedding light on the underlying constructs of critical thinking ability, and it seems that few of these constructs can be nurtured by technological devices which are at use today. In order to develop the ability to arrive at a solution to an outstanding problem, one of the constructs of critical thinking, one should practice augmenting the efficiency of one's performance through collaboration with a larger group of individuals. This could take the form of devising a plan about how the problem should best be approached. This stands in contrast with most technological innovations in the modern era aiming to enable the users to act autonomously without directly appraising the different sides of an issue.
This is not to state that all the factors contributing to one's ability to think insightfully depend on one's cooperation within a group. However, what seems to be the key in the further development of critical thinking is for the individual to be utterly engrossed in the subject matter, whether it is their studies or a dilemma they are facing. This is again at odds with the trend that technology is leading us to, depriving the users from thorough contemplation of the issues by providing them with the fastest route to the solution, which pertains solely to the problem at hand. The strategies that a computer presents, for example, may not be generalized to other contexts.
However, what I alluded to in the body should not be taken as an indication that technology deters autonomous thinking categorically. There is a myriad of technological devices which function solely as an assistance to the human mind, providing the means for it to further its Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), to put it in Vygotsky's words. For example, I have personally witnessed that some video games engage the kids fully by introducing gradual hints in a stepwise fashion to help them overcome the difficulty of the question. Such initiatives which are now becoming more and more rampant in computer games these days clearly capture the essence of Vygotskyan theorizing. This all suggests that the way technology impacts human mind should not be perceived through only a negative eye. There are potential benefits to it as well.
All in all, taking all the aforementioned argument into account, I hold that the way technology affects people's lives, particularly their potential to think creatively, is not all negative. Through a closer examination of some technological innovation today, we can attest to the benefits of technology in enhancing people's intellectual capacity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 408, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...d practice augmenting the efficiency of ones performance through collaboration with ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...sing the different sides of an issue. This is not to state that all the factors co...
^^^^
Line 3, column 59, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...te that all the factors contributing to ones ability to think insightfully depend on...
^^^^
Line 4, column 455, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a stepwise fashion" with adverb for "stepwise"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...kids fully by introducing gradual hints in a stepwise fashion to help them overcome the difficulty of...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, well, for example, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 14.8657303371 20% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 45.0 33.0505617978 136% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 84.0 58.6224719101 143% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 12.9106741573 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2686.0 2235.4752809 120% => OK
No of words: 525.0 442.535393258 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11619047619 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.78673985869 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99906198487 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 264.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.502857142857 0.4932671777 102% => OK
syllable_count: 855.9 704.065955056 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.7287375134 60.3974514979 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.904761905 118.986275619 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.71428571429 5.21951772744 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.178760292305 0.243740707755 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0517756799627 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0305652835081 0.0758088955206 40% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103228403823 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0307440231864 0.0667264976115 46% => 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: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 48.8420337079 94% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 145.0 100.480337079 144% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 11.8971910112 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 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.