As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
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.
Surely many of us have expressed the following sentiment, or some variation on it, during our daily commutes to work: "People are getting so stupid these days!" Surrounded as we are by striding and strident automatons with cell phones glued to their ears, PDA's gripped in their palms, and omniscient, omnipresent CNN gleaming in their eyeballs, it's tempting to believe that technology has isolated and infantilized us, essentally transforming us into dependent, conformist morons best equipped to sideswip one another in our SUV's.
Furthermore, hanging around with the younger, pre-commute generation, whom tech-savviness seems to have rendered lethal, is even less reassuring. With "Teen People" style trends shooting through the air from tiger-striped PDA to zebra-striped PDA, and with the latest starlet gossip zipping from juicy Blackberry to teeny, turbo-charged cell phone, technology seems to support young people's worst tendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed, they have seemingly evolved into intergalactic conformity police. After all, today's tech-aided teens are, courtesy of authentic, hands-on video games, literally trained to kill; courtesy of chat and instant text messaging, they have their own language; they even have tiny cameras to efficiently photodocument your fashion blunders! Is this adolescence, or paparazzi terrorist training camp?
With all this evidence, it's easy to believe that tech trends and the incorporation of technological wizardry into our everyday lives have served mostly to enforce conformity, promote dependence, heighten comsumerism and materialism, and generally create a culture that values self-absorption and personal entitlement over cooperation and collaboration. However, I argue that we are merely in the inchoate stages of learning to live with technology while still loving one another. After all, even given the examples provided earlier in this essay, it seems clear that technology hasn't impaired our thinking and problem-solving capacities. Certainly it has incapacitated our behavior and manners; certainly our values have taken a severe blow. However, we are inarguably more efficient in our badness these days. We're effective worker bees of ineffectiveness!
If T\technology has so increased our senses of self-efficacy that we can become veritable agents of the awful, virtual CEO's of selfishness, certainly it can be beneficial. Harnessed correctly, technology can improve our ability to think and act for ourselves. The first challenge is to figure out how to provide technology users with some direly-needed direction.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 394, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'peoples the worst'.
Suggestion: peoples the worst
...hone, technology seems to support young peoples worst tendencies to follow the crowd. Indeed,...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 579, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...s essay, it seems clear that technology hasnt impaired our thinking and problem-solvi...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, so, still, then, while, after all, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 19.6327345309 51% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 12.9520958084 23% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 28.8173652695 149% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2232.0 2260.96107784 99% => OK
No of words: 382.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.84293193717 5.12650576532 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42095241839 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2174382998 2.78398813304 116% => OK
Unique words: 256.0 204.123752495 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.670157068063 0.468620217663 143% => OK
syllable_count: 693.9 705.55239521 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59920159681 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.76447105788 11% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.67365269461 299% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 31.0 22.8473053892 136% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 172.244658037 57.8364921388 298% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 186.0 119.503703932 156% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.8333333333 23.324526521 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08333333333 5.70786347227 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 6.88822355289 29% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107233793278 0.218282227539 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0439210475168 0.0743258471296 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0382845650341 0.0701772020484 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0644009111183 0.128457276422 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0231979059415 0.0628817314937 37% => 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: 22.0 14.3799401198 153% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 23.09 48.3550499002 48% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.1628742515 181% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 12.197005988 145% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.18 12.5979740519 136% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.13 8.32208582834 134% => OK
difficult_words: 144.0 98.500998004 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 60.0 12.3882235529 484% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 14.4 11.1389221557 129% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.9071856287 151% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.