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.
It is apparent how advancement in technology, leads our generation towards a state of tranquility. It is not astonishing to see how technology updates have aided humans in problem-solving over decades. But one would certainly ask the question,” is the ability of humans to think for themselves deteriorating?”. In my opinion, I would partially agree with the given statement and I would like to ascribe two reasons in support of the statement while one reason contrary to the given statement.
First of all, people have started relying on technology to solve their routine problems. This can be made apparent by considering one of the expanding fields of technology in modern times, “Artificial Intelligence” or AI. What AI does is, it enables a user to input any mundane problems and answer this question based on experiences and earlier data stored over the internet. The question is analyzed and a piece of relevant advice is put forward before the user. With the increase in the marketability of artificial intelligence, people are becoming staler and staler. This is a clear indication of how people have stopped solving problems on their own and their thinking ability to solve problems is deteriorating.
Again, people have stopped discovering answers to new types of questions on their own. This can be explained as follows. A study from a university in California has found that aptitude problem-solving skills among the students in the last ten years has plummeted. They asserted technology as a major reason for this downfall by certain examples. For example, a tool ‘Mathematica’ has been developed to solve complex integrations in no time. Traditional mathematicians spent days and sometimes even months trying to solve these integrations by themselves. On the contrast, contemporary researchers use this tool to solve their problems. This leads to people becoming less creative and later fail to turn up to their expectations. In this way, the study states an important conclusion of how technology is deteriorating the human ability to think.
But a contrasting theory would suggest how this thing has not deteriorated the ability of humans to think but aided to improve it in numerous cases. Considering the number of research documents published in a famous journal last year and comparing it with the number ten years ago, one can easily find that the number has quadrupled. The conclusion made by the journal authority was the advancement in technology. With upgrading technology, scientists find it easier to solve the toughest problems and this provides them with time to solve the next part of the same questions. In some sense, they tend to think more and on a wider aspect in a short period. This has enhanced thinking ability in several cases since they work through several problems in less time.
Concluding, one would always agree on the bright side of technology and how it is helping researchers, but again based on the first two reasons, we can see how technology is deteriorating the thinking ability of human beings.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
It is apparent how advancement in techno...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 241, Rule ID: ASK_THE_QUESTION[1]
Message: Use simply 'ask' instead.
Suggestion: ask
...g over decades. But one would certainly ask the question,” is the ability of humans to think for...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 257, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...ut one would certainly ask the question,” is the ability of humans to think for t...
^
Line 1, column 322, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...s to think for themselves deteriorating?”. In my opinion, I would partially agree...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, while, for example, first of all, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 14.8657303371 114% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 11.3162921348 18% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 38.0 33.0505617978 115% => OK
Preposition: 81.0 58.6224719101 138% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2576.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 498.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17269076305 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72397222731 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.10982399926 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 249.0 215.323595506 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 807.3 704.065955056 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.9240167619 60.3974514979 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.0769230769 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.1538461538 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.57692307692 5.21951772744 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.263415490471 0.243740707755 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0703138044473 0.0831039109588 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0549665697997 0.0758088955206 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152343954766 0.150359130593 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0343327667217 0.0667264976115 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.1392134831 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.1639044944 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 125.0 100.480337079 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.