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.
Technology today is our helping hand in an endless number of daily tasks, from remembering people's birthdays to creating predictive models for COVID-19's spread. Whether its our computers or our phones, its perenially at our fingertips, ready to do as we command. But does this mean reliance on technology is leading to a degradation in our ability to think? I would argue that this is very much not the case. Instead, technology is merely changing the nature of our thought and freeing up mental space for higher level reasoning.
Detractors of technology's increasing stature in our daily lives may ask, what about the people using their smart phone calculators to do trivial addition while shopping? Technology is clearly deletorious to their mental mathematics capabilties! Certainly, when I whip out my phone to calculate the total cost of my groceries, I am relying on my phone to do maths that my parents could have done in their heads. However, in today's world, when technology is available, what do we actually need those mental maths abilities for? Instead, we offload those trivial calculations and free up our minds to apply ourselves to more creative tasks; I instead dedicate the time I saved by using my calculator to think about how I can tackle a particularly persistant problem at work. The menial tasks technology takes over do not need to be a major factor in our lives anymore.
Using technology also creates worlds of possibilities the human mind could not otherwise reach, like in pharamceutical development. In the past, most new medicines were created by relying on half-baked instincts and potentially dangerous trial and error. With technology, modern pharamceuticals are developed using computer simulations, where you run through thousands of computer simulations of possible drugs within hours and can test their interactions with biological components and other drugs. It greatly reduces the time, risk, and cost of developing new, life-saving medications, and could not be accomplished without relying on modern supercomputing facilities. Yet, knowing what to test and interpreting the resultig data produced is still a human task, and requires a new kind of creativity, practice, and instinct that is different, but not less than, the old methods.
However, some might argue, what about artificial intellegence? Sure we are using the technology to open up new creative avenues today, but what about tomorrow when AI's are able to perform surgeries on people or translate human speech? The evolution of artificial intellegence is certainly changing the nature of a lot of human skills, but there are still people masterminding the coding of the AI, a task which also requires great mental acuity and skill! The playing field is changing, but people are always going to need to adapt and apply themselves in a new, more innovative ways, and will gain the ability to solve problems we may not even percieve today.
Thus, I believe technology is creating novel paths forward for us. These will not resemble the old paths, and there are definitely skills that will become obselete and will fall into disuse. However, the tradeoff for greater future possibilities and the new skills that will have to be acquired means that our mental faculties will not deteriorate, just transform.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 170, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ve models for COVID-19s spread. Whether its our computers or our phones, its pereni...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, so, still, thus, while, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 24.0 14.8657303371 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 49.0 33.0505617978 148% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 58.6224719101 116% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2783.0 2235.4752809 124% => OK
No of words: 536.0 442.535393258 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1921641791 5.05705443957 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.81161862636 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90999266917 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 299.0 215.323595506 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557835820896 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 864.9 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 11.0 1.77640449438 619% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 82.7285537492 60.3974514979 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.523809524 118.986275619 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.5238095238 23.4991977007 109% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.33333333333 5.21951772744 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.201965666274 0.243740707755 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0546084051287 0.0831039109588 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0379975140075 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105361817447 0.150359130593 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0269611533432 0.0667264976115 40% => 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: 15.8 14.1392134831 112% => 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: 13.12 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 141.0 100.480337079 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.