The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time.
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 no secret that technology has vastly simplified day-to-day tasks that people, perhaps from before the Industrial Revolution, would have never thought imaginable. And with advancements in technology throughout the years, increased efficiency has undoubtedly been a byproduct. The prompt suggests that the primary objective of increased efficiency is proportionally greater leisure time. While I understand there are merits to this argument, I disagree with this prompt for two reasons.
To begin with, increased efficiency does not necessarily guarantee more leisure time. In fact, in the recent past, quite the opposite has held true! Suppose a father of two spends six days of the week at the car factory he owns. His factory may produce 6,000 cars a day, as opposed to a century ago, when a single factory could manage to produce only 6. Yet, this man has to spend 72 hours per week managing the manufacturing process in order to meet the rising automobile demands. Consequently, he may be left with little or no time to do chores, spend time with his family, or even do the bare minimum like eat or sleep. Thus, greater efficiency results in commensurate demands in greater productivity- as technology continues to make our lives simpler, we become keener and keener to live faster-paced lives, leaving negligible time for us to even think about leisure!
Further, there are more critical issues to tackle with respect to technological advancements as opposed to merely increasing efficiency. Medical imaging, for example, is a field that has made remarkable advances in the last 70 years, without which detecting trauma to the body would be nearly impossible. Of course, performing an x-ray was increasingly different when the discovery was initially made compared to the present. While it may have taken nearly an hour to get the skeletal image of someone’s ankle in the 1950s, it only takes seconds to do the same today. Instead of conducting research on how to shorten this process to a fraction of a second, it may be more worthwhile to divert that effort and time into more pressing issues, such as a COVID-19 imaging test. These imaging modalities could be a potential alternative to the uncomfortable, invasive nasal swabs that are currently, unfortunately, the only option. Thus, technological advancement should seek to not only simplify daily tasks but to introduce alternative solutions as well.
It would, however, be remiss to say that efficiency and leisure time are completely unrelated. Inventions like the Roomba, a sensor-based vacuum, have almost completely diminished the need for manual sweeping. Vacuum cleaning an entire carpeted house could potentially take upwards of an hour, but the Roomba saves you the trouble. This extra time could be utilized for leisure, and ultimately is the result of technological advancement. That is not to say that the primary purpose of purchasing a Roomba is for extra leisure time; the purchase may simply be because it is more convenient than traditional sweeping, or more economical than hiring a cleaner twice a week.
In conclusion, technological advancements have undoubtedly increased efficiency in innumerable ways- transportation, cleaning, research, and more. Greater efficiency is not synonymous with increased leisure time, however, and if our motivation is driven by this belief, our efforts to progress in society will be short-lived.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, however, if, may, second, so, thus, well, while, as to, for example, in conclusion, in fact, of course, such as, to begin with, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
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: 2886.0 2235.4752809 129% => OK
No of words: 544.0 442.535393258 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30514705882 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.82947280553 4.55969084622 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.03794619873 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 303.0 215.323595506 141% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.556985294118 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 922.5 704.065955056 131% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 6.24550561798 208% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.77640449438 394% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.821500472 60.3974514979 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.47826087 118.986275619 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.652173913 23.4991977007 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.04347826087 5.21951772744 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 10.2758426966 136% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.293584076104 0.243740707755 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0832866767838 0.0831039109588 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.05884019042 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.167399219457 0.150359130593 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0284978885628 0.0667264976115 43% => 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: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.38706741573 111% => OK
difficult_words: 157.0 100.480337079 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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.