In today’s modern living, arguments about whether the primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that they have more leisure time have taken place or not. While some people agree with the former, others believe otherwise. In my opinion, although both options might present meritorious points, without a doubt, I would settle upon the latter ones. Certainly, I stand on this perceptions because of these explanations.
One of the causes is that I believe that the profound goal of developing technologies should be solving problems which we cannot solve with current technologies, not increasing leisure time. Nowadays, there are many serious problems to solve in various fields, which people anticipate new technology to ameliorate and it is obvious that the primary goal of technology should play an excellent role to meet this anticipation. Especially, about medical field, many patients who are suffering from incurable disease and their family rely on possibility of technological advancement to solve the disease. Furthermore, autonomous car which is new technology many car industries focus on is also a good example of showing the most important goal of technology. This technology is not for saving time for leisure, but for amending difficulties current people have about driving.
An additional contention that caused me to favor this side is that there will be many adverse effects if the primary goal of technological advancement is to increase people's efficiency for more leisure time. If all the concern of technology is concentrated on efficiency for more leisure time, there will be less consideration for public profit and protecting environment. For instance, even though nuclear power plant could generate huge amount of energy more efficiently than other methods, considering public safety, it is difficult to say that this technology should be used all over the world. Therefore, we have consider more than efficiency and leisure time such as safety and purpose of development when we advance technology.
Thus, from what has been argued, one can only generalize that the profound goal of developing technology should not be for better efficiency to increase people's leisure time.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 418, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
... the latter ones. Certainly, I stand on this perceptions because of these explanatio...
^^^^
Line 5, column 619, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'considered'.
Suggestion: considered
... all over the world. Therefore, we have consider more than efficiency and leisure time s...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, if, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, such as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 11.3162921348 115% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 58.6224719101 68% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1915.0 2235.4752809 86% => OK
No of words: 350.0 442.535393258 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47142857143 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32530772707 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.96419586783 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.557142857143 0.4932671777 113% => OK
syllable_count: 614.7 704.065955056 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 25.0 23.0359550562 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.6271384028 60.3974514979 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.785714286 118.986275619 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0 23.4991977007 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.57142857143 5.21951772744 126% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => 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: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.406115244904 0.243740707755 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144002808868 0.0831039109588 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100201819098 0.0758088955206 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255348388153 0.150359130593 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0227168876099 0.0667264976115 34% => 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: 16.8 14.1392134831 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 29.18 48.8420337079 60% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 12.1743820225 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.74 12.1639044944 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.03 8.38706741573 108% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 100.480337079 92% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.2143820225 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.