Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate, practical application.
Reason: it is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
The argument claims that scientific investigations should not be exclusively limited to fields that are associated with immediate and practical approaches, because the lack of certainty about the projected result of researches is inevitable. I strongly disagree with neither the claim nor the reason that both of them are problematic in some aspects.
First of all, generalization a rule in all fields of researches is unacceptable. researching in some areas should absolutely be associated with practical experiences and immediate result. Contribution in medical researches that is closely related to the health of individuals is a good case in point. Scholars in this field of study have to only rely on practical experiences to find the treatment of a specific disease. For example, lots of accurate practical examinations should be done to discover the safe medicine of an epidemic new health condition. In addition, contributed scholars in this area have to also determine the immediate result of their research as soon as possible because the faster they find the solution the better they can prevent the spread of the disease. If they establish their new result of study without practical and immediate observations, they definitely may treat the health of generations. Consequently, researchers have to limit themselves to pragmatic immediate applications.
It is also worthy to mention that in such areas referred above, researchers' projection about the outcome of their practical experiments is both feasible and crucial. Prediction in filed such as medical science, biological studies, psychology, etc, is one of the most necessary parts of the research in order to decline the side effects of the research process. For instance, if biological scholars seeking the main reason of unexpected extinction of a rare beneficial insect in agricultural farms would not predict the consequence of their experiments on nature and creatures, not only they might fail to find the solution but also they may hurt the alive creatures in the studied area too. Therefore, making a reliable prediction in some fields of study is both vital and possible.
In conclusion, we cannot lose sight of the fact that there are numerous fields of research with plenty of possible approaches. Pragmatic science needs practical and sometimes immediate approaches. And as a result, making a certain prediction leads to the best consequent either for individuals or society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 82, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Researching
...l fields of researches is unacceptable. researching in some areas should absolutely be asso...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, if, may, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in addition, in conclusion, such as, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2081.0 2235.4752809 93% => OK
No of words: 384.0 442.535393258 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.41927083333 5.05705443957 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0970352489 2.79657885939 111% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510416666667 0.4932671777 103% => OK
syllable_count: 655.2 704.065955056 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.2370786517 84% => 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: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.4297636215 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.411764706 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5882352941 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.52941176471 5.21951772744 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => 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: 0.301818111319 0.243740707755 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0945548076898 0.0831039109588 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0473506465925 0.0758088955206 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173022859205 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0548561327131 0.0667264976115 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 14.1392134831 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.1639044944 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 11.8971910112 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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: 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.