Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people.
Author’s claim “Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people”, in my opinion is too elusive claim as any research area cannot be categorized into beneficial categories unless results are not obtained. Following are the reasons for my discordance towards author’s claim.
Firstly, How can any research areas be categorized into most beneficial category unless and until research results are not available. Consider for example, The great scientist, Sir Isaac Netwon when discovered fall of apple downwards, would one able to discern it out that such notion would be beneficial?, in my opinion, no, as after unleashing forces responsible for such free fall and making people aware about the gravitational force. People cherished Sir Isaac Netwon for his discovery.
And it is common sense that unless we are not aware about the results how one can categorize unknown results.
Secondly, Even if people consider limiting scientists and other researchers work domain as prudent choice. The big question arises about who would make such decisions regarding their work domain? Would it be wise to leave such important decisions in the hands of few? and even if such decisions are foist on few hands, would they able to determine what is beneficial for people and what is not? Those authorities might get swayed by their wants as people’s wants. If such would be the case than the author claims about making scientists and researchers to research in areas which is likely to benefit large number of people would be unwarranted.
Thirdly, In research fields, passion and perseverance is required to achieve success and by checking the areas of research might deter many researchers and scientists to work zealously or to put their 100%. Such action might also hamper discoveries and innovations. Consider for example, If Sir Einstein was forced to not work after theory of relativity as it doesn’t benefits the people, people would not get enlighten about such concepts and in my opinion, there is no research area which is not worth excavating. Each and every field have something to offer to human life it might be some unknown facts or it can be as useful as air-flight.
On wrapping up, Scientists and researchers should allow to work in field of their interest and passion and determination is important to achieve success and by confining the domain of study might not accord with their passion. Instead of limiting their domain of work, government should provide incentives to researchers and scientists like funding their research work, other accommodations, etc. to actually expedite the research work.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 160, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...fit the greatest number of people', in my opinion is too elusive claim as an...
^^
Line 3, column 322, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ion would be beneficial?, in my opinion, no, as after unleashing forces responsi...
^^
Line 3, column 327, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ould be beneficial?, in my opinion, no, as after unleashing forces responsible f...
^^
Line 6, column 269, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...mportant decisions in the hands of few? and even if such decisions are foist on few...
^^^
Line 6, column 300, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'foisted'.
Suggestion: foisted
... of few? and even if such decisions are foist on few hands, would they able to determ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, as for, for example, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.5258426966 123% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2296.0 2235.4752809 103% => OK
No of words: 435.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27816091954 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56690854021 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8693983611 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 209.0 215.323595506 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.480459770115 0.4932671777 97% => OK
syllable_count: 691.2 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 6.24550561798 16% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 80.5796520991 60.3974514979 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.842105263 118.986275619 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8947368421 23.4991977007 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.26315789474 5.21951772744 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396898645426 0.243740707755 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.123477696922 0.0831039109588 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.140997311675 0.0758088955206 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.206655834917 0.150359130593 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131327603997 0.0667264976115 197% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.1392134831 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.64 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.36 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.8971910112 130% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.