Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people.
Scientific research is a process of identifying an interesting phenomenon, investigating the causes, and finally appreciating the spectacular work of nature. As far as I'm concerned, the intrinsic value of research is attributed to the enlightenment it brings to society and applications derived from research results if there are any, are just a byproduct. Hence, I don't think scientists and researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people. However, if the funding for research is provided by the government or the taxpayers, scientists should dedicate some of their effort to areas that might be beneficial to the public.
Conducting research is an onerous and exacting process yet the results of the research can often be unexpected. Hence, it is difficult for scientists to decide their research areas based on the likelihood that the result is beneficial to most people. Furthermore, if scientists adopt such a utilitarian approach to research, they might eventually compromise academic integrity and solicit funding by making spurious conclusions about their research.
Furthermore, if scientists only focus on the benefits research can bring to most people, the advancement of science itself might be shackled. For example, most research about planets, stars, and the universe is often inaccessible to the general public. Since most people are unable to actually discover the universe because they are not professionally trained, this research might not be beneficial for them. However, these studies broaden our horizons and enlighten us about the numerous possibilities of the outer realm of the universe, which is what makes science intrinsically valuable. If these research are not conducted, the development of pure science might be greatly fettered.
Nevertheless, given the inherent uncertainties of science, if research is funded by the government through taxpayers' money, scientists should focus on areas that can benefit most people. Many research programs are often established by the government with a view to creating societal value. For example, medical research programs that fund the research of vaccines, medicine, and therapies for maladies are created since the research results could cure diseases and is beneficial for the general public. Research about eco-friendly energy such as solar power is also beneficial to the sustainability of our natural environment. If researchers are working under these programs, they should focus on research areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people to be responsible to society.
In conclusion, I don't think scientists and researchers should solely focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people. This is not only due to the unpredictability of research but also because adopting this utilitarian mindset might hamper the advancement of pure science itself. Nevertheless, if research is funded by the general public, some focus should certainly be put on areas that are beneficial to society.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 169, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: I'm
...e spectacular work of nature. As far as Im concerned, the intrinsic value of resea...
^^
Line 1, column 367, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...are any, are just a byproduct. Hence, I dont think scientists and researchers should...
^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Two successive sentences begin with the same adverb. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...s conclusions about their research. Furthermore, if scientists only focus on the benefi...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 238, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...e universe is often inaccessible to the general public. Since most people are unable to actual...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 108, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'taxpayers'' or 'taxpayer's'?
Suggestion: taxpayers'; taxpayer's
...rch is funded by the government through taxpayers money, scientists should focus on areas...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 488, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...cure diseases and is beneficial for the general public. Research about eco-friendly energy suc...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 18, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...onsible to society. In conclusion, I dont think scientists and researchers should...
^^^^
Line 9, column 362, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...ertheless, if research is funded by the general public, some focus should certainly be put on ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, so, for example, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 32.0 19.5258426966 164% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 59.0 58.6224719101 101% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 12.9106741573 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2614.0 2235.4752809 117% => OK
No of words: 472.0 442.535393258 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.53813559322 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6610686524 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05666523917 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 203.0 215.323595506 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.430084745763 0.4932671777 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 806.4 704.065955056 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 3.10617977528 290% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.1187258209 60.3974514979 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 130.7 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.6 23.4991977007 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 7.80617977528 102% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 5.13820224719 19% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.54281203842 0.243740707755 223% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.211939509168 0.0831039109588 255% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.189158979313 0.0758088955206 250% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.381718062778 0.150359130593 254% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126904316579 0.0667264976115 190% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.1639044944 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 100.480337079 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.