Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another.
Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
In the last 30 years the increasingly growing speed of new technology products has made posible for every single human to have access to a minimum of one device that has access to the network, this implies the ability to connet to any other device on earth. The promt poses to perspectives on the subject, wether this increase in technology has improved human social interactions or has created a barrier for this interactions to take place. In my opinon, I strongly agree with the perspective that technology has created new ways to communicate and also has improved the already existing ones for two reasons.
In first place, creating or maintaining human interactions is an activity that is challenged not only by the person social abilities but also by multiple exterior factors. For example, during current covid 19 pandemia where face to face interactions are limited by national regulations, technology has allowed to keep already existing social relationships "alive" but also create new relations with almost the same feeling as if it was done in person due to feateres introduced by technology such as video calls where one may not only hear but also see the other creating a more real feel of human interaction. The above example illustrates how some caracteristics of new technology has overcome inherent challenges of social interactions, wich in most cases are circumstances that are hard to overcome or that may depend on some external factors not related to ones abilities to make social interactions.
Secondly, technology has open the world to new long distance relations wich where not possible before. A long time ago rich people were the only ones who had the posibility to have conections with some other from countries around the world, bringing not only wealth, knowledge but also the satisfaction of creating this kind of social interactions. For instance, nowadays people may find applications dedicated to meet new people from all around the world by just an action as simple as a click, removing obstacles such as distance, income and many others. In other words, if it wasnt by this increase in the development of new technologies this would not be possible.
Of course some may argue that countries where technology has advanced the most match the unhappiest countries. One may see that a top technology country as Japan has the biggest suicide rate on the world and there may be a direct correlation. According to historians Japan has always been a country with a significant suicide rate and it is because of their cultural background where social interactions were greatly regulated by its emperors. So in fact, technology has only open a window for this social interactions to take place and has allowed million of japaneses to create new relationships that are not tied to their cultural impositions. In conclussion technology must not be seen as a reducer of social interaction but all the opposite.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 410, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...teractions or has created a barrier for this interactions to take place. In my opino...
^^^^
Line 2, column 209, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'pandemia' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'pandemias'.
Suggestion: pandemias
...s. For example, during current covid 19 pandemia where face to face interactions are lim...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 872, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...on some external factors not related to ones abilities to make social interactions. ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 172, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ere the only ones who had the posibility to have conections with some other from ...
^^
Line 3, column 580, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
... and many others. In other words, if it wasnt by this increase in the development of ...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 549, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
...eractions to take place and has allowed million of japaneses to create new relationship...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, second, secondly, so, for example, for instance, in fact, kind of, of course, such as, in most cases, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.5258426966 72% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 33.0505617978 70% => OK
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2466.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 485.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08453608247 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.69283662038 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.97021455686 2.79657885939 106% => OK
Unique words: 234.0 215.323595506 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.482474226804 0.4932671777 98% => OK
syllable_count: 801.0 704.065955056 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 6.24550561798 32% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.2370786517 74% => 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: 32.0 23.0359550562 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 88.7554442775 60.3974514979 147% => OK
Chars per sentence: 164.4 118.986275619 138% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.3333333333 23.4991977007 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.53333333333 5.21951772744 183% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.266406447632 0.243740707755 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0996442738187 0.0831039109588 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0359011275898 0.0758088955206 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.175412773607 0.150359130593 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0335112122285 0.0667264976115 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.7 14.1392134831 132% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.54 48.8420337079 63% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.92365168539 164% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.0 12.1743820225 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.78 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.74 8.38706741573 104% => OK
difficult_words: 108.0 100.480337079 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 20.0 11.8971910112 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 11.2143820225 132% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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.