Today, advanced science and technology have made great changes to people’s life, but artists such as musicians, painters and writers are still highly valued. What can arts tell us about life that science and technology cannot?
It is true that people’s life have been significantly changed by the rapid developed science and technology such as internet and AI. Some people believe that contemporary artists, especially musicians, painters, and writers, should not be undervalued nowadays. This essay explores the benefits bought by arts which cannot be gained from science and technology.
Firstly, some people believe that some forms of arts such music can afford us feelings and emotions, whereas science and technology cannot due to its focus is on practicality. For example, an audience can indirect experience and have a feeling of melancholy from Beetoven’s pieces which were composed while he was suffering unfortunate events. In contrast, science and technology cannot offer the same kinds of feelings.
Moreover, some people would argue that a some forms of arts can inspire people and make them think and help them connect themselves to the reality, which advanced technique cannot provide. For instance, people may take a visit to a photo exhibition of the daily life of children who live in a third world and they would think about how fortunate they are compared to the underprivileged counterparts in other poor countries. And they will value what is given to them and be inspired to treasure everything around them. And again, pure science and technology cannot make people think this way due to their concept is based on structures, formulas and trial and errors.
In conclusion, science and technology are essential to human beings in society and play an important role in 21st century. However, contemporary artists such musicians, painters and writers also should be widely respected as the arts they create can offer people feelings and inspiration that the science and technology cannot ever provide.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 578, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cience and technology cannot make people think this way due to their concept is b...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, however, if, may, moreover, so, third, whereas, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, in contrast, such as, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 7.85571142285 204% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 22.0 10.4138276553 211% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 41.998997996 67% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1527.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 286.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.33916083916 5.12529762239 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84920413513 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.56993006993 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 469.8 506.74238477 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 1.0 2.52805611222 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.809619238477 371% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.4940785783 49.4020404114 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.25 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8333333333 20.7667163134 115% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.5833333333 7.06120827912 178% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.379284110255 0.244688304435 155% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13799582874 0.084324248473 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0916132633271 0.0667982634062 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.238243160119 0.151304729494 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0485318681142 0.056905535591 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.6 13.0946893788 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 50.2224549098 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.99 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.