Some people believe that it is good to share as much information as possible in scientific research, business and the academic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Restricting information for some vague security reasons is not democratic or rational according to some while others express that information should be available only when the necessity arrives. Both views have some justification, and I firmly believe that scientific studies, universities, research institutions and businesses can benefit the whole nation if all information is made accessible to them.
To begin with, sensitive information, that could be used to breach security, manipulate the stock market, create a market monopoly or trade with terrorists, should be scrutinized before making them publicly accessible. In this digital era, information spread like wildfire and for the sake of maintaining global peace, they should be delimited, according to many. For instance, if nuclear technology is shared with all nations for scientific studies, the world will soon stand on the verge of obliteration, despite an inconceivable possibility this technology possesses to facilitate all nations.
On the contrary, scientific research largely depends on available data and previous discoveries. If valuable information and past findings are not shared openly with academics and researchers, global progress will become standstill. For instance, the Internet is probably the most significant invention the modern world has seen and if this technology had not been shared by the US military, we would still be living in the pre-internet era. Moreover, restricted information has no value if they are not used to solve any real-world problem and thus curbing them is like imprisoning human potential. Finally, world history suggests that humankind has advanced due to discoveries and inventions shared with the world as each finding went through profound modification and advancement. I thus personally favour the ideology that supports 'free information for all'.
In conclusion, information has limited value when it is restrained and not shared. For the true global progress, restriction on valuable information should be debarred and let people know the truth instead of keeping them in darkness.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...y possesses to facilitate all nations. On the contrary, scientific research lar...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, if, moreover, so, still, thus, while, for instance, in conclusion, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 7.85571142285 115% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 41.998997996 74% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 8.3376753507 216% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1795.0 1615.20841683 111% => OK
No of words: 315.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.69841269841 5.12529762239 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.09769702898 2.80592935109 110% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612698412698 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 554.4 506.74238477 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.2907522643 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.076923077 106.682146367 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2307692308 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.15384615385 7.06120827912 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.281185697466 0.244688304435 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0948540188614 0.084324248473 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0581575035264 0.0667982634062 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172276528015 0.151304729494 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0784735903029 0.056905535591 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.0946893788 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.08 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.99 8.58950901804 116% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 9.78957915832 179% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 10.7795591182 167% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.