Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Although science and technology will continue to improve, the most significant improvements for the quality of people’s lives have already taken place.
The quality of people’s lives is almost among the most important desires of the human being. Science and technology have had a profound impact on individuals’ lives through making advances. Although many pitfalls have been eliminated from our lives during the last centuries, owing to major advancements and many diseases have been eradicated, thanks to science achievements, we never can consider them sufficient for our quality of lives. I hold this idea for two essential reasons which I will elaborate on in the following essay.
First of all, like many other concepts, significance of improvements and their sufficiency do not feature in mere notions and absolute meanings and they have relative values. This issue finds its meaning in comparison to others. Human needs and requirements are constantly changing and promoting, thus there is no end in sight for this trend of human being. For instance, diseases and ailments, some of which have been eradicated are still very much of an issue due to our desires to expand human’s life expectancy. Other needs, such as routine’s welfares have always been changed too. Not only are we dissatisfied with science and technology’s accomplishments in this scope, but we are also seeking more possibilities for minor drawbacks to provide everyone, even people with exceptional problems, with more facilities. For example, disabled people had once been neglected in their presence in society. Although some progresses are made for this reason, they are undermined in many aspects and still need to be considered for more technologies. A small number of these handicapped people need special vehicles which we do have now. Since these people or other aforementioned patients are part of the society, there are still many tasks which should be done to alleviate their suffering.
Secondly, new need itself causes more necessities. As a special procedure is invented or new technological devices are devised, the need of subsidiary requirements to make the most out of them comes to our minds. Neither consumers nor manufactures can imagine a fast car without safety equipment, therefore a remarkable advancement in capability of cars in merely velocity is not a complete achievement. Another example is the challenge of striking a right balance between communication devices and their convenience or safety again. In this case, we are all aware of the intense competition between phone companies to present a cutting-edge mobile to us, while we also need some other gears such as smart watches, earphones and so on to hook up to our cellphones too.
To sum up, this claim which we have already accessed the most necessary technological advancements for the quality of our lives does not look valid since necessity is an ever-changing concept in human’s life and every new achievement creates a new requirement for the future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1046, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: A few; Some
...to be considered for more technologies. A small number of these handicapped people need special v...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 1288, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d be done to alleviate their suffering. Secondly, new need itself causes more ne...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, look, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, such as, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 15.1003584229 166% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 9.8082437276 92% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 13.8261648746 130% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 11.0286738351 45% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 35.0 43.0788530466 81% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 52.1666666667 117% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.0752688172 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2425.0 1977.66487455 123% => OK
No of words: 461.0 407.700716846 113% => OK
Chars per words: 5.26030368764 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.63367139033 4.48103885553 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.02082058778 2.67179642975 113% => OK
Unique words: 257.0 212.727598566 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55748373102 0.524837075471 106% => OK
syllable_count: 783.0 618.680645161 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.51630824373 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 9.59856630824 63% => OK
Article: 3.0 3.08781362007 97% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.51792114695 142% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.86738351254 54% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.7068489581 48.9658058833 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.25 100.406767564 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.05 20.6045352989 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.45110844103 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 11.8709677419 93% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.88709677419 102% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233035509219 0.236089414692 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0652811868861 0.076458572812 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0534502981225 0.0737576698707 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143702629794 0.150856017488 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0790553144677 0.0645574589148 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 11.7677419355 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 58.1214874552 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 10.1575268817 132% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 10.9000537634 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.01818996416 116% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 86.8835125448 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 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: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.