Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Scientists should be responsible for the negative impacts of their discoveries
By and large, it’s established beyond doubt that technology and new inventions play a prominent role in all societies. A controversial question which is often raised regarding this idea is whether scientists are responsible for undesired effects of their discoveries. I firmly believe that the answer is absolutely no. In the following paragraphs, I will delve into the most outstanding reasons.
First off, it is generally agreed that most of new inventions and technologies are capable of being used in order to serve human kind or on the other hand simultaneously being a potential threat to the world and its inhabitants. So it is not rational to accuse scientists of the dark side of technology. The modern world offers numerous examples of this point. Internet is a concrete sample; although it comes up with lots of advantages, it may be disreputable due to lots of crimes which are committed through it. While we cannot deny the massive effects of internet in our everyday life and modern world, we may have seen people who have lost their fortune or have been deceived via the internet.
Another equally significant point is that, in cases which misusing of technology leads to undesired effects, the user is the direct responsible for it. To illustrate the point, consider drugs which are made for specific diseases. Some people may use them in improper cases such as suicide. Here there is no logical reason to blame scientists for discovering drugs that save lives of millions of people every year.
Although the aforementioned reasons are the first ones which cross the mind at first glance, they are by no means the only reasons available. Actually, there is another subtle point which must be borne in mind. Scientists cannot guarantee that no one will abuse their inventions, in fact it is really out of their control. In these cases, authorities must legislate to prevent and reduce these problems. A prime example is the science of telemetry which is a high technology using satellites to observe climate changes such as global warming or the process of polar ice melting; on the other side of the coin, this science can be used with military purposes which could be a threat to mankind. Some organizations have the power of legislation to prevent turning technology into a nightmare.
Contemplating all the aforementioned reasons, one soon realizes that there are different aspects when talking about undesired and negative effects of new discoveries and innovations which ends up with this conclusion that scientists are not responsible for negative effects of their discoveries.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, if, may, really, regarding, so, while, in fact, such as, talking about, by and large, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 15.1003584229 185% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 9.8082437276 112% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 13.8261648746 80% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.0286738351 172% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 43.0788530466 79% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 52.1666666667 107% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.0752688172 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2184.0 1977.66487455 110% => OK
No of words: 427.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11475409836 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88719937519 2.67179642975 108% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 212.727598566 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.545667447307 0.524837075471 104% => OK
syllable_count: 690.3 618.680645161 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.94265232975 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.6003584229 97% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.1344086022 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 70.7293962932 48.9658058833 144% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.2 100.406767564 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.35 20.6045352989 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 5.45110844103 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 11.8709677419 67% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 3.85842293907 233% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.19563266356 0.236089414692 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0501079039594 0.076458572812 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0535872707268 0.0737576698707 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115472210397 0.150856017488 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0474646143047 0.0645574589148 74% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 11.7677419355 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 58.1214874552 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.1575268817 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 10.9000537634 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 86.8835125448 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 10.002688172 120% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.0537634409 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.