Some people want goverments to spend money looking for life on other planets. Others, however, think this is a waste of public money when there are so many problems on earth. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion
There is a divergence of perspectives on whether national authorities are supposed to budget public money for exploring new life on other planets or for counteracting miscellaneous problems on Earth. I unequivocally agree with the view that governments should prioritize addressing problems on Earth, as opposed to spending funds on the exploration of life on other planets.
Arguably, there are several rationales for the search for extraterrestrial life, chief among them being the emergency preparedness for doomsday. Naturally, there is an array of threats that may exterminate human beings on Earth, notably climate change and pandemics. These acute problems would likely be unmanageable; thus the search for alien life should be pursued promptly to protect humans against extermination. Moreover, were extraterrestrial life to be uncovered, it would facilitate the conquest of space which humans have been aiming for centuries. Hence, governments are required to invest public money in the pursuit of life on other planets.
But then, undoubtedly, it is billions of dollars that have been allocated to space research, yet tangible outcomes are elusive. For instance, the Mars Rover missions, while technologically impressive, did not conclusively prove the existence of extraterrestrial life. This begs the question about the efficacy of pouring billions into such endeavors when there are pressing issues on Earth that demand immediate attention. Contrary to the results of findings on alien life, numerous issues have been addressed effectively. Illustrative instances can be seen in COVID-19 and the prevention of World War III. Furthermore, if a civilization existed beyond Earth, reaching there would pose another significant challenge to deal with since leaving the solar system is widely considered to be currently unattainable for humans. Given the aforementioned, I align with the notion that this is a misallocation of public funds when countless issues on Earth have not been rectified yet.
In conclusion, allocating public funds to the search for extraterrestrial life in the cosmos is somewhat acceptable. Having said that, I hold a belief that it is not an appropriate time to do so when there is a host of problems on Earth that should be prioritized to face.
Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng
Errors and Improvements:
"There is a divergence of perspectives" -> "Divergent perspectives exist"
Explanation: The suggested improvement streamlines the sentence, removing unnecessary words and adopting a more concise and formal tone.
"I unequivocally agree" -> "I firmly agree"
Explanation: The replacement maintains the strength of the agreement while using a more formal and precise adverb.
"chief among them being" -> "primarily including"
Explanation: Substituting "chief among them being" with "primarily including" enhances formality and clarity.
"emergency preparedness for doomsday" -> "preparedness for catastrophic events"
Explanation: The alternative phrase is more formal and specific, avoiding the colloquial term "doomsday."
"Naturally, there is an array of threats" -> "Naturally, various threats exist"
Explanation: The change introduces a more formal synonym for "array" and maintains the structure of the sentence.
"would likely be unmanageable" -> "could become unmanageable"
Explanation: The replacement phrase introduces a conditional aspect, adding nuance to the statement and aligning with formal language.
"search for alien life should be pursued promptly" -> "pursuit of extraterrestrial life should be undertaken promptly"
Explanation: The alternative wording is more formal and precise, avoiding the colloquial term "search for alien life."
"were extraterrestrial life to be uncovered" -> "if extraterrestrial life were discovered"
Explanation: The revised phrase adheres to a more formal conditional structure.
"conquest of space which humans have been aiming for centuries" -> "exploration of space, a goal pursued by humans for centuries"
Explanation: The improved version provides a more nuanced and formal expression for the idea.
"it is billions of dollars that have been allocated" -> "billions of dollars have been allocated"
Explanation: Removing the redundant "it is" results in a more direct and concise sentence.
"tangible outcomes are elusive" -> "tangible outcomes remain elusive"
Explanation: The replacement maintains formality and aligns with a more precise expression.
"did not conclusively prove the existence of extraterrestrial life" -> "did not definitively establish the existence of extraterrestrial life"
Explanation: The suggested alternative uses a more formal and precise phrasing.
"This begs the question about the efficacy" -> "This raises questions about the efficacy"
Explanation: The alternative phrase adheres to a more formal expression of the idea.
"Contrary to the results of findings on alien life" -> "In contrast to the findings on alien life"
Explanation: The suggested improvement offers a more formal and structured transition.
"Illustrative instances can be seen in COVID-19" -> "Illustrative instances include the management of COVID-19"
Explanation: The revised wording adds precision and formality to the sentence.
"Given the aforementioned" -> "Considering the aforementioned"
Explanation: The replacement maintains formality while using a more standard transition phrase.
"this is a misallocation of public funds" -> "allocating public funds to this endeavor is a misallocation"
Explanation: The alternative phrasing restructures the sentence for clarity and formality.
"not an appropriate time to do so" -> "not an opportune time to do so"
Explanation: The replacement phrase adds formality and nuance to the statement.
Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 8
Band Score for Task Response: 8
Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively addresses both perspectives outlined in the prompt. It discusses the reasons for advocating the allocation of funds for exploring life on other planets, such as emergency preparedness and the potential benefits of conquering space. Simultaneously, it acknowledges the opposing viewpoint by highlighting the lack of tangible outcomes and the significant challenges associated with space exploration. The response provides a comprehensive overview of both sides.
- How to improve: While the essay successfully covers both views, it would benefit from a more explicit acknowledgment of the personal opinion in the introduction. Clearly stating, "In this essay, I will argue that…" would enhance the reader’s understanding of the writer’s stance from the beginning.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a consistent stance throughout, explicitly stating the writer’s agreement with the perspective that prioritizes addressing problems on Earth. The position is reinforced in each paragraph, ensuring clarity and coherence.
- How to improve: To further strengthen clarity, consider revisiting the introduction and conclusion to reiterate the chosen position. Emphasizing the stance in these sections can enhance the overall cohesion of the essay.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively presents, develops, and supports ideas. It provides detailed reasons for the importance of exploring extraterrestrial life, such as preparing for doomsday and advancing space conquest. Conversely, it supports the opposing view by citing the lack of conclusive evidence and the allocation of funds to more pressing issues on Earth.
- How to improve: To enhance the development of ideas, consider providing more specific examples or evidence for the successful resolution of issues on Earth. This can further strengthen the argument against allocating funds to extraterrestrial exploration.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay largely stays on topic, addressing the exploration of life on other planets versus solving Earthly problems. However, there is a slight deviation in the conclusion, where the essay mentions the acceptability of allocating funds to space exploration. While this does not significantly detract from the overall coherence, it is worth noting.
- How to improve: Ensure that the conclusion aligns more closely with the writer’s stated position, emphasizing the prioritization of Earthly issues over extraterrestrial exploration without introducing a potentially conflicting perspective.
In conclusion, the essay demonstrates a strong grasp of the prompt, effectively presenting and supporting ideas while maintaining a clear position throughout. Minor improvements in explicitly stating the personal opinion in the introduction and refining the conclusion can contribute to an even more cohesive and focused response.
Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 7
Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally logical organization of information. The introduction clearly presents the two opposing views, followed by body paragraphs that explore each perspective in detail. The conclusion succinctly summarizes the main points and restates the writer’s opinion. However, there is room for improvement in the logical flow within paragraphs, as some ideas could be better connected for a smoother transition.
- How to improve: To enhance logical organization, ensure a seamless transition between sentences and ideas within each paragraph. Consider using transitional phrases or words to guide the reader through the essay, creating a more cohesive and connected narrative.
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs paragraphs effectively, with a clear structure for the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion. Each paragraph addresses a specific aspect of the prompt, contributing to the overall coherence. However, there are instances where ideas within paragraphs could be more tightly connected for improved cohesion.
- How to improve: Focus on maintaining a clear and consistent topic sentence at the beginning of each paragraph. Additionally, strengthen the connections between sentences within paragraphs by using cohesive devices. This will help create a smoother and more seamless flow of ideas.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay utilizes a range of cohesive devices, such as transition words (e.g., "Arguably," "Moreover," "Furthermore") and pronouns ("this," "these"). These devices contribute to the overall coherence by signaling shifts between ideas. However, there is room for diversifying the use of cohesive devices to add nuance and sophistication to the essay.
- How to improve: Introduce a broader variety of cohesive devices, including synonyms for commonly used transition words and a mix of conjunctions. This will not only enhance coherence but also add depth to the essay’s language. Additionally, ensure that the use of cohesive devices is consistent throughout the essay for a more polished and professional presentation.
Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong foundation in coherence and cohesion, earning a band score of 7. To improve further, focus on refining the logical flow within and between paragraphs, strengthening connections through effective use of cohesive devices, and diversifying the range of these devices for a more nuanced expression of ideas.
Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6
Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6
Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a moderate range of vocabulary. There is an attempt to use diverse words and phrases, especially in discussing the reasons for exploring extraterrestrial life. However, some repetition occurs, and certain terms are used in a somewhat predictable manner. For example, the repeated use of "extraterrestrial life" could be replaced with synonyms or varied expressions to enhance lexical variety.
- How to improve: To enhance the score in this aspect, try incorporating a more varied selection of synonyms and expressions. For instance, instead of consistently using "extraterrestrial life," consider alternatives like "alien existence," "otherworldly beings," or "cosmic organisms" when appropriate.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The precision in vocabulary usage is generally commendable, with specific terms like "emergency preparedness," "doomsday," and "conquest of space." However, there are instances where a more precise choice of words could strengthen the expression. For instance, the phrase "array of threats" is somewhat general, and specifying the threats (e.g., environmental hazards or global crises) would add precision.
- How to improve: Aim for greater precision by specifying and using more precise terms where possible. Instead of a generic "array of threats," consider specifying the particular threats, providing a clearer and more nuanced picture of the issues being discussed.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: Spelling accuracy is generally sound throughout the essay. However, there are a few instances where typographical errors or minor misspellings occur, such as "goverments" (governments), "unmanageable;" (unmanageable), and "extraterrestrial" (extraterrestrial).
- How to improve: To improve spelling accuracy, it is recommended to proofread the essay carefully, paying attention to details. Additionally, considering the use of spell-check tools can be helpful in identifying and correcting minor spelling errors.
Overall, while the essay demonstrates a competent use of vocabulary and spelling, there is room for improvement in terms of lexical variety and precision. Focusing on incorporating a more diverse range of synonyms and refining precision in vocabulary choice can elevate the lexical resource score. Additionally, meticulous proofreading to eliminate minor spelling errors will contribute to a more polished and accurate presentation.
Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7
Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7
Use a Wide Range of Structures:
Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a commendable variety of sentence structures. The writer effectively employs complex sentence structures, utilizing phrases and clauses to convey nuanced ideas. For example, in the opening sentence, the use of "There is a divergence of perspectives on whether national authorities are supposed to budget public money…" showcases a sophisticated structure. Throughout the essay, there is evidence of compound and complex sentences, contributing to a rich linguistic repertoire.
How to improve: To further enhance the grammatical range, consider incorporating more compound-complex sentences. Introduce variety in sentence length and structure to create a more engaging rhythm. For instance, intersperse shorter sentences for emphasis and longer ones for elaboration. This can add a layer of sophistication to the writing.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
Detailed explanation: Overall, the essay demonstrates a strong command of grammar and punctuation. There are minimal grammatical errors, and the punctuation is generally accurate. For instance, the correct use of semicolons and commas to separate ideas within sentences is evident. The writer effectively employs proper verb tenses and subject-verb agreement throughout the essay.
How to improve: While the grammatical accuracy is commendable, pay attention to the consistency of verb tenses. In a few instances, there is a shift in tense, such as in "were extraterrestrial life to be uncovered, it would facilitate the conquest of space…" where a shift from the past to the present subjunctive occurs. Ensure a seamless transition in tense throughout the essay. Additionally, consider utilizing a more diverse range of punctuation marks, such as colons or dashes, to add variety and sophistication to sentence structures.
Overall, the essay showcases a strong command of grammar and a commendable range of structures. To elevate the writing further, focus on refining tense consistency and incorporating additional punctuation marks for stylistic variation.
Bài sửa mẫu
There is a divergence of perspectives on whether national authorities should allocate public funds for exploring new life on other planets or addressing various problems on Earth. I firmly agree with the view that governments should prioritize addressing issues on Earth rather than spending funds on the exploration of life on other planets.
Arguably, one primary reason for searching for extraterrestrial life is to be prepared for catastrophic events on Earth. Naturally, various threats, such as climate change and pandemics, could become unmanageable and pose a significant risk to human existence. The prompt pursuit of extraterrestrial life is seen as a safeguard to protect humanity against potential extinction. Additionally, the exploration of space, a goal pursued by humans for centuries, could be furthered by the discovery of alien life. Therefore, governments may find it necessary to invest public money in the pursuit of life on other planets.
However, it is crucial to note that despite the billions of dollars allocated to space research, tangible outcomes remain elusive. For example, the Mars Rover missions, while technologically impressive, did not definitively establish the existence of extraterrestrial life. This raises questions about the efficacy of pouring billions into such endeavors when there are pressing issues on Earth that demand immediate attention. In contrast to the findings on alien life, numerous issues, such as the management of COVID-19 and the prevention of World War III, have been effectively addressed.
Considering the aforementioned, allocating public funds to this endeavor is a misallocation, particularly when not an opportune time to do so. Furthermore, the prospect of reaching a civilization beyond Earth would pose another significant challenge, as leaving the solar system is widely considered to be currently unattainable for humans. In conclusion, while the pursuit of extraterrestrial life is somewhat acceptable, I believe that it is not an appropriate time to do so when there are numerous unresolved problems on Earth that should take precedence.