Technology, one offspring of science, is a world of imagination being made true

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: Technology has made children less creative?

Technology, as an offspring of scientific knowledge, is no doubt a conclusive proof of humans' imagination. And yet it is for some to suspect that technology has lessened children's creativity. I, personally, oppose the unproven notion, and to specifically cease such thoughts, I shall deal with local evidence that has been believed to affirm the conception.

It is debated that the reality that children now take advantage of such technological inventions as calculators to cover the work of mathematics is proven grounds to support the preceding idea. However, as we look back, the imagination we have been taking into account is not diminished within the act of calculators. All that such innovations do is speeding up the work, and thus providing children with more time. And what people say is that time is golden, and we should not underestimate the power. All things considered, the accounted reason is simply unjust.

Another good reason, if not an extremely firm one, is the virtual world that some children might be enticed to endure. The world of games, of unreality, of imitation, which very much resembles real life, may have brought such defective impacts on children. They spend more and more time looking for goods, trading, bargaining, and thereafter do not possess just qualities and makings to partake in reality. This notwithstanding, what the world resembles is real, what the world teaches children is satisfying, and such may not, and in some cases cannot, be earned from actuality. Sufficing this to say, the virtual world, to some extends, is not worthless.

The last stiff reason, yet not the ending one I notice, is the reduction of brainstorming. Some children, as a consequence of technology, cannot brainstorm as fast as ones who do not rely much on this sire of science. I must not deny this, but I can confess that many others, learning in the world of computer, Internet..., are able to. What they absorb from this form of technology is not to be ignored, but to be esteemed, for it is knowledge, the unquestionable tool of humans. The last reason, therefore, should not be overvalued.

Of all the makings, technology might have been the best but for such doubtful sentiments. Yet without the words, technology would cease, because once no doubts are laid, no answers are found. I have my own answer, which is, I believe, steady enough for some to reconsider thoroughly. After all, technology, one offspring of science, is a world of imagination being made true.

Is it acceptable my offending the opinion by such queer approaches? And what do you think about my very paperwork?

Your writing is impressive with the rich vocabularies. The first notion about calculators is really unity, however in the second and third notions it showed that the points are weak to prove your opinion and to persuade audiences. I also have some other comments in your writing belows:

To argumentatively affirm my point of view and accuracy of grammar, I should have offense against your very correction.


To begin with, "such technological inventions as" is a correct phrase, referring to the very structure "such as".
And most of all, "grounds" have the same meaning as "bases". And the reason that I replaced the word "bases" in this sentence with "grounds" is that it meliorates the harmony of the speech.


It is at least to say, that "take something into account" has the same meaning as "bear something in mind", which is, I believe, adequately communicative in this situation.

And "within the act of something" is under the influence of something, which, too, is expressive enough.


Yes, thank you for having struck-through the very inharmonious phrase. Yet I believe it would be better if you correspondingly reassure my very expression. For if missing, the last one should wear the readers out, believing that there are many more reasons.

After all, very grateful I am, for having been corrected.

You make a great point at the beginning -- that technology is evidence of imagination.

It is debated argued that the reality that children's use of such technological inventions as calculators to cover the work of mathematics is proven grounds to support the preceding idea. ----- it was no wrong, but I simplified and made it clearer.

...the virtual world, to some extends, is not worthless.--- very good paragraph.

The ending is very eloquent, too! How did you learn to write so well? It is a very fancy style of writing, and it is impressive. However, I think using lots of commas is like so much stop-and-go traffic, and the use of more words than necessary is like a boxer throwing many punches but langing only a few.

So, I think you should experiment with saying what you have to say in fewer words. Some people have weak reading comprehension and would have trouble understanding your complex sentences!

please check out essayforum.com/ef-contributor-page/

:-)

Thank you for having seized some particularly unfathomable speech.

About learning to simplify things, yes, I have to do so. But still, it feels little bit queer. :D

Anyways, as the matter is accounted, how? :D

You're welcome. Yep, when you are good at language, it is tempting to really use it in complex ways, just like composing beautiful music. But depending on you purpose, complex music might or might not be appropriate. Some people are not familiar enough ith music to really appreciate complexity. Anyway, it is great to be able to do it.

to some extent* :?

Interesting way of approaching the prompt. placing down arguments for the assertive and then disproving them. Still, I think you can add much more than what you have written. Because you can write well, write more. Make your thoughts more complete in order to argue for you claim better.

So, in all this great writing, I did find it a bit hard to follow, because while you do use more than sufficient commas, there are some sentence that are left without them. Interesting style of writing I must agree though. Somewhat has that archaic feel to it, which, though complex, is really unique.