Controversial conversations can be the most interesting and insightful debates. This prompt suggests that it is not useful to discuss a controversial topic with someone who has a contrasting view because very seldom do people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. I mostly disagree with the claim and will elaborate on three necessary points to defend my stance.
Firstly, controversial conversations don't have to be about trying to change someone's mind. These types of discussions can be very informative if both sides present facts about a controversial topic. For example, two people in a book club could have a discussion about the meaning of a mystery book they've read. One could argue that the book was about exploring the subconcious mind while the other could argue that the book had no meaning at all and was just a thriller story. Although their opinions contrast one another, if both sides present examples of why they believe their view to be true, it can be an interesting conversation. They don't have to try to convince one another that they must change their opinion on the meaning of the story to gain a different perspective on the topic.
Further, aside from having discussions about the meaning of a mystery book, two people with opposing views could talk about why their favorite baseball team is their favorite team. For example, one person's favorite baseball team is the rival of the other person's favorite baseball team. They could discuss why they think their team has a better chance of winning the championship this year over the rival team. They could present player's statistic records as evidence of why their team will dominate the other team this year. At the end of the discussion, they don't have to change each others' minds to have a good conversation. They can learn more about the rival team and even learn more about their own team's flaws.
Although, in contrast to my position, it is true that conversating about a controversial topic with someone who has a contrasting view can be disastrous. This could quickly turn ugly once personal insults start becoming involved over a topic that both sides feel strongly about. An example of this would be two people with opposing political beliefs talking about politics. Once the conversation deviates from talking about facts and turns into insulting one another, tensions will start to rise. However, if both sides are to remain calm and only talk about facts on certain political topics, it can become one of the most informative conversations they could have. Thus, it is imperative that both people remain respectful and stay on topic with the conversation.
Nevertheless, although it is true that talking about controversial topics like politics with people who hold opposing views can become an problematic, they can be very productive if both parties remain on topic about facts about the issue. Personally insulting one another for having an opposing view can destroy friendships; therefore, it is best to remain respectful and learn what the other side has to say.
- The luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals 75
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agree or disagree Be 50
- SuperCorp recently moved its headquarters to Corporateville The recent surge in the number of homeowners in Corporateville proves that Corporateville is a superior place to live then Middlesburg the home of SuperCorp s current headquarters Moreover Middle 73
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and s 66
- People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences Instructions Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the positio 65
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 38, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... Firstly, controversial conversations dont have to be about trying to change someo...
^^^^
Line 3, column 299, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: they've
...ion about the meaning of a mystery book theyve read. One could argue that the book was...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 642, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...an be an interesting conversation. They dont have to try to convince one another tha...
^^^^
Line 5, column 562, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ear. At the end of the discussion, they dont have to change each others minds to hav...
^^^^
Line 5, column 594, Rule ID: ADMIT_ENJOY_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the gerund form: 'minds having'.
Suggestion: minds having
...n, they dont have to change each others minds to have a good conversation. They can learn mor...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 136, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ople who hold opposing views can become an problematic, they can be very productiv...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, while, as to, for example, in contrast, talking about, in contrast to, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.5258426966 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 12.4196629213 177% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 66.0 58.6224719101 113% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2577.0 2235.4752809 115% => OK
No of words: 511.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04305283757 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70533630448 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.424657534247 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 782.1 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 15.0 6.24550561798 240% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.7140890975 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.043478261 118.986275619 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2173913043 23.4991977007 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30434782609 5.21951772744 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.13820224719 175% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.303049100985 0.243740707755 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107556714594 0.0831039109588 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.108356860404 0.0758088955206 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.213460499959 0.150359130593 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114218128416 0.0667264976115 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.1392134831 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.8420337079 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.1639044944 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.29 8.38706741573 87% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 100.480337079 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.