Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.Write a res

Argumentative power can be easy to some people; however a lot do not have this power or find it difficult. One has to be with a very good knowledge of a subject and based on strong information to start an argument. Although to convince someone with an opposing point of view can be very powerful, but I think to judge effectiveness of arguments only in terms of its ability to convince is not a fully accurate approach. There are various cases in which failing to convince someone with an opposing point of view does not mean the argument fail, nevertheless it can be due to the strong beliefs of defender.

Firstly, it is not objective to test argument by measuring the level of others being convinced or not. There are cases in which you can change an opposing point of view while others not and will never happen, because you will be moving in two parallel ways where there will be no point of intersection. For instance, one will never be able to use the author approach of powerful arguments are when you change the contrasting view point in religions. In religions people base their point of view on beliefs which is very hard to change or sometimes hard to get an explanation to it. For example, it is impossible to change the belief of a Muslim, Christian or a Jew. The same goes for political opinions, people defending a particular party will be very hard to switch or even give a space to anyone with an opposite point of view to prove their party wrong or flaws in their opinions, it will almost be impossible to let a republican be convinced with a contrasting view point or an idea of the demarcates.

On the contrary there are some cases in which one can change the view point of an opposing party and can let them change it. Sometimes people can be easily convinced, it is not because of the value of the argument but it is the situation and people lack the thoughts and ground base of their own point of view. They claimed to be opposed, while they are not totally convinced. For example, in big organizations when board members are studying and proposing a new policy, sometimes you can find other board members opposing and trying to prove them wrong. Surprisingly after a while and a short argument you find them convinced with the opposing point of view. This happens because they lack some necessary information and data. As soon as they were faced with it, they changed their opposing opinion. In this case the author reason that only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea will be working.

Finally, the author claim is not convincing to a great extent. There are proved situations to show that sometimes it is not based on the idea, beliefs are impossible to change, or to have argument with someone totally convinced with his beliefs. In this case failing to convince the other party does not mean the argument is not powerful but these two roads will never intersect. On the other hand there are some cases in which the reason behind the author claim to defend an idea against a contrasting point of view will work