In any situation, progress requires discussion among people who have contrasting points of view.
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 supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The statement is linking progress with collective discussion among people having contrasting views. I mostly agree with this. There are certain reasons behind my position on this argument which are addressed below.
Progress always needs a collective approach under any circumstances. Discussion among people with different ideologies enables an organisation to make a better decision. Let's consider a situation that a nuclear powperplant is to be built at a certain area. While taking the final decision, taking opinions from all the stakeholders involved is really important. Engineers will consider this safe but environmentalist may disagree. Their contrasting discussion will create more pressure on the policy makers to follow all the compliance issues if the power plant is to be made. This will overall have a positive impression on the people too. Engineers have to explain the concept of energy mix, over all safety procedures to the people who are opposing it. At the same time they have to hear to the environmentalists as well and protect our nature as much as possible.
Similar thing is applicable while passing a law at legislature. A constructive debate among the parliament members will help to get all the perspectives regarding the law. How people of different cultures, places, social stages will react, whose purpose will be served, how it can be misused, what are the scopes of future improvement, how it should be modified to establish the rights of marginalised people-all of these views can be brought together by a discussion. If so, thesis and anti thesis will create a synthesis which will be beneficial to all. If there's no discussion among contrasting views, the aftermath or consequences can not be predicted either. It will be like blindness.
The aforementioned situations moderately explain the importance of debate among people having contrasting views. However, someone may argure that at times it can create unpleasant circumstances and debates that are not constructive. But getting a comprehensive view is more important than the fear of the minor demerits. That's why I mostly agree with the fact that discussion among people having contrasting views is a major element in the process of achieving success.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 170, Rule ID: LETS_LET[1]
Message: Did you mean 'Let's'?
Suggestion: Let's
...organisation to make a better decision. Lets consider a situation that a nuclear pow...
^^^^
Line 3, column 186, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ectives regarding the law. How people of different cultures, places, social stage...
^^
Line 3, column 561, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: there's
...sis which will be beneficial to all. If theres no discussion among contrasting views, ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 292, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ehensive view is more important than the fear of the minor demerits. Thats why I ...
^^
Line 4, column 322, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: That's
...t than the fear of the minor demerits. Thats why I mostly agree with the fact that d...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 341, Rule ID: AGREE_WITH_THE_FACT[1]
Message: Use simply 'agree that'.
Suggestion: agree that
... the minor demerits. Thats why I mostly agree with the fact that discussion among people having contrast...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, may, really, regarding, so, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 33.0505617978 61% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1893.0 2235.4752809 85% => OK
No of words: 357.0 442.535393258 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3025210084 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.08191487224 2.79657885939 110% => OK
Unique words: 205.0 215.323595506 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.574229691877 0.4932671777 116% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 704.065955056 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 23.0359550562 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.4906130923 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.0454545455 118.986275619 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.2272727273 23.4991977007 69% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.59090909091 5.21951772744 50% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 7.80617977528 77% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.234142100205 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0734076510228 0.0831039109588 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0718543097077 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174915362111 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.078756801269 0.0667264976115 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 48.8420337079 96% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.16 12.1639044944 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.38706741573 106% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 100.480337079 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.0 11.8971910112 42% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.2143820225 75% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
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.