The best test of an argument is the argument's 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.
The Glorious tradition of critical thinking started from Ancient Greek when many philosophers spread their thoughts through argument with youngsters in order to revise their extreme opinions and immature judgment of things. There has been a long-time contest about the standard of a qualified argument. Generally, it seems convincing that defending for an idea against the doubts and objections deepen one's approval of it. Yet occasionally alternative test could have a better effect.
On one side, individuals approval of one idea tend to stand on the same side and form an ally, which impedes them from comprehending this idea from an overall perspective. Whereas, when challenged by viewpoints on the other side, incentives help them more efficiently discover valuable aspects they failed to notice before. For instance, Socrates form his philosophy and constantly prove its validity in practice during the process of argument with young people in Athens. Contrarily, without incentives, one be tired of searching for defending in diverse aspects and end up with a shallow understanding of knowledges and thoughts, which might explain the necessity of establishing the debate course in universities.
On the other side, no idea is impeccable. When concerning merely about the advantages of one idea, individuals could easily go to extreme and intoxicated in the good characteristics he discovered. Whereas, defending against converse views serves as a perfect reminder for the drawbacks of the idea and only in this way can one thoroughly scrutinize the idea and continuously revise its imperfection and promote its cogency. The Congress serves as a platform for the United States government to amend the acts by councillors debating on proposals and revising the inappropriate parts. Accordingly, defending for one idea is a considerable way to improve it through rediscovering the unnoticeable flaws.
Admittedly, defending for one idea against opposing viewpoint is an excellent method to test and enhance one’s understanding of it. It appears arbitrary to regard it as the only appropriate way to judge an argument. The alternatives, in some cases, could function even better. For example, by displaying one idea through a speech or presentation, individuals gain the opportunity to go through the whole picture and express it systematically. In this process, the authenticity of argument is explicitly revealed as well.
Conclusively, defending for an idea against doubts and disapprovals can effectively examine and elevate one’s comprehension of it. The overestimating of it, however, seems irrational since the alternative methods could achieve the same effect.
- Workers in the small town of Leeville take fewer sick days than workers in the large city of Masonton, 50 miles away. Moreover, relative to population size, the diagnosis of stress-related illness is proportionally much lower in Leeville than in Masonton. 64
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field 94
- In order for any work of art—for example, a film, a novel, a poem, or a song—to have merit, it must be understandable to most people. 90
- The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company s president A recent national survey found that the majority of workers with access to the Internet at work had used company computers for person 74
- The following appeared in a health newsletter."A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that numbe 80
individuals approval of one idea tend to stand on
individual's approval of one idea tends to stand on
Sentence: Contrarily, without incentives, one be tired of searching for defending in diverse aspects and end up with a shallow understanding of knowledges and thoughts, which might explain the necessity of establishing the debate course in universities.
Description: A numeral, cardinal is not usually followed by a verb 'to be', infinitive or imperative
Suggestion: Refer to one and be
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 408 350
No. of Characters: 2220 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.494 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.441 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.158 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 172 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 144 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 105 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 74 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.4 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.303 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.4 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.301 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.509 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5