Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
Discussing controversial or challenging topics should absolutely be discussed as it one of the key ways society advances. One should always be challenging their core beliefs to see if they are in fact correct or if there is a better idea or belief that can be reached in a civil discussion.
The Socratic method of debate has been used for over two millenium as tool for how to have a productive discourse and try persuade people. A deluge of brilliant ideas that challenge people's core beliefs and society as a whole has brought us. In the 16th and 17th century great mind in London, Paris, Vienna, and across the world were a hot bed for challenging new ideas, that brought about modern democracy, our current morality, and scientific breakthroughs that would never had existed if no one had thought to challenge the status quo. A more modern example would be the gay right's movement. over the past twenty years it has gone from a societal taboo to an accepted idea by the majority of society. Most of this progress came from discussions around the dinner table, bar booth, and long car rides.
All discussions don't have to be soley about challenging one's core beliefs. There can be a rich spectrum of beliefs and out comes. For instance, you may not be out to change their mind, but simply make them empathize and see a point of view other than their own. Another outcome is their could be a common ground and reach a synthesis of ideas. Your goal should not be to try and change their mind, it should be to get to the truth of whatever the topic at hand is. If the belief they hold happens to be the correct one, then after their belief has been held up to scrutinity and found valid it would seem they had the right idea all along.
This is all presupposed on certain understandings. Firstly, that everyone in the discussion is acting in good faith. If one side has some sort of ulterior motive in the debate, the debate will lose most if not all of its validity. Secondly, sometime certain people are truly set in their ways. Many Thanksgivings have been ruined by a serious and heated debate by two bull-headed people who ultimately went nowhere.
One should constantly be looking to discuss controversial topics it is beneficial to them as a person and to society as a whole. Our entire way of life as we know it has been built on people challenging the status quo and asking the "what ifs" that changed the world. The world is a much better place thanks to people entering into good-hearted debate.
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership. 16
- Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society’s problems. 83
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. 75
- Understanding the past is of little use to those in current positions of leadership. 16
- Some people believe that it is helpful to view a challenging situation as an opportunity forpersonal growth. Others believe that reimagining challenging situations this way occupiestoo much of the focus one needs to face challenges effectively. 54
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
Discussing controversial or challenging ...
^^^
Line 1, column 103, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'ways'' or 'way's'?
Suggestion: ways'; way's
...utely be discussed as it one of the key ways society advances. One should always be ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...can be reached in a civil discussion. The Socratic method of debate has been u...
^^^
Line 3, column 599, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Over
...ample would be the gay rights movement. over the past twenty years it has gone from ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 740, Rule ID: DISCUSSIONS_AROUND[1]
Message: Did you mean 'discussions about'?
Suggestion: discussions about
...ociety. Most of this progress came from discussions around the dinner table, bar booth, and long c...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...table, bar booth, and long car rides. All discussions dont have to be soley ab...
^^^
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...nd long car rides. All discussions dont have to be soley about challenging ones...
^^^^
Line 5, column 375, Rule ID: TRY_AND[1]
Message: "Try and" is common in colloquial speech, but "'try to'" is recommended for writing.
Suggestion: try to
...is of ideas. Your goal should not be to try and change their mind, it should be to get ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...em they had the right idea all along. This is all presupposed on certain under...
^^^
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... people who ultimately went nowhere. One should constantly be looking to disc...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, look, may, second, secondly, so, then, as to, for instance, in fact, sort of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 55.5748502994 101% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 16.3942115768 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2076.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 450.0 441.139720559 102% => OK
Chars per words: 4.61333333333 5.12650576532 90% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.6057793516 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57471465517 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 204.123752495 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.544444444444 0.468620217663 116% => OK
syllable_count: 639.9 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59920159681 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.67365269461 239% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.1961907541 57.8364921388 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.3636363636 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4545454545 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.59090909091 5.70786347227 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 5.25449101796 190% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186586235628 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0554905199148 0.0743258471296 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496737409501 0.0701772020484 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103426971626 0.128457276422 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0439705656931 0.0628817314937 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.3799401198 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 48.3550499002 141% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.197005988 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.46 12.5979740519 75% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 98.500998004 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.5 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.