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 certain to fully develop your position and carefully consider ways in which your position could be challenged.
Discussion within a society is one of the most important tools to reach a substantial conclusion. In most cases, opinions of people thinking differently amalgate to conjure a solution that can be as conclusive as possible. Although there are factions of society that are unrelenting in their views and do not entertain a healthy discussion, it is my firm opinion that discussing controversial topics with people who are not like-minded can be beneficial for two reasons.
To begin, it is important to note that controversial topics require an in-depth analysis and a well-rounded discussion regarding the same is necessary since controversial topics may have an imminent impact on the society. To illustrate this, a parliament of any country is the hub for discussing things that are pertinent to the interests of the country and a lot of them could be controversial. The party in power and the opposition party, in most cases, do not align in their views. But this does not mean that such discussions are not useful. The point of the discussion is to reach a common ground by taking outside viewpoints, either in the form of criticism or suggestion, to finally engender a solution which satisfies most of the people.
Further, the point of people not yielding to other people's opinions seems futile since in most cases, the point of discussing controversial topics with people having contrasting views is not to change their opinions. Moreover, people standing firmly with their viewpoints can be correct in their individual spaces and thus result in a new line of thought. To elaborate on the same, I would suggest considering the example of science. Scientists, when discussing a new scientific phenomena, tend to pitch their viewpoints which are usually different from each other. In such a case, if all scientists have the same mindset, new ideas would be very hard to come by. A discussion so eclectic can most certainly result in new theories/ideas cropping up. Albert Einstein would never have thought of the quantum theory had he aligned himself with the existing traditional theory. Thus having discussions with varying opinions on controversial topics can actually be beneficial in the long run.
Although it is important to see that not all conclusions are certain in nature and can have the application of exceptional rules under different circumstances. A discussion with a person or group of people lacking sanity to some degree on a controversial topic can prove futile or dangerous in the long run. There have been instances where people with highly conservative ideology have actually jeopardised people with opposing views on topics sacred to the conservatives. Religion is one area that can be exception. But again, the frequency of such instances is very small and we know by logic that an exception cannot be used to define a trend. With growing sensibility, people tend to be more tolerant and thus, having discussions on topics that are not so simple can be made easy.
To conclude, I would like to state that having discussions with people of opposing views on controversial topics can prove fecund as it enables one to grow in their intellectual capability and also be more tolerant to diverse opinion.
- 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 66
- 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 73
- Paleo diets in which one eats how early hominids human ancestors did are becoming increasingly popular Proponents claim our bodies evolved to eat these types of food especially bone broth a soup made by cooking animal bones for several hours They believe 57
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 73
- According to a recent report by our marketing department during the past year fewer people attended Super Screen produced movies than in any other year And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies actual 58
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 480, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'phenomenon'?
Suggestion: phenomenon
...tists, when discussing a new scientific phenomena, tend to pitch their viewpoints which a...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, thus, well, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2709.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 532.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09210526316 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80261649409 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99590980806 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473684210526 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 842.4 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7158323179 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.782608696 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1304347826 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.86956521739 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324774301212 0.243740707755 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0998767955402 0.0831039109588 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.072153004298 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203883390041 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0396177421593 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 480, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'phenomenon'?
Suggestion: phenomenon
...tists, when discussing a new scientific phenomena, tend to pitch their viewpoints which a...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, if, may, moreover, regarding, so, thus, well, in most cases
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 87.0 58.6224719101 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2709.0 2235.4752809 121% => OK
No of words: 532.0 442.535393258 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09210526316 5.05705443957 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.80261649409 4.55969084622 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99590980806 2.79657885939 107% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.473684210526 0.4932671777 96% => OK
syllable_count: 842.4 704.065955056 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 6.24550561798 64% => OK
Article: 8.0 4.99550561798 160% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.7158323179 60.3974514979 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.782608696 118.986275619 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1304347826 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.86956521739 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324774301212 0.243740707755 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0998767955402 0.0831039109588 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.072153004298 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.203883390041 0.150359130593 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0396177421593 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.1639044944 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.58 8.38706741573 102% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.