We can learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own.
Learning has been an innate trait found in us, humans, right from our existence. We always try to grab the opportunity, which comes our way, for learning new things, be it related to our existence, the universe, biological diversity around us, politics etc. Coming to the titular topic which reads that if we can learn more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own, I incline towards the fact that it needs a thorough analysis to come to a conclusion and the same follows in the following paragraphs.
First of all let us see why do our own views align with the views of certain group of people (say x) and contradict with those of other group (say y). The answer to this basic question is that right from our childhood, we have been fed with the ideas and the type of knowledge which is in alignment with that of the group x. Actually we were being made to imbibe the knowledge in a way that we found no contradiction with it. We hardly asked any question against the already set belief system or already held knowledge. Now what happens here is that we learn the things the way we were supposed to by our elders of that field. We hardly did any rigorous mental exercise to find out whether the knowledge we are seeking is worth it. This is one set of learning.
Another type of learning is; we get some knowledge, then we come along such individuals which partially or completely contradict with us. Now what happens here is that the circumstances compel us to do some pretty rigorous research which eventually leads to getting more closer to the truth and also, more importantly, during the process we might have come along numerous such situations where we defied various already held myths and also apart from going closer to what we were looking for, we might have discovered many other things unintentionally.
So, in conclusion, I would like to state that it is more important to have people which contradict our knowledge, around us so that both of us strive to get closer to the actual reality.
- The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client. “Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experi 55
- Is it important to keep your old friends than to make new friends 60
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 13
- "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 ac 24
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 43
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 266, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'closer' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: closer
...earch which eventually leads to getting more closer to the truth and also, more importantly...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 187, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ve to get closer to the actual reality.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, first, if, look, so, then, apart from, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 52.0 33.0505617978 157% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 58.6224719101 89% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 12.9106741573 46% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1681.0 2235.4752809 75% => OK
No of words: 365.0 442.535393258 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.60547945205 5.05705443957 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37092360658 4.55969084622 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51826281168 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 215.323595506 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523287671233 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 517.5 704.065955056 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 20.2370786517 64% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 95.6589726751 60.3974514979 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.307692308 118.986275619 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0769230769 23.4991977007 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 5.21951772744 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.442720785362 0.243740707755 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151150246431 0.0831039109588 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.140878223679 0.0758088955206 186% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.262189900156 0.150359130593 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.15175041255 0.0667264976115 227% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.1392134831 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.98 48.8420337079 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.8 12.1743820225 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.75 12.1639044944 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.97 8.38706741573 95% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 100.480337079 68% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.7820224719 119% => 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: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.