Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
To discuss controversial topics to change the mind of the opposition is, by definition, a difficult undertaking. However, the purpose of discussion is not always to change the mind of the other party. Instead, the purpose of discussion is to garner further insight, create an exercise of knowledge and presentation, and potentially alter the degree of the view of the participants.
Differing viewpoints over any subject tend to miss certain aspects of any arguement that is presented. Any side that reapeats the same discussion with only their peers will simply develop a cycle with no further conclusion. That is why it is important to discuss the controversy with an opposing viewpoints. The insight garnered by both participants leads to more informed views and the possibility of solution if common ground is developed.
Furthermore, the simple act of arguement can be a stimulating exercise of knowledge, philosophy, and presentation betweeen parties. A poorly made arguement, despite many valid points, can be trounced by a superior argument construction. No common ground may be made, but respect for an opponent can be created through their ability to deliver their view. This in turn, may lead to particpants improving their ability to create and present arguements in a productive, yet benign, method.
However, if not properly refereed, controversy can devolve into chaos; no one wins or benefits in any fashion. Only further confusion and disparity develops, enlarging the rift between the opposing views. That is why it is important to maintain control of the discussion; controlled discussions may not see a clear winner but both parties may change their view by a matter of degrees. It may be no perfect balance but all great journeys begin with single steps.
In conclusion, it may be true that controversial discussions may have no clear winner. However, that should not halt discussion entirely; rather, discussion will lead to greater insight to the other's view while also improving the capabilities of the participants involved. Despite the difficulty, people should coutinue to discuss their views knowing that there are greater benefits than simply winning an arguement.
- Although sound moral judgment is an important characteristic of an effective leader it is not as important as a leader s ability to maintain the respect of his or her peers 50
- The following is a petition to the city council of Centerville Over the past three years there has been a marked increase in cases of sidewalk rage similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road but instead among sidewalk walkers The resul 44
- 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
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 297, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'viewpoint'?
Suggestion: viewpoint
...iscuss the controversy with an opposing viewpoints. The insight garnered by both participa...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, so, while, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 12.4196629213 121% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 33.0505617978 54% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1859.0 2235.4752809 83% => OK
No of words: 347.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35734870317 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31600926901 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0293407502 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 215.323595506 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.538904899135 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 561.6 704.065955056 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.77640449438 225% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.7193452801 60.3974514979 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 103.277777778 118.986275619 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2777777778 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.66666666667 5.21951772744 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.235099516698 0.243740707755 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0773242710769 0.0831039109588 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0636618724482 0.0758088955206 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137970382855 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391219876915 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 14.1392134831 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.1639044944 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.22 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 100.480337079 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.