There is an old adage which marks the importance of listening to be good learner, even if the you do not share views of the orator. In fact, adopting this methodology will give one several advantages over others who do not prefer to listen or discuss the matter with people possessing contradicting views. It can help the person to present to defend his own theory for future arguments and can render him the opportunity to look at the problem with different perspective. In my opinion one gets to learn more from the people with opposing viewpoint. This will be analyzed in details in the following paragraphs.
For first, it is very natural for humans to have different point of view on a matter. But that does not necessarily mean the person with opposite view point is incorrect. In fact, there are several instances in the history where the person believed to be aberrant was later accepted to be correct. Consider, for example, the case of Aristarchus, who was the first person to propose the idea of heliocentric solar system. Initially people did not believe him and some even demanded to punish him for going against the scared sculptures. Had people listened to him, even though they did not share his belief, they would have expanded the horizons of learning which was in the interest of both.
In addition to that, it is not always true that discussion with people of opposing view point will always turn into altercation which thwart the learning process. Studies have concluded that the policies which are framed after discussion with opposition are more likely to succeed than that of others. Discussion with opposition on a topic help one look at the policies in a different manner. There might be circumstances where the two parties or people do not agree on all elements but they do share some ideas. This can help in improvising the reforms unanimously. For instance, all of us aware of the ongoing trade war between U.S. and China. They have certain differences in their trading policies due to which economy of both countries is suffering and recession is looming over the globe. How can they mitigate the differences without negotiating? In order to resolve any issue discussion is vital. Discussions pave the way for positive results and offers an occasion to learn from each other.
Perhaps, if the situation is contained properly then one gets more to learn from people with conflicting view point. Not only this further learning but this technique also equips one with tools to tackle differences which otherwise could be disastrous sometimes.
- Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take.58
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.50
- The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people.58
- Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.50
- Some people believe that college students should consider only their own talents and interests when choosing a field of study. Others believe that college students should base their choice of a field of study on the availability of jobs in that field.Writ60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 92, Rule ID: DT_PRP
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'you'?
Suggestion: the; you
...f listening to be good learner, even if the you do not share views of the orator. In fa...
Line 5, column 371, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER
Message: Consider replacing "in a different manner" with adverb for "different"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...n a topic help one look at the policies in a different manner. There might be circumstances where the...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, look, so, then, for example, for instance, in addition, in fact, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.3162921348 133% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2149.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 434.0 442.535393258 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.95161290323 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.56428161445 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63521246799 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 228.0 215.323595506 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52534562212 0.4932671777 107% => OK
syllable_count: 670.5 704.065955056 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.3965112654 60.3974514979 62% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.4347826087 118.986275619 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8695652174 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.34782608696 5.21951772744 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.2758426966 117% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.197637186329 0.243740707755 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.057323865715 0.0831039109588 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0434378846782 0.0758088955206 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130164045074 0.150359130593 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0419478854656 0.0667264976115 63% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.1392134831 80% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.1639044944 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.38706741573 100% => OK
difficult_words: 107.0 100.480337079 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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: 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.