In any situation, progress requires discussion among people who have contrasting points of view.
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 supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
The issue states that if people are having completely different viewpoints in a particular area, the discussion amongst them is fundamentally required to achieve any sort of progression. I believe that this holds true for majority of the cases. This would not only help the area progress from a standstill position during the conflict, it would also help highlight the problems in the contradictory viewpoints. As a result the area would eventually improve and prosper as well.
The best example for the above would be the major political parties of the US, namely, the Democrats and the Republicans. While the Republicans value localism and capitalism more, the democrats value globalism and inclusion to a greater extent. This would always lead the parties into conflict at various situations. While most of these conflicts are not handled in an appreciable and pretty ways, some times, these would also lead to a discussion and compromises, which would include the ideas of both the parties partially. Thus, it would prevent either of the afore mentioned principle left out completely which might lead to problems and further reforms in the future.
While most of the time, the above thesis holds true, there might be some situations wherein one or the other side would be in the extreme. In these cases, it would feel that the vanquishing of the extremist's viewpoints would be a good outcome. But these situations are very rare and the only example I can think of it is the World War II. But this also does not seem to be a good example, because we probably cannot fathom what could have happened if the war was avoided altogether or at the least brought to an end sooner with treaties.
Hence, with the above examples as evidence, I would like to conclude that clash of different viewpoints in a peaceful and agreeable way would most likely end in the betterment of the area. In this regard, it would also seem that multiple equally valid viewpoints on a topic would actually be appreciated, as long as there are people on both the sides willing to discuss and resolve the conflict.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ought to an end sooner with treaties Hence with the above examples as evidence I w...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, hence, if, so, still, thus, well, while, sort of, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 20.0 12.4196629213 161% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 58.6224719101 72% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 12.9106741573 23% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1709.0 2235.4752809 76% => OK
No of words: 356.0 442.535393258 80% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80056179775 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34372677135 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59409922255 2.79657885939 93% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 215.323595506 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.497191011236 0.4932671777 101% => OK
syllable_count: 536.4 704.065955056 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 6.24550561798 0% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 1.0 20.2370786517 5% => 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: 356.0 23.0359550562 1545% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 0.0 60.3974514979 0% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 1709.0 118.986275619 1436% => Less chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 356.0 23.4991977007 1515% => Less words per sentence wanted.
Discourse Markers: 82.0 5.21951772744 1571% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 10.2758426966 10% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 5.13820224719 0% => 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: 0.092510499128 0.243740707755 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.092510499128 0.0831039109588 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0758088955206 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0624046828338 0.150359130593 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0275298267001 0.0667264976115 41% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 179.2 14.1392134831 1267% => Automated_readability_index is high.
flesch_reading_ease: -281.4 48.8420337079 -576% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 0.0 7.92365168539 0% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 141.0 12.1743820225 1158% => Flesch kincaid grade is high.
coleman_liau_index: 12.04 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 24.89 8.38706741573 297% => Dale chall readability score is high.
difficult_words: 81.0 100.480337079 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 60.0 11.8971910112 504% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 144.4 11.2143820225 1288% => Gunning_fog is high.
text_standard: 60.0 11.7820224719 509% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
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: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.