Claim: The best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.
The statement acknowledges that the validity of an argument is greater if it succeeds in convincing one that share an opposing viewpoint. Though it may sometimes be the case, this is not always accurate.
The following claim that convincing someone with a contrasting viewpoint will reflect on the validity of an argument is only partial aggreable, as it fails to take consider that an argument may be shared and as powerful. For instance, it is well known that Canadian winter are quite rough; Roads are icy and slippery, mountain are steep and narrow, and vision may be altered by ongoing snow falls. While debating over government environmental laws, the agencies and citizen parties may both agree that strict restriction are necessary for safety purposes. As such, an argument can be very sharp and convincing while having both sides in agreement regarding the accounted belief. As a matter of fact, winter tire regulations is one of those indispensable rules that needs to be in effect for a safe driving.
Though the argument considers the value of arguing in favor of contrasting viewpoints, it assumes that while defending an idea one will appreciate its value. This may not be the case. A typical example is represented by court cases. Lawyers are employed to advocate in favor of a party whether they agree or not. A popular court case in the United States was that of Casey Anthony who was accused of murdering her young daughter and lying about facts that took place making her suspicious. The lawyer that defended her case may not have agreed with the proof and attitude of her defendant. Nevertheless, a good lawyer is one that can defend an argument that does not parallel his or her belief. In short, it means distancing oneself with our core values and beliefs and finding flaws and loopholes that are in favor of the client.
However, it happens that one experiences a “change of heart,” while taking a side. A typical stereotype in seen in high school while the most popular kid is part of a crew that bully peculiar students. Due to their idiosyncrasy, kids in high school are often mistreated if they are fat, socially awkward, have a family reputation or else. Some kids that either participate or persuade other to do so may suddenly show empathy and defend the bullied kids after seeing the consequences of such bullying. Empathy, compassion and a feeling of guilt takes over and triggers a desire for proper conduct and respect for bullied classmate.
Arguing against does not always generate an appreciation for what or who is being defended. One may simply agree and perceive the value of a case whereas another may defend a case while not agreeing at all. Nevertheless, no matter what initial position is taken, a change of heart is always possible and does occur.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 42, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...owever, it happens that one experiences a 'change of heart,' while taki...
^
Line 6, column 65, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , &apos
... one experiences a 'change of heart,' while taking a side. A typical stereot...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, may, nevertheless, regarding, so, well, whereas, while, for instance, in short, as a matter of fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 28.0 19.5258426966 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.4196629213 105% => OK
Conjunction : 22.0 14.8657303371 148% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 11.3162921348 168% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 33.0505617978 118% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2340.0 2235.4752809 105% => OK
No of words: 476.0 442.535393258 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91596638655 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70985276845 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 255.0 215.323595506 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535714285714 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 737.1 704.065955056 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.740449438202 0% => OK
Article: 10.0 4.99550561798 200% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 7.0 3.10617977528 225% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.2819044338 60.3974514979 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.739130435 118.986275619 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6956521739 23.4991977007 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.86956521739 5.21951772744 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.279530424252 0.243740707755 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0768227109281 0.0831039109588 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101631148426 0.0758088955206 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161349813853 0.150359130593 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0798212441732 0.0667264976115 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.1392134831 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 100.480337079 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => 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.