The claim here is that when an argument goes on between two contrasting view points, we can verify that argument is good by making to believe that opposite view point is a valid one. And the reasoning goes like when the person arguing about his viewpoint must be put in a defense situation, there by, he tries to defend his idea and identifies the value of his idea. Below is my response to the above claim and reason where my views of agreement are put down.
Firstly, I like to present an argument of two persons using different mobile operating systems, Android and IOS. Although this is subjective to the one using it. The person using argues that his android mobile phone has lot of customization features like changing the wallpapers with carousel feature, set the ringtone specific to particular callers, can download the required files and store it in the phone storage, install the apps through offline by not using the app store a.k.a Play store in android. Android mobile phones are way cheaper than IOS operated Iphone's which makes the android to have a very large customer base, making a way for developers to produce a lot of applications which makes the end users with copious applications. Juxtaposing the above views, the argument of an IOS user will be like, the software to hardware optimization in the IOS operated devices is a lot consistent than android phones, then the offline application installation which compromises the security over user experience is what makes IOS special. This opposing view makes the android user think about the abstruse views and he should be convinced about the security, which goes on with our claim with correct reasoning.
Secondly, In the similar way we can see an argument where two persons discussing about different shampoo's used by them. The first one argues that the shampoo used by him makes the hair more silkier but the hair fall growth is not controlled in that shampoo. Second person argues that it may not make his hair silkier and smoother but controls his hair fall. Here by contrasting views the first person may be convinced with the idea of hair fall reduction and is in a defense position to make his point valid, there by, saying that he has no hair fall and so he uses that shampoo. So in this way one can test the validness of an argument, by trying to convince the opposite person with his juxtaposing view point.
With above examples arguments, we can validate the claim and reason provided above in a positive way. The opposing viewpoint however should be in a positive way with healthy comparisons to be made.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 114, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...ile operating systems, Android and IOS. Although this is subjective to the one using it....
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 186, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'silkier' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: silkier
... the shampoo used by him makes the hair more silkier but the hair fall growth is not control...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 84, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a positive way" with adverb for "positive"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...ate the claim and reason provided above in a positive way. The opposing viewpoint however should ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 144, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a positive way" with adverb for "positive"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...he opposing viewpoint however should be in a positive way with healthy comparisons to be made.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 58.6224719101 114% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2151.0 2235.4752809 96% => OK
No of words: 449.0 442.535393258 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.79064587973 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.60321845022 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51984351916 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 207.0 215.323595506 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.461024498886 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 678.6 704.065955056 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => 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: 78.0988956388 60.3974514979 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 134.4375 118.986275619 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0625 23.4991977007 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.0625 5.21951772744 78% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.222530152684 0.243740707755 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.086974648961 0.0831039109588 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0595948071606 0.0758088955206 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.1512203965 0.150359130593 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0536841660768 0.0667264976115 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.8 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.38706741573 101% => OK
difficult_words: 97.0 100.480337079 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.8971910112 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => 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: 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.