Claim: We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from those whose views contradict our own.
Reason: Disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning.
Learning is a never-ending process; we start learning right from the inception of our life to the end. A person would become more sharpened, knowledgeable by learning the things around them. I completely disagree with the claim that learning will be more effective from the people whose views are similar to us rather than the people whose views differ.
People (having different views than ours) can bring to the light very different, yet important things. They can shape your mind to cerebrate on anything from broader perspective. For example, our prime minister was planning to prepare detailed project report for the hydropower. He had certain views and every minister in the cabinet was also sharing the same view. So he had planned to implement his idea, but, at the very last moment he consulted opposition parties. They suggested the prime minister their idea, and ultimately the prime minister was resonant with them, which benefited the project a lot.
In addition, I, during my school day, solved a very difficult mathematic problem, and i took 30 minutes for it. But one of my friends, who was not convinced with my way of solving, put forth a logical technique that solved the same problem in 5 minutes. I learnt a very useful tip that worked for me throughout my school day. Had I not learnt from this friend who had different views, I would not have come across this very effective technique.
Many might argue that learning from the people with similar views is more crucial. Because they share similar opinions, they can learn more with simpatico mind. They might also think that differing views causes mental agitation, which restrict your brain from learning. However, it is to be noted that not all people get annoyed by opposing views. In fact, most of the time, people love to discuss the issues with people (having different views) so that they can see the things from different perspectives to come up with more plausible standings.
In summary, of course, learning is benefitial, be it from people with similar views or different views. But we get to know majority of new perspectives from the people whose views contradict with ours. Therefore, learning will be more fruitful with people having different views.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 55, Rule ID: AFFORD_VB[1]
Message: This verb is used with the infinitive: 'to right'
Suggestion: to right
...never-ending process; we start learning right from the inception of our life to the e...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 168, Rule ID: NOUN_AROUND_IT[1]
Message: Consider using 'the surrounding things'?
Suggestion: the surrounding things
...re sharpened, knowledgeable by learning the things around them. I completely disagree with the claim t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 87, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
... very difficult mathematic problem, and i took 30 minutes for it. But one of my f...
^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun might seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much might', 'a good deal of might'.
Suggestion: Much might; A good deal of might
...across this very effective technique. Many might argue that learning from the people wit...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, so, therefore, for example, in addition, in fact, in summary, of course
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 44.0 33.0505617978 133% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 49.0 58.6224719101 84% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 12.9106741573 39% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1870.0 2235.4752809 84% => OK
No of words: 376.0 442.535393258 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97340425532 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40348946061 4.55969084622 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51978224635 2.79657885939 90% => OK
Unique words: 197.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.523936170213 0.4932671777 106% => OK
syllable_count: 555.3 704.065955056 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 11.0 6.24550561798 176% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 30.9221830713 60.3974514979 51% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 89.0476190476 118.986275619 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9047619048 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.52380952381 5.21951772744 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 5.13820224719 97% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334259192781 0.243740707755 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107653168615 0.0831039109588 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0975834205537 0.0758088955206 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2030599966 0.150359130593 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.11439871846 0.0667264976115 171% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 14.1392134831 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.25 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.63 8.38706741573 91% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 100.480337079 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.