Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
A cogent argument about any controversial topic is useful to change the core belief of people having contrasting views on that topic.
In this material world thousands about varieties of people live on. Some are docile: easily persuaded while there are some who are not easily deflected from their core belief, the dogmatic one. Those of later quality usually do not want to accept any argument against their core belief; moreover, they want to make convince others to accept their wrong, maybe, belief. However, even rock like people are amenable to cogent argument. Indeed, if the argument placed against them has potential to persuade them, there is no way to avoid yielding. History is inundated with such examples of yielding of dogmatic people when they were confronted with contrasting views having sufficient quality to make them convinced. For instance, the people of Saudi Arabia at early 500 AC worth mentioning. Reverence to simulacrum was their tradition and they maintained that sculpt will help them in their hard times, they revered those creation of them as their God. However, Muhammad, the light bearer, when confronted with such wrong belief tried to disabuse them. The cogent argument of Muhammad along side with hard evidence was enough to remove the darkness of mind of those benighted people. So, a cogent argument was enough to persuade them and to change their core belief.
Earth is flat or not? Another controversial topic. The believers of flat earth try to convince the believer of opposite belief but the thing which make them failed is their depth of argument. In this modern era, people are not amenable to mere argument they want proof but those having flat earth belief have no such cogent enough proof and as a result they have failed so far. However, it is not that the round earth believers are dogmatic which can be attributed for this, it is the lack of hard evidence which frustrated the effort of flat earth believer.
Long ago, people used to believe light spreads from the eye and thereby, we can see. However, today we know the mechanism of visualizing and people no more has that wrong belief. But, in order to change the core belief of the past people scientist had to aggregate evidence by working assiduously. Scientific proof and cogent argument was enough to change the wrong belief of people living in the past.
However, their are exceptional in any case. The earth also contains such people who never want to cede, even daylight is not enough to persuade them that the night is over. But their proportion is not large enough because by cogent argument most of the dogmatic people are proselytized but those certain ones. Maybe it is true that even more cogent argument will help to persuade them and people having contrasting views should try until that point and should not give up.
An cogent argument having hard proof is useful to change the core belief of the people having contrasting views.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 778, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'mentioning' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'mentions'.
Suggestion: mentions
...e of Saudi Arabia at early 500 AC worth mentioning. Reverence to simulacrum was their trad...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 915, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this creation' or 'those creations'?
Suggestion: this creation; those creations
... them in their hard times, they revered those creation of them as their God. However, Muhammad...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1084, Rule ID: ALONG_SIDE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'alongside'?
Suggestion: alongside
...e them. The cogent argument of Muhammad along side with hard evidence was enough to remove...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 10, Rule ID: THEIR_IS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'there'?
Suggestion: there
...f people living in the past. However, their are exceptional in any case. The earth ...
^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'A' instead of 'An' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: A
...il that point and should not give up. An cogent argument having hard proof is us...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, while, for instance, as a result, in any case, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.5258426966 133% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.4196629213 48% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 33.0505617978 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 73.0 58.6224719101 125% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 12.9106741573 155% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2462.0 2235.4752809 110% => OK
No of words: 500.0 442.535393258 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.924 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.72870804502 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.35600594227 2.79657885939 84% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.434 0.4932671777 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 762.3 704.065955056 108% => 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: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.0554720553 60.3974514979 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6923076923 118.986275619 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2307692308 23.4991977007 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.84615384615 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 7.80617977528 64% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.275890747673 0.243740707755 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0877765750099 0.0831039109588 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0705198614168 0.0758088955206 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172012982789 0.150359130593 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.09245612478 0.0667264976115 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 14.1392134831 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.29 8.38706741573 87% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 100.480337079 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.8971910112 63% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.