Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
Write a response to the prompt in which you discuss whether or not you agree or disagree. Be certain to fully develop your position and carefully consider ways in which your position could be challenged.
We, as humans usually have a tendency to think that we are always on the right, no matter what our thought at that time might be, whether tragic or good. So, to discuss a controvertsial topic with a person with contrasting view is always going to a challenge for both the parties.
Let us consider a controversial topic of earth and it's existance. At a time, it was believed to be flat, and that all the planet and sun goes around the planet earth. But scientists like Plato and Galileo discovered that earth is round and that it and other planets goes around the sun. When they tried to correct this view of public, they berated him for having such an outrageous thought. Even the church outright ridiculed their discovery at the time. For centuries, the initial thought that led us ultimately towards space were made a laughing stock.
Again, let us consider a topic of using paper bag instead of plastic ones. Conservatives will say that it is good for the long run, but people with diffident views would lambaster it by stating the production costs, economic problems, ease of use just to prove their point, even though they are in the wrong on promoting the use of plastic.
Even the most trifling discussions of movies with an open ending, in which a user is left upon his imagination to think of an ending ends up as a chaotic affair with others. Everyone has a different version of ending, but the contrasting views tend to affect others opinion, each person want to prove that their version of ending is the best, causing a conflict and a never ending deadlock. This, in turn, might create self-doubt, confusion and maybe even a conflict amongst others.
So, whenever a controversial topic needs to be discussed, it must be kept in mind to dicuss the version of thought while keeping in mind other people can have a contrasting view, which either must be coalesced with the current thought, or must be corrected along with the person with contrasting view.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 540, Rule ID: LAUGHING_STOCK[1]
Message: Did you mean 'laughingstock'?
Suggestion: laughingstock
...us ultimately towards space were made a laughing stock. Again, let us consider a topic of...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 14.8657303371 87% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 58.6224719101 80% => 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: 1640.0 2235.4752809 73% => OK
No of words: 346.0 442.535393258 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.73988439306 5.05705443957 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55711593908 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.566473988439 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 704.065955056 68% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.59117977528 88% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.77640449438 281% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.7971916909 60.3974514979 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.142857143 118.986275619 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7142857143 23.4991977007 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.64285714286 5.21951772744 31% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.252964401722 0.243740707755 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0726294635209 0.0831039109588 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721924722363 0.0758088955206 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137990421624 0.150359130593 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0590189538091 0.0667264976115 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.1392134831 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 48.8420337079 131% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.1743820225 85% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.51 12.1639044944 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 100.480337079 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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.