As communication is essential for sharing thought's process in society. It gives others exposure to understand how others think or percieve the world around him/her. It might result futile but not in all cases. I disagree with this view that discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful bacause very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
It might be the case that some people who are very conventional and stubborn about their beliefs when they are embraced with contrasting views while discussing controversial topics. They do not accept other's logical views and are reluctant to accept other's views deliberately. This is very subjective term as it again depends upon from person to person. But some people may also accept the contrasting views if bolstered by logical evidence and presented with logical views. The contrasting views may compel the person to think in the same way you are thinking. Since it is not generalized, i refute the author's prompt.
Personality and behaviour of person varies greatly. Person's behaviour and way of thinking is very versatile. The thing which is right for you may be wrong in other's point of view. The way we perceive the world is different the way other's perceive. Each person is unique in itself. For example child marriage might be wrong for some one but it might be right for some one. When someone enumerates the cons of it in front of someone who thinks it right by presenting contrasting views with logical evidence. It might result futile if someone is adamant and conventional and one is not able to look the other side of coin. This is the case when one can not do anything. You can not compel anyone to change one's thought and thinking process. But if the same thing is presented with facts and logical evidence ithat too in a comprehensible manner then it might compel to change other's perspective or core beliefs.
As the above mentioned prompt is not generalized and varies from thinking process of one person to other which is variable in nature. I strongly disagree with this statement.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 87, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ghts process in society. It gives others exposure to understand how others think ...
^^
Line 3, column 592, Rule ID: I_LOWERCASE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'I'?
Suggestion: I
... thinking. Since it is not generalized, i refute the authors prompt. Personali...
^
Line 5, column 328, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'someone'?
Suggestion: someone
...ample child marriage might be wrong for some one but it might be right for some one. Whe...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: ANY_BODY[1]
Message: Did you mean 'someone'?
Suggestion: someone
... for some one but it might be right for some one. When someone enumerates the cons of it...
^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 373, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “When” 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.
...one but it might be right for some one. When someone enumerates the cons of it in fr...
^^^^
Line 5, column 704, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...ng. You can not compel anyone to change ones thought and thinking process. But if th...
^^^^
Line 5, column 816, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a comprehensible manner" with adverb for "comprehensible"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...th facts and logical evidence ithat too in a comprehensible manner then it might compel to change others p...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, so, then, while, for example, in all cases, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 22.0 19.5258426966 113% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.4196629213 89% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 14.8657303371 108% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 58.6224719101 68% => 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: 1766.0 2235.4752809 79% => OK
No of words: 357.0 442.535393258 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.94677871148 5.05705443957 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.34677393335 4.55969084622 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64731224611 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 215.323595506 75% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.450980392157 0.4932671777 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 547.2 704.065955056 78% => 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: 3.0 4.99550561798 60% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.10617977528 129% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => 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: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.8506869622 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 76.7826086957 118.986275619 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.5217391304 23.4991977007 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.69565217391 5.21951772744 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 7.80617977528 90% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 10.2758426966 19% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.83258426966 269% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.328535186709 0.243740707755 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0857393877925 0.0831039109588 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138749159989 0.0758088955206 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226185396848 0.150359130593 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.126322180765 0.0667264976115 189% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.6 14.1392134831 68% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.71 48.8420337079 132% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.0 12.1743820225 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.13 12.1639044944 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.38706741573 89% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 100.480337079 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.7820224719 68% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
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: 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.