We learn more from people whose views we share in common than from those whose ideas contradict ours.
The author claim that people tend to learn more from those who are similar instead of those ideas are contradictory. In my view, although people are more willing to cooperate with congenial friends, it doesn’t mean that we cannot learn more from people who have different thoughts.
I concede that people can gain benefits from cooperation with each other. Cooperation is a powerful skill through human society, and it is why we have surpassed most of other species in the earth. From cooperation, an arduous project can be break down and accomplished by people. Building a skyscraper, for example, it needs concerted effort through different staff, who all have the same goal and purpose. From working with others, they not only can accomplish a masterpiece but also accumulate their skills from assimilating the things that are lack of.
However, a wide range of benefits can be acquired from working with people who have contradictory thoughts and they are commensurate to benefits of working with people having common views. First, the process of challenge can spur people’s potential. People tend to become indolent in the comfortable and peaceful circumstance. Therefore, contradiction can galvanize more power and potential from human beings. In the government, congress men heckle and challenge people in power, such as mayors or presidents. In this process, it supersedes them as well as spurs them to come up with more effective solution.
Also, by integrating the ideas from the people who have contradictory thoughts, we can conceive innovative ideas. Sometime it is hard to make a break through in a field only work with people who have similar thoughts. People who have contradictory thoughts can provide us with different aspects, sometime they are the crux for solving a problem. This is the reason why today’s society focus on the ability of cross-field. For example, although anthropology and computer science are different field, however, achieving a well-establish system of vocal recognition application need to concerted effort of two field, that is, combing the power of calculation and the knowledge of linguistic of human beings.
To sum up, working either with people whose thoughts are contradictory to our or with people have same idea benefits us equally. It hard to assert we can learn more from which one. We can accomplish a complex task by cooperation and also learn more idea and galvanize more potential by debating with contradictory people.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 326, Rule ID: NEEDS_FIXED[1]
Message: "needs concerted" is only accepted in certain dialects. For something more widely acceptable, try 'concerting' or 'to be concerted'.
Suggestion: concerting; to be concerted
...ing a skyscraper, for example, it needs concerted effort through different staff, who all...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 608, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'field' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'fields'.
Suggestion: fields
...ication need to concerted effort of two field, that is, combing the power of calculat...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, so, therefore, well, for example, such as, as well as, in my view, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.5258426966 77% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 33.0505617978 94% => OK
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 12.9106741573 93% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2097.0 2235.4752809 94% => OK
No of words: 399.0 442.535393258 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25563909774 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.46933824581 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91631984726 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 215.323595506 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.491228070175 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 638.1 704.065955056 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9665647846 60.3974514979 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.8571428571 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 23.4991977007 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.21951772744 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.308364263512 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102930784123 0.0831039109588 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0906747975042 0.0758088955206 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210486827729 0.150359130593 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110051317876 0.0667264976115 165% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 14.1392134831 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.23 12.1639044944 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.14 8.38706741573 97% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 100.480337079 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.7820224719 110% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.