Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
Human being by birth wants to be fixed at its own belief and hence discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is useless.
Mankind has some innate properties which are common and thus are found in nearly every one of them. The core beliefs, regional belief-for example, are imparted into people in their early childhood and such beliefs are difficult and even impossible to change. When two person having contrasting view discuss over a controversial topic, most of the time the discuss turns into a debate and ends at the same point where the discussion was started. This same thing is applicable for political or economic beliefs a person. For example, in Bangladesh there are two political party-BNP and Awamileague. The followers of BNP have their belief on former president of Bangladesh Ziaur Rahman. They believe that he is the person who had declared war and venerate him for being the founder of BNP. However, the followers of Awamileague have other view in this respect. They think Zia was a spy working for Pakistanies and hence execrate him and his followers. At the same time, they urge the supporters of BNP by placing first hand evidence to change the belief that Zia made the declaration of the war. But, no matter how strong is the evidence, the followers of BNP never listen to the follower of Awamilieague. This topic is a very controversial topic for Bangladesh and discussion on this topic between contrasting views is useless if not mere wastage of time.
Similarly, People who believe that the earth is flat, no matter how hard evidence is paced in front of them, never accepts the idea that earth can be spherical. Usually people remain dogmatic in their idea and strong first hand evidence is not enough to change this view. This is the innate virtue of human being. So it is better for the believer of round earth not to try to influence the flat earth believer because it is hard and even impossible to proselytize them.
However, there may be some argument about the fact that the Prophet who came in this material world and become successful in the fact of proselytization. For example, before Prophet Mohammad has come in this world the people of Saudi Arabia believed in many God. But when Mohammad had become prophet he tried to change the belief of people of many gods and turned them into the follower of only one God, Allah. Mohammad was successful like the other Prophet before him but all of them were more than human and had supernatural power. But for mass people like us it is impossible to change the belief of others and hence there is no point in trying to proselytize other.
Discussing controversial topics with people having controversial topic is useless.
- Last year, Kensington Academy turned over management of its cafeteria to a private vendor, Swift Nutrition. This company serves low-fat, low-calorie meals that students do not find enjoyable – my son and several of his friends came home yesterday compla 39
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. 58
- Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and even more importantly to disobey and resist unjust laws 83
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. 58
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college 58
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 270, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'person' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'people', 'persons'.
Suggestion: people; persons
...and even impossible to change. When two person having contrasting view discuss over a ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 354, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...a controversial topic, most of the time the discuss turns into a debate and ends at the sam...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 254, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun God seems to be countable; consider using: 'many '.
Suggestion: many
... the people of Saudi Arabia believed in many God. But when Mohammad had become prophet h...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, may, similarly, so, thus, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.5258426966 154% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 12.4196629213 16% => OK
Conjunction : 20.0 14.8657303371 135% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 33.0505617978 109% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 58.6224719101 107% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 12.9106741573 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2272.0 2235.4752809 102% => OK
No of words: 468.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8547008547 5.05705443957 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61822858055 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 215.323595506 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.465811965812 0.4932671777 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 717.3 704.065955056 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.0031504608 60.3974514979 60% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 98.7826086957 118.986275619 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.347826087 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.21951772744 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.244789607857 0.243740707755 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0678200314281 0.0831039109588 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0888892045989 0.0758088955206 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174707121588 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0969088260408 0.0667264976115 145% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 14.1392134831 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.8420337079 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.1743820225 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.1639044944 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.43 8.38706741573 89% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 100.480337079 83% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.8971910112 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => 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.