Claim: the best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.
Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea.
The author of the issue claims that the best way to confirm an argument is measuring its ability to convince another one with a different point of view. The author states that discovering the value of an idea needs serious debates, so the only way to confirm an argument is defending it against doubts and opposing views. I can agree neither with the claim nor the reason because I think both of them is a misconception.
For my first reason, I point out the primary purpose of an argument. An argument reveals a solution to an issue, so we should analyze the effect of it to its problem, not test its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint. For example, consider an argument about air pollution that suggests people using electric cars rather than gasoline cars. One with a different point of view says that it is no difference between electric and gasoline vehicles in polluting the air. The amount of carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere is equal in both cases. The amount of carbon dioxide produces to create electricity is as much as gasoline cars reveal to the atmosphere. This viewpoint is not a good reason for validating that argument, so we may experiment this in a real situation and find the precise effect of using electric cars.
Another problem with the claim is the word best. I think there is no best way to test an argument. Any suggestions about the validation of an argument only show some parts of a real solution. For example, my advice about analyzing and examine the debate in the real world only shows some parts of the validation process of an argument. In this process, we should consider the effect of other unwanted events to the result, so there is no "best" way to test an argument.
As I mentioned in the introductory paragraph, the reason for the claim is indeed a misconception. The reason for the claim is one of the ways to validate an argument, but not a very good way. Assume someone who has excellent knowledge about something and can convince anyone in this field. This person can defend indeed about any argument in this field with his/her extent knowledge. No one can argue with this person. I think there is no only way to discover the value of an idea. It depends on the situation, so we should consider a lot of variables to find the value of an argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-16 | jason123 | 66 | view |
| 2020-01-09 | Abhipray Singh | 58 | view |
| 2020-01-09 | Abhipray Singh | 66 | view |
| 2019-12-12 | Pranjil | 66 | view |
| 2019-11-26 | NRS | 58 | view |
- Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently 66
- Claim: the best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea. 50
- Claim: the best test of an argument is its ability to convince someone with an opposing viewpoint.Reason: Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea. 50
- Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently 58
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, may, so, for example, i think
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.5258426966 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 14.8657303371 47% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 12.9106741573 186% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1923.0 2235.4752809 86% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.65617433414 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64830169491 2.79657885939 95% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 215.323595506 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.426150121065 0.4932671777 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 618.3 704.065955056 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 6.24550561798 144% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.99550561798 140% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.2370786517 109% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 23.0359550562 78% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.7949685755 60.3974514979 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.4090909091 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7727272727 23.4991977007 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.04545454545 5.21951772744 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.445050881696 0.243740707755 183% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.142406469259 0.0831039109588 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112552918262 0.0758088955206 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.304755969372 0.150359130593 203% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0844075209575 0.0667264976115 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 14.1392134831 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.8420337079 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.75 12.1639044944 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.36 8.38706741573 88% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 100.480337079 74% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.2143820225 82% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
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.