I am completely against the statement provided. If we have learned anything over centuries of violent human history involving wars, is that discussing a subject is the best way to solve the problem.
When two people from opposing extremes sit together and talk about a controvertial topic it is not a pretty scene. It might get loud and ugly but this is a very necessary part of the process of reaching a conclusion. It is during this phase that both the parties involved put forward their points of view. Now because of the extrimity involved it is very likely that most of these point won't make it to the other side as intended but a few points will definietly do and these are the few points that matter. These few points actually help bridge the gap between the extremes. Over a period of time the number of such points grow and leads to moderation among the adversaries.
Consider a counter example. What happens when people with contrasting views are kept apart. Social media manages the content that we see and the people we interact with through out the day. It is known fact that these social media algorithms show us only the posts and views that we want to see. A conservative will only see posts praising the conservative views and disparaging the libertanians. This leads to forming social pockets with minimal overlap. These groups of people are completely removed from the others view point and this often result in hate mongering and clashes among these groups.
Similarly when these opposing parties sit together and discuss a matter, like in a house of parliment it brings out the overlap. Overtime this overlap grops leading to moderation and hence a conclusion. This is a gradual process and might not happen in a day eventually a conclusion will be reached.
- 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 75
- Over the past three years there has been a marked increase in cases of 039 sidewalk rage 039 similar to the irrational anger drivers experience on the road but instead among sidewalk walkers The result is an increase in assaults property damage 67
- Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society s problems 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 584, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...ge the gap between the extremes. Over a period of time the number of such points grow and lead...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 170, Rule ID: THROUGH_OUT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'throughout'?
Suggestion: throughout
... we see and the people we interact with through out the day. It is known fact that these so...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Similarly,
...ring and clashes among these groups. Similarly when these opposing parties sit togethe...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, hence, if, similarly, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.5258426966 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.4196629213 40% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 14.8657303371 94% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 58.6224719101 65% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 12.9106741573 31% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1480.0 2235.4752809 66% => OK
No of words: 308.0 442.535393258 70% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.80519480519 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18926351222 4.55969084622 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57054294076 2.79657885939 92% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 215.323595506 78% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.548701298701 0.4932671777 111% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 704.065955056 65% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.99550561798 20% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 20.2370786517 89% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.0027776813 60.3974514979 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.2222222222 118.986275619 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1111111111 23.4991977007 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.16666666667 5.21951772744 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.83258426966 124% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151285906098 0.243740707755 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.045153512329 0.0831039109588 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456732717189 0.0758088955206 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.077045197984 0.150359130593 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0334655758691 0.0667264976115 50% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.8 14.1392134831 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.32 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.81 8.38706741573 93% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 100.480337079 65% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.8971910112 67% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => 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.