Some people think it’s better to choose Mends who always have the same opinions as them. Other people believe it’s good to have friends who
sometimes disagree with them.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
As ancient philosophers put it, "man is a political animal". What this maxim means is that the material and spiritual needs of humans can only be met in an interdependent social setting. It is based on this universal fact that most people cannot dispense with the company of friends, so much so that the contrary is considered pathological. The characters and qualities of those friends in relation to ours, however, is much more relative.
For some people, the need for friendly opinions is one for validation and acceptance. They therefore have to mostly be in accordance with our own. That is, the opinions are meant to provide us merely with the psychological consolation of hearing them being confirmed out loud. It is to hear more arguments on the propositions we already assume to be true. Now this might seem like begging the question at first sight, but we can hardly deny that it is case when it comes to things we strongly believe in but have a hard time proving. It may be a sophistical question to ask what is objectively wrong about cynicism, for example, but no philanthropist whatsoever would enjoy the company of a cynic.
Another way to look at diiferent opinions is that of dialectic. Namely, it is the notion that true knowledge is a synthesis of two opposing views. Proponents of this approach like to be surrounded by people of different mentalities in hopes of catalyzing the evolution of their own outlooks. Apparently, this method can lead to catastrophic clashes and prove unfeasible when it comes to firm convictions. However, it is a good practice to review the great majority of personal views through this lens to make sure we are not kept in a small bubble. At the end of the day, most theoretical and practical questions are pluralistic.
In summary, the beliefs and mindsets of our loved ones cannot be reduced to a simple agreement test. We can rather prioritize a few meta opinions whose adoption is deemed an absolute criterion to tell a friend from a foe, whereas we stick to the suspension of judgment on the great rest of matters. This ensures that we stay open-minded while also living by an unequivocal code of ethics.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-02-18 | Assemkhidhr | 11 | view |
| 2024-02-19 | Assemkhidhr | 56 | view |
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony Last year however private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony s concerts in the park series doubled The symphony 73
- Some people think it s better to choose Mends who always have the same opinions as them Other people believe it s good to have friends who sometimes disagree with them Discuss both these views and give your own opinion Give reasons for your answer and inc 56
- You have just read an article in an international travel magazine which contained some information about your town that is incorrect Write a letter to the editor of the magazine In your letter correct the information in the article explain why it is impor 66
- A person s worth nowadays seems to be judged according to social status and material possessions Old fashioned values such as honour kindness and trust no longer seem important To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion 67
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, however, if, look, may, so, therefore, whereas, while, for example, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 13.1623246493 190% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 39.0 24.0651302605 162% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 57.0 41.998997996 136% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1806.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 373.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 4.8418230563 5.12529762239 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91592891434 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 176.041082164 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.595174262735 0.561755894193 106% => OK
syllable_count: 572.4 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 5.43587174349 184% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.5374222254 49.4020404114 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.0526315789 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6315789474 20.7667163134 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.68421052632 7.06120827912 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.4128256513 205% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127307277473 0.244688304435 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0361869907332 0.084324248473 43% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431388682331 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0684463231213 0.151304729494 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0463944927841 0.056905535591 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.2 13.0946893788 86% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 50.2224549098 121% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.3001002004 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.79 12.4159519038 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.85 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 78.4519038076 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.