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 idea 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 main purpose of an argument. An argument reveals a solution to a problem, so we should analyze the effect of an argument 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 electronic cars rather than gasoline cars. One with a different point of view says that it is no difference between electronic and gasoline cars in polluting air. The amount of carbon dioxide enters the air is equal in both cases because the amount of carbon dioxide produces to create electricity is as much as gasoline cars reveal to the air. This is not a good reason for validating that argument, so we may experiment argument in a real situation and find the precise effect of using electronic 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 suggestion about analyzing and examine the argument 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 truly 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 great knowledge about something and can convince anyone in this field. This person can defend truly 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 58
- 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 66
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: 32.0 33.0505617978 97% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 12.9106741573 209% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1922.0 2235.4752809 86% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.65375302663 5.05705443957 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71165902024 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 215.323595506 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.411622276029 0.4932671777 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 617.4 704.065955056 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: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => 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: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.0571903036 60.3974514979 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.5238095238 118.986275619 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6666666667 23.4991977007 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.14285714286 5.21951772744 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 10.2758426966 78% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 13.0 5.13820224719 253% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.83258426966 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.444070182882 0.243740707755 182% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148528954383 0.0831039109588 179% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110577320876 0.0758088955206 146% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.304107905531 0.150359130593 202% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0935646145731 0.0667264976115 140% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.3 14.1392134831 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.8420337079 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.1743820225 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.69 12.1639044944 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.22 8.38706741573 86% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 100.480337079 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.8971910112 88% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => 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.