Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs.
The sweeping argument that discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs is indeed deeply flawed. It is inevitable that people will have differing beliefs and challenging the core beliefs of others may at times be fruitless. However, there are a number of examples that proves we must continue to open this discource to become a truly better society. This has been evidenced through many events throughout history. This sentiment has proven false through pivotal moments of political change and areas of scientific advancement.
Political protests are a prime example of when discussing controversial topics proves fruitful. Although not every protest or rally changes opinions, history has proven that through persistance and perserverence, confronting core beliefs can indeed change people's minds. Consider the 1960's Civil Rights movement in America. While many of it's rally's did not change the minds of folks who held on to rascist laws, the culmination of their efforts led to changes in our laws as well as the gradual change of an entire culture. In fact, if these brave citizens chose to believe the authors argument, the vast majority of our society may still hold on to those antiquated beliefs. The need for change necesitates confronting the core beliefs of others.
Even scientific advancements require confronting longstanding core beliefs. Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was absolutely in contrast with the deeply religious views of the time. His choice to continue bringing his work into the scientific community allowed for a great number of scientific advancements in areas like biology, chemistry, and psychology that society benefits from to this day.
The field of psychology also rests upon the core belief that often times strongly held beliefs can be changed when understanding a person's core motive for their opinion. For example, someone may be against refugees entering their native country and in a intellectual discussion may never be factually persuaded to change their mind. Through careful examination they may find this person had a relative murdered by someone who was a refugee. It is through understanding and healing the person's basic needs that they are able to better understand themselves and their core beliefs. Therapy, in and of iteself often confronts core beliefs that end up changing after realizing that the basis of their core belief may not be founded on factually based grounds but rather emotionally charged ones.
Controversy is inevitable and it is the choice of the individual whether they believe it will be fruitful to discuss their differing opinions with others. Politics, science, and psychology have proven that moreover discussing controversial topics, even with those who have contrasting views, is not only necessary but essential for the progress and advancement of society and ourselves.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-09-22 | GeneralBlitzer | 50 | view |
| 2020-09-22 | GeneralBlitzer | 66 | view |
- Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society’s problems. 66
- Discussing controversial topics with those with contrasting views is not useful because very few people change their mind when questioned about their core beliefs. 83
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 66
- 'The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station.“Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of 69
- Over the past year, our late-night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station's coverage of w 55
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 579, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ese brave citizens chose to believe the authors argument, the vast majority of our soci...
^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 253, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...es entering their native country and in a intellectual discussion may never be fa...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, well, while, for example, in contrast, in fact, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 11.3162921348 141% => OK
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 61.0 58.6224719101 104% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2529.0 2235.4752809 113% => OK
No of words: 465.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.43870967742 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64369019777 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79489649361 2.79657885939 100% => OK
Unique words: 248.0 215.323595506 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.533333333333 0.4932671777 108% => OK
syllable_count: 776.7 704.065955056 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7677493754 60.3974514979 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.428571429 118.986275619 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 23.4991977007 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61904761905 5.21951772744 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => 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: 0.416605797276 0.243740707755 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.113438725419 0.0831039109588 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.162148035016 0.0758088955206 214% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.222364845445 0.150359130593 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108450644217 0.0667264976115 163% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 48.8420337079 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 12.1743820225 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 133.0 100.480337079 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.