Some people think it’s better to choose friends who always have the same opinions as them. Others believe that it’s good to have friends who sometimes disagree with them. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

In recent time we have noticed there is increasing in a debate between the people choosing their subordinates having same thoughts while others selecting the contradicting friends. In this essay, we will discuss the benefits of both the views and state why choosing a contradicting person is more beneficial over the other. On one hand, we have considerably seen people building a friendship with someone who just think like them in every aspect because of two main reasons, Firstly they can compute with the same level of the person and no need to waste of the time in explaining in about anything in details. Secondly, they might think rather than wasting time in contradicting and continuing the endless discussion it is better to focus on the outcome and deliverables. Therefore such persons believe having similar thoughts may help leading faster and better results to them. On the other hand, there are some people who believe having friends who do not obey their decision will help them in generating and give many probabilities and combination in their lives. For an instance, we have seen many scientists prefer selecting peers who disagree with their thoughts as they may discover some other cases or scenario of the problem which could not be possible by them. Hence because of this reason much kind of people choose person who disagrees with their decision. To conclude, in this essay we have discussed why selecting your peer is important based on matching your thoughts and disagreeing to your imaginations. In my opinion it’s important to select a colleague of you who could put forward other thoughts so that you can catch hold off all the possibilities of failures.