Writing Sample Critique Corner

[eng_dude786]

We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes.

 

Can someone come up with an anti-thesis to the above statement. As in one example where you are educated by success and not by mistakes? I can not think of any national or global examples for the anti-thesis.

[The Law]

We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes.

 

Can someone come up with an anti-thesis to the above statement. As in one example where you are educated by success and not by mistakes? I can not think of any national or global examples for the anti-thesis.

 

Hmm, you could try to use an example such as diplomacy between the US and North Korea... maybe you can spin it so that success helps to educate us by showing that we can co-operate with one another despite our differences and thereby opens doors that may not have been possible if not for the success (get to know one another's points of views and use that knowledge to move forward in relationships).

 

 

 

I think the best thing to do is first, just do your best to come up with an example. Remember, YOU are the one doing the spinning. You can really just spin it to fit the prompt if you think about it hard enough. Then try to find comparisons between the synthesis and antithesis... see if you can use these differences to really explore the issue and show you have complex thought processes and evaluate things thoroughly.

 

I must say though - this is definitely a tough prompt.

[avenir001]

Hmm, you could try to use an example such as diplomacy between the US and North Korea... maybe you can spin it so that success helps to educate us by showing that we can co-operate with one another despite our differences and thereby opens doors that may not have been possible if not for the success (get to know one another's points of views and use that knowledge to move forward in relationships).

 

 

 

I think the best thing to do is first, just do your best to come up with an example. Remember, YOU are the one doing the spinning. You can really just spin it to fit the prompt if you think about it hard enough. Then try to find comparisons between the synthesis and antithesis... see if you can use these differences to really explore the issue and show you have complex thought processes and evaluate things thoroughly.

 

I must say though - this is definitely a tough prompt.

 

and remember...if law can show complex thought processes, anyone can.

[The Law]

and remember...if law can show complex thought processes, anyone can.

 

Enough with the jibber-jabber!

 

 

[goose]

A couple of prompts. Any advice is appreciated!

 

The primary goal of every business should be to maximize profits.

 

Success in the business world is most often quantified by profits. Organizations that yield the highest profit are deemed the most successful. From this logic, and given than all business owners desire success, it can be deduced that all businesses should strive to maximize profits. Exxon is currently considered to be one of the United States' most successful enterprises. This success, in part, is reflected in Exxon's recent astonishing profit margins totaling nearly 12 billion US dollars in the last quarter. Evidenced by the driving costs of fuel for consumers at a rate higher than the increase in value of oil, it can be assumed that Exxon holds the desire for profit in high priority - perhaps higher than that of respect from its consumer base.

 

However, there do exist circumstances in which profit must become of secondary concern for businesses. When this thirst for profit undermines the safety and well being of employees priorities should be reexamined. Such was the case for the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in 1911. Terrible working conditions, over worked employees, and poor safety standards led to a devastating fire that took the life of many of the factory workers. Company owners had locked fire escape routes to prevent workers from stealing merchandise. This, driven by a blind desire for profit, was assumed to be the cause of many unnecessary deaths. Rather than letting profits consume every once of attention from the Shirtwaist Company owners, the wellness of employees should have been reevaluated before this devastation occurred.

 

The primary concern of businesses should always be success. Often, this success comes in the form of increased profits yet there are circumstances in which companies can be unsuccessful despite high profits. The example of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire of 1911 provides good evidence for the notion that profit should be the primary concern only in businesses in which the health and well being of workers is maintained.

 

 

A politician’s lifestyle should reflect his or her political views.

 

The easiest way to determine whether or not a politician's political views are genuine is to examine that individuals own life. This is based of course on the assumption that individuals live their lives according to their genuine ideals. Any facades are removed when there is no one to mislead. In order to gain the respect of voters and peers, politicians should be genuine in their political views. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that most aspects of a politician's life should coincide with any opinions that are portrayed publicly.

 

However, it is sometimes justifiable for a politician to have a lifestyle that is not entirely consistent with his or her political views. A politician's views may very well represent an unattainable ideal or Utopia. Consider the example of Cuba in mid to late 20th century. Fidel Castro, the leader of communist Cuba likely did not have a lifestyle that strictly coincided with his Marxist idealism. The central ideology of Marxism relies on the equality of all citizens in all aspects of life. Castro was provided with luxuries that the average Cuban citizen was not including military protection and extra financial support. This deviation in lifestyle from Castro's political views represents a situation where inconsistencies between lifestyle and views are justified. Without additional military protection, Castro would have been vulnerable to attack by those that opposed his political views. Furthermore, pure communism in which all citizens are treated identically is a utopia that is not possible under realistic circumstances.

 

A politician’s lifestyle should reflect his or her political views only when said political views are easily represented, as is the case they do not suppose an unattainable idealism. When a politician portrays relatively non-extremist political views, the authenticity of these views is enhanced when they are reflected in the politician’s lifestyle. On the other hand, when a politician's views are represented by an impossible utopia, deviation in his or her lifestyle from these views is justified.

[Odie]

Guys I am having trouble with this one:

 

Laws should not change social values.

 

any ideas of e.g. when they should not, should, and resolution?

[eng_dude786]

I think we'll have to wait for the expert Law on this one:

 

but here are some rough thoughts:

 

Laws should not change social values:

1. you could argue that laws are pretty much some guidelines that people in power agree to and ask the majority of the public to obey. By that merit alone they should not change social values. You could define the term social values as 'close relations' people have with each other - like a day to day conversation. If you analyze one's daily life, laws rarely change social values. People still treat each other the way they used to - they still are the same person.

 

2. Anti-thesis is a bit easier I think. Laws should change social values when the laws forbid racism and discrimination. For example, in Canada, one can be charged if a inappropriate comment has been made to a minority group. You could say that since the Law or ruling has been passed, it should change people's social values. You could even go back in time when the first bill was first passed against racism and say that because of the bill, people were forced to change their social values. It was now wrong to use the colour of one's skin for discriminatory acts. Another example comes to mind is driving at a high speed. Because laws exist, social values of racing or driving fast have been subdued.

 

3. Resolution could be that if the laws, after critical thinking by one's own mind, change the society for the better than those laws should change social values. In the case of speed driving, research shows that driving fast and not obeying the road laws can result in injury to oneself and the people around the person - therefore in this case laws should change the social values people hold of driving fast.

 

I hope that makes sense, but I would wait for Law to come up with complex and really nice examples

[Odie]

It does thank you!!!!!!

 

Does anyone have a specific e.g. for the 1st paragraph?

[eng_dude786]

Hey buddy,

 

I thought about long and hard for this prompt and I think I have an example for the first paragraph. (Ironically laws are passed on to make changes in the social values of the people or at least every law limits or excludes certain practices of humans. I mean that's what laws are for. )

 

Here's another perspective from how you could approach the first paragraph.

 

Laws should not change social values.

 

Thesis:

Throughout history there have been countless examples where people in power have issued laws - to suit their own interests - at the risk of humanity. One paramount lesson harnessed from such, rather horrific, events is that laws should not change social values. Take the hideous example of Hitler during World War II, where he changed the political structure of Germany and used unjustifiable propaganda-morphed-into-a-law cause to assault people of a specific faith. The horrendous acts scream out in resonance that laws should not change social values. Had the Germans practiced friendlier social values to different spiritual needs , history would have been quite different. World War II is a prime example of why social judgment, morality and all other peaceful social values of human beings should not be tarnished at the face of a law that so-and-so political party passes.

 

 

lol...how does that sound? I think I got carried away. Lemme know what you think. Do you think that's a good example for paragraph # 1?

[S B]

hey...I am really glad seeing this thread! I was hoping if someone could look over my writing sample. Thanks a lot!!

 

Progress often complicates as much as it simplifies.

 

Progress is loved by one and all. There are many reasons to it like an increasing financial benefit or having greater authority over others. It might be argued that a promotion is always welcomed as one ends up having greater control over things as well other co-workers, can be a little relaxed while working, in short that things would be simpler if one gets promoted but it is not quite true all the time. Progress often ends up with much more responsibility and needs much more hard work than what needs to be input at a lower level. The above text mentions progress in the sense of only promotion but the same refers to any kind of progress. For instance if one considers progress in the economy of a country as it joins hands with another one, it might end up with as many complications as it tries to simplify things.

For instance, the simplicities would be the two nations joining hands in other things like war forces if they are economically together and can help out one another because if one ends up in trouble the economy of both might suffer. But on the other hand the situation might end up being quite complicated if one nation thinks to take advantage of the other just because they have joined hands to boost their economy. Some of the problems that might arise could be invasion by one on the others territory taking full benefit of the economic relations.

Another general example would be of a simple store manager. If one progresses from a store employee to a store manager it might seem like a piece of cake as one might exhibit more freedom and can be more authoritative towards their employees. The position however, also comes with an increased responsibility towards the store, for example, taking care of store supplies, making sure a certain number of employees are present at all times, making sure the balance at the end of each day is correct. Hence the situation comes with as many benefits as there are losses.

There are certain cases when the complications may not outnumber or come close to the simplifications. Consider the case at a construction site. If a person works as the labourer there are many risks involved most of them related to physical injuries due to any accidents that might happen while others related to things like heat stroke or snow bite etc. If the person does further studies and progresses to a higher level like an architect who is responsible to designing the construction site. His new job does not involve that much of outdoor work and hence the probability of him being injured is less. Although the responsibilities increase with the promotion the risk is not as much as it would have been if he were a labourer.

Hence, it could be seen that progress can complicate things as much as it can simplify but at times it may not end up in a situation that is more simple than complicated. Many factors govern whether the complications or simplicities outnumber. One of them being any sort of risk involved. The situation revolves around the type of risk involved. For instance ,a risk of life will definitely outweigh any sort of monetary risk. Another contributing factor would be the increased responsibilities over increased freedom. Therefore, if progress complicates or simplifies depends on the situation being dealt with.

[Odie]

Hey buddy,

 

I thought about long and hard for this prompt and I think I have an example for the first paragraph. (Ironically laws are passed on to make changes in the social values of the people or at least every law limits or excludes certain practices of humans. I mean that's what laws are for. )

 

Here's another perspective from how you could approach the first paragraph.

 

Laws should not change social values.

 

Thesis:

Throughout history there have been countless examples where people in power have issued laws - to suit their own interests - at the risk of humanity. One paramount lesson harnessed from such, rather horrific, events is that laws should not change social values. Take the hideous example of Hitler during World War II, where he changed the political structure of Germany and used unjustifiable propaganda-morphed-into-a-law cause to assault people of a specific faith. The horrendous acts scream out in resonance that laws should not change social values. Had the Germans practiced friendlier social values to different spiritual needs , history would have been quite different. World War II is a prime example of why social judgment, morality and all other peaceful social values of human beings should not be tarnished at the face of a law that so-and-so political party passes.

 

 

lol...how does that sound? I think I got carried away. Lemme know what you think. Do you think that's a good example for paragraph # 1?

 

Hey! Yes that's wonderful!!!! Then for a resolution you can tie it into well-being/safety of society/humanity in general. Thank you :D:D

[kidbao1290]

A couple of prompts. Any advice is appreciated!

 

The primary goal of every business should be to maximize profits.

 

Success in the business world is most often quantified by profits. Organizations that yield the highest profit are deemed the most successful. From this logic, and given than all business owners desire success, it can be deduced that all businesses should strive to maximize profits. Exxon is currently considered to be one of the United States' most successful enterprises. This success, in part, is reflected in Exxon's recent astonishing profit margins totaling nearly 12 billion US dollars in the last quarter. Evidenced by the driving costs of fuel for consumers at a rate higher than the increase in value of oil, it can be assumed that Exxon holds the desire for profit in high priority - perhaps higher than that of respect from its consumer base.

 

However, there do exist circumstances in which profit must become of secondary concern for businesses. When this thirst for profit undermines the safety and well being of employees priorities should be reexamined. Such was the case for the Triangle Shirtwaist Company in 1911. Terrible working conditions, over worked employees, and poor safety standards led to a devastating fire that took the life of many of the factory workers. Company owners had locked fire escape routes to prevent workers from stealing merchandise. This, driven by a blind desire for profit, was assumed to be the cause of many unnecessary deaths. Rather than letting profits consume every once of attention from the Shirtwaist Company owners, the wellness of employees should have been reevaluated before this devastation occurred.

 

The primary concern of businesses should always be success. Often, this success comes in the form of increased profits yet there are circumstances in which companies can be unsuccessful despite high profits. The example of the Triangle Shirtwaist fire of 1911 provides good evidence for the notion that profit should be the primary concern only in businesses in which the health and well being of workers is maintained.

 

 

A politician’s lifestyle should reflect his or her political views.

 

The easiest way to determine whether or not a politician's political views are genuine is to examine that individuals own life. This is based of course on the assumption that individuals live their lives according to their genuine ideals. Any facades are removed when there is no one to mislead. In order to gain the respect of voters and peers, politicians should be genuine in their political views. Thus it is reasonable to conclude that most aspects of a politician's life should coincide with any opinions that are portrayed publicly.

 

However, it is sometimes justifiable for a politician to have a lifestyle that is not entirely consistent with his or her political views. A politician's views may very well represent an unattainable ideal or Utopia. Consider the example of Cuba in mid to late 20th century. Fidel Castro, the leader of communist Cuba likely did not have a lifestyle that strictly coincided with his Marxist idealism. The central ideology of Marxism relies on the equality of all citizens in all aspects of life. Castro was provided with luxuries that the average Cuban citizen was not including military protection and extra financial support. This deviation in lifestyle from Castro's political views represents a situation where inconsistencies between lifestyle and views are justified. Without additional military protection, Castro would have been vulnerable to attack by those that opposed his political views. Furthermore, pure communism in which all citizens are treated identically is a utopia that is not possible under realistic circumstances.

 

A politician’s lifestyle should reflect his or her political views only when said political views are easily represented, as is the case they do not suppose an unattainable idealism. When a politician portrays relatively non-extremist political views, the authenticity of these views is enhanced when they are reflected in the politician’s lifestyle. On the other hand, when a politician's views are represented by an impossible utopia, deviation in his or her lifestyle from these views is justified.

 

I'm having trouble to write teh second essay, a politician's life style should refelct his or her politic view?...i'm just wondering what kind of example we could use to support the prompt, and I don't think the example for the antithesis is good enough. and what part of a lifestyle should be related to "political view", and what kind of "political view" are talking about here? I need a clearer definition for both "lifestyle" and "political view" here, really confused...I've been thinking about this prompt for a while, still can't find a good relasionship b/w "lifestyle" and "political view" HELP PLEASE:confused:

[StreetballKing]

I'm having trouble to write teh second essay, a politician's life style should refelct his or her politic view?...i'm just wondering what kind of example we could use to support the prompt, and I don't think the example for the antithesis is good enough. and what part of a lifestyle should be related to "political view", and what kind of "political view" are talking about here? I need a clearer definition for both "lifestyle" and "political view" here, really confused...I've been thinking about this prompt for a while, still can't find a good relasionship b/w "lifestyle" and "political view" HELP PLEASE:confused:

 

Any part of lifestyle can be related to political view. For example, if a politician is living a lavish lifestyle, he will not understand the perils of the working class, since he has never tasted it before. Therefore he will not be sympathetic of the working class when setting laws/policies.

[Odie]

A person's first priority in life should be financial security.

 

- unsure about e.g. and need help!

 

IDEAS:

- financial security=wealth

like Mr. Burns! It makes him happy.

 

- better to have immaterial wealth to be happy

- like the Cratchits in A Christmas Carol

 

- resolution: happiness!

 

Hahahhaaaaa no seriously I'm not sure

[supafield]

I would mention Maslow and his Hierarchy in my opening and stray from that to define financial security

 

You could say under normal circumstances financial security may be the first priority because it is basis of many other things like your home and transportation and nourishment so one worries about financial security in order to assure all basics needs...

 

Then you can say unless health becomes and issue.... When health becomes less then ideal one should put away financial concerns likes work/jobs in order to become healthy again because if health threatens life financial considerations are useless if you die... and you can mention the canadian health care system is socialized so money doesn't become a limiting factor when attaining health.

 

and your conditions could be as simple as:

 

When someone is healthy it is in their best interests to make financial security a priority as it will ensure they receive the basics necessities in life. When significantly unhealthy one must make returning to a healthy state their top priority in place of financial security as life and health supercede financial considerations.

 

I don't know... kinda simple but I think it'll get the job done...

 

As long as your follow a clear concise formula with moderate examples you'll do well in the writing sample....

 

I got an S by saying... This prompt means this in my own words and an example of when this is true is....

 

An example when this in not true is...

 

This is true when and not true when....

 

Of course it's dolled up with fancy language and writing but really as long as you hit those points and stay on topic you'll do well.

[Albertan10]

hey guys,

 

im having trouble with the following prompt.

 

 

In international diplomacy, what is said is less important than how it is said.

 

Describe a specific situation in which something said in international diplomacy might be more important than how it is said. Discuss what you think determines whether or not what is said in international diplomacy is less important than how it is said.

 

some help would be appreciated.

 

 

thanks

[StreetballKing]

Hi,

 

I came across this prompt just now, I was pretty confused by it because I didn't know what "equality" they are talking about. So I just went ahead and wrote the essay, although I think I was pretty off topic on this one. I think there are many grammatical errors too. Any critique or suggestion is greatly appreciated! thanks!

 

Education makes everyone equal.

 

Write a unified essay in which you perform the following tasks. Explain what you think the above statement means. Describe a specific situation in which education

 

does not make everyone equal. Discuss what you think determines whether or not education makes everyone equal.

 

 

People are born with a wide array of abilities and predispositions, and public education tries to narrow people's differences by teaching everyone the same ideas and principles. It is in society's best interest to supply every member with sufficient knowledge in order to live a proper life, while at the same time trying to make everyone equal. A harmonic society is one in which all of its members have similar values,beliefs, and ablities. Therefore, all the courses in the North American K-12 education are standardized, and curriculums between every school are vastly similar to eachother. The kids are taught the same things whether they are from Alabama or British Columbia. This is the ultimate goal of education, that is to give everyone a fair chance at success.

 

Yet, as stated above, not everyone is born with the same abilities and genetic predispositions. For example, two students from the same education system can have vastly different outcomes. One might become a doctor or lawyer, while the other one might end up in a state prison. This is due to the differences between the students' backgrounds, living conditions, brain development, and many more factors. In this case, while education tries to make everyone equal, it is rarely the end result. This is even more evident between members of the same family. They grow up in identical environments, go to the same school, are taught by the same teachers, yet they can end up in totally different walks of life.

 

The debate over whether or not education makes everyone equal has always been a contentious one. As seen from above, while the ultimate goal of public education is to eliminate differences between students and to make everyone equal, it is rarely achieved. This is due to a variety of reasons, as too many factors other than education can affect a child as he grows up. Genetic predisposition alone can undermine the goal of public education. For example, while every elementary student is taught the multiplication rules in North America around the same age, some students will grasp the concept immediately, while other students will never be able to multiply without the aid of a calculator. In conclusion, while the goal of education is to make everyone equal, there are so many other factors affecting each member of society, that equality is impossible to obtain.

[Odie]

We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes

 

what do you guys think?????

[g35]

Question:

 

how long does the essay need to be? TPR Cracking the MCAT CBT book says that they should be 500-600 words, yet many of the examples i see posted here are only 200-300 words. Or are the ones people are posting here simplifications of their actual essays?

 

Hi,

 

I came across this prompt just now, I was pretty confused by it because I didn't know what "equality" they are talking about. So I just went ahead and wrote the essay, although I think I was pretty off topic on this one. I think there are many grammatical errors too. Any critique or suggestion is greatly appreciated! thanks!

 

Education makes everyone equal.

 

 

Personally,

 

thesis for this one I would use what you have, that standardized curricula give everyone an equal base to start from, regardless of their background.

 

The antithesis I would use for this one is that education, according to Karl Marx and conflict-theory sociologists in general, is that education is actually a tool to keep the rich people rich, and the poor people poor. The rich are the only ones with access to higher education, as well as "friends in all the right places", while poor people do not generally have access to higher education and thus are stuck in lower-class jobs generation after generation.

[Odie]

We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes

 

what do you guys think?????

 

 

anyone? I really need help on this one

[Odie]

bump it up

[StreetballKing]

We are educated more by our mistakes than by our successes

 

what do you guys think?????

 

Hi Odie,

 

For the thesis i'd write something like "we learn best from our mistakes". Things such as wars and stuff. By seeing how much destruction WWII has caused, the world has learned that wars can never be a real solution to problems, that's why the great powers in the world has avoided direct conflicts for the past 60+ years.

 

For the antithesis I'd say something about scientific advancements. The successful development of satellites and space probes have enabled us to study the outer space much better than if we didnt have them. So in this case we are better educated by our successes.

 

hope this can get u started

 

[Odie]

Hi Odie,

 

For the thesis i'd write something like "we learn best from our mistakes". Things such as wars and stuff. By seeing how much destruction WWII has caused, the world has learned that wars can never be a real solution to problems, that's why the great powers in the world has avoided direct conflicts for the past 60+ years.

 

For the antithesis I'd say something about scientific advancements. The successful development of satellites and space probes have enabled us to study the outer space much better than if we didnt have them. So in this case we are better educated by our successes.

 

hope this can get u started

 

 

 

So then would your resolution be safety/well-being/benefit to society?

[StreetballKing]

Ya something like that. Point out that when something is absolutely doomed for failure (wars, racism, etc), then we can learn from the mistakes that people have made in the past so that we will not do it again. Otherwise, we learn best from our successes (advancement of science, medicine, physics, etc etc).

[Albertan10]

hey guys,

 

im having trouble with the following prompt.

 

 

In international diplomacy, what is said is less important than how it is said.

 

Describe a specific situation in which something said in international diplomacy might be more important than how it is said. Discuss what you think determines whether or not what is said in international diplomacy is less important than how it is said.

 

some help would be appreciated.

 

 

thanks

 

bump on this one...

 

i was also struggling on this prompt. im not sure of what i could use for an antithesis.

 

Education should promote learning outside the classroom as well as within.

 

Describe a specific situation in which education might justifiably not promote learning outside the classroom. Discuss what you think determines whether or not education should foster learning outside the classroom.

 

 

thanks