Writing Sample Critique Corner

[future_doc]

Yes, and which Bush, there were two of them, one brought an unnecessary war for phony reasons where the public was totally misled and got in by only a few votes with the help of Court and the other was great friends with the Saudis, being an oil man.

[akmg13]

Hi All,

 

I would appreciate any comments. I haven't written an essay since high school about 10 years ago. Thank you!

 

Only those politicians that have learned the art of compromise can achieve their political goals.

 

Explain what you think the above statement means.

Describe a specific situation in which a politician might achieve a political goal without compromising. Discuss what you think determines when politicians should compromise to achieve a political goal.

 

The political process involves many different people who are bound to have different opinions and values. Learning how to listen, understand and accept others views, while not necessarily having to agree, can assist in progressing the political process. If a politician expects to advance their own goals and agenda, they will require the support of other politicians. So to succeed, there must be reciprocity and respect in the acceptance of others ideas, so that their own goals can eventually be met.

 

There are certain political goals that should not be compromised on. For example, it is reported that North Korea has reinitiated their nuclear program to the dismay of the United Nations and much of the world. The political goal is to bring the end to their nuclear program, to prevent misuse of a very powerful weapon that could kill many people. There were recently two American journalists detained in North Korea for crossing into the country illegally. The negotiations regarding their freedom appeared to be kept distinct from the political arena. It would not be appropriate to lax the rules with respect to North Korea's lack of regard for UN policy as a negotiation tool in the attempt to free the journalists. Other non-political demands, such as an apology and an American convoy showing respect, were met to satisfy North Korea's president to free the journalists, without compromising on the overall political goal. While showing respect to the North Korean president might appear to strengthen his stance momentarily, it is a very brief act that does not weaken the stance of the rest of the world in opposition to their nuclear program.

 

Certain compromises could be acceptable in the political arena, when prioritized with the overall political goals. A lower priority goal, could be compromised, if only temporarily, if it advances a higher priority goal. For example, not raising taxes might be an important long term goal of the newly-elected President of the United States, Barack Obama. However, the health care crisis that exists, where millions of Americans do not have access to health care, is currently a higher priority. In the short term, if might be necessary to raise taxes, in order to progress the higher priority goal of health care, while temporarily sacrificing the long term goal of not raising taxes. The hope would be that once the health care goals are met, that taxes could then be reduced, or at least not raised any further. While this might not make the President popular and possibly risks future election for not meeting one goal, the achievement of the health care goal could make him quite successful and a master of the art of compromise.

 

My Comments

For the 2nd paragraph, I probably strayed a bit from the actions of a politician, I could have tied it in by stating that the State department was involved in the negotiations although a "non-politician" convoy was sent. And that the negotiations focused on the one issue because the nuclear program was non-negotiable.

[future_doc]

You should have used the word 'delegation' and not 'convoy' that has an entirely different meaning, in fact it confused me and I had thought you were then referring to the US military ships on the high seas that did not actually inspect a NK ship that was thought to be caring nuclear arms.

 

This is well done, especially for a first attempt after 10 years. Why not try another one dealing only with domestic politics and leaving out the international aspect.

[akmg13]

Thanks future_doc. I agree about the convoy... oops! I think as I practice more I'll have more time to review to catch things like that.

 

I will definitely be practicing more and I'll work on some domestic examples.

 

Thanks again!

[nino]

sry mr. future_doc, care to read my essay which is on the previous page rite on top of another essay which u probably overlooked?

[future_doc]

sry mr. future_doc, care to read my essay which is on the previous page rite on top of another essay which u probably overlooked?

 

I just read your essay and wrote my below remarks as I was reading each part, without having read it completely. You will see below the parts I don't agree with and why.

 

 

The object of education should be to teach skills, not values.

 

Describe a specific situation in which the object of education might be teaching values rather than skills. Discuss what you think determines when the object of education is to teach skills and when it is to teach values.

 

Education, in its common definition, usually means the teaching of the skills essential for living. Ever since kindergarten, where basic literacy and arithmetics are taught, all the way to post-secondary school, where job-related trainings are gained, a person spends more than a quarter of his or her life indulging in such learning. Much like an investment, education aims to offer a positive return by improving the learners' lives.

 

In the above part, you are discussing basic skills that are taught, reading, writing, arithmetic. All are essential skills for life. You don’t mention socialization and the common values that come with it, friendship. Collaboration, being quiet when the teacher teaches, to be good, not to steal, not to interrupt others, proud to be Canadian, etc. But this is not part of what you want to say, so it is fine.

 

But then you leap from elementary school to medical skills, this is also fine.

 

Hence, it is not surprising that strong emphasis is placed on real-life skills, such as dissection for doctors.

 

On the other hand, values, being perceived as sets of rules governing one's action, vary greatly from person to person. Views on controversial issues, such as abortion or stem cell research, cannot be "passed on" to children in school, as they are entitled to their own opinions on such matters. Thus, it is understandable for values to play a less important role in education.

 

Above, you discuss values, but you jump to controversial values without having considered first “common values” of society which may have been a better starting point. The controversial examples you give don’t fit in for a discussion with elementary children in school. Therefore, I am not sure whether your conclusion follows that “it is understandable for values to play a less important role in education. I question the validity of this conclusion b/c I question the validity of the example you gave. And I do not agree that one flows naturally from the other. I think you need a more compelling argument or example. I would try to rework that to flow logically and in the context of what you wrote previously.

 

For example, in Pakistan where so many children go to private religious schools, they are brainwashed with the values of the Taliban, of extreme Islam, and these values are not only non traditional values of Pakistan, they are not the values of Islam, yet these vulnerable children’s minds are being warped, they become easy targets for recruiters to be suicide bombers, they consider we are the infidels who need to be killed. Better no values than ideologically being attracted to extremism values if they can be called values.

 

However, that is not to say the teaching of values should be completely omitted from education. There are values shared by people, which are regarded as societal morales. The respect for others, for example, is taught to toddlers even before pre-school. So are freedom of speech and religion, the fundamentals outlined by the Bill of Rights that laid out the foundation of the democratic society. Such societal values play important roles in one's life. It is obvious that no matter how well prepared a person is for a job, a lack of basic respect for co-workers would not benefit that person in his or her journey in life. Since education ultimately offers opportunities and satisfaction in life, common societal values are incorporated into one's education, whether it is taught by family or schools.

 

You cover values well above.

 

The object of education is for one to self-improve, to gain from what is learned and use it to better his or her life. Whether the emphasis should be on skills or values depend on the nature of the said values. In a society that encourages individual opinions, values that differ among people should not be advocated in schools, such is the case with common controversial topics. On the other hand, values that have been approved by the society as a whole, such as respect or freedom, are more important than skills in one's education, since those are the solid foundation of our society.

 

I hope what I wrote is helpful in some way. If not I am sorry and apologize.

[sucotai]

my first attempt to write one under 30 min, i found it hard to focus and write it coherently.....any help's appreciated!

 

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is not good ideas, but rather personal influence, that leads to success in politics.

 

Describe a specific situation in which good ideas might lead to success in politics. Discuss what you think determines whether good ideas or personal influence leads to success in politics.

 

 

A person's influence may vary according to that person's ability to engage people's attention and appeal to their needs. In the realm of government politics, where silent battles are often fought between rivalrous parties, the influence a politician can exert on the public usually gains him or her support and popularity. Often times, a politician's personal charisma comes into play when that person attempts to draw the public to his or her side. This is well desmonstrated by the notorious Nazi leader Adolf Hitler in his approach to win public support. At the end of WWI, Germany was in a state of severe economic recession after a large amount of reparation was paid to the Allies. People were demoralized as a result of the defeat. Hitler, seeing through the people's concerns, enticed the public with his passionate speeches and flamboyant promises that could allegedly make Germany the leader of the world. By appealing to people's emotion, he successfully conveyed his personal thoughts and beliefs to his followers, which eventually led to the devastating events in WWII. In Hitler's case, he did not have concrete ideas that specifically targeted the economic crisis for the public. Contrarily, it was his speeches, which may seem empty in hindsight, that led him to his initial success among Germans.

 

However, while influence exerted on the public is important, it sometimes gets overshadowed by the introduction of good ideas in politics. Ideas, especially the ones that are concrete and specific, can have great impact on whether the politician can be successful. Former US president Bill Clinton, for instance, used ideas instead of influence to revive the economy. Prior to his presidentship, US was in a state of economic recession and national debt. Clinton proposed a new taxation system that increased the tax rate on the wealthiest 1.2% of the population, while reduced tax on the low-income families. Also, a budget contraint was placed on unnecessary matters to save money for the more urgent social matters such as wellfare and education. As a result, US faced an unprecedented uninterrupted ten-year economic growth and a government budget surplus without national debt. Clinton was clearly successful in his attempt to revive the economy. Yet he did not exert much personal influence on the public as his policies gained large criticism from the opposition party and the wealthy. Nonetheless, his concrete ideas solved the economic crisis at hand.

 

Thus, it seems both personal influence and good ideas can play a role in a politician's success. Whether one outweigh the other depends largely upon the public's needs. When the public is emotionally scarred, a politician can easily influence the public by addressing their emotional needs. This is the strategy used by Hitler on the post-WWI Germans, who gladly accepted Hitler as their saviour in their war-scarred condition. On the other hand, when the public requires more concrete solutions, as with the case of US in 1990s, ideas that are well-planned, problem-specific, and workable can lead the politician to success.

[future_doc]

nino, see my PM.

[nino]

thx future_doc! in spite of the fact that somehow my post disappeared...?= =

 

should i have gone w/ the NK u mentioned to make it look "deeper"? i tried to define property as inanimate objects like houses or lands to make it easier for me to contrast w/ my examples and i overlooked the part abt intellectual assets...

[future_doc]

thx future_doc! in spite of the fact that somehow my post disappeared...?= =

 

should i have gone w/ the NK u mentioned to make it look "deeper"? i tried to define property as inanimate objects like houses or lands to make it easier for me to contrast w/ my examples and i overlooked the part abt intellectual assets...

 

Your essay was complete as is and had depth. I was merely suggesting that generally you can keep NK in mind for almost any question as it is at the other end of the spectrum. It did not need NK to make it deeper in what you had written. And yes, "property" has a meaning greater than land or money, so generally, think outside the box when you come across a term that has a conventional meaning, just ask yourself if 'property' or whatever the word may be has a wider interpretation before crafting your answer.

[Godot]

Hi everyone,

 

I would really appreciate your comments on this essay. The prompt is: In a democracy, successful politicians resemble ordinary citizens. I know that I was very repetitive in certain parts, and I've been working on that.

 

Politicians need to resemble the ordinary citizen. Success in politics is based on adequately representing the needs of constituents, and this is much easier for politicians who resemble the ordinary citizen. Firstly, to become elected, a politician must convince constituents that he or she is just like them. So-called "out-of-touch" politicians face tremendous challenges in getting elected. For example, in Canadian politics, Stephane Dion was often criticized for an overly intellectual image that ordinary citizens could not relate to. This was frequently cited as a reason for the failures of the Liberal Party. This need to resemble the ordinary citizen compels many politicians to campaign amongst ordinary citizens in ordinary places, such as coffee shops, public parks, and restaurants. Many public relations events involving politicians make a point of including many ordinary citizens, such as senior citizens and babies. This is so that citizens may perceive the politician to resemble the ordinary citizen, and adequately concerned with their welfare. Secondly, to have a successful term and to become re-elected, a politician must always been keen of public attitudes and desires. In a time of recession, a politician's frivolous spending may tarnish his reputation amongst citizens. If ordinary citizens do not feel that their needs have been represented by the politician, and that the politician ultimately does not understand them, the politician will not be re-elected. Successful politicians thus resemble the ordinary citizen, because it's only by resembling the ordinary citizen that they can be elected and stay in office.

 

However, an objective comparison of citizens and their politicians reveals that politicians do not resemble the ordinary citizen in several important ways. Firstly, the demographics of politicians is vastly different from the general demographic; minorities and women are under-represented. The average constituent probably does not have the same gender or race as the average successful politician. Secondly, politicians tend to be from richer and have attended private schools. They tend to be from upper-class backgrounds, especially in Britain. In London, especially, most successful politicians attended expensive private schools and very exclusive universities, that mark them from the ordinary citizen. Wealth is necessary to some degree for a politician, because campaigns are expensive and they must be able to afford the time off from work to campaign. Thirdly, politicians tend to be connected to a country's elite in ways that ordinary citizens are not. In order to fund-raise for their campaigns and promote their political career, politicians must make connections amongst the country's most important people. They must be spend time socializing with such people. Ordinary citizens will rarely get a chance to meet such people. Fourthly, politicians must be more savvy than the ordinary citizen in intellect, since they must deal with sensitive political issues, and be able to analyze and foresee the repercussions of their decisions on a country. Lastly, the pressure on politicians to maintain a good public image restrains their activities and behaviour in ways that ordinary citizens are not restrained. For example, a politician might have much more pressure on him to quit smoking than an ordinary citizen.

 

Therefore, for a politician to be successful, they must cultivate a public image that resembles the ordinary citizen in speech, manners and behaviour, but exceed the average citizen in social skills, wealth, and restraint. To the public, they must seem down-to-earth because constituents must be able to relate, and connect with them. However, to further their careers, politicians must also cultivate skills that ordinary citizens may never have, and have wealth or access to wealth that ordinary citizens will never have. They must be smarter, richer, and more well-connected, but not appear so. The most successful politician is one who is extraordinarily charismatic and intelligent, yet also exceptionaly humble and modest.

[future_doc]

Godot, sent you PM.

[shestheman]

Hi everyone,

 

I would really appreciate your comments on this essay. The prompt is: In a democracy, successful politicians resemble ordinary citizens. I know that I was very repetitive in certain parts, and I've been working on that.

 

Politicians need to resemble the ordinary citizen. Success in politics is based on adequately representing the needs of constituents, and this is much easier for politicians who resemble the ordinary citizen. Firstly, to become elected, a politician must convince constituents that he or she is just like them. So-called "out-of-touch" politicians face tremendous challenges in getting elected. For example, in Canadian politics, Stephane Dion was often criticized for an overly intellectual image that ordinary citizens could not relate to. This was frequently cited as a reason for the failures of the Liberal Party. This need to resemble the ordinary citizen compels many politicians to campaign amongst ordinary citizens in ordinary places, such as coffee shops, public parks, and restaurants. Many public relations events involving politicians make a point of including many ordinary citizens, such as senior citizens and babies. This is so that citizens may perceive the politician to resemble the ordinary citizen, and adequately concerned with their welfare. Secondly, to have a successful term and to become re-elected, a politician must always been keen of public attitudes and desires. In a time of recession, a politician's frivolous spending may tarnish his reputation amongst citizens. If ordinary citizens do not feel that their needs have been represented by the politician, and that the politician ultimately does not understand them, the politician will not be re-elected. Successful politicians thus resemble the ordinary citizen, because it's only by resembling the ordinary citizen that they can be elected and stay in office.

 

However, an objective comparison of citizens and their politicians reveals that politicians do not resemble the ordinary citizen in several important ways. Firstly, the demographics of politicians is vastly different from the general demographic; minorities and women are under-represented. The average constituent probably does not have the same gender or race as the average successful politician. Secondly, politicians tend to be from richer and have attended private schools. They tend to be from upper-class backgrounds, especially in Britain. In London, especially, most successful politicians attended expensive private schools and very exclusive universities, that mark them from the ordinary citizen. Wealth is necessary to some degree for a politician, because campaigns are expensive and they must be able to afford the time off from work to campaign. Thirdly, politicians tend to be connected to a country's elite in ways that ordinary citizens are not. In order to fund-raise for their campaigns and promote their political career, politicians must make connections amongst the country's most important people. They must be spend time socializing with such people. Ordinary citizens will rarely get a chance to meet such people. Fourthly, politicians must be more savvy than the ordinary citizen in intellect, since they must deal with sensitive political issues, and be able to analyze and foresee the repercussions of their decisions on a country. Lastly, the pressure on politicians to maintain a good public image restrains their activities and behaviour in ways that ordinary citizens are not restrained. For example, a politician might have much more pressure on him to quit smoking than an ordinary citizen.

 

Therefore, for a politician to be successful, they must cultivate a public image that resembles the ordinary citizen in speech, manners and behaviour, but exceed the average citizen in social skills, wealth, and restraint. To the public, they must seem down-to-earth because constituents must be able to relate, and connect with them. However, to further their careers, politicians must also cultivate skills that ordinary citizens may never have, and have wealth or access to wealth that ordinary citizens will never have. They must be smarter, richer, and more well-connected, but not appear so. The most successful politician is one who is extraordinarily charismatic and intelligent, yet also exceptionaly humble and modest.

 

Hey Godot,

I really enjoyed reading your essay. I think you used appropriate vocab and had excellent ideas. There are a couple things I'd recommend. Instead of mentioning several ideas in passing, try to mention fewer ideas yet build upon them more (in your second paragraph you had numerous excellent ideas but none were developed too fully). Also, the second paragraph sounded a little calculated and rigid with the whole "firstly...secondly...thirdly...", try words liek "moreover", "furthermore", etc.

[nino]

i'm stuck on this prompt and have no idea how to start, someone plz drop me a hint? thanks

 

Innovative methods used by the press to reach a broader audience often end up providing that audience with less information.

 

Describe a specific situation in which innovative methods used by the press might not end up providing an audience with less information. Discuss what you think determines when innovative methods used by the press to reach a broader audience end up providing less information.

[akmg13]

That is a hard one. Here is how I would approach it (point form).

 

The internet and possible dilution of important information. The younger generation tends to read the internet as a source of news vs. the newspaper, so an attempt to reach this audience through publishing information online.

 

Internet is a great way to appeal to a more technologically savvy reader and has sped up the process for accessing new scientific journals and dissemination of scientific discoveries.

 

But the demand for fast information on the internet leads to information that is not as accurate/informative/researched as extensively. Example could be news of Michael Jackson's death... breaking the story on the internet important...speculation, false information at first. Accurate information comes out later once there is time to fact-check.

 

i'm stuck on this prompt and have no idea how to start, someone plz drop me a hint? thanks

 

Innovative methods used by the press to reach a broader audience often end up providing that audience with less information.

 

Describe a specific situation in which innovative methods used by the press might not end up providing an audience with less information. Discuss what you think determines when innovative methods used by the press to reach a broader audience end up providing less information.

[akmg13]

Again, any comments appreciated. I have written two more practice essays. Thank you!

 

I was a bit repetitive in this one.

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

 

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 books might educate students better than practical experience. Discuss what you think determines when practical experience provides a better education than books do.

 

Education is a process of learning that involves both information gathering but also the application of that information. The application of information to particular situations is difficult to learn from information in a book but is better learned from immersing oneself in that situation. By being in a situation, one can apply information but also make additional observations and witness how that information is useful or not useful by assimilating both background knowledge and observations. These observations from a situation, the subsequent analyses and how that will apply to future scenarios can only come from experience.

 

That is not to say that books do not have their rightful place in the process of education. There are certain facts that can only be learned by reading a particular book. For example, a medical student will learn about the entire circulatory system, the heart, blood vessels and diseases associated with the circulatory system, through information provided in a book. Studying anatomy using cadeavours is also useful in this process, but not all conditions would be present at once, and so the most comprehensive knowledge would be gained from a book. This information, however, is limited in the sense of how it must be used when dealing with patients. For example, the theory regarding blood pressure, its measurement and what it might mean, an important diagnostic tool for a physician, can be obtained through a book. However, the actual practice of measuring blood pressure and taking in other patient information and cues is really the only way to master the technique and its interpretation.

 

Therefore, when the application of information is the key to a particular learning process, practical experience outweighs what one might learn from a book. This is especially the case when the information can apply to many different scenarios with many possible outcomes. For example, if a medical student has learned about the circulatory system from a textbook, they might be able to explain how the heart works. While this is important background information, this only lays the foundation for the practical application of physical measurement of circulatory system function and interpretation of how a particular measurement indicates a particular health status. The decisions made under these conditions are very important, so it is key to have had similar experiences that have been learned from, to know what works and what doesn't work. The practical experience of measuring blood pressure in a patient, in addition to gathering other information, and then interpreting what that means under a certain set of conditions can only be gained from practicing the technique. Background information from a book is part of this process, but observations made from previous experiences will guide how that information is best used to have the best outcome.

[nino]

That is a hard one. Here is how I would approach it (point form).

 

The internet and possible dilution of important information. The younger generation tends to read the internet as a source of news vs. the newspaper, so an attempt to reach this audience through publishing information online.

 

Internet is a great way to appeal to a more technologically savvy reader and has sped up the process for accessing new scientific journals and dissemination of scientific discoveries.

 

But the demand for fast information on the internet leads to information that is not as accurate/informative/researched as extensively. Example could be news of Michael Jackson's death... breaking the story on the internet important...speculation, false information at first. Accurate information comes out later once there is time to fact-check.

nice, thanks! i thought abt internet but i was stuck on the word "less", i kept thinking "less" as..well "less"....instead of some other things like "less informative" as u mentioned.....man i gotta learn to twist words around for mcat.......

 

there's one more that i can't think up good examples for cuz i know nothing abt cars...plz helppp

 

Modern transportation is often more concerned with speed than with safety.

 

Describe a specific situation in which modern transportation was or might be concerned more with safety than with speed. Discuss what you think determines when modern transportation should be concerned with speed and when it should be concerned with safety.

[akmg13]

Practice essay #2

 

A few grammatical errors. Bolded.

 

Scientific inquiry is rooted in the desire to discover, but there is no discovery so important that in its pursuit a threat to human life can be tolerated.

 

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 a threat to human life might be tolerated in the pursuit of scientific discovery. Discuss what you think determines when the pursuit of scientific discovery is more important than the protection of human life.

 

The information and understanding that are gained from scientific inquiry have made tremendous advancements in (the) development, understanding and application of technology and health care. However, the overall goal of that scientific inquiry is to protect human life, so a scientific pursuit that threatens human life would go against the intended purpose of the inquiry and would be counterintuitive. Curiosity should not be the only reason for scientific pursuit(.), (T)the overall goal of improving technology or health must be kept in view.

 

The improvement of health care through scientific research, in particular (the) pharmaceutical treatment of disease, has significantly improved the survival of patients, ultimately improving human quantity and quality of life. For example, the drugs developed for the treatment of HIV and AIDS has (have) significantly improved prognosis for these patients, with some patients living decades after diagnosis of what was almost always a terminal disease. Unfortunately, there (omit) a cure for HIV/AIDS has still not been discovered and some patients with the disease will die within a short amount of time after diagnosis. In the example of a terminal AIDS patient, while the patient is not expected to survive very much longer, they might also be experiencing a poor quality of life. If there was an experimental drug that was shown in pre-human studies (to have promise for improving) to improve the quality of that patient's life, although there were possible severe side effects that might result in death, this would be an exception whereby a threat to human life could be tolerated. Especially if the information gathered from a human study could not be obtained from any other type of study in lab animal or cell culture. This would have to be conducted with full consent of the patient, knowing and understanding the risks. In this instance, because the patient is dying, if it was possible to improve the quality of life, the risk of death could be tolerated because the alternative outcome or risks associated with no treatment were similar.

 

When the possible benefits largely outweighs the risk, this is a case for when information provided from the scientific process could be more important than the protection of human life. In the case of a terminally-ill patient, the quality and quantity of life are already at risk. So the added risk from a particular scientific inquiry, for example a drug trial, would not amount to much more risk than is already being experienced. This pursuit of scientific discovery could provide information that would benefit the current patient but could almost certainly progress the scientific inquiry and possibly future patients by providing a better understanding of a particular drug and its specific effects in humans with a disease. The hope would be that the information would then reduce the risks associated with a particular treatment, in addition to the actual benefit of the drug. This endeavour could then further the gap between the benefits and risks, substantiating the original inquiry and making a case for what was once a threat to human life that could become a protection to human life.

[akmg13]

These are definitely more challenging. They are very specific so it's hard to think of examples other than what seems obvious.

 

I wouldn't limit transportation to cars. My first inclination was planes. You could use more than one mode of transportation.

 

For safety more than speed, the minivan?

 

Speed for long distance train travel to entice people to take trains vs. planes for the reduced environmental impact. Safety for when risk is high... children in minivan, large numbers of people in planes.

 

 

nice, thanks! i thought abt internet but i was stuck on the word "less", i kept thinking "less" as..well "less"....instead of some other things like "less informative" as u mentioned.....man i gotta learn to twist words around for mcat.......

 

there's one more that i can't think up good examples for cuz i know nothing abt cars...plz helppp

 

Modern transportation is often more concerned with speed than with safety.

 

Describe a specific situation in which modern transportation was or might be concerned more with safety than with speed. Discuss what you think determines when modern transportation should be concerned with speed and when it should be concerned with safety.

[bubblegum]

I just wanted to say that this thread was really helpful for me for WS (even though I didn't post anything here lol).

 

Now a question to soothe my post-Mcat mind: having gone through the last couple of pages of this thread I've noticed that people's essays are pretty darn long. My essays on the Mcat had proper paragraphs, but they were pretty short (as were the essays). Overall I had three total paragraphs in each essay and I think my examples were relatively good to pretty good. Taking this into consideration, should I be worried about not having spent more time on expanding my essays rather than improving their content quality?

[chrail]

I'm so impressed with all the essays on here. I wonder if someone could help me out again...

 

The strength of a democracy depends upon each citizen's respect for the ideas of others.

 

T -Canada. We respect everyone's rights to freedom of religion, sexual orientation, etc.

A - ?? Disrespecting other's ideas??

S - Rights/priveledges, individial rights (I don't have to like you personally) vs collective rights in society.

 

I'd really appreciate some help on this prompt. Thanks so much

[nino]

for anti-thesis the easiest (and most corny..) way to argue is prolly give examples of ideas that are not legal/constitutional/bad, i.e. there's this recent custody case in canada about a father who exposed his two children to white supremacy, his ideas were that "he got rights to his beliefs, and his beliefs were that non-whites should be sent back to his own country", so in this case his ideas can't be respected, look it up on the internet if u need details

[chrail]

Hey nino,

 

great idea... thank you. i'd used this example in previous WS examples for rights vs privileges (right to freedom of speech, parenting a privilege, etc) and it fits here.

 

thanks again!

[chrail]

One more,

 

For the prompt:

The privileges of citizenship in a democracy involve responsibilities. Describe a specific privilege of citizenship in a democracy that might not involve responsibility.

 

T - Driving. A privilege not a right. Need to learn the rules, take test, buy insurance, not drive drunk, etc, etc

A - The ONLY thing that fits here is getting a Canadian passport. You need no responsibilities except just being a Canadian citizen. But, this example is tres boring and I can't think of anything better.

S - Need to figure out A first.

 

Do you think I could call Canadian health care a privilege in this sense? Ie must have OHIP or other provincial card, must be vaild. But then, even if I use this, getting and maintaining a health card is still a responsibility...

 

Thanks so much if anyone has some great ideas

[future_doc]

See the Canadian Charter of Rights to stimulate your imagination for ideas. Virtually every privilege or right involves a responsibility. I guess you can say the right or privilege to universal health care does not require a responsibity per se. There are the fundamental freedoms (privileges) of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of asociation (I am quoting from the Charter). You have the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada. You have thr right to move to any province and take up residence there and the right to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province. You have the right to life, liberty and security of the person. You have the right not to b e subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment. You have the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination. You have the right to education and the right to free health care.

 

This is all food for thought for you.