Writer's Corner: Free Essay Grading by PastaInhaler

[PastaInhaler]

I just want to commend PastaInhaler for his work this summer! Good job!

 

Thank-you for the kind words. Glad to have your support.

[ByrdPac]

I was wondering if you could please take a look at my essay its back in post 703. Thank you for your time.

[samd681]

Clicked!

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

...

Education is a recurrent topic in debates about improving society. It serves as an indicator of how well versed the next generation of each country will be, and how it will fare as a society compared to others. An important subject of that debate is how education is presented. The classical approach has been to indroctrinate students via academic readings. Nowadays, however, a movement away from books and towards practical experience has gained momentum. This following holds that education is most effectively conveyed through live, hands-on experience rather than through the diction of a textbook author. The field of biology, for instance, has been dramatically affected by this. Instead of relying on textbooks for information on how populations function or the structure of a cell, students are being taught by traveling to a local pond to observe the dynamic ecosystem, and by looking through the microscope to see exactly what a nucleus looks like. Schools are investing more in teaching labs and educational field trips. This models a more natural, physical approach to learning about the world around us, just as each of us does as a young child when discovering speech or how to walk. Thus, the practical approach to education is becoming more favoured in the field of biology.

 

On the other hand, more physical experiences are not always the best method of teaching. In such instances, books become far more important for conveying the necessary information and thus furthering a student's education. Modern mathematics offers an important demonstration of this concept. In this field, concepts have become too obscure to be realized in a real-world situation. For example, mathematical theories now describe several dimensions above ours. It would be impossible to expose students to realities that extend above our own. A field trip to a worldy location would not physically convey the principals revolving around a higher dimension, nor would a microscope. This theoretical mathematics continues to be taught from textbooks, and remains the most effective way to impart abstract ideas fully constructed by the human mind to others.

 

Thus, education cannot always rely on a one-sided approach in terms of practical experience versus literature. The former technique has found its way into such fields as biology, where knowledge depends upon the physical realities of our world and can be appreciated by our basic human senses. The latter method is predominant in such topics as theoretical mathematics, where knowledge has reached the level of the abstract where it cannot be perceived on a human plane. Therefore, whether education involves more reading or more hands-on experience depends upon how well the field correlates with our own reality. Biology, including ecology and microscopy, represents an an interaction between humans and a physical plane. Practical applications work well in this case because they are relatively readily found and utilized in the world for a more constructive educational experience. The same cannot be said regarding modern mathematics, where real-world examples are largely absent and cannot be physically experienced to promote education. Learning in this field requires the assistance of human interpretation, which can be found in a book. Indeed, if technology can improve in the future to allow us a glimpse into a metaphysical world, it will be interesting to see if literature can continue to hold as strong a position in education.

 

Thanks a ton, I think your feedback has really helped my essay composition.

[samd681]

Clicked!

 

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.

...

Since the beginning of modern humanity, our ancestors have been delving into the world of scientific inquiry. Stemming from a natural desire to discover, we have rapidly developed into the technologically advanced species that we are today. Scientific experimentation is at an all-time high, as the field of the sciences has expanded exponentially. Along with this growth has come more regulation of experiments by official bodies. Over the years, policies have been enacted to protect patients while advancing the level of scientific inquiry. Our past includes examples of such experimentation that often involved immoral and sometimes dangerous actions taken on the part of the researcher towards the patients. In recent times, however, these actions have been decried as unethical since they put human lives at risk. The psychological experiment set up by Professor Zimbardo several decades ago provides an excellent example. Volunteer university students were split into two groups, one acting as prisoners and the other posing as their security guards. Zimbardo himself was the warden of the mock 'prison.' His idea was to observe what happened amongst the student when left in their roles for a long period of time. He was eventually forced to cancel the experiment early, as embarassing and violent atrocities took place in the treatment of prisoners by the guards. The fact that Zimabardo did not stop the process earlier ignited a wave of criticism of his methods by all sectors of the academic community, especially when several of his subjects complained of psychological trauma. To this day, his name is associated with that experiment, and he is still seen by many as an unethical researcher, despite the valuable lessons about human psychology that were gleaned from the study. This demonstrates the vehement opposition to dangerous experimentation that exists in today's world, and the belief that the search for answers should not in any way jeapordize the life of a human.

 

Contrastingly, some scientists may view a limited amount of dangerous research as acceptable in the pursuit of discovery. In finding a solution to something as threatening to the human race as, for example, the HIV/AIDS epidemic, individual threats ot human life may be tolerable. Indeed, studies are already conducted on chimpanzees, the closest known animal relative to humans, in finding a treatment for the deadly virus. How long until this experimentation crosses over to willing human subjects? The fact that HIV/AIDS kills millions of people every year may justify testing relatively few subjects in a manner that threatens their lives. These cases would, of course, be very difficult to pass by the bodies governing scientific research, but, in the event that the patients are willing, fully aware of the risks, and have not been deluded in any fashion, the case may be benefitted. Since the epidemic has not shown any signs of abating, it is becoming more likely that drastic measures will have to be taken to combat it and save the future of humanity.

 

The discussion between aiming to minimize risk to every individual and allowing a threat to few in order to potentially save many is a common topic in scientific research. In the initial example, where Professor Zimbardo was heavily criticized for his lack of control over his experiment and the possible psychological damage done to the patients, there was no tolerance for any threat to human life. Researching more effective methods to combat HIV/AIDS, however, presents an alternative view where humanity is overall favoured against the individual subject. Consequently, the decision as to which stance to take depends upon the goal of the experiment and how likely it is to be achieved. Zimbardo's research was not seen as critical enough to justify the danger his patients faced, whereas some may view the HIV/AIDS epidemic as a viable reason to place certain patients at risk. If this viral research can progress to the level where positive results are guaranteed in human subjects, the support for that method will grow. It will be interesting to see, however, how far a danger to individual lives will be tolerated and to what extent it will expand.

 

...

This is probably the last one I'll post before tomorrow so thanks again PastaInhaler!

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#733

-clicked-

 

thanks so much!

 

 

Governments have a responsibililty to regulate companies taht provide necessary services to citizens

 

One of the primary reasons a government body is elected in a democratic society to protect the rights of citizens and ensure no violations to such rights result. Such rights can be extended to the right to be protected from methods of financial extortion imposed by businesses. When individuals cannot protect themselves from being charged unfairly or without cause, the government needs to step in and prevent such violations from occuring. An example of such an intervention is Harper government's attempt to introduce legislation to prevent cellular service providers from charging consumers for incoming text messages. Cellular service companies like Bell introduced charges for receiving incoming texts, which left users helpless but to pay even for texts that were spam or texts that they did not want to receive. In such cases, the user had no choice but to pay for such texts or give up their cell phone, which potentially incurred high termination fee payment. Thus, in order to protect consumers from being charged unfairly, the Harper government is trying to compel such companies to withdraw the charges and thereby, protect the rights of citizens.

On the other hand, however, there are circumstances when the government need not intervene in necessary services that are provided to the citizens. Currently, there are no stringent regulations for the use of herbal supplements and distribution of 'ayurvedic' medicines. The primary reason is that the consumers who partake in these alternative forms of medicine, do so knowingly. There is no pressure from companies selling such medicines on the potential consumer and hence, no violation to their rights occurs. The use of such alternative medicine is entirely up to the consumer, who is not under any obligation to use such medicines, unless they express their own desire to. Moreover, they are fully aware of the possible implications of consuming such medicines, which are not certified by Health Canada, as prescription drugs are. Therefore, in cases such as these, government intervention and subsequent regulation of such companies that provide alternative medicine, is unnecessary.

Thus, the determing factor of whether government needs to regulate companies that provide necessary services to its citizens is whether or not the citizen partakes in the services on their own will. Specifically, in the case of cell phone users, being charged for incoming text messages that are spam, messages that the user did not want to receive, is unacceptable. Since the user himself cannot control whether or not he is charged for such texts, the government needs to step in and ensure that businesses do not take unfair advantage of consumers. By charging for incoming texts, the businesses profit while the user unwillingly economically suffers. On the other hand, individuals who themselves chose to visit a herbal supplements' store or pursue alternative over traditional mode of medical treatment, do so at their own will. There is no pressure from businesses who solicit these services and therefore, such businesses are free from government regulation. Thus, the key is to ensure that the citizens do not experience violation to their human rights unknowingly or being able to change their situation without further suffering.

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Evidence of some clarity and depth of thought.

Ideas presented in a coherent manner.

Adequate control of language.

 

The first example is good, however, the second example is not as strong. If the service is necessary, then there isn't much choice for the consumer as the service becomes needed. The rule that you provided, that it depends on the consumer and whether he partakes on his own can be applied to cell phones as well. People can still get by without a cell phone and just use a landline. So, it would be best to choose another service that is necessary and more or less needed. Can you think of other examples that are needed, but do not require regulation by the government for some legitimate reason? This will enhance your completion of task#2 and task#3.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

 

JKLMNO/PQRST

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#734

-clicked- THANK YOU!!!!

 

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

 

The art to compromise is characterized by the person's ability satisfy one's opponent's needs while at the same time, fulfilling one's own needs. Such a virtue is of exceptional importance to a politician who is always battling with other needs while trying to fulfill one's own goals. This quality became of utmost importance to Jawaharlal Nehru when he was fighting for India's independence from the British Raj. In early 1947, when it became apparent to Nehru that the only way to attain independence would be by following Britishers' 'divide and rule' strategy, Nehru had little choice but to compromise. Although the division was against his own values and beliefs, he decided that the gain of attaining independence from the British had more 'weight' over the loss of a part of India and subsequent creation of Pakistan. Thus, by employing his ability to compromise and weigh the benefits of independence over the loss of India to Pakistan, Nehru was able to achieve his goal of an independent and sovereign nation of India.

 

On the other hand, the art of compromise does not always lead to fulfilling one's political goals. In fact, if a politician compromises too readily, it can reflect poorly on the foundation of one's social and political values. An example of this adherance to one's political values over making a compromise for political gains was seen in Gandhi's refusal for violent protests during the independence movement in India. During the 1930s, the insurgence of violent protests against unfair treatment by british authorities was apparent all over India. Such insurgencies gained momentum and had it not been for Gandhi's 'fast till death' plea to stop all the violence, it would have lead to India's independence sooner rather than later. However, despite the possible gain of liberating the indian people through violent protests against the british, Gandhi did not compromise on his values of 'ahimsa' and protests through non violent means. Thus, despite having the advantage of fulfilling his political goals, Gandhi let go of such a advantage in order to ensure that his true beliefs remain uncompromised.

 

Therefore, whether or not a politician should make compromises in order to achieve his political goal depends on his cost and benefit analysis. In the case of Nehru, even though division of India went against his nationalist beliefs, it allowed India to be free from British rule and becoming an independent nation. This gain, according to him, was of a greater 'weight' than the creation of Pakistan. However, in the case of Gandhi, the violent protests all over India represented countless loss of lives, which was unacceptable to his beliefs of 'ahimsa' and preservation of life. For him, such losses did not justify the eventual liberation of the Indian people. Thus, even though his political goal was that of India's independence, he refused to compromise on the loss of human lives to attain such a goal. For him, the cost was much too high over the gain. Indeed, such an ability to weigh potential gains and losses against each other and be able to make the right decision for the masses, is what makes a political leader truly exceptional.

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Evidence of some clarity and depth of thought.

Ideas presented in a coherent manner with some focus and utility.

Adequate control of language.

 

Your examples are sufficient in supporting your arguments. The final task is fine, however, it may be better if you altered your rule for arbitration, instead of using cost-benefit analysis. You could summarize the two examples in your mind then think of the deeper implications of why compromising is okay for Nehru, but not Gandhi -especially not Gandhi.

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

 

JKLMNOP/QRST

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#735

- clicked - !! water

 

Thanks so much for this!!

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience.

 

There is no question whether or not an individual learns more experientially truly what a frog is by seeing a frog, touching a frog, hearing a frog than by reading about a frog in a text. You can read that the texture of a frog is cool, slippery and smooth, but if you have never actually touched a frog can you possibly understand exactly what a frog feels like? It can be argued then that education is at it's best when one learns from direct experience rather than through reading about experiences in a book. How can I truly understand the Aurora Borealis if I have in fact never seen them in action? A flat picture of the Northern Lights cannot capture the same incredible color variations that are made by the lights as they dance across the dark night sky. To say then that eduction comes from practical experience rather than books means that while one can gain an understanding through reading, you cannot truly understand or even comprehend what the real event will be like.

 

This is not to say that there are never instances where books might be the better option for education. Historical events, for example, cannot possibly be learned through direct experience due to their very nature. One cannot experience life in a concentration camp under Hitler's regime since it occurred decades ago, so there really is no way to learn about the intricaties of concentration camp life than through reading. Also - due to the danger and fear in experiencing a concentration camp, reading would likely be the chosen alternative even in the event that it were possible to experience concentration camps through living in one.

 

There are factors that should be taken into consideration when determining whether to use books or practical experience to educate. The main factor is whether or not the topic can be experienced. If the event is historical then there is no option other than to learn about the event through text. If it is not financially feasible to attend the topic, then reading is the best alternative. If it would be dangerous to experience the topic, then again, reading is the best option. If the topic is readily obtainable for students to experience, if it is not dangerous, and if it is financially feasible, then practical experience should be the form selected by educators.

 

Overall, one can argue that education is of higher quality when delivered through providing practical experience to students, but when practical experience is not an option one must consider that books provide a viable alternative.

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Evidence of some clarity of thought.

Ideas presented in a coherent manner.

Adequate control of language.

 

It may be best to take some more time explaining the prompt more thoroughly in your own words rather than to jump right into an analogy. Then you will need to clarify words such as education, books, etc... because you will need these terms to build your arguments throughout your essay.

 

You may wish to use a different example for task#1 that really encompasses practical experience in education with specific academic merit. The second example is sufficient. The final task is sufficient.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

 

JKLMNO/PQRST

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#736

- clicked - ~ Thanks again!!!

 

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

 

 

Society has come to rely on scientific inquiry for the perpetuation of the human race. Cures for genetic and terminal illnesses have been discovered and are being searched for in order to extend lives and environmentally friendly ways of creating energy are evolving in order to preserve the earth so that humans can continue life in the event that fossil fuels are completely consumed. Science is behind the extended lifetimes that humans are experiencing. For the most part, scientific inquiry has resulted in the ability to save and extend lives. So how could we possibly tolerate a scenario in which the pursuit of scientific inquiry results in the threat to human life? Despite the importance of scientific discovery, we cannot allow human lives to be compromised whether it be by testing dangerous substances on humans in the pursuit of a cure for a terminal disease, or by killing a human being in an attempt to obtain stem cells. No scientific discover is so significant or important that it is worth the death of a human being. Despite the fact that overall science has resulted in an extension of the age of most humans, we cannot allow discovery to be at the cost of individual lives.

 

Someone might argue that there are instances when a threat to human life might be forgivable if it is for the pursuit of scientific discovery. An instance where this might be acceptable is in the example of the search for a cure for terminal illness, such as cancer. If all of the typical treatment options for a patient have been exhausted, the patient has been given a terminal diagnosis, and the patient understands and is willing to go forward with a experimental treatment that may threaten his life, then we may be inclined to tolerate the threat to human life in the pursuit of discovery. This patient is willing to trade his remaining months for the possiblity that he may be cured - he understands the consequences fully and is willing to trade what remains of his life for the possiblity of a cure and an extension onto that life. In this case, surely we can leave the decision as to whether to potentially give up life for the purpose of scientific discovery, since it is at the decision of a terminal patient.

 

The patient's understanding of what they are giving up is crucial when determining whether or not this is acceptable. This brings to light the example of a small child who is unable to make decisions for herself. Is it feasible to allow the pursuit of scientific discovery in exchange for this life? Despite the fact that the child has legal guardians who supposedly can legally make this decision for the child, it could be argued that this is still not acceptable. Would the child choose suffering for the possibility that their life may be extended? In this instance that can't possibly be determined. This is an instance where the patient does not have an understanding of what they are giving up or signing up for.

 

The fact that a patient has been given a terminal diagnosis is also an important factor because it is not as though he is selecting a scientifically induced suicide due to psychological distress. He knows that his life will not last much longer and he is willing to exchange that for a possible new lease at life. The intention and hope is not for death.

 

As important as scientific discovery is, there are really very limited instances where it is reasonable to assume that scientific discovery trumps human life. Each situation should be carefully evaluated by independent parties. Science has worked hard to preserve and extend life, we cannot allow this good to be destroyed by allowing it to overtake the sacredness of human life.

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Ideas are somewhat developed.

Some issues with organization, integration, and coherence of ideas.

Adequate control of language.

 

It may be best to take a specific example for task#1 and expand on it in more detail thoroughly exploring what that example means, and what it means for the prompt. The second example is sufficient, yet coherence begins to suffer towards the end of your essay. You provided another example in paragraph#3 that opposed your example for task#2, and this created problems for the essay. It created tension which weakened your previous argument and it showed issues with organization and integration. Task#3 was also not sufficiently completed.

 

For task#3, you will need to:

Discuss what you think determines when the pursuit of scientific discovery is more important than the protection of human life.

 

You have the material there, you just have to tie the two main examples together to form a good rule for arbitration, which should be easy for you because you have some good examples.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

 

JKLMN/OPQRST

[PastaInhaler]

I was wondering if you could please take a look at my essay its back in post 703. Thank you for your time.

 

Be sure to read post#1 in its entirety with the rules for essay grading and make sure to make the necessary revisions to your post, otherwise your essay will not be graded.

 

This information is also linked in my signature.

 

http://www.premed101.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51813

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#744

Definitely clicked.

 

Successful politicians are motivated more by practical considerations than by moral values.

...

Politics is a dangerous game. One critical error can lead to the end of a lifetime of hard work and dedication. To be successful in American politics means to harbor the trust (and votes) of your community from year to year, and to constantly represent the interests of that population. The greatest difficulty, however, is in being elected. Appealing to people who carry a plethora of divergent views can seem impossible. Indeed, many politicians find it easier to simply give up their own moral aspirations and instead promote the causes of the majority, whether or not those correlate with their own. These politicians consider this a more practical way of being successful in the political arena. For instance, the switching of political parties by Senator Joseph Liebermann several years ago demonstrates this. Instead of continuing to follow his own more conservative views, he chose to remain elected by heeding the changing demographic of his electorate and becoming independent of any political party. Thus, his actions demonstrated that changing one's own political beliefs can engender success in the end.

 

Practicality does not always triumph over personal moral values, however; some politicians feel the need to uphold their own beliefs and hope that these lead to success. This is evidenced in the debate over abortion. More conservative politicians argue that disposing of an unborn child is absolutely immoral and should not be condoned by the law or society. These beliefs largely stem from a religious tendency on the conservative side of American politics. From a strictly financial stance, abortion would be beneficial to the United States, as it would reduce the number of orphans, prevent low-income families from being burdened by unexpected (and in these cases unwelcomed) living costs, and may even increase the average educational level (since many studies have shown that being a young parent and dropping out of school are correlated). Nevertheless, these conservative politicians refuse to condone what they view as murder, and instead hope that, in the pursuit of their own moral beliefs, the populace will reward them with their votes. Since these anti-abortion politicians are still a strong element in American politics, their strict adherence to their own moral values has rewarded them with success.

 

Practicality versus morality continues to define the political arena in the United States. Politicians willing to uphold the beliefs of others on the road to success see the loss of their own moral beliefs as inconsequential. On the other hand, those who rely upon their own moral beliefs hope that their views correlate with those who have the power to elect them. The choice as to which path to take depends upon the political environment of the day and the morality of the politician. If a politician believes in "A," but the majority of society favours option "B," it would be financially favourable to convert to the latter and hopefully be elected. Likewise, if both the politician and most of the electorate harboured "A" as their choice of policy, there is no need for the politician to change their point of view in order to meet success. The only obstacle to this model is the moral obstinancy of the politician. He or she may feel guilt and lack conviction if they have purposefully changed their own beliefs to match those of others, and this may prevent them from being appealing to the populace upon which they rely for success. Those without much attachment to their own beliefs will be less affected. Thus, it is the willingness of a politician to part from their moral beliefs that decides whether or not they wish to conform to the ever-changing wishes of society.

 

Thanks!

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Evidence of some clarity and depth of thought.

Ideas presented in a coherent manner.

Adequate control of language.

 

You will need to clarify the Libermann example better. You have shown that he changed his political beliefs and was successful, but you will need to clarify how this was specifically a practical consideration. Also, what were the moral implications? You will need to state this explicitly and clearly. Also, you will need to unify the essay better in the final paragraph to really solidify your rule for arbitration for task#3.

 

I feel this essay will be scored a:

 

JKLMNOP/QRST

[vdincale]

-clicked

 

Prompt: 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.

 

The main idea of the statement is that human life is precious and that preserving it should be put at the top of concerns in any scientific experiment. This notion is clearly held by the scientific community and can be seen by the implementation of various regulations in human testing of drugs and vaccines. In the United States of America before a new pharmaceutical may even be tested on living humans it must pass various hurdles implemented by the FDA. First they have to show that it doesn't cause death in animal tests. Next they have to implicitly show that its cost to benefit ratio is high enough in animals that if it worked similarly in humans it would increase the quality of life. These rigorous guidelines not only protect human test subject from dieing, but also ensure that drugs which are being manufactured actually help the people who are taking them. This long process can take years to go from new drug discovery, to administration to patients.

 

In contrast, lets imagine a situation where a disease was wide spread and no current approved drug or vaccine could treat this illness. A example of a disease like this would be small pox. During the time when the disease was killing a lot of people one doctor had created a vaccine that could potentially prevent people from getting this disease. He had a strong belief that it could work but he didn't have time to do rigorous testing because some many people were dying as a result of the disease. He therefore skipped clinical trails and directly injected his son with the vaccine and then exposed him to the smallpox virus. This threat to human life was tolerated in his view because had the vaccine worked, a lot of lives could be saved. It did turn out to work and this eventually lead to the erradication of smallpox across the globe.

 

In conclusion when a lot of time exists for the development of a drug or vaccine, preserving human life is the most important aspect in any clinical trail. However the small exception to this rule exists when the need for a drug is strong. In that situation human testing, which in itself is a threat to human life because of the potential side effects, should only be done with consent.

[vdincale]

-clicked again

 

Education comes not from books but from practical experience

 

Education is the learning and understanding of subject matter that can allow you to solve problems. Education from practical experience would be best when the subject being taught is not clearly defined. One example would be making your partner happy in a relationship. Even though many books might have been written on the subject, learning how to make your specific partner happy comes from interacting with them for a long time as opposed to reading these books. This is mainly because each person is unique and the books take a rather generalized approach at solving the problem of making them happy. Long term interaction will eventually lead to an understanding of what makes them happy, or not, and this will lead you make decisions that will result in them being happy as opposed to made.

 

In opposition when subject matter is clearly defined, learning from books would be better than practical experience. One example would be solving energy conservation in physics. From a practical experience approach, you could theoretically go to various slides that have different heights and measure how much fast you are travelling when you reach the bottom. You could then use this knowledge to answer problems on a test because you have firsthand experience of the speed at the bottom. This approach would take a lot of time and effort. In contrast you could simply learn the equation of energy conservation from a book and apply it to each situation to find your speed at the bottom because you know that the law will hold constant for novel situations.

 

In conclusion when the subject matter is not well defined, such that solving specific problems requires a unique approach in novel situations, a practical approach to education is best. In contrast if the subject matter is well defined, education from a book is better because it saves times and allows you to generalize your knowledge to novel situations.

[AccountantGirl]

- clicked! -

 

PastaInhaler, you are awesome! Thank you so much for all of your hard work. We really appreciate it!

 

In a democracy, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.

 

In a democracy the voice of the majority elects who will become the country's leaders. In most societies the majority is represented by the average citizen. For this reason, the average citizen is not represented by minority groups, not the millionaires, homosexuals, or aboriginals. He or she is represented by those that form the majority of the population - caucasians, middle-class, moderately educated people. Since these majority groups control who is elected, the successful politician will likely belong to one or more of these groups and at the very least appeal to these groups, for that is how one is elected. Therefore, in a democracy, where the majority rules, the successful politician will resemble individuals from the majority group, that being the group where the ordinary citizen belongs. A perfect example of this would be the late Jack Layton. He was a family man, moderately educated, caucasian. He was a prime example of a person belonging to the majority group of the ordinary citizen. Jack Layton never experienced such a high level of success as some politicians, but many would say that for the leader of the NDP to become the leader of the official opposition is a huge success in it's own right. He was successful, and he was, in all physical respects ordinary. It was this "ordinariness" that the people could relate to, which would help Jack to obtain more votes for the NDP party, since relating to and liking someone are two of the driving forces behind voting for them to become the country's leader. The differences between Jack and the ordinary citizen were his mind, his attitudes and his charisma.

 

In this right, Jack did not represent the ordinary citizen. The ordinary citizen cannot command the attention and respect of a crowd in the way that Jack did. Some might say that Jack was even more successful than the current Prime Minister by the way he touched the lives and hearts of the people. This is one way in which Jack differs from the ordinary citizen. Few of us average people are able to portray our thoughts and emotions with such feeling that we are able to grab the hearts and hands of the public who are listening to our words. Even after his death, Jack continued to command the hearts and minds of Canadians in his words, "...my friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And together we will change the world." Very few of us could be so eloquent and even given a piece of paper to capture our last thoughts would not be able to come up with such inspiring words. This is one way in which the successful politician is far from a representation of the average citizen.

 

What determines whether or not the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen is usually the context in which we are viewing the politician. When we view a politician in the limelight of a crisis, he or she will often not resemble the average citizen. This is the situation in which the politician and ordinary citizen are different and the reason that one is the politician and the other is not. In times of crisis or instability the successful politician must rise above, use their charismatic personality to maintain control and confidence of the people. This is what they live for - to guide the country through times of difficulty. Gathering the gumption and courage to do so takes a specific type of person, and for this role, the ordinary citizen is not typically as skilled or capable as the politician. For example, during campaigns, Jack Layton appeared much as the ordinary citizen, despite being a very opinionated citizen, he spoke with confidence about issues that the average person was concerned with. He used his position in society, being an "average citizen" to his advantage in order to relate to the average citizen. However, upon his death he was far from the average citizen. He spoke to the average citizen but he demonstrated that he was a man of great knowledge, insight and inspiration.

[antithesis]

clicked!

Thank you so much!

 

A student's academic success depends more on hard work than on intelligence.

 

The success of a student usually depends on their motivation and drive to do their best and therefore reach their potential. Students have the capability to overcome the barriers of natural intelligence with hard work and determination to reach their goals. Intelligence in this case can be defined as one's natural ability. If every student allowed themselves to succumb to this "natural ability" and did not try and work hard to achieve more, then very few people would ever accomplish anything. For example, take a child who is not naturally very good at math. They do not have that natural intelligence that allows them to be proficient in the subject automatically. However with hard work, studying math concepts, doing many practice problems, and even eliciting the outside help of a tutor, a child can overcome these barriers of natural intelligence. In this case the student's success in math would depend more on hard work and the time they are willing to put in, rather than natural intelligence.

 

However, there are certain situations where a student's academic success can depend more on intelligence than on hard work. There are instances when natural ability or intelligence just cannot be overcome, even with hard work. Take for example, a medical student who wishes to become a neurosurgeon. They have worked hard to learn everything there is to know about the parts of the brain and every intricate function it has. They have read every book on how to perform surgeries and watched many different surgeries performed by neurosurgeons. However, when the student tries to put their knowledge into practice, they find that they simply do not have "the hands" for neurosurgery. In this situation, no matter how hard the student works, they will not be able to overcome this barrier and be a successful neurosurgeon. In this case natural ability/intelligence overrules hard work.

 

Therefore, what determines if a student's academic success depends more on hard work or on intelligence. The answer is, the nature of the education determines this factor. If the education is more classroom based, then hard work will more heavily determine a student's academic success. However, if the education is more practical or hands on, then intelligence/natural ability will determine academic success. In the example regarding the child struggling in math, this type of education is classroom based. It requires understanding and memorizing certain topics. If a student is not naturally "intelligent" in these areas, hard work and determination can allow them to overcome these barriers of natural ability. In the example regarding the medical student wanting to become a neurosurgeon, no amount of hard work will change their natural ability in surgery. This is practical/hands on education, where intelligence and natural ability determine success more than hard work does.

[antithesis]

clicked!

Thank you so much!

New technologies often hide problems that are only revealed later.

 

Often times when new technologies are developed, a great deal of hype and excitement clouds over potential problems that may be created by this new advanement. When what seems to be a novel discovery has been made, no matter what field, be it science, medicine, or computers, people want to focus on the positive aspects because it usually appears to be something that will make their lives better. People usually don't want to think of the negative aspects that may come with a new technology. Then once it is actually put into practical use, people begin to see the problems surface. For example, there was a great deal of excitement created when the Liberation Therapy was revealed as a cure for multiple sclerosis. People were overjoyed that a cure had finally been found for this terrible disease, even though there was not a great deal of information actually available on the procedure. Not to mention that it had only been tested on a very small sample size. As people began finding doctors who would perform this therapy and going to have it done, the problems began to reveal themselves. For some, it did not help and for others it was even fatal. Therefore, not very much was known about this new technology, and for that reason as time passed, problems were uncovered.

 

However, there are times when the benefits of a new technology might not hide later problems. As technology has progressed, so have many operations performed in hospitals. An example of this is laser surgery to remove the gallbladder. This procedure has become increasingly simplified with laser surgery, What used to require a much more complicated process, now just requires a small incision with a laser, no scalpels needed. In this situation, the benefits far outweigh any problems that may be revealed. This surgery has been made faster, safer and simpler. It has been tested on large sample sizes and any problems that may surface are isolated to specific situations.

 

Therefore what determines when the benefits of a new technology outweigh potential problems. The answer is that, if the new technology has been researched and adequately tested the benefits outweigh the potential problems. The example above regarding the MS Liberation Therapy, demonstrates a new technology that has not been tested diligently enough. A larger sample size should have been tested and the procedure should have been examined more closely, to help reveal problems that could have been addressed before the benefits were revealed as a cure for multiple sclerosis. However in the example regarding the removal of a gallbladder through laser surgery, this procedure has been well researched and diligently tested, so any forseeable issues could be addressed and fixed. Therefore any problems that can occur, are more specific to certain situations and can be dealt with accordingly. The benefits of faster and safer surgery far outweigh any problems that could occur in isolated situations.

[nicks2]

-clicked-

Thank you!

In Business, competition is superior to cooperation.

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 cooperation in business is superior to competition. Discuss what you think determines when competition in business is superior to cooperation.

 

Businesses are build to provide products and services to consumers. The main goal of major businesses is to make the highes profits possible. Businesses may compete with other businesses which provide same or similar products and services. Businesses make a profit by comepting with other businesses in providing better products and services at a lower price. Businesses may also cooperate in sharing expensive infrastructure such as electricity grids, phone lines, or cable lines.

 

Cooperation in business allows for sharing of resources and expertise by various companies. During the 2009 economic recession in Canada, TD Canada Trust cooperated with RBC Bank in buying their under-valued shares to help the company stay in business. TD Canada Trust was able to save RBC from bankruptcy by providing RBS with resources and expertise on how to scale down operations such that the company can remain in business.

 

Competition between businesses allows for the increase in quality of products and service at a lower prices. In order for businesses which provide the same or similar services and products to stay in business, they must offer consumers their products and services at a competitive price. Due to the enormous success of Nintendo's Wii console, Sony reduced the prices of it's Playstation 3 console in order to compete with Nintendo's Wii console. This attracted customers to buy Playstation 3 at a lower price although Sony's profits went down. This allowed Sony to take some of the marketshare of the video game industry by directly competing with Nintendo's Wii console. Consumers directly benefited from this competition because they were able to buy the same product at a much cheaper price.

 

What determines whether competition is superior to cooperation depends on the economic health during the time of competition or cooperation. If businesse are operating in an economic crisis, then cooperation is superior than competition because it allows for the sharing of resources and expertise. TD Canada trust cooperated with RBC during the 2009 economic recession by providing resources and expertise in avoiding bankkruptcy. If economic crisis is not affecting a country, competition is superior than cooperation because higher quality products are produced at a lower price. Sony reduced the price of Playstation 3 to compete with Nintendo Wii. As a result consumers benefited because they were able to purchase the same product at a lower price.

[Tina_HP]

-clicked-

Thanks!

 

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 statements 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 the process of acquiring knowledge in a field of interest such as medicine. Education allows us to gain a general understanding of the principles in that field. It allows for the development of skills in order to apply that knowledge to various situations which may involve problem solving. Education allows us to make sense and comprehend the world that we live in. The knowledge and skills that are gained through education comes from books which explain the facts and practical experience of applying those facts in various situations.

 

Education involves the transfer of knowledge from one person to another. Books are the medium for the transfer of this knowledge. Medical students learn the basic principles and diagnosis of disease from books. This allows medical students to gain a general understanding of processes involved in many diseases. Books educate medical students the signaling pathways and mechanisms which are involved in disease. It is impossible to learn the signaling pathways and mechanisms involved from practical experience of dealing with patients because you can only see the symptoms of the disease but not the causes of the diseases. Without the knowledge that books provide, medical students would not be able to make proper diagnosis because they would lack an understanding of pathways involved in disease. Therefore, books allows medical students to understand the processes that cause disease and use that knowledge to diagnose patients in their practice.

 

Educations must also teach the skills necessary to be successful in a career. The university of Waterloo offers business students a co-op program where they can practice the knowledge that they gained in the classroom in the real world. This program allows students to practice the skills which are needed to be successful. This program educates students on the practical skills needed to be successful by allowing students to interact directly with customers and solving their problems.

 

What determines when practical experience provides a better education than books depends on the time stage of the education. At the initial stages of education books are important to understand the general facts and principles in a particular field. Books are important to understand the basic principles and mechanisms of disease which cannot be learned through practical experience. In the later stages of education, practical experience plays an important role in developing the skills necessary to apply the knowledge that was gained at the initial stages of education. The University of Waterloo students need to practice on how to interact with business customers and how to solve their problems. Practical experience allows them to gains those skills.

[globy321]

-clicked-

Thank you for reading my essay!

 

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 statements 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.

 

Scientific inquiry allows the unbiased and objective understanding of the world that we live in. Through testing and observation science allows us to understand the causes of many phenomena in our world. Science is rooted in gaining an understanding of the physical laws of the world. By understanding these physical laws we can make predictions about climate change, disease, and famine. However, the pursuit for the gain of knowledge may be rooted with bad intentions.

 

Scientific inquiry allows us to test the effects of various drugs on many diseases. The experimental anti-cancer drug Vanderal was given to patients with terminal cancer. Although the side effects were not known for this drug, the drug was tested in terminal cancer patients because the decision was made that it may help some of the terminally cancer patients. The drug may harm patients through many undesirable side effects but the chance exist that the drug may also alleviate the terminal cancer in these patients.

 

The roots of scientific inquiry may also have bad intentions which may bring intentional suffering to many people. Nazis tested the effects of various poisonous gases on Jewish people during Holocaus to determine which gas was the least expensive and most efficient in killing the highest number of people. It was discovered that the best poisonous gas to use was mustard gas because it takes the least amount of time for it’s effects to take place. This discovery cannot be tolerated because it violates human rights and brings suffering to people with no general benefits.

 

What determines when the pursuit of scientific inquire is more important than the protection of human life depends on whether the discovery will only bring suffering or whether the chance exist that it may have benefits as well. If terminal cancer patients might be harmed by unexpected side effects from Vanderal anti-cancer drug but the chance exist the drug may alleviate the caner, then scientific inquiry should be supported because the benefits of being alive from the drug outweigh the side effects of the drug. If the purpose of scientific inquiry is rooted in bringing suffering to people by experimenting to determine which poisonous gas is the best one to kill the highest number of people, then scientific inquiry should be stopped because it has no benefits.

[nicks2]

-clicked-

 

Thank you.

 

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

 

Describe a specific situation in which a person’s first priority in life might not be financial security. Discuss what you think determines whether or not a person’s first priority in life should be financial security.

 

Financial security can be defined as the ability to meet one’s basic needs of living such as food, shelter, and clothing into the future. Financial security may have a different meaning to different people. One person may view financial security as being able to afford to travel the world, live in million dollar mansion and drive a Ferrari. Another person may view financial security as having enough money to provide a roof over the head for their family, provide food, and other basics necessities of life. People priorities financial security different depending on their upbringing and social circle.

 

The priority of a person in life may not be financial security. Princess of Protugal, Mary-Chaex Duboi, gave her fortune worth billions of dollars away to charity and family in order to marry the love of her life, Frank Debjak who worked a low paying job as a librarian. Princess Mary-Chaex could not legally marry Frank Debjak without giving away her fortune because of her family ties. Princess Mary-Chaex priority in life was love life and not her financial security. Her children were busy raising their own families, and since her husband died she did not have anyone to feel close to. Her wealth did not provide her with a good sense of security but the man who she fell in love gave her a better sense of security.

 

The priority of a college student in the process of developing their career is financial security. Micheal Tremble at the Kingston College gave up his dream of becoming a basketball player for the purpose of pursuing his passion in medicine. Micheal Tremble wanted to have a stable career that would provide a stable job with financial security. As a result he gave his chance of trying out for Toronto Raptors because of his acceptance to medical school.

 

Whether a person’s first priority in life is financial security depends on the time of their age. If the person is young looking to develop their career as in the case of Micheal Tremble, then financial security is the first priority. If a person is in the old age and does not require financial security then they may choose someone to pass their time with instead of fortune. People in old age may prioritize companionship, love and friendship higher than financial security. Their time is limited and therefore, their priority is to spend the time with the people they love.

[sticky1]

-clicked-

Thank you!

 

In a democracy, the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.

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 the successful politician in a democracy does not resemble the ordinary citizen. Discuss what you think determines whether or not the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen.

 

In a democratic nation, people elect political representatives in public office. People elect a politician who they believe has the same needs as they have and will listen to their needs in order to fight to make sure they are fulfilled. Politicians are elected representatives in office whose job is to represent the views and needs of the people who elected them in office. The goal of a politician is to stay in public office for as long as possible. The way politicians accomplish this is by making sure that the needs of their constituents who elected them in office are being met.

 

Brazil’s president Hughes Iglozz was born in Brazil. However, he spent the majority of his childhood and adult life living in United States. When his family moved back to Brazil, he had no choice but to move back with them. While in United States, Hughes Iglozz studied law and wanted to run for public office. In Brazil, he was elected as a president in the first year of going back by promising people that he will increase the quality of life by decreasing poverty rates. Hughes Iglozz was a wealthy man because he inherited a fortune from his parents. However, the majority of people living in Brazil are below the poverty level. Hughes Iglozz was successfully elected in office because his education in United States helped him gain credibility in Brazil. He was viewed as a hero in Brazil because of his education.

 

Politicians are elected in office by constituents who believe that the politician shares the same social values as they do and thus resembles them. Toronto’s mayor John Debukke was born and raised in Toronto. He was a university drop out. He was inspired to run for public office because of the high crime rates that was occurring in the city. John Debukke believed he was the best person to run for mayor because he knew the city inside out and he would be able to solve the crime problems which the previous mayor was unable to do.

 

What determines on whether in a democracy the successful politician resembles the ordinary citizen depends on the time during which they are raised. If a politician is raised in a different country where they are able to gain necessary educational skills which would benefit the birth country, then the politician may not resemble the ordinary citizen because they may have inherited wealth. Therefore, they may have different ideas and plans on how to solve social problems. Hughes Iglozz was raised outside the United States and became a successful politician in Brazil because he brought hope to the poor people of Brazil. Even though, Hugh Iglozz did not resemble the poor ordinary citizen he was able to be successful because of his high education which people viewed as prestige. Tough problems can only be solved by politicians who understand the basic functioning of society. John Debukke was a university dropout but he was a successful politician because he understood how to solve the crime rates in his streets.

[Tina_HP]

-clicked-

 

Thank you in advance.

 

Advancements in communication technology have reduced the quality of human interaction.

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 advancements in communication technology have not reduced the quality of human interaction. Discuss what you think determines whether or not advancements in communication technology have reduced the quality of human interaction.

 

Human communication is essential part of our society because it allows us to share ideas, solve problems and help each other when in need. Human interaction does not just involve talking but also involves body language, touching, and facial expressions which allows us to communicate with each other. Technology plays an important role in helping us communicated by providing a medium through which people can be connected.

 

Advancements in communication technology plays a central role in human interaction. An immigrant Canadian family from Poland uses webcams to have breakfast with their grandmother in Poland. Webcam technology has allowed them to see the facial expressions of their grandmother who is thousands of miles away in a different country. Without webcam technology, the immigrant family would not be able to communicate with their grandmother who was in a great need of seeing their facial expression.

 

The development of smart phones has allowed text messaging to be the central communication pathway for many teens. Teens at Sisler high School are unable to read body language and facial expressions of various emotions due to their constant use of cell phones to communicate outside the classroom. This has reduced the quality of human interaction because cell phones have allowed for shortcuts to be used in language. Teachers have also reported that many students at the school are unable to comprehend text and write complete sentences. Cell phone technology has allowed normal human interactions to be replaced by an inferior text messaging communication where body language and facial expressions cannot be seen.

 

What determines whether advancements in technology will reduce the quality of human interactions depends on the usage frequency of the technology. The Canadian immigrant family used the webcam technology to communicate with their grandmother only at breakfast because that is the time when the family was getting ready for their day ahead. They used the webcam to communicate only when it was necessary. Teens at Sisler High School used cell phones to communicate casual conversations during the entire day. This reduced the quality of their interactions because through frequent use of text messaging they were unable to learn facial expressions and emotions which are part of normal human interactions.

[bored]

-clicked-

 

A student's academic success depends more on hard work than on intelligence.

 

Describe a specific situation in which a student's academic success might depend more on intelligence than on hard work. Discuss what you think determines whether a student's academic success depends more on hard work or on intelligence.

 

 

Academic success is used by admissions committee of many professional schools including medicine, pharmacy and business. These schools realize that academic success is a bad criteria to use because academic success often depends on the hard work used doe by a student. Success in academics is to be able to get good marks in courses taken in school. It is the ability to do good on tests and projects assigned by your teachers. Both of these tasks can be accomplished by hard work. Hard work is when a student places their school above all else and works towards achieving success at schools as their primary task. Often academic success is achieved by all students who work towards achieving the best they can in class. During my time in high school, I was not able to get very high marks. I was an average science student, achieving usual grades in the 70 range. However, as time passed and I moved on to University, I realized that achieving grades is an easy task. I started doing lots of practice and started spending more and more time towards school. As soon as I made school a top priority, the mark started increasing. I now realize that academic success is a result of hard work done by a student towards their academic career.

 

When I was placed under a laboratory environment however, the hard work did not seem to work. Working in the lab for hours and hours did not get me good conclusive results. I was able to get many results, but I was unable to get conclusive results that would help me prove my hypothesis. At this point I realized that working in a lab requires more than hard work, it also requires creativity. The creative aspect of a researcher is obvious when he or she is able to come up with great methods to test a difficult hypothesis. Creativity is according to psychology a type of intelligence. Albert Einstein is a perfect example for intelligent achieving academic success. Albert Einstien is known for his intelligent thinking, not his hard work in school. His creative thinking is what helped him come up with the theory of relativity. In this case, the Intelligence of the researcher is much more useful than hard work.

 

In a person's life, both hard work and intelligence are important. While the scientist is undergoing his or her learning of basics as they do in high school and during undergraduate studies, the hard work is very much important. But when the scientist moves on do to individual research and work, their ability to do think intelligently and their ability to carry out intelligent analysis becomes critical. A researcher will only receive support for research if their project is attainable and that is only done via creative thinking. Scientists are some of the most creative thinkers and their success is determined by how creative they are and how high their intelligence. A persistent researcher will never be as successful as Albert Einstein if they do not have any intelligent thinking power.

 

 

The End

 

 

Question for you: In this essay I have restricted my discussion to a student of science. I don't believe my argument can apply to a student of business or other fields.. Do you think I have done a good job restricting my discussion to a student of science? or will the reader criticize my essay and say that "well a person working in the business field does not need creative thinking, thus this essay does not make sense"

 

thanks!!!!

[aj123]

- clicked on water -

 

Plans for achieving social justice can succeed only when those affected give their approval.

 

Government policies for achieving equality are only created after significant voter pressure. For instance, in 2005 the Canadian government introduced a bill to change the legal definition of marriage to include homosexual partners. This was done after polls indicated significant public support for the legalization of same-sex marriage. Pubic support was generated by massive awareness campaigns initiated by gay and lesbian communities across Canada; bringing awareness to this issue, and encouraging the public to contact their local Member of Parliament expressing their support for the bill.

 

However, there have also been instances of governments passing bills promoting social justice without voter pressure. Such was the case with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a constitutional amendment guaranteeing numerous rights and freedoms, and ensuring equality for all Canadians regardless of race, creed, age or gender. This plan for ensuring social justice was created by progressive politicians unaffected by voter pressure, and passed by the government on their own accord.

 

In general, government policies for achieving social justice are created when significant public pressure is placed on politicians. This can be done through public awareness campaigns and contacting local Members of Parliament. However, there are circumstances when progressive governments pass bills promoting social justice on their own accord. Such was the case with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a personal goal of then Prime Minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau. However, citizens cannot always rely on progressive leaders to always strive for social justice. Therefore, to achieve social justice citizens must apply significant voter pressure on politicians.

 

Thanks for all your help.

[aj123]

- clicked on food -

 

In times of war, maintaining public support is often the most difficult battle.

 

In fighting a war, maintaining public morale is important to achieving pre-war goals. To declare a war, democratic nations must receive popular support from the general public. Maintaining this public support throughout the conflict is often the most difficult battle. For instance, in 2003 the War in Iraq was declared with the support of a majority of democratically elected officials representing the general public. This was largely due to the mistaken notion that Iraq posed a threat to US national security and was partially involved in the 9/11 attacks. Eight years later it is clear that public support for the war has waned. This is largely due to the fact that it has been proven that Iraq was not a threat to US national security was not involved in the 9/11 attacks. Consequently, one of the first promises US President Barack Obama made upon being elected was a full withdrawal of troops from Iraq, despite a lack of success for pre-war goals of stability and democracy for Iraq.

 

However, under different circumstances maintain public support is easier. Take for example the War in Afghanistan. After the 9/11 attacks, Afghanistan refused to hand over the mastermind of the attacks, Osama Bin Laden, and became a perceived threat to US national security. As a result, the US invaded Afghanistan with overwhelming public support. After a decade in conflict and a considerable lack of success, public support for the Afghanistan War continues to be strong. Due to this support the US is able to remain in Afghanistan and continue to attempt their pre-war goals of stability and democracy for Afghanistan.

 

Maintaining public support throughout a war is one of the most difficult battles. Often times the circumstances surrounding the war dictate public support for it. If a nation had been attacked or views another nation as a perceived threat to their national security, public support for the war is easier to maintain. Such was the case with the still popular war in Afghanistan. However, if the nation neither attacked nor is it a perceived threat to national security, public support for the war is difficult to maintain. Such was the case for the now unpopular war in Iraq. Therefore for nations to overcome their most significant hurdle in achieving their pre-war goals, they must initiate wars under favourable circumstances.

 

Thanks.

[PastaInhaler]

..............................................Post#748

 

----clicked----

 

Hi PastaInhaler

 

I'm new on this forum and just needed some help on figuring out where i can improve on my writing samples. My MCAT is tomorrow morning

 

Thanks in advance

 

1)Voters should not be concerned about a political candidate’s personal life.

 

When a political candidates personal life does not effect their judgment in there position as a representative of the voters, it is not necessary for the public to concerned. Being so entrenched in issues such as what magazine a certain politician prefers or how many personal relationships they have had in the past doesn't give or take credibility away from their stand on tax reduction. For example when President Obama was running his campaign there was a lot of interest in the nationality of his parents and his ethnic background even though he was born a U.S citizen. The interest shown in these aspects of the president's personal life provided no insight into the kind of president he would become. Therefore that information should not have been divulged to the voters.

 

However when a political candidate makes a promise to voters to uphold the same values, it is necessary to then hold the candidate accountable to this. After all the candidate is asking voters to allow them into office on their behalf. It is important to understand when a candidate makes promises to voters. When such politicians as rob blagojavech who laundered money from the public for his own personal gain. This directly affected the voters so they had every right to have information about his personal life.

 

There are many circumstances to consider when it comes to decided whether knowing certain things about a candidates personal life go against what their campaign stands for or it has no impact. If a politician is laundering money then the public has a right to know as it affects the voters. If the personal information divulged has no standing then the

 

You're welcome.

 

Thanks for clicking. Appreciated.

 

Ideas are somewhat developed.

Adequate control of language.

 

People were concerned with Obama's eligibility to run for president, and in a way, that was significant to the voters. It may be best to use another example to illustrate the prompt. The second example was sufficient, but will need to be explained in further detail. The final task was sufficient.

 

Be wary of grammatical errors, at times it was hard to follow your viewpoints.

 

I feel this essay will be scored an:

 

JKLMN/OPQRST