Charisma

Hello. Below I've posted my GRE essays, would you give me some feedback on them? Maybe a score estimate? Thanks in advance. ISSUE: It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. I do not fully support this idea. While it is true that, given the social nature of human beings, people often see themselves in the mirror of others and it this regard social groups provide a uniform response to the question of "who I am"; it should not be forgotten that groups, especillay in their establishment process, find their identification through their individual members. It is only later on that the collective thinking and undertakings of the group members as a whole, that group's ethos fully form. Thus, thinking of groups apart from their individuals (especially their founders') is unwarantted. Moreover, even in well established social groups, reformers get a chance to adjust group's values to present facts; now if these individual's own self-definition is only stemmed from the group's mentality; they are simply unable to do so. Nevertheless examples of reformist (and even revelutionary thought) are abudnant in history; the fall of the Soviet Union was broght on by a leader that had litterally been born into the Scoialist cause, yet he managed to overthrow a seemingly inexorable force and turn the socialist juggernut on its head. Another key point about the relation between group identity and the individual's is the fact that more often that not, we only partially support any particular ideology. We humans, as social beings, are on constant lookout for groups to join. But it is very rare that our ecisiting beliefs are fully compatible with those of any particualr groups. Therefore the fact that we have joined a group does not necessirly mean that we fullt support every corollary of the group's policy. For instance, many women and men relate to the feminist cause; however, even feminism has its extreme and fanatical branches; and many self-proclaimed feminists do not support these off-shoot manily because they have other standing values that contradict extreme feminism. Thus we observe how individual values can oppose group values; to the point one considers forgoing a certain cause. Our definition of ourselves is a highly involved epistomologic endevour that transcends our concious behaviour and we cannot exert concious control over them. Thus indvidual subconcience also plays a role in self-indentification. In conclusion, I would like to say that individuals can change the most adament group identities and they may even do so on an uncncious level. ARGUMENT: The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper. "Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in Elthyria maintains that the majority of competent workers who have lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this claim is undermined by a recent report on the Elthyrian economy, which found that since 1999 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated, bringing the unemployment rate in Elthyria to its lowest level in decades. Moreover, two-thirds of these newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time." *Downsizing is the process whereby corporations deliberately make themselves smaller, reducing the number of their employees. Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. The net number of jobs created (jobs created minus jobs lost) is not necessirly a strong indicator of vocational status of Elthyrian workers. Many people take on finincial commitments (like mordgages, or health insurances) that require secure and stable employement. Many companies have turned to the policy of mass hirings and mass downsizing; as a result many workers are forced to work in short stints. Moreover the transition between such jobs can be particularly detrimental to financial stability of the workers and their families and as such a clear example of "economic hardship"; workers might go without pay for dozen months. However in such large scopes of time (like "since 1999") such details are granular and easily glossed over. (What is 6 months of unemployement in 17 years of data?) Moreover, the revelation that "the unemplyment rate has reached its lowest level in decades" has to be scrutinized. Although it is mentioned that the majority of the jobs created pay above-average, there is not particular mention of the nature of these jobs execpt that they are "industarial". It should be noted that although many industarial jobs pay well, their adverse effects on workers' health can ultimately be a great source of financial discomfort for workers. Many such employements do not contain an exhustive medical insurance package. As a result, if workers do become critically ill, it is not clear wheather these high-paying jobs can provide for a sufficent care of the worker. Moreover, in that case it is not even certain that the unfortunate worker can maitain their employement in the course of his or her treatment. These are all terms that must be covered in the worker's contract, but no mention of this exist in the argument either. Therefore It is unclear, how a worker who has accepted a hazardous job can eschew "financial hardship", if his or her contract is not worker-friendly. In conclusion, In order to appropicatly gauge the impact of major corporate downsizings, data needs to be collected in various time spans. The psychological effects have to be measured and be taken into account and "econmic hardship" be defined based on a higher number of influential variables; like the unemployement frequency, fincancial commitments and worker-favorable contract provisions.

Hello everyone. These are my responses to Official Guide's 1st practice test. Could you please have a look and tell me how it's lacking? (possibly a score?) Thank you all. Issue TaskThe best way to teach is to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. I found the statement quite lacking on many ascpects, and therefore I do not support its message. First, I believe that "positive" and "negative", can be highly subjective terms depending of the problem at hand and in most practical situations, no such dichotomy exists and the positive and negative tend to segue into one another in very subtle ways. Therefore it's outright simplistic to think we can neatly catagorize actions into such limited groupings. More importantly, even attempting to do such think will be counterproductive in the longterm; by teaching a binary logic framework, we (possibly inadvertantly) are teaching that such framework is applicable in other situations; this, as stated before is simply not the case in our increasingly complex and convoluted world. Abortion is one topic where plausible arguments exist for both pro-life and pro-choice sides and the ethical choices depends on som many factors that the right/wrong dichotomy fails to capture its intricacies, let alone produce the almighty "right answer". Instead, what we should be teaching children is critical thinking; its value as well as how it is done. Of course it is a daunting task but it is by far the most invaluable life lesson we could provide our children. Second, it is not enough to merely praise or discredit, teachers must take a position and defend it and by doing so, teachers are indeed on their way to teach critical thinking instead of feeding their puiples with already-chewed food for thought; what the French aptly named "les pret-a-pensee", ready to be thought. At last, it should be noted that ignoring "negative actions" is potentially dangerous. And while we need to teach our students to think critically, we need to provide examlpes of what we deem negative and most importantly why. Ignoring negative actions is infentalizing in the sense that we deprive our student of a chance to practice their newly built skills, by providing them with a faux protection from what really takes place in the world. Argument TaskThe following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist. “Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research of mine proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is invalid and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid as well. The interview-centered method that my team of graduate students is currently using in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures.” Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. The article makes three distinct conclusions, that "Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village is invalid" and therefore that "observation-centered approach to studying culture is invalid". The third conclusion is in fact a prediction; that the "interview-centered approach"will yield a "much more acurate understanding of child rearing traditions". The first conclusion is drawn based on Dr. Karp's group's interviews with "children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia", however the size of the group interviewed and the population of children living in these regions are not mentioned. It is indeed possible that the conclusions drawn, by one or both of the researchers, are invalid, simply because the group they interviewd (or observed) is not representative of the status quo in the region and therefore one or both studies have not captured the exisitng trend in the islands. More importantly, Dr. Karp mentions that he has interviewed children from a larger group of children; a group that included Tertian children but also a number of other children. It is therefore clear that with the lack of statistical data about the ethnic and geographic background of each child interviewed, one can not arrive at the conclusion that Dr.Karp's concluisons are valid. It is entirely possible that a large proportion of children interviewed are indeed not from Tertia Village, but from surronding villages, with possibly different cultures. Second, even if Dr. Karp's conclusion about child rearing in Tertia is valid, it neither ensures the validity of his method nor discredits that of Dr. Field's. It is possible that each method have their merits as well of weaknesses and that the choice of method can be made according to the realities of the studied region. No such realities are mentioned in the article. Third, the effectiveness of Dr. Karp's method can be questioned. Children interviewed may have a tendency to misreprensent the relevant facts of their lives due to a number of reasons. The most important one is that they simply cannot grasp the adult aspects of child rearing that escapes their attention; for example, the villagers may all bear some responsibility for the safty of the village's children, while most children are obeliviously carrying on with their child play. Therefore we see how misconducted interviews or a limted number of interviews could lead to erronous conclusions. Thus, considering all of the above, we cannot discredit Dr.Field's method or assign exclusive credit to Dr.Krap's. We need to ensure statistical soundness of both studies and without those the majority of the generalist conclusions mentioned at the beginning (especially the second and the third) are unwarranted. ----------------------Thanks again for taking the time for reading my essays. They are indeed my "essays" (in French literally "trys") to show my critical thinking. However somehow they managed to reveal my technical background by lacking literary refinement! Do you have any particular approach to improve? other than, obviously, writing more?

Thank you Vince. I really appreciate your thoughts on my essays. I had one general question: Do the spelling errors stand out so obviously that might convince raters to deduct points? In your assessment, did you deduct points? The reason I'm asking is that I have a problem with the clock and when that happens I tend to focus more on the material (getting it out there) than spelling. I've read in the Official Guide that unsystematic spelling/grammar errors are not punished, I would like to know where that boundary lies so that I can stay clear of it. Thanks

Hello everyone. Here are my GRE essays. I would be much obliged if your provided me with some feedback. You will notice spelling errors, my apologies in advance; this is my first attempt at a timed GRE essay. Thanks in advance. Issue TaskTechnology, while apparently aimed to simplify our lives, only makes our lives more complicated. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. Developing technology, a very broad umbrella term for what consittutes many diverse disceiplines and their respective objectives, in itself has not been solely intended for simplyfing human lives. Their objectives have changed during the course of history. While I agree that the fast pace of technological developements have taken a toll on so many slowely-adapting humans, one must not try to make an amalegam of all of the technological advancements and assign a single purpose to them, namely, simplfing human lives. Indeed, early technological offerings were intended to ameliorate our life experinces, but humans progressed through thier quest for knowledge and expertise, soon they found out that technology enables them to transcende their already-familiar life experinces and lets them unleash their creativity in largely uncharted waters. At that point, technology morphed from a means to an end, to an end itself. Examples are abundant. Space exploration and the technological advancements that led to its possibility, are prominent examples. While it's true that much of those precursory developements were originally intended for aerospace industry, with the alleged goal of easing human travail in traveling, one could just as strongly argue that developing rockets with accelerations up to 10 times that of earth's gravity force did little to ease our mundane earthly lives. Another point in the argument that is problematic, is the alleged fact that technology "makes our lives more complicated". I disagree. Although, the pace of technology has increased considerably since the second half of the 20th century and this fast pace has overwhelemed so many people, I contend that this is not a fact applicable to everyone. Younger generations tend to adapt to new technologies very quickly. Therefore, I believe the problem raised is that of the old "evolution", a fast-paced, unprecededant evolution, but still an evolution. To conculde I say while it is true that our world has become an overwhelming place, but to blame technological advancements for it, is simply a fallacy. Argument TaskSuperCorp recently moved its headquarters to Corporateville. The recent surge in the number of homeowners in Corporateville proves that Corporateville is a superior place to live than Middlesburg, the home of SuperCorp's current headquarters. Moreover, Middleburg is a predominately urban area and according to an employee survey, SuperCorp has determined that its workers prefer to live in an area that is not urban. Finally, Corporateville has lower taxes than Middlesburg, making it not only a safer place to work but also a cheaper one. Therefore, Supercorp clearly made the best decision. Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on the assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.There are a number of assumptions that either hold weak relations to their source facts, or whose sources are arguable; there are also assumptions that have no support in the passage given. The assumption that the surge in Corporateville's homeowners is a valid signal that it "is a superior place to live" falls on many different notes. First, what constitutes superiority? is there an overarching definition for such a thing, or is it just a vague and highly subjective term? Second, what if the surge in homeowner's number is caused by other factors, such as yet another recent major corporation displacement? Does that warrants that the situation is better? wouldn't it be possible that mere corporate deceisions have led to such consequneces and not human resources' concerns? To legitimize the claim, a survey is mentioned. While the contents of the survey is not discussed, one can already discern a clear conflict of interest; what gurantees that the surveyors has been truly impartial in its conduction and analysis? Another key argument for favoring the displacement to Corporateville is lower taxes. However, it's not mentioned how reduced taxation helps the average SuperCorp employee's household. While lower taxes is certainly attractive to SuperCorp admininstration, it's unclear how much it would benefit its employees. Yet still, there are other significant factors for the average SuperCorp employee that the article conveniantely glosses over, including general level of prices (that could be higher in Corporateville compared to Middlesburg), educational facilities (which would clealy be problematic given the fact that Corporateville is not as urbanized as Middlesburg), inflation, and so forth. In the end, there's a unwarranted assumption, that Corporateville would be safer than Middlesburg; this finds no support whatsoever in the article. ----------------------Thanks again