Please grade my "Analyze an Issue" essay

[swiftie]

I wrote this essay in a 30 minutes while attempting Manhattan Practice Test. Please grade it or comment on it. I can grade your essay in return.

 

Prompt:

 

Some people believe that teaching morality should be the foundation of education. Others believe that teaching a foundation of logical reasoning would do more to produce a moral society.

 

Write a response in which you discuss which view  more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented above.

 

Essay:

 

Teaching a foundation of logical reasoning is necessary to ensure that people behave morally. A person who lacks the ability to reason logically cannot be depended upon to do the morally right thing, even if his intentions are good.

 

Advances in psychology tell us that humans aren't perfectly rational agents. Aside from committing what are called logical fallacies in reasoning, they are also prone to cognitive biases. Only a person who is well aware of them can be expected to reason correctly. An introductory course in logic includes learning about syllogisms, deductive and inductive arguments, what it means for a deductive argument to be logically valid or sound, and common fallacies. 

 

An "ad hominem" attack is an example of fallacy that is not uncommon. It occurs when a person tries to invalidate an argument by discrediting the person who made the argument. It is true that pondering over this can make someone who hasn't taken a logic class realize that there's something wrong with ad hominem. But, there are too many forms of bad arguments and one cannot be relied upon to independently discover all of them or even try to do so. Moreover, cognitive biases like confirmation bias (the tendency to neglect evidence against your position) worsen the situation.

 

Why care so much about logical reasoning in order to produce a moral society? Because what a foundation of morality can teach are basic moral values, like the Golden Rule or do not harm others unnecessarily. In practical situations, what to do must be decided by making arguments where those moral values serve as premises. The various moral systems e.g. deontology and consequentialism utilize this. One form of consequentialism, utilitarianism requires a person to do a cost-benefit analysis of each action he does. If the costs of an action outweigh the benefits, a utilitarian will decide against going through with it.

 

On the other hand, as has been witnessed by humanity, fundamentalists commit atrocities while thinking that they are behaving morally and according to God's instructions. Basic logic, if taught to them, can have gone a long deal to make them realize that their actions aren't really moral.

 

So, I would advocate teaching logical reasoning over morality itself as the basic moral values, if they are to be adopted by a person, are  intuitive, thanks to evolution.

 

[awells27]

I would be hesitant to grade the essay numerically, as it might mislead you unfairly, and because I hear the graders are very inconsistent and rushed.  However, I did get a 6 on the AW, and the comments I'm giving you reflect the strategies I adopted in my own essays.  

 

 

1.  You need to provide context in your introductory paragraph.  You might set the issue within the age old debate between religious moralists and rational thinkers, utilitarians vs those who attempt to legislate morality, or even secular humanists vs biblical literalists, or even Creationism vs evolution.  Relate the context to the current debate between secular humanist and religious moralist views of education.  Whatever you do, have your intro paragraph a bit longer through the supplying of context.

 

2.  GRE graders apparently appreciate nuance, so you need to have at least one paragraph where the opinion your are arguing against could be at least partially true.  For example, you could appeal to a few universally accepted moral principles that should be inculcated in children from a very young age.

 

3.  Your paragraphs need to connect with each other.  let the last sentence flow more into the first sentence of the next paragraph.  You did this once with the notion of fallacies leading into Ad Hominem attacks, although "a common fallacy"  sound a bit better than "not uncommon."

 

4.  When you chastise fundamentalists, you can pick up extra points by acknowledging that their actions are often motivated by an authentic desire for what is good, but that they have not been taught the basic abilities of discernment that good logical reasoning can provide.  In other words, be careful not to vilify the opposing side. Being sympathetic toward their argument while exposing its problems is a good way to show nuance. Also, in this paragraph YOU HAVE TO PROVIDE EXAMPLES!  If you simply state that a phenomenon exists without providing a real life example, such as the bombing of abortion clinics, stoning of a heretic, or even the 911 attack, you will lose points

 

5.  Your conclusion should provide implications for the future.  What will our educational institutions produce through logical instruction and what type of society would you envision?  

 

 

If you learn to follow the 5 steps above, your grade should improve.  There are tons of essay prompts available, so feel free to post another essay.  You're off to a good start.  

Edited October 18, 2013 by awells27

[swiftie]

Thanks a lot for your suggestions! This was my first essay and found myself hurrying up in the last 10 minutes. I'll try with other prompts too.

[awells27]

This is definitely not a fair test, so the more you practice the better it will get.  By all means seek advice from others as well who have gotten at least a 5 score. Finally, if you have not read through Barons latest GRE book and the Manhattan book covering the AW, pay close attention to their instructions, which are expanded versions of what I just pointed out.  

[swiftie]

I wrote another essay! I realize that even this time, my essay could have been improved a lot if I had more than 30 minutes. I am pasting my essay as it is without improving it. I will be really grateful if you could comment on it. Thanks a lot in advance.

 

Prompt:

The physical differences in men and women make women inherently less suited for most tasks.

 

My Essay:

 

Men and women might have physical differences, but that does not make women inherently less suited for most tasks. Women have been historically denied many work opportunities and rights, either by enforcing sexist policies or discriminating against them in the hiring process. After seeing women achieve success in various fields, we should no longer think of them as less capable.

 

Although, the reasoning behind thinking that women have less physical strength is suspect, traditionally that contention has been used to deny them opportunities. But, in the modern era, most of the menial work has been automated and performed by machines. The most demanding fields today like management and software development do not require any physical work. And, women have shown that they can perform as well, if not better, than their male counterparts in such fields.

 

Marissa Mayer, the CEO of Yahoo Inc, is one such woman. After graduating summa cum laude from Stanford University, the incredibly talented and intelligent Marissa joined Google. Her contributions were a major factor in Google's stupendous growth and when she left, she was the Vice President of Product Design. She was chosen over Ross Levinson for the job of chief executive of Yahoo and is currently helping Yahoo regain its old momentum.

 

There isn't a dearth of such examples of ultra-successful women. Christine Lagarde, the director of IMF and Hillary Clinton, who recently resigned as Secretary of State of the United States come immediately to mind. However, women have also proved their mettle in lower positions. 

 

A common objection that prevails even now is that women have less strength and thus cannot work in manufacturing and the army. The US army recently approved women's joining the infantry showing that they do not doubt their capacity even in jobs requiring strength. That should put to rest most people's objections. However, even if one continues to believe that women have less strength, that is not sufficient to stop them from working in most of the jobs, as they don't require such brute strength.

 

Another objection is that women require maternity leave. Although, women might need to take a leave off while they are pregnant, that doesn't make them less suitable at any task. Not hiring bright women for jobs, just because they might have to take a leave, if they decide to bear a child, seems irrational for most fields. However, there might be companies involved in specialized work in which such leaves might be untenable, and it might suit their purpose to prefer men or women which do not plan on bearing a child.

 

As discussed above, most of the objections don't apply to most of the fields. In most situations, women and men are equally suited to the task. Moreover, women have excelled in many fields and shown that they can work as well as men.

[awells27]

1.  Intro is an improvement, as it provides  historical context.  List, however, the skeleton of your argument within the intro.  "I would generally contend with the above argument on the  following grounds: physical strength represents a misleading criterion of usefulness; several women have proven equal to men in vital vocational fields; women have achieved success in the military, a field often presupposing physical strength and stamina;  and, finally, concerns over maternity leave are overstated.  

 

2.  Your transition from paragraph 2 to 3 is just such a connecting strategy that graders look for.  Combine paragraph 4, however with paragraph 3, since the examples all relate to each other.  "There isn't a dearth of such examples of ultra-successful women" sounds awkward.  Something like, "Such examples of successful women abound."   

 

3.  Conclusion:  "most of the objections don't apply to most of the fields." = too vague.  rather, "Most common appeals to female ineffectiveness prove inapplicable to the majority of vocational fields."  Also, DON"T FORGET TOO PROVIDE THE POSITIVE IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIETY, GIVEN YOUR POSITION.  Why is the world represented by your view of women a better one for both ourselves and our children?  Also, in a position as faulty as the one given you, if you can find even a bare instance where it is warranted, it helps.  My problem here, however, is that the odds of a liberal grader is greater than a conservative one, so you run the risk of annoying them if you even hint at patriarchy.  

 

[clandry]

This prompt is literally retarded (lack of a better word). Can't they at least define "most." If I received this prompt, I would probably choose a middle ground since "most" can mean many things....

[awells27]

This prompt is literally retarded (lack of a better word). Can't they at least define "most." If I received this prompt, I would probably choose a middle ground since "most" can mean many things....

You would be on dangerous ground if a female, or any prof concerned with gender bias, graded your paper.  You could definitely devote one paragraph to the problem of "most."  We are told that no bias goes into grading these essays, but judging by my history of paper grades, I would contend that position.  

[clandry]

You would be on dangerous ground if a female, or any prof concerned with gender bias, graded your paper.  You could definitely devote one paragraph to the problem of "most."  We are told that no bias goes into grading these essays, but judging by my history of paper grades, I would contend that position.  

Yeah, I figured they would even though they're required to grade impartially, but they're human, so there is some bias at all times. Best to be politically correct.

 

I would probably throw an example in there for a task such as strenuous physical labor where men would tend to be more appropriate, but the advent and proliferation of automatons have superceded the need for hand labor in most industrial jobs. 

 

Oh btw, I heard they like it if you throw in a modest amount of GRE words, but don't be too excessive with it or you may come off as pretentious. 

 

What's your opinion on contractions? Yes/no?

Edited October 20, 2013 by doubled

[awells27]

Oh btw, I heard they like it if you throw in a modest amount of GRE words, but don't be too excessive with it or you may come off as pretentious. 

 

What's your opinion on contractions? Yes/no?

 

 

I think I used 3 GRE words for my first essay and two for my second.  I would generally avoid contractions.