GRE Issue essay: Some people X; Some people Y?

[Dustin DeWinn]

I have been assiduously studying for the GRE and one of the things I did was read through the entire pool of potential Issue topics on the ETS website (Still reading the Argument pool). I feel comfortable with most of them, except there is a certain subset of topics that concern me. This is just one example, taken from the list:

 

Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.

 

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.

 

My concern is that all the other topics seem more straight-forward and it is easier, at least for me, to take a position and defend it because the topics are not so ambiguous. In being intellectually honest, both in thought and writing, I recognize at least on some of these "Some X; Some Y" issues, I straddle both sides of the topic equally. As an example, on matters of national security, I do not believe political leaders have an obligation to divulge secrets, but on the other hand I believe government should be more transparent about, say, spending and where campaign contributions come from. These views are not in direct opposition with each other, and I hold both equally and simultaneously.

 

The prompt is apparently asking me to pick one side, meaning the other is a position I do not support. It is easy to write about the pros and cons of the positions equally, but for this species of issue topic,  how is one supposed to convincingly write an essay when I'm only supporting one side? 

 

More confoundingly, I'm asked to address both sides, so does that mean I'm allowed to straddle and give an even-handed analysis, or am I just supposed to present the other side from the perspective of it being fallacious? Perhaps it is just in my broken interpretation of the prompt.

Thank you so much!

EDIT: To elaborate a bit, on an issue topic like "All high school students should have the same curriculum till college", it's easy for me to say, "No well not ALL. You said ALL. Here is why: private schools would be included, not all districts have the same funding, different students have different needs, etc." All of the NON SOME X; SOME Y, they are worded in such a way that it is easier for me to have a concrete stance. But here I feel like they're asking me "Some people feel that driving fast is dangerous. Other people like racing cars and think that's okay. Take a position"....clearly it's okay to not like speeding on the highway AND like racing cars on a closed track. 

 

These SOME X, SOME Y are not either/or issues, and I think both sides have to be fully vetted.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Dustin DeWinn

[maelia8]

Obviously these "some x, some y" type of prompts are asking you to take some sort of stance and clearly indicate that you are at least MORE for one side than the other. Let's be honest: GRE essay graders could honestly care less about what you actually believe about the issue, and fully expect you to choose one side even if it is a comparison that makes little sense in real life.

 

When the prompt asks you to address both views that are presented, it means to make sure that you cover both viewpoints while clearly supporting one over the other (i.e. if you support X, write about the pros of it and then explain that "although one could support Y because blah, I as a proponent of X must point out that this is a weak argument because blerg"). It doesn't matter if you really do feel that there are equally convincing arguments for X and Y, or that X and Y are both equally problematic or shouldn't be compared. You only have a short time to write, so pick a side, list your top few arguments for that side, and then spend some time explaining why the most convincing arguments for the other side are wrong/not as good as the arguments for the side you chose.

 

For example, f you are doing a five-paragraph essay format, I would say paragraph one should introduce the topic and state that you are for X rather than Y, paragraphs two and three should describe and elaborate on the most important/convincing arguments for X, paragraph four should address any arguments for Y and refute them, and paragraph 5 should reiterate paragraph one again. Good luck, I hope this helps!

[VioletAyame]

I don't think you have to be extremely clear-cut on your stance. The prompt clearly said "which view more closely aligns with your own position," so in those 2 views, you should have a preference but not necessarily a staunch support while critiquing the pros and cons of both sides.

 

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.

 

As an example, on matters of national security, I do not believe political leaders have an obligation to divulge secrets, but on the other hand I believe government should be more transparent about, say, spending and where campaign contributions come from. These views are not in direct opposition with each other, and I hold both equally and simultaneously.

 

I also think your position as explained here is perfectly reasonable, and I would say you lean more toward the transparency end, except on matters of national security. It'd make for a fine essay!