People who pursue their own intellectual interests for purely personal reasons are ..

[akhil1988]

Somebody Please comment on this issue ... It would be very helpful to me

"People who pursue their own intellectual interests for purely personal reasons are more likely to benefit the rest of the world than are people who try to act for the public good."


Both type of people whehter those who worked with purely personal motives or those who worked for human welfare have benefitted the society in some way or the other. It depends on the perspective of the person that whom's contribution (s)he considers more beneficial to the society.

To start with, let us first try to make distinction between the various ways in which one can use his intellect. As the issue states there are people who pursue intellectual interests for personal reasons i.e. they use their wit, knowledge, abilities and creativity to attain some self-centered goals e.g. to mint a lot of money or to attain fame in the society by hook or by crook. Other type of people use the same intellect for public good i.e. they use their intellect to serve humanity in some way e.g. by fighting for rights for a particular sect of the society or for freedom of their country or by bringing social reforms in the world which are beneficial to the scoiety.

Let's consider the case of the first category of people who puruse their intellectual interests for puely personal reasons. Consider Bill Gates, who started the today's one of the most pervading software industry in the world. Unequivocally it can be stated that at his age when he started the start-up he used his intellect to come up with some product that can be used by the society. But his goal was not that he wanted to do good to the society, he was an intelligent person who came up with a new idea of programming and implemented it and this earned him a lot of bucks. Similarly consider other big personalities who have earned both money and fame in the society like Sergey and Bin (founder of Google), again their aim was not to do good to the society, but was to come up with some invention that earns them laurels in the society. Now one will argue that they have done a great deal of good to the modern world by introducing unprecedent products in the market and with their efforts these technologies have reached billions of households. True, but the point to be noted here is that their main goal was their own self-centered interests. Concomitant to the technology they brought to the world, other problems like poverty, cruelty, etc. have only aggravated rather than ameliorated.

Now, lets consider the second category of people who dedicated their lives for public welfare. Mahatama Gandhi, the great freedom fighter of India(also called Father of The Nation) lived a totally austere life and freed India from the grips of British rulers. The good he did for the people of India is incomparable. Similarly, consider spiritual personalities like Jesus Christ, the benefit he did to the society is insurmountable and infact cannot be compared to the benefits that were brought by the first category of people. If you ask any reasonably thoughtful person about what he thinks about Jesus Christ or Mahatma Gandhi as compared to Bill Gates one will defeinitely have great reverence for the second class of people. These personlities taught people how to live in harmony with each other and live a life of respect and bliss.

From the examples above, it can be inferred that those belonging to the first category have done good to the society in one sense(in the field of sciences) but it has come at a great cost of other things that people have lost or forgotten like thier culture, the beautiful nature that people used to relish. etc. In one sense such advancements by these people have also brought exploitation in the society as people are exploting each other for money. On the other hand, people who worked just for public good have brought bliss in the life of people by giving them thier rights and thus bringing bliss in their lives. Such people are definitely more revered than persons who work with personal motives.

[Gravy924]

I think you did a really good job on this essay.

However, I feel like you might of lost your way a bit near the end.

Here is how I breakdown your essay, if I just didn't get it, then I apologize and don't listen to what I say =).

Thesis: Both people who do things for the benefit of themselves and benefit of others have done good in the world. Which has benefited the world more is in the eye of the beholder so to speak.

Point 1: Bill Gates and the Google Guys both brought technology to a lot of people which did good for the world, even if they did it for themselves. Still, they may have aggravated other problems in the world.

Point 2: Ghandi and Jesus did things for the social good, not themselves. In doing that, they did a ton of good for the world. Jesus did so much for the world that you cannot even compare him to Bill Gates. Everyone will have more respect for Ghandi and JC than Bill Gates.

Conclusion: People who do things for themselves, while brining good, also bring bad. People who do things for public good only do good.

I guess what I am trying to say is that your argument seems like you are going to argue that it depends on who you talk to whether or not the BG's and Google Guys of the world have done more good than the JCs and Ghandi's, but your argument ends up coming out like the JCs and Ghandis have done way more good.

I think if you just have a stronger thesis, like, " While both groups have done good for the world, those who did things for public good have brought more good to the world than those who did things for personal reasons" than the rest of your essay works really well.

Please don't accept everything I say on faith, I haven't taken the GRE yet so I dont know how good of a writer I really am.

Good Luck.