021 Reform is seldom brought about by people who

[sow1225]

Hi,

I am exceeding time. But, I am trying to edit my essay after 45 mins...I think I corrected my mistakes this time....just let me know. Did I take mention my stand right?. Did I wirte my points clear?. How are my examples?. Thanks!

 

Reform is seldom brought about by people who are concerned with their own reputation and social standing. Those who are really in earnest about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution must be willing to be viewed with disdain by the rest of the world."

 

As generations pass by people who are concerned for the society’s established system are becoming less. However, reasons for the people’s concerns could be a committed one or it could be for their own selfish reasons. Both have positive and negative effects on the society, as society is full of people with multifarious thoughts, which can do some good and at the same time have adverse effects. Lets look into the above-presented fact.

 

People who work for their own selfish reasons, may do some good or improvements to the society initially to increase their reputation, but at one point or other, they get diverted from their objectivity, as success gets into their hands and ambitions to become rich out of whatever resources are available could lead nowhere in the process of the reforming the society. For example, political leaders who make promises during election campaigns, never try to keep their promises. Even if the do, they leave it partially, as they get easily diverted from their goals and promises, for some other reasons like trying to denigrate their rival parties or trying to figure out what they are up to. It is true that to have profound reformed system is not possible with the people who look after their own social status and fame.

 

People who tried to reform any established system must have the courage and willingness to prove their genuine reasons for committing themselves to work for the society. Initially, they may have to go through disdain and rejection as people have contrasting views and ideas. However, once the strong penchant for working towards the better improvement of the society is realized, they are widely accepted and appreciated for their efforts. For example, Mahatma Gandhi who fought for India’s independence. Though, he had to get exposed to disdain and suppression in the beginning, he fought with audacity to achieve independence for India. Even though one has to go through so much for the society, their efforts are greatly praised and remembered for ages to come.

 

Finally, when an established system is going through reformation, it will have both positive and negative effects depending on the people who work for it. People who chose to work for their status in society and for their own benefits may contribute partially to the society, which can never lead to the complete reformation. People who chose to live for the society, may have to go through the disdain, but should have the courage to live with it without forgetting their objectivity.

 

[AmigoRo]

Sow,

 

There are no major, grammatical, typographical, or structural errors with your essay. However (you knew that was coming, didn't ya ?) I feel some sections of the essay are a wee bit offtopic.

 

After reading your essay, I am not totally clear about your stance. I am suffering from a bad case of sleep-deprivation at the moment, so it could well be me, but, have you taken a stance, and if so, what is it ? Or are you playing devil's advocate ?

 

Thanks,

AmigoRo

[sow1225]

Hi Amigo,

I think you got me this time too!. I was indicating my stand indirectly but not clearly. I agree with the issue topic and I mentioned it at the end of the first para and the last para which starts with 'Finally'. Instead of explaining my stand, I gave a general statement in the last paragraph. I don't know why I keep doing this everytime.

 

After looking at reply I tried with 023- Contemporary technology makes available many small pieces of factual information. As a result, people have become so preoccupied with bits of fragmented information that they pay too little attention to the larger issues and overall perspectives." Please take a look at that one, and let me know what you think. thanks!! sow.

[ss6872]

Hi I'm VIDYA. This is my first time posting on this website. Actually i read a lot of essays and while reading some of my own ideas come streaming but i have always shyed away from putting it into writing. Since Iam planning to give my gre next month, i thought it was high time i'd actually write some essays inorder to gain confidence.

Please feel free in critiquing it.

 

Reform is seldom brought about by people who are concerned with their own reputation and social standing. Those who are really in earnest about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution must be willing to be viewed with disdain by the rest of the world.

 

 

History has shown us time and again that heroes , radical thinkers and reformers who had dared to question the convention and bring about heretical ideas and novel methodologies to reform any institution have always been looked upon with skepticism ,contempt and disdain in their times.It is only later , when their efforts attained fruition and brought about results for the betterment of the society , have they been proclaimed heroes and thier efforts lauded and acclaimed all over the world. Would our modern society be basking in the glory of all its virtuous sons and daughters achievements, if these great reformers and heroes had hesitated to pursue their vision of the modern world, due to fear of mere loss of short term social standing and reputation? I certainly dont think so.

 

We only have to look back at history to find numerous such examples. The efforts of Abraham Lincoln , Martin Luther King and innumerable such pioneers who championed the civil rights movement were attacked by many White Supremists proponents of those times. But these odious attacks did not deterr them from thier pursuit for a truly liberal and democratic society, the results of which we enjoy today.

 

Another field which survives on reforms and modifications, is the field of Science and technology. It is well known that great scientists like Thomas Edison, A. Graham Bell, White Brothers, M. Faraday were all faced with condemnation, rebuke and derision for their radical theories and ideas. Their theories were ridiculed with strong words from scholars as 'completely idiotic' and 'totally impractical and impossible'.

Many even faced the threat of being ostracized from thier respective fields. However it is only due to their efforts that we are the technologically advanced society that we are today.

 

Such reformers set the trend for new leaders , who should follow the spirit of their vision rather than worrying about their social standing and reputation inorder to attain any success in their efforts.

Admittedly, anyone who endeavours in such reforms will be faced with innumerable hardships and heavy opposition, but if he is confident of the beneficial results of his efforts to the society, then he should dare to undertake such reforms, gaining strength from his adherents and being unmindful of the short term lossses .

 

I conclude by asserting that reform can only be brought about by selfless thinkers who dare to prsue thier vision.

 

 

[megha_the_angel]

Thats a good essay Vidya. I would rate it about 4.5 or 5.

There are minor spelling mistakes in ur essay.

I think u it would be better if u primarily give examples from the govt. or edu. system since these 2 fields r mentioned in the statement. For eg., the great Indian reformers Mahatma Phule and Savitribai Phule had to face a lot of derision when they championed the women's right to education.

However, u have to be very careful while giving local examples, coz it is always likely that the ETS readers r not aware of them. It is likely that they do not know about Mahatma Phule. In such a case it is necessay to elaborate about the person and his works.

Bye!

(These r only my views, and I completely understand if u disagree. Feel free to comment.)

[ss6872]

Thanks for your comments Megha.

I'll make sure that i keep abt 1-2 mins in the end for correcting typos and spelling mistakes.

I knew there were plenty such examples of reformers in the educational system, but i couldnt come up with relevant examples on those in the given 45 mins. Anyway, that is a perfectly viable critique.

I will try posting some more essays on this forum soon.

Good luck to you too.

[spyffe]

Originally posted by sow1225

 

Hi sow1225! I'll probably be really nitpicky, so please be understanding.

 

As generations pass by people who are concerned for the society's established system are becoming less. However, reasons for the people's concerns could be a committed one or it could be for their own selfish reasons. Both have positive and negative effects on the society, as society is full of people with multifarious thoughts, which can do some good and at the same time have adverse effects. Lets look into the above-presented fact.

 

First sentence:There should be a comma after "by," otherwise it appears as if the generations were passing by the concerned people. Second sentence: "A committed one" refers to a single thing, but it refers to the plural "reasons" - make sure to match number! Also, "However" seems useless in this context: the sentence does not seem to go against anything previously said. The whole sentence sounds a little awkward, perhaps you could write something like: "Concerned people's reasons could be selfless and altruistic, or selfish and petty." Third sentence: This is a good sentence! Fourth sentence: I'm not sure you've established that the previous statement is a fact per se. Perhaps you could write something like, "Let's look at these effects in more detail." Also remember the apostrophe in "Let's."

 

People who work for their own selfish reasons, may do some good or improvements to the society initially to increase their reputation, but at one point or other, they get diverted from their objectivity, as success gets into their hands and ambitions to become rich out of whatever resources are available could lead nowhere in the process of the reforming the society. For example, political leaders who make promises during election campaigns, never try to keep their promises. Even if the do, they leave it partially, as they get easily diverted from their goals and promises, for some other reasons like trying to denigrate their rival parties or trying to figure out what they are up to. It is true that to have profound reformed system is not possible with the people who look after their own social status and fame.

 

First sentence: This is a run-on sentence which gets lost. You need to break it up. First say that people may initially improve the society, in order to build their own reputation. Then place your second statement - the power people gain in this way can corrupt them and cause them to lose their ideals - in a seperate sentence. You may even want a third to state that this process of corruption can bring their previous reforms to nothing. Second sentence: A good sentence. But I don't think you need the comma. Third sentence: What are they leaving? This sounds silly, but in your writing you should make sure that every "it" and "this" refers directly to something. How about "they only fulfill them halfway?" Also, how does trying to "figure out what they are up to" impede reform? Fourth sentence First of all, you need an article after "have." You may want to say "have a," for instance. Secondly, your use of the word "profound" is somewhat ambiguous. Maybe you could use "completely" or "thoroughly?"

 

People who tried to reform any established system must have the courage and willingness to prove their genuine reasons for committing themselves to work for the society. Initially, they may have to go through disdain and rejection as people have contrasting views and ideas. However, once the strong penchant for working towards the better improvement of the society is realized, they are widely accepted and appreciated for their efforts. For example, Mahatma Gandhi who fought for India's independence. Though, he had to get exposed to disdain and suppression in the beginning, he fought with audacity to achieve independence for India. Even though one has to go through so much for the society, their efforts are greatly praised and remembered for ages to come.

 

First sentence: One does not prove a reason. Perhaps you mean "prove that their reasons for committing themselves to work for society are genuine?" Second sentence: This is a very nice sentence. The only thing I might suggest is to replace "go through" with "suffer." To "go through rejection" sounds either medical or as if they were dumped by their girlfriend. Third sentence: Great! Just change the "the" after "once" to "their," because this penchant is a characteristic of the reformers. Fourth sentence: This is a sentence fragment (a sentence without a verb). "Mahatma Gandhi, who fought for India's independence, is one example," is one way of resolving this. Also notice the comma after Gandhi. The phrase "who fought for India's independence" is a subordinate phrase describing Gandhi, so you want to put commas around it. Fifth sentence: Nice. But take the comma after "though" out. Sixth sentence: You must remain consistent in your pronoun use. Since you used "one" in the first half of this sentence, you must use it in the second as well: "one's effors are greatly praised and remembered for ages to come." May I suggest that you replace "are" with "will be?"

 

Finally, when an established system is going through reformation, it will have both positive and negative effects depending on the people who work for it. People who chose to work for their status in society and for their own benefits may contribute partially to the society, which can never lead to the complete reformation. People who chose to live for the society, may have to go through the disdain, but should have the courage to live with it without forgetting their objectivity.

 

First sentence: "Finally" is best replaced with "In conclusion" in this case. Second, what is "it" referring to? The first use of "it" refers to reformation, whereas the second use refers to the system. However, "it" always refers to the subject. You need to explicitly say when you're not referring to the subject, so in this case I'd replace the first "it" with "this reformation." Otherwise, the sentence is good. Second sentence: Great, just leave out the article "the." "Reformation" is an abstract concept, wherease "The Reformation" is a period in European Christian history. Third sentence: Again, you don't need an article before "disdain." Also, since the verb "may" is an action directly undertaken by "People" - that is, "people may have to go through disdain" is the main verb phrase - you don't need a comma after "society."

 

In general, your essay is perfectly attuned to the nature of the issue. You present the two sides - selfish desire for admiration, and selfless desire for societal reform - compellingly, and your examples of the politician and Mahatma Gandhi are wonderful. I would perhaps suggest that you pick out a politician who abandoned reform for selfish reasons. Blanket statements about "all politicians" don't make good examples, and your reader might know a really idealistic politician and be offended. Good luck with your GRE!

[Fake]

hi,

this is the first essay that I am posting. I can already pinpoint a few mistakes namely the structure is not right, as each paragraph does not start a new point and lack of examples. I would like other mistakes to be pinpointed as well. Thanks :)

 

 

A reformer is a rebel, who in the course of time has either been a victim of the existing system or has been kindled into action by being a spectator to the injustice and bitter consequences of a system. Since a reformer chooses to be an iconoclast, he is viewed with disdain by the power-holding dogmatic and orthodox personals . Therefore this role can only be assumed by a person who has no wish of monetary values and bears no love to his social standing.

Social standing and fiscal values hold importance to people who are willing to sacrifice their conscience for a firm stand in the society foothold. They have to go with the flow of the existing structure. Any person is any walk of life can be a reformer is he willing to go against the established doctrines. A poet is a reformer if he paints a picture of the real world, and criticizes the attitudes of the human beings instead of writing a flowery poem with an idyllic situation. An scientist would be a reformer if he sets aside an established fact and deems it important to let the world know of his contradictory views. Those who are confined in the narrow walls of their social standing and status would never contemplate to flow against the tide because in the struggle of going against the tide there is a hefty chance that it would shake the foundation of their social standing and reputation.

Nonetheless a reformer is a person who has lost his precious belongings to the animosity of the institutions, be it an educational institution, a law making institution, the marriage institution or a part of the government, The precious belonging can be materialistic like his money or it can be his moral values or his dignity, whichever he deems important enough to raise his voice against the injustice and take a different course of action.

All the great reformers of the world were mocked and jeered at because they chose to disrupt the lives of their contemporaries. Be it known that humble poets and scientists and leaders who took the reforming path were viewed as lunatic, outrageous individuals who tried to gain attention by their radical ideas but in truth they were individuals who deemed it important to let the world know of the consequences of a particular act and chose to go against it.

Since time immemorial it has been a tradition to castigate anyone who chooses to flow against the tide, one who chooses to degrade or question the existing principle and established beliefs is viewed derisively by the majority of people. Those in power , be it law makers or servants of law view their system as best and resent any change brought about by unruly people, which is what they would refer to the rebel as.

Also the majority of the people would view any change in their course of life as cataclysmic and would resent the person responsible for changing it. Once adjusted with their lives and molding their needs to the requirements of the extant institution they would not be yielding to the recriminations of a change.

Being a reformer requires great courage and is only inherent to those who have the ability to stand against the torrent and are willing to be castigated in their world so that their voice becomes a chant in the future, which changes the lives of millions. So in effect they win the affection and love of the future generations while losing the respect and standings amongst their present world.

 

 

 

[sonali]

20Reform is seldom brought about by people who are concerned with their own reputation and social standing. Those who are really in earnest about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution must be willing to be viewed with disdain by the rest of the world."

 

It is true that some people use reformation as media to gain reputation and popularity among society, as per quoted in issue. Further, I also agree with the issue statement that those people, who are really serious about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution, have to face skepticism and are initially viewed with disdain by rest of the world.

 

While concerning about gaining social status and reputation through reform, the field that comes into mind is politics. Everyone is aware with hypocritical behavior of the despots just few months before to election. Some leaders for gaining position in politics delude public by assuring false promises of reformation. They are mostly interested in gaining power and after achieving their ambition they renege their assurances. For example, every politician cites confidently that he will try to demolish indigence from the country, but is it really happen after he got elected? Moreover, in such cases, reformation can only be seen in social status of that politician rather than in other social problems.

 

 

Our history is depleted with examples of reformers who strive hard until end of their life for welfare of the country. Iconoclast Mahatma Gandhi, for example, fought consistently against the British government for having independent India. At first, he had to face lots of criticism, derisions for his non-violence fight against the British tyranny. Nevertheless, his strong determination of having independent India never let him away from his mission. He was jailed several times and went on hunger strikes to focus attention on his cause. Alas, after a long arduous fight with the British regiment, India gains independence on 15th August 1947.

 

 

Undoubtedly, our nation is in need of unselfish reformers who are truly devoted to their work. For example, Martin Luther King, who fought against racism, was seriously committed to his mission. While carrying out his mission, he never cared about obstacles or criticism he faced. People like them bring out reformation not for gaining reputation and popularity but to resist against the injustice.

 

In sum, reformation that is carried out for insatiable lust for reputation and social status mostly based on cajoles. In my view, altruistic thinkers, who strongly prone for their mission, can bring reform in the society.

 

 

[cooldude001]

Hi friends :), You have heard this before, and your are about to hear it again. :) I am newcomer to this forum, its been very useful and instructive. And now that GRE is about two weeks to go, I have finally stopped prcrastinating, and written my first analyses attempt. Any reviews, and constructive criticism will be most welcome.

 

"Reform is seldom brought about by people who are concerned with their own reputation and social standing. Those who are really in earnest about reforming a government, an educational system, or any other institution must be willing to be viewed with disdain by the rest of the world."

 

Human societies, by their very nature, tend to despise change, however beneficial it may be in the long run. While this has often protected them from hasty revolutions and experiments, it has also had the negative effect of dampening down several revolutionary thinkers who tried to reform the human society. Hence, if one has a major reformatory proposal that one believes to be correct, one should also have the strength of conviction to stand by it, and be willing to be looked down upon by the rest of the society.

 

A brief glance at the history of sciences or philosophy suggests that society has always tended to look down upon the propounder of major revolutionary ideas with disdain. For example, Copernicus was subjected to severe trials and tribulations for daring to propound his correct, albeit revolutionary theory regarding the earth's revolution around the sun. Similarly, Socrates had to drink the proverbial cup of poison for displaying the temerity to question the contemporarily prevalent system.

 

This response to change and reform has been the characteristic of human societies, transcending the borders of time or nationality. While Abraham Licoln had to contend with stiff resistance in America for his reformatory steps, his contemporary Raja Ram Mohan Roy in India too had to face considerable ridicule when he proposed to ameliorate women's lot and tried to eradicate evil practices like Sati - wherein a widow was forced to burn on the pyre of her husband.

 

The reason for this rather unfortunate phenomena can be traced down to the human tendency to resist change. We all love to be esconced in our own comfortable niche. Since most of the radical ideas tend to disturb this comfort zone, humans show a distinct proclivity to to look down upon anybody who dares to question our ideas or practices.

 

This implies that in order to bring about long-lasting reforms in any institution, whether governmental, educational, scientific or societal, one needs not only the idea, but also the conviction to stand by his beliefs while they are beibg ridiculed by all and sundry. Such reformatory thinkers, even if not accepted readily during their heyday, are frequently posthumously considered geniuses and their ideas revolutionary. More often than not, such ideas tend to outlive the propounder and make immortal his name and fame. The necessity of the appropriate strength of conviction in one's well-considered but revolutionary

 

On the other hand, if not qualified by rational considerations, the above thoughts stand the risk of being considered an apology for brash, unrespoinsible course of action in order to execute one's beliefs, without paying heed to the saner voices. A reformatory should never be closed to constructive criticism. She should pay attention to the reasons her ideas are not so readily acceptable, and then modify her stance if necessary. While one should not be cowed down by empty filibusters that tend to shoot down his propsals, she must listen attentively to other, more constructive thinkers.

 

Similarly, a reformatory should also be willing to temper his stance so that it is made more acceptable to the society. Rather than have one's drastic reform proposals become musty with age in a waste-basket, it is often better to adopt a course of compromise, and introduce reforms gradually, in steps so that they are more acceptable to society and cause least disturbance, even while achieving the ultimate objective.

 

Hence, the ideal reformatory thinker should be open to new ideas, and welcome change. However, she should also be wary of new, half-baked proposals for reforms which, if carried out, would cause more harm than good.

 

In conclusion, in order to carry out a paradigm transformation in any field, a reformatory must be prepared to face the disdain and disrespect a part of the world will surely show him. Only then can he be sure his ideas will see the light of day.

[cooldude001]

Waiting for comments plz ....

[cooldude001]

Anybody has an opinion to offer ?

[BeHappy]

It is too good. I wrote on the same topic some 3 days back but.....:-(

This is really good.

[cooldude001]

Thanks BeHappy.

 

Your comments certainly live up to your nick, don't they ?

 

:-)

[rashmi]

Hi cooldude

your essay is really too good. I can only dream of giving such examples. way to go !!!

[cooldude001]

A word of praise from the maestro!! My confidence rockets sky-high, Rashmi !

 

Really, you dudes are spoiling me :-D