Search the Community

Topics: To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. A society can consist of many large and small cities as well as rural areas. Each area has its own distinct character. As characteristics of areas differ widely, one can miss the most important characteristics of a society by just studying major cities. The major cities play different role in a society. A city can be the capital of the country, a city can be the capital of the state or a city can have a port that serves as a business hub. Among the vast different characters of these cities, it is very difficult to find out the most important ones which is also common. Even if someone completes this difficult task, he missed out the rural areas completely which varies widely from cities. It is possible that all the citizens of the major cities have a very busy and dynamic life, while rural people lead a very simple life. In this case, dynamic life style is one of the most important characteristics of the major cities but not for the rural areas, thus not the most important characteristic of the society. There can be other difficulties in this study. There can always be a lot people staying in a major city and they aren't permanent resident of the city. Their behavior can differ from the permanent residents or even from themself when they are staying in their own city. For example, people go to Las Vegas for gambling or having fun. Although they spend a lot of money without any care in Las Vegas, this is not their normal character. Similarly, people can behave differently from their normal state in capital or historic cities or cities that are famous amongst tourist. However, there can be a lot of similarity between cities and rural areas. For example, the citizens of major cities start their day with a cup of tea or coffe while reading a newspaper and the people of rural areas also start their day with a similar fashion. But this need to be confirmed by studying both areas. The citizens of major cities may eat a lot of junk food. On the other hand, rural people may strictly follow a healthy diet. There is no way to tell this without studying both sides. People can behave differently in city and rural area. There can also be a character that is common to all major cities, but not in rural area. Nonetheless, there can be character which is common both to rural areas and major cities. So, to understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study both major cities and rural areas.

Hi everyone, Could someone rate and provide feedback on my issue essay? The topic is from the ETS issue pool. Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position. In the world of globalisation and amalgam of eclectic cultures, there are a lot of courses available in universities for the students to study. Needless to say, with freedom of choice to pursue these courses comes the limitation of whether one will be able to succeed to study and make a living out of it. Educational institutions should deter students from opting for courses in which they’re unlikely to succeed, because of factors pertaining to efforts and opportunity cost. A student’s diligence and efforts more or less determine the grades, and in a way how he’ll be succeeding in that field. Moreover, if the student decides to switch fields, or wishes to delve into a new unorthodox and challenging path, the chance of failure is relatively less as compared to someone who is frivolous and remiss. For instance, Chetan Bhagat, a renowned novelist, comes from an engineering and a management background, graduating from the top schools of India with stellar grades. His persistence in whatever field he wanted to get into led him to his pedestal of success. Though top Indian universities only focus on a major theme: IITs and IIMs emphasising on engineering and management respectively, if he had an opportunity to shift to a major apart from engineering, he would have a good chance at succeeding. Therefore, someone having bad grades would be a clear indication that it wouldn’t be prudent to allow him to change his field of study, since he won’t be able to put in the required efforts to make a difference. Even if the person has a good academic record, this shouldn’t be a reason for him to be allowed to change majors. The future is full of uncertainty, and establishing a good financial background at the earliest would help the person live a life without stress. The opportunity cost in the future associated with changing majors should be considered, since it could happen that the chances of succeeding in it are negligible. A good example would be the art of filming. For someone to major in Computer Science would be a wise call currently because of the abundance of job opportunities. However, if someone makes a decision to shift to filming, just because of the “coolness” factor, or maybe in an attempt to mimic his favourite director, it’s not going to be a good decision. The ratio of people succeeding in computer science and getting a good paying job to the total graduates far exceeds the ratio for filming. Thus, with a foresight of the future, if universities allow students to change into unorthodox majors, then it wouldn’t a solid economic foundation of the nation, since a lot of people living stressful lives would hamper the development of the country. Someone could say that one should always study things according to their call, because happiness and emotional stability is the most important thing. However, the importance of having a good financial stability far exceeds the requirements of satisfying emotions, since even if someone is unhappy, he or she can use the ability to spend money on things so that you can improve your life in different ways possible. Thus, this concludes that educational institutions shouldn’t allow students to take up fields of study in which they’re unlikely to succeed.

Request to review my argument. An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be paid subsidies for farming the new variety of millet. Since millet is already a staple food in Tagus, people will readily adopt the new variety. To combat vitamin A deficiency, the government of Tagus should do everything it can to promote this new type of millet. Answer The argument is about a millet developed by an organisation which helps combat vitamin A deficiency. At first glance the argument does look cogent but there are several aspects in which it is lacking. Vitamin A deficiency is due to low exposure of sun rays. In the argument there is no mention of the testing of the new breed of millet. It is widely know fact that genetically modified substances may prove to be pernicious to humans. There is strong possibility that after adopting to the new breed of millets there may side-effects experienced by the people. The argument further states that farmers will be paid subsidy on farming the new variety of mullet which is certainly a good thing. However it would be imprudent to assume that the people will readily adopt to it.Since the cost of the new variety is high and there may be farmers who cultivate vegetables other than millet.For them adopting to the new variety might prove to be difficult. Lastly instead urging the government to promote the new type of millet it would be beneficial if there is a focus on improving the agricultural facilities at Tagus.Thus resulting in a better life for the people.

The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal. "A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring." Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument. Several gratuitous assumptions formulate the given argument. Primarily, the argument generalizes studies of eighteen rhesus monkeys , as standard trait of the entire species. Thereby rendering the conclusion fallacious. The study specifically involves only eighteen rhesus monkeys. Traits that hold valid for rhesus monkeys may not necessarily hold true for the entire specie. Besides, no information pertaining to the environment in which the studies have been conducted is provided . How a Rhesus monkey responds in its natural habitat , can be very different to controlled experimental environment. Had the letter provided specific details of the experimental environment and its impact in the behavioral aspect of Rhesus monkey , we could justify the conclusion. Even then , it cannot be concluded that what holds true for eighteen Rhesus may hold true for all the other Rhesus monkeys and infact the entire monkey specie. The letter also states that higher level of cortisol results in increased body activity. No substantial proof has been provided to coorelate the effect of Cortisol and individual's levels of simulation. The simulation may be due to other reasons like the age between the first born and their younger sibling .Effects of other factors have not been dealt with in the study. Higher level of cortisol in first time mother is observed compared to those who have several offsprings.Argument assumes that , this higher cortisol level results in higher cortisol level in offspring. This is an unwarranted assumption. No proofs have been provided in the letter for this consequent effect of cortisol in pregnant mothers. However, the letter also states similar behavioral trait among humans. This could make the argument a bit more veritable. But again, the letter does not provide any insight into the study group . The number of people , their socio-economic background , race- ethnicity none of this has been taken under consideration . Because the argument is based on several unwarranted assumptions , we can refute the study .The argument lacks specific details as mentioned earlier to bolster its study.

The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal. "A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring." Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument. Several gratuitous assumptions formulate the given argument. Primarily, the argument generalizes studies of eighteen rhesus monkeys , as standard trait of the entire species. Thereby rendering the conclusion fallacious. The study specifically involves only eighteen rhesus monkeys. Traits that hold valid for rhesus monkeys may not necessarily hold true for the entire specie. Besides, no information pertaining to the environment in which the studies have been conducted is provided . How a Rhesus monkey responds in its natural habitat , can be very different to controlled experimental environment. Had the letter provided specific details of the experimental environment and its impact in the behavioral aspect of Rhesus monkey , we could justify the conclusion. Even then , it cannot be concluded that what holds true for eighteen Rhesus may hold true for all the other Rhesus monkeys and in fact the entire monkey specie. The letter also states that higher level of cortisol results in increased body activity. No substantial proof has been provided to correlate the effect of Cortisol and individual's levels of simulation. The simulation may be due to other reasons like the age between the first born and their younger sibling .Effects of other factors have not been dealt with in the study. Higher level of cortisol in first time mother is observed compared to those who have several offsprings. Argument assumes that , this higher cortisol level results in higher cortisol level in offspring. This is an unwarranted assumption. No proofs have been provided in the letter for this consequent effect of cortisol in pregnant mothers. However, the letter also states similar behavioral trait among humans. This could make the argument a bit more veritable. But again, the letter does not provide any insight into the study group . The number of people , their socioeconomic background , race- ethnicity none of this has been taken under consideration . Because the argument is based on several unwarranted assumptions , we can refute the study .The argument lacks specific details as mentioned earlier to bolster its study.

ARGUMENT ESSAY: A recently issued twenty-year study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia investigated the possible therapeutic effect of consuming salicylates. Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, food-processing companies also add salicylates to foods as preservatives. The twenty-year study found a correlation between the rise in the commercial use of salicylates and a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by study participants. At the time when the study concluded, food-processing companies had just discovered that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods, and, as a result, many companies plan to do so. Based on these study results, some health experts predict that residents of Mentia will suffer even fewer headaches in the future. Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction. The argument that in the future residents of mentia will suffer even fewer headaches is flawed and many aspects need to be considered before this conclusion is reached. The twenty year study does not mention the amount of people that were a part of the study or the age group that took the study. It also does not confirm that it was due to the salicylates that the reduction in headaches was observed. It assumes for fact that during the time period of the entire study, the other factors did not vary and that this study can be extrapolated to the future to predict that there will be a decrease in the number of headaches due to the consumption of salicylates in the food. The study assumes for fact that during the time period of the study, no other external factors have influenced it. Hence questions such as the presence of external factors and their effect on the number of headaches in the people has to be examined to conclude whether the decrease in the headaches was only due to the presence of salicylates in the food. If, in fact the external factors have no effect on the number of headaches then it might help the argument that salicylates are indeed responsible for the decrease in the number of headaches. But if this is not the case then, the argument would seem to be fallacious. The argument does not mention the number of people that have been considered for the study. Questions such as how many people were a part of the study and what were the age groups of people who were a part of the study have to be considered before jumping to conclusion that the salicylates were responsible for decrease in the headaches over the years. The answers to these questions would help judge whether a large number of people took part in the study or the study was based on a small number of people. In this case, there would be no substantial evidence to extrapolate the study to the future and hence the study’s results would be unfounded. The study also does not consider the side effects of the salicylates if consumed in excess. There might be cases in which the excess consumption might cause more headaches than normal and hence is not feasible at all. In conclusion, the argument that the decrease in the number of headaches is only due to the consumption of salicylates is flawed and various question regarding the study such as the number of people who have participated and he age group of the people who have participated in the study need to be answered. The side effects of the salicylates need to be considered and the time interval and the external factors that affect the study have to considered before evaluating the argument. ISSUE ESSAY Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists. Reason: The surest indicator of a great nation is actually the welfare of all its people. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based. A great nation is one that not only provides a well nurtured, safe and secure environment for its citizens, but also makes sure that there is an overall progress in its economical and social status so that there is an overall development of the society as a whole. Welfare of the people is one of the most important markers of a nation to judge the development of the nation throughout the years. The population of a nation consists of a variety of people that are distributed in various professions. But, most of the people will be in the middle class or lower middle class range for an average country. The reason that makes some nations great and other nations average is due to the reason that these great nations have the ability to develop their population and care for their well being and they strive to improve the social and economic status of their people and try to stabilise them so that the nation as a whole is not affected adversely in any kind of fallback. The amenities that are available to the people in a nation speak about the richness of the nation. For example, if in a certain nation, health services are made free to all its citizens and the quality of the health service is much better than those available in the other countries, then this speaks volumes about the nation and its ability to care for its citizens. This is one of the qualities that make a nation great than that of a nation where some individuals have been at their peak but the majority of the population has not even been able to satisfy their basic needs. There are various aspects when related to the overall development of a nation. Of those, the main aspects that govern or quantify the greatness of a nation are a nation’s relation with its neighbouring countries, the stability of its economy, the GDP of the nation and the number of people who are in below the poverty line in that country. All of these aspects are mainly judged by judging the welfare of the people. Hence it is very important to improve the welfare of the people in order to make sure that the country as a whole progresses and not only a select number of people. Some people may believe that only if the country has been able to cater to the general needs of the people, it can produce people who are capable of achieving laurels at an international level. But this is not true. This does not take into account the fact that in a country there are various types of people and the greatness of the country cannot be measured by the achievements of the a few people but have to be measure by taking into account the welfare and satisfaction of all the people living in that nation. PLEASE DO TELL ME HOW I CAN IMPROVE ON THE ESSAYS AND WHAT SCORE I CAN EXPECT FOR THESE PARTICULAR ESSAYS. THANKS A TON!!!!