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.

Issue question: Science and technology will one day be able to solve all of society’s problems. Science and technology have solved many social issues in the past decade. I agree that science and technology can solve some issues but not all. First, several social issues are related to institutions, culture and social norms, which cannot be altered by only science and technology. For example, many women face multiple layers of gender inequality at the workplace. Women are still under-represented in managerial or leadership positions even in high-income countries while many women in developing countries suffer from heavy burden on household responsibility. Moreover, discrimination against the black-skinned race still exists, resulting in inequality of economic opportunities in today's society. Changing social norms and institutions requires a huge amount of time to change an individual's perception, which science and technology solely cannot change. Second, social issues such as poverty and unemployment arise from systemic or market failures. For instance, countries need strong private sector companies to create employment opportunities. Private companies need an enabling environment for their growth, such as access to finance, market, and better regulatory environments. The improvement of market system and business environments cannot be achieved only using science and technology but require context-specific solutions developed by local people. It is important to note that science and technology have solved many social problems in the past. For instance, it has improved the quality of and the accessibility to education for marginalized people or areas using the internet, online courses and digital devices. Many diseases have been treated or eliminated by advanced medical sciences such as vaccinations to yellow fever. However, solely science and technology cannot solve all the social issues inherited to social institutions, cultures as well as systemic issues. In summary, I disagree that science and technology will be able to solved all of society's issues while it has still helped to improve our society.

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.

In most professions and academic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. Everyone develops an imagination once they come to be a certain age. However, knowledge, on the other hand, is accumulated and constructed over time as we get older in age and further along in our academic career. Being able to have a broad sense of imagination allows for a multitude of new ideas that can potentially enhance a profession or academic field. Consequently, being able to supply that skill of imagination with a surplus of knowledge is ideal in perfecting one’s profession or academic field. However, the prompt states that imagination is actually more important than knowledge when it comes to most professions or an academic fields. I moderately disagree with this proposal, as being educated, backing claims or ideas with empirical support are far stronger than making a claim based on one’s imagination, for two reasons. First, since everyone develops an imagination at some point in their life, there would be no use for education and higher education if humans solely relied on their imagination. One’s imagination allows them to go so far until further knowledge is needed. For instance, a doctor that holds a PhD in Pediatric Neurosurgery did not finish their bachelor’s degree by imagining the different brain parts and functions of a three-year-old. Nor did they learn how to operate on a small human brain by closing their eyes and imagining how they would complete such a travailing surgery. The above example indicates that it is evident that a successful doctor that holds such a high degree accomplished this through gaining knowledge over the course of their life. Professions that include operating on people, saving people’s lives, or that require one to be cogent during a situation, are all professions that must have required some amount of knowledge. Relying on purely imagination would not allow for people’s lives to be saved each and every day. Secondly, gaining knowledge over the course of one’s life allows human interaction to be enhanced because different pieces of information are being shared with a solid foundation, thus enhancing the human race by allowing for even more knowledge to be absorbed. For instance, if a person without a certification in nutrition wanted to understand how they should be eating and properly fueling their body, chances are they would find a certified intrusions The reason for listening to someone of this caliber is because they are, in fact, knowledgeable about the topic that needs to be discussed about. Very rarely would we see someone taking any type of advice from another person that claims the advice is based on purely imagination. While being able to imagine different cases in which someone would lose this much weight or have to eat this amount of protein is important in determining the best plan for someone, it is ultimately based on the foundation of one’s knowledge. Of course, some may claim that not everyone has the opportunity to gain a greater amount of knowledge, so they resort to their imagination instead. While this may remain true, it is a mistake to say that most professions and academic fields rely more on imagination because one’s imagination has to be based on some type of knowledge or we would not have a starting point for that idea. For the above reasons, I find it problematic to say most professions rely on imagination rather than knowledge. If imagination was enough, there would be no need for technology, teachers, or higher levels of education.

Social service, being a vital character of students, also serves to make him a better citizen of the society. The argument is based on many unwarranted assumptions which if not supported will fail to hold the argument valid. The argument heavily relies on the assumption that all the students will do the community service legitimately and assiduously. Although the majority of the students will be interested in serving the community, chances are good that students who aren't interested in such activities may produce spurious proofs on serving the community. That is, there is no mentioned method to verify if the student has truly engaged in community service and served for the specified duration; so students who are unlikely to be engaged with these social activities may not take part in the service. Had the argument provided a method to verify if the student has truly taken part in community service, it would provide better support to the argument. Another assumption the argument makes is that enforcing the 9 months community service as a requirement for graduation will not affect the students' performance in academics. For instance, consider a below-average student who barely makes it through the examinations. The community service, while making him a charitable and a solicitous member of the society, may well be a hindrance for his performance in academics. Had the college made it optional or reduced the service duration, it would have been better of the below-average students. Also, it would have been better if the college had formed a team, like the Community Service Scheme, involving students who are truly interested in social service, to engage in community service. Also, the argument assumes that all the local charities mentioned in the list will require the help of every student in the college. It is possible that most of the charities are already doing good in terms of man-power and may require other pecuniary support, which is not the aim of the community service rule enforced by the college. Hence, the college needs to make sure if all the mentioned charities need volunteers, which the argument has not mentioned. The argument, failing to provide support for the assumptions on which the argument depends, is pretentious and hence enforcing such a rule will likely fail to serve its purpose. Thank you,

A leader is judged by his ability to manage a group with his expertise which primarily includes his astuteness, persevearance, team building and approach towards the team's goal. In my opinion, I strongly believe that an effective leader is one who has peternatural qualities of taking right judgement at right time as rest of the other things can be done by subordinates and also have enough time but taking right decision at right time is something which makes a leader apart from other memebers in a group. It is a well known fact that the success of any group depends uopn the vision and mission of the group. The vision and mission is primarily made by the leader of the group and rest of the team memebers follow it as per the direction of the leader. So, it is very crucial for the leader to make right choices and achievable goals for the entire team. A perfect example could be drawn from the recent Indian Cricket team. Cricket has always been a very popular game in India and it had always been made sure by the BCCI to select the best of the players in the national team. Inspite of such competitive selection procedure, there has been a time in 2000 when India's performance was not upto the the mark. . Later, inlate 2000 the vision for fit players came into picture and the entire scenario changed drastically. there werefitter players and performance of the entire team improved gradually. This was under the captainship of M.S. Dhoni. Thus, a leader has capability of changing the entire game. Secondly, having a ability to provide a sound moral judgement within the team keeps the team more engaged and connected within itself. every individual in the team feels secured and unbiased. This eventually leads to better performance as everybody as a feeling of equality in the the team. There ae also few instances when the leader has to be very celerituos in decision making such that in any launch of new product in any organisation or deciding on a risk factor of a certain product, where he/she has to be very apt with his analysis and the entire burden of success lies on his shoulders. On the otherhand, it is also important to maintain cordial relationship with his/her peers because it makes the work more efficient and swift. They work together to achieve goals and mutual relation is very important in achieving any tast in a healthy way. The truth also remains that unless a leader is capable himself as a unbiased role model, the team cannot perform well. So, it is evident that a leader has to build himself first in terms of such qualities so that the peers are in mutual agreement with the leader and are motivated towards the goal.

The most important component of a society is the people who form it, nevertheless at the same time being influenced by the settings under which it forms. Rural and urban settings influence differences in a society in terms of the economic conditions and the way people lead their lives and interact with one another. In many parts of the world, villages are heavily dependent on agriculture and animal husbandry as the chief source of income and such activities usually thriving on the cooperation from a body of people working together. Thus, the bucolic pastoral villages often provides an insight to inter-human connections building up a society. It is the perfect mirror of co-existence and cooperation keeping society together as a unit. However, villages are less successful as representatives to dynamism of which cities are apt as examples. Life in cities is fast moving. Residents hold jobs, both in organized and unorganized sectors. Hence, it’s common to find employees of an MNC commuting to their workplaces on the same vehicle as a peddler and florist. What cities offer is diversity in terms of occupation of people and how it reflects upon the economy and behavior of people. However, none of the two settings is a complete representative of a society, often overlapping with each other. To get the holistic picture, it will be relevant to have an understanding of both.

Essay topic : People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. My Essay: Every person takes myriad decisions in the journey of life. Generally decisions are based upon multiple factors:emotions, logic, consequences of decisions, people involved in the situation. People choose the option with which they feel more comfortable then it may be based on emotion or logic. Let's consider a few examples: Staying away from family for better job opportunities, better education are one of the most important decisions for one's career. One person might choose to stay with the family and leave career opportunities because of emotional attachment with family, sometimes he needs to give emotional support to the family. Another person might choose to leave family and go for his/her dreams. First decision is based on emotions but still there is logic behind it, the person won't be happy after leaving his family. He feels good in his comfort zone. Maybe he does not have courage to go away, stay alone and make new friends, start a new life. For him emotional decision is logical. He has his own reasons. Second person likes to take challenges, explore the world, get out of his comfort zone. His decision is also based on emotions that he wants to grow and improve. He has logic and emotions in his decision. Does it mean that any one of them is a poor decision maker? No. They are good and happy with their own decisions. Both of them are able to justify their decision with logic. Maybe first person has taken decision based on emotions but still it is logical. Moderate amount of emotions are always logical. Let's consider country's important decisions. PM cannot take such decisions based on only emotions, because it will affect entire country. If he takes decisions based on emotions then he won't be able to justify it with apt logic. Even if he generates some logic then it will be fallacious. In this case, PM will be poor decision maker. CEO of a company cannot take decisions based only on emotions. There should be practical reasoning. Emotions should be important part of any decision because our happiness or sadness after decision is also a emotion. The way we will handle consequences of decision depends upon our emotions. If we are able to justify our decision with logic then definitely we are not poor decision makers. But whether we should focus more on emotions or practical approach depends upon the situation, consequences after decision, people involved in decision making.

Topic Educators should find out what students want included in the curriculum and then offer it to them. Instruction Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. Essay In a way to keep the students engaged in the curriculum which if, designed by keeping students' interests in mind, seems logically far better than the curriculum in which students’ opinions are not given careful considerations. To explain this, there are few points that will validate this approach. First, students will themselves take interest in the courses because these courses are well chosen by themselves. Things will not get boring with time, if they study the subjects of their own choice. For example, if a student wants to pursue his/her career in the field of medical science, then it would not be beneficial to force him to study the pesky English literature as well mathematics. Students will start to take interest more when they know that they can study what they want. They will definitely engage in exploring themselves that in what field they want to excel and from early age, their goal will remain focused. Likewise, for teachers it would become easier to understand what a student thinks about his/her own career. As extracurricular activities also play a major role in the whole curriculum, the students will find themselves engaging the activities they want to participate. A student would not be told to play the cricket just because it is an inseparable part of the curriculum, he/she might easily take part in swimming or the sport which they are proficient in. In contrast to all these, there are students who don't know what they are actually going to choose their career in. In that case also, it would be better, if a proper counselling is done for them. They would be told about the specifics of each course and what would it bear on their career so that they start choosing wisely. In conclusion, it would be beneficial for the students, if they are given the freedom to include the things, they want to be a part of their curriculum.

Dear Friends and GRE Experts, I am preparing for GRE and this is my 5th attempt to write a GRE essay (different topics each time). This is an argument topic given on official GRE website. I would request you to have a look on the essay and grade it upon convenience and availability of time. Thank You. Sincerely, NickyGRE. Actual GRE Argument Prompt: The following appeared on the Mozart School of Music Web site. "The Mozart School of Music should be the first choice for parents considering enrolling their child in music lessons. First of all, the Mozart School welcomes youngsters at all ability and age levels; there is no audition to attend the school. Second, the school offers instruction in nearly all musical instruments as well a wide range of styles and genres from classical to rock. Third, the faculty includes some of the most distinguished musicians in the area. Finally, many Mozart graduates have gone on to become well-known and highly paid professional musicians." Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The argument presented is a form of advertise on the website of Mozart School of Music, which promotes its readers to consider itself as the first choice while thinking of learning music or musical instruments. The first assumption that this kind of arguments suppose is that people would visit the web-site on which the advertisement has been published. It may be a case that the other schools of music publish their advertisement in news paper, other forms of print media or in radio or television broadcast, while the Mozart School of Music may be alone in publishing the advertisement through its web-site and there may be very few people, actually interested in learning music or musical instruments who might visit the web-site and the advertisement displayed in it. Though in the second statement, the argument states that it welcomes people of all age-groups and all ability levels,in the first statement it reveals its unstated assumption that its chief cluster of clients is children by stating 'the first choice for parents'. This suggests that the majority of new customers or new students that this school gets comes from children or youngsters of lower age. This also suggests the scientific assumption that at lower ages, the interests are easier to be cultivated, nurtured and developed than at higher or older ages. The fourth statement argues that the school possesses some of the most distinguished musicians as its faculty members. It is a vague and unclear statement since it doesn't state what are the criteria on which it establishes the 'most distinguished' status of its faculty members, for example, popularity of their musical albums, variations and skilles incorporated in their musical scores, intuitions presented in their compositions - these all factors can make them distinguished and well-reputed. Also, what it assumes as 'the area' is again a debatable topic, as music is a very wide region having majestic scope and its classification can vary individually. One possible classification can qualitatively confine music into different areas like vocal music, instrumental music etc. In the final statement, the argument assumes that the Mozart graduates, who have gathered reputation and fame after getting educated from the school, are well-known to the readers of this advertisement since there are no details given about the individuals who succeeded on the base of education gathered from the Mozart School. Then, again, the argument assumes that the relative term 'highly paid' communicates unanimous and unambiguous meaning to all different classes of its readers- poors and rich people alike. In conclusion, the argument poses some seriously flawed assumptions which can be corrected. Above is response typed in actual test conditions: 431 words

Dear Friends and GRE Experts, I am preparing for GRE and this is my 6th attempt to write a GRE essay (different topics each time). This is an issue topic given on official GRE website. I would request you to have a look on the essay and grade it upon convenience and availability of time. Thank You. Sincerely, NickyGRE. Actual GRE Issue Prompt: As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ In this issue, the author presents a very interesting present-world scenario in which the ease of technology engenders concern of lack of natural human capability of thinking and logical rasoning. Although there are few possible exceptions to the issue presented, I agree with the statement in general. The supportive examples are described in following paragraphs. As an analogy, industrial revolution took place in around 1850. The work of human workers and human labour was delegated to machines. The majority of hand-woven cloths were gradually started being made by automated machines and as a result, the human skills and proficiency in woving clothes got deteriorated. Today, despite the fact that some clothes are still woven by hand, it is really hard to find a skillful worker in that profession. Same holds true for manufacturing pottery, writing books with calligraphy and so on and so forth. Similarly, the 20th and 21st centuries witnessed some break-through technological innovations, starting right from the invention of first computer, the 'Eniac'. Today, the computers are used just not to solve complex mathematical and astronomical problems, but also to simulate human brain and its thinking process. In past two decades, the cutting edge developmment in the field of artifical intelligence and machine learning has proved that the days are not far away when computers, just like every other business they are employed into, would also think on behalf of their creators or mankind in general. Computers would employ logical reasoning and arrive to a conclusion for every given problem they would encounter. This of course, will have a detrimental effect on humans as humans would prefer more and more intellectual burden to be given to the computers and they (humans), instead of taking any iniciative to apply their own brains, would simply live a dull life. However, there is one unavoidable compulsion that stays even after unbelievable technological innovations is that, there is always a demand for the creator himself. In other words, there is always someone required to develop these technologies, to innovate new and more complex arithmetic algorithms that can be dumped into computers and to remove possible errors in algorithms already fed into them. This would also give lucrative professional scope to possible computer engineers given that most of other humans will tend to avoid such intellectual burden. Hence, this field of developing new technology to make computers think more logically would indeed demand more intellectual contribution from humans and in that way, it would prevent the situation that entire humankind gets badly affected by lack of the ability to think. In conclusion, except for such few exceptions, as people rely more and more on technological innovations to solve their daily problems and think on their behalf, the ability of humans will gradually deteriorate in general. We, as a responsible and aware individuals, must act consciously to indulge overselves into bare minimum intellectual tasks to avoid such scenario at individual level. Above is response typed in actual test conditions: 487 words

Hey guys, I'm an international student and want to apply for top 20 Econ PhD programs. The rest of my profile looks good, but my GRE AWA is 3.5, which makes me very nervous. I got 161 on Verbal (88 percentile) and 170 Quant. Do you guys know if I could update new GRE score after the application deadline? I really appreciate any advice from you guys. Thanks in advance.

People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position. People who make decisions based on emotion and use logic afterward to justify those decisions are poor decision makers. This statement holds true because justifying an action to yourself is much easier once the action has already been taken. Once you have already acted, you have a bias towards justifying the action instead of thinking through the action logically and considering both sides. Justifying an action to yourself isn't difficult. There are many ethics scenarios where this comes into play. For example, you steal a snack from work because you're hungry and you don't have too much extra money. You initially make the decision based on a feeling - you're hungry. This emotional action, once completed, is easy to justify. You buy things from your workplace all the time, and they get plenty of your money. You're working for them, after all, and they'll never notice on measly snack missing. You don't have much money, and those corporations have tons of it. There are many lines of reasoning that could be used to justify such a thoughtless, hastily made decision. But, the reality is that you could very well lose your job over such a decision. If you had really and sincerely stopped to consider both sides, logically, before you had taken the snack, you may have come up with some very compelling counterpoints. Your job is your main source of income, is one snack worth losing it? You, like most people, have a moral stance firmly against stealing. Is this case really different? Or were you simply using your emotions to make a decision that wasn't all that wise, after all? This defines the heart of the problem with justifying a decision after it is made - you are much more inclined to try to think about what was right with what you did than what was wrong with it. You have forfeited the chance to make a decision based completely on the rational consideration of options and consequences. Another scene where the statement rings true is this: someone at school, or work, is taunting you. They're making you very upset, and they don't seem to care. In your anger, you swing at them and hit them. After the decision has been made, reasons for it are easy enough to find. The person was taunting you and didn't care about your feelings. You were quite upset with them and it seemed a blow was the only way to get them to stop. But, again, when examined too closely, the logic falls apart. The reasons are valid enough, but if logic were used from the beginning, some very strong cons of striking are present. You could be punished at your school or workplace for fighting, and likely you will be. You could have chosen to walk away, or ignore the person, or report them to a supervisor. When thinking logically, there are many choices that could, and should, have been made before striking someone, and yet it is also easy to justify a blow once that act has been committed. You could argue that those who decide based on emotions are still using logic in their justifications, and this would be a correct assumption. The issue with this is not that they are not using logic, rather it is that their logic is inherently flawed. There is an unignorable bias that is present when justifying an action that you have already taken rather than thinking the through a course of action you are yet to take. You are always inclined to find the best, most logical reasoning to explain an action you took out of emotion, rather than finding the logical reasons you should not have done it. When you use logic in decision making before the decision has been made, it gives a chance to consider both sides equally, without the overwhelming presence of bias to justify an action already done. Those who respond to situations with emotion and only later justify these responses using rational thinking are poor decision makers because using logic after a decision has already been reached creates and unmistakable bias towards logic favoring your decision. Scenarios in which this rings true are many, and the best thing for you to do would be to use logic before arriving at a decision - to try to put your emotions aside for a time and logically think through your options and consequences. This is the first GRE essay I've ever written and I want to see where you might think I'm at. Thanks!!