<p>Hey ya'll from Canada over here. I was wondering if someone would be willing to look over a test SAT essay I wrote just a while ago for practice.</p>
<p>Prompt:
Our cherished notions of what is equal and what is fair frequently conflict. Democracy presumes that we are all created equal; competition proves we are not, or else every contest would end in a tie. We talk about a level playing field, but it is difficult to make conditions equal for everyone without being unfair to some.
Adapted from Nancy Gibbs, "Cool Running"
Assignment: Is it possible for a society to be fair to everyone? Plan and write an essay in which you develop your point of view on this issue. Support your position with reasoning and examples taken from your reading, studies, experience, or observations.</p>
<p>Response:
A society is unlike its conventional definition; instead it is an intricately designed system that encompasses various aspects of human nature, built upon through generations and, generations hence. Obstinately our society appears to be of an equal and fair nature, yet in reality, our society functions through an alternate lens, plagued with stereotypes, judgmental assumptions, and fallacious reasoning. Thus those born in this society, since and hence, have and will always been born on an unfair playing field.
Throughout history we have seen societal values come into play, but none as pressingly as the Jewish genocide in World War II. At the time of 1948, support for the German chancellor Adolf Hitler was at large. His despise of Jews was concealed at first, waiting for a premeditated strike. His political campaign highlighted Aryan purity, which was plagued by the existence of the Jewish people. For a Jew born into such a society would be at risk of being berated and being put in adversity by all whom would were of German nationality. But lets suppose such a society did not exist, instead replaced by a chancellor that supported Jewish rule. But in reality, such a chancellor wouldve never been elected into power, because even before Hitler, people who were not of a majority race, were deemed inferior or unable to rule. Even in the United States, created with the intention of a Utopia in mind, similar social diversions existed, specifically between the white and the blacks. The blacks of America were first imported as slaves, to do work for the superior whites. Their wages were little to nothing, and their environment, cruel and harsh. But one might object that the blacks would eventually become much better off, to the point that one would eventually (Barack Obama), become president. Then why is it that we only have had one black president? Because it is inherent that minority races or classes are treated with a different social lens, they are not held in respect, and often belittled. It is this same principle that we saw in Germany; because the Jews were different, every one of them were subpar compared to a German of the same class. Thus under status quo, it is impossible for the Jews, or the blacks, to be equal, or to be treated fairly.
Contrary to the first principal, we see a unique factor highlighted in the book Freakonomics, by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. This literary text covers many aspects of ones ordinary life, including teaching. Conventionally, teachers are able to teach only within the curriculum; some teachers do just that, some go further, and some slack off. The trivial difference between the three categories of teachers encompasses their ability to teach. The book suggests that all three have had the same education, but why is it that some are better than the rest? Its due to the inherent nature of people, their ability to perform. Some are naturally more intellectual than others, some much more physically superior. Ultimately it comes down to genetics, and on a genetic level, some are just more advanced than others in a certain category. That is why Special Forces soldiers generally are not as philosophical as philosophers, or physicists or mathematicians. Soldiers, especially Special Forces, need to be intuitive, and able-minded to perform their task. They need to be able to make decisions under stress, and have quick reactions to eliminate hostile forces that could just as likely kill them. On the other hand, famous physicists, philosophers, or mathematicians need to be clear-headed as well, able to process vast arrays of data, and make conjectures. They need to be quick headed, to get their articles published before others, in spite of fame. But what we clearly see in both of these groups that these distinguished people, are distinguished for a reason. Not every soldier can become a Special Ops, just as no ordinary thinker can become a famous physicist, mathematician or philosopher. Genetically, every one of these high level operatives is unique from their conventional colleagues. Because of these skills, (which they had probably shown at a young age), they often had far more advanced education. And on a genetic level, ordinary people who aspire to be successful may suffer, for others are simply born on a better playing field.
In careful analysis of all three texts, from World War II, to the black segregation, to genetic indifferences, society is indeed unfair, for every person has and will always be born on a different playing field. And while we so desire the Utopia that every person, major institution, and global power, has dreamed; it will exist, but only in an imaginative society.</p>
<p>Thanks in advanced!</p>