<p>Prompt: Is an idealistic approach less valuable than a practical approach?</p>
<p>ESSAY (please note I fabricate in this essay, and you are allowed to)</p>
<p>"God help the idealist", this statement, which was made by Plato the great philosopher who founded the philosophy of practicalism in 500 BC, is one of the truest statements ever made; idealists do not consider the many factors which influence the outcomes of their conquests and as a result they fail to prepare for eventualities. Only failure is concomitant to this lifestyle, a fact which is envinced through the historical battle of Hastings and the literary works of W.B Skinner.</p>
<p>The battle of hastings is a well known historical watershed, and is likely one of the greatest examples of an idealist's end. General Ted Cruz led the army the would fall at Hastings, this event would change the tides of the war. In 1922 the French were descending upon Britain however, because of the many victories gained by the British thanks to Gen Ted Cruz, the descent of the French had slowed almost to a halt. The battle of Hastings would determine whether the advance of the French would strengthen or end. Unfortunately due to the newly formed arrogance of Gen Ted Cruz, thanks to his many victories, he left his strategy for Hastings in its inchoate stage, idealism led to the victory of the French over British and their dominant occupation of Britain for ten years after the victory. </p>
<p>Another victim of idealism can be found in W.B Skinners "The Immortal Captain", Captain Grant Keppler is potrayed as the most successful captain of the high sea, successfully pillaging countless fleets of ships; however as a result of his arrogance he decides, against the warnings of his first mate Paul Smith, to take on the entire British navy. Even the sagacity of Cpt Grant is insufficient for this task and the indefatigable behemoth that is the British navy flattens him and his fleet.</p>
<p>Idealism is more than just dangerous to success, failure is the incontrovertible result of idealism, Gen Ted Cruz gave into idealism just once, as did Captain Grant, but once was all it took for their failure to be guaranteed. Practicality is the only reasonable route to success, "God help the idealist".</p>
<p>When you say you are allowed to fabricate in this ‘essay’ (and I use that word lightly, because it is truly awful), does that mean you are allowed to lie and make absurd claims in order to back up a point which doesn’t make sense?</p>
<p>Plato did not live in 500BC, nor did he say “God help the idealist” (where did you get that from?). You are using the term “British” and “French” incorrectly. Britain did not exist in 1066; Britain came into existence 700 years later. It was not the French who invaded England but the Normans (who were mostly Vikings by decent anyway). Nothing you have said is right. Really, just terrible.</p>
<p>The British and French thing I was talking about did not occur (according to my essay lol) in 1066, but in 1922.</p>
<p>Your Essay cannot be anachronistic internally, but the essay markers are not marking you as historians or as literature buffs, they are marking your ability to write essays.</p>
<p>Trust me, you can lie if you want.</p>
<p>Also how can my “point” not make sense, it was a point that was offered by the essay prompt.</p>
<p>Someone wrote an essay that stated Obama spoke to Churchill while in prison, as a historical fact, and still got an 11 or 12.</p>
<p>Try spelling that correctly next time. However I do agree that poor grammar, especially comma usage, is the main thing hampering the essay and preventing it from scoring higher.</p>