Grade my essay please!

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

Okay,so now that I have got your attention,please read on further.

Assignment: Is conscience a more powerful motivator than money, fame or power?

The presupposition that conscience is a more powerful motivator than money,fame or power is categorically false.Although some romantic critics would argue that humanity still exists in the world,these critics are so dogmatic in their provincial ideology.Power can motivate people to go to great lengths to commit unethical acts.Three archetypes that demonstrate that money,fame and power are more powerful motivators than conscience are Animal Farm,Emperor Ashoka and the American 1%.

George Orwell’s Animal Farm depicts a dystopian society in which animals drive out the humans and rule themselves.All the animals are happy until a cunning pig named Napoleon becomes greedy and decides to rule all the animals.In his conquest to gain fame and power,he ignores the interests of the animals(except the pigs) and makes them work harder and imposes harsh laws.

The Indian emperor Ashoka,in 540A.D.,fought myriad wars in his conquest to gain more fame,power and money.In the process he killed millions of people and received a lot of criticism for doing so.Ashoka was born to the wealthy king of Meerut and instead of helping out the people of the kingdom,he went on to conquer more lands.

A recent survey in 2014 showed that the top American 1 percent now owns 40% of the country’s wealth and that the gap between the rich and the poor is continuously increasing.Instead of giving money for charity and trying to reduce the income gap between the public,the rich are opening up more business and trying to figure out ways to get richer.

Through a careful analysis of Animal Farm,Ashoka and the 1%,it can indeed be said that money,power and fame are the root of all evils and are detrimental for the society’s happiness and tranquility.
---------------x--------------

okay,I know that I’m no pro but that’s why I’m here.Please give me suggestions and grade my essay.Thanks a million.

2

It’s not the most brilliant essay ever.

3

It got your attention and that’s what’s important.Please help me out by giving me suggestions and grade my essay.

4

“Although some romantic critics would argue that humanity still exists in the world,these critics are so dogmatic in their provincial ideology.” Drop the “so”.
“Power can motivate people to go to great lengths to commit unethical acts.” Redundancy. Go great lengths or commit unethical acts. Pick one.
Misuse of the word “archetype”. Just go with example.
Rule over all the animals.
“In his conquest to gain fame and power, he ignores the interests of the animals(except the pigs) and makes them work harder and imposes harsh laws.” Drop the parenthesis. It makes you sound a lot less formal here than the rest of the essay. How about “the interest of all animals except that of his own species”? Also, making the animals work harder and imposing harsh laws don’t sound appropriately evil enough. You can talk more about the atrocities committed and how the pigs eventually became the new oppressors of the animals, turning the revolution full-circle instead.
“The Indian emperor Ashoka,in 540A.D.,fought myriad wars in his conquest to gain more fame,power and money.In the process he killed millions of people and received a lot of criticism for doing so.”
=> “The Indian emperor Ashoka in 540 A.D. fought myriad wars in his conquest to gain more fame, power and money, massacring millions of innocents in the process.” Of course he received a lot of criticisms. He killed people.
“Ashoka was born to the wealthy king of Meerut and instead of helping out the people of the kingdom,he went on to conquer more lands.” These parts make no sense. I don’t know what you were trying to say here, and I don’t think the detail has anything to do with the prompt.
“A recent survey in 2014 showed that the top American 1 percent now owns 40% of the country’s wealth and that the gap between the rich and the poor is continuously increasing.” Shifting tense. Switch to simple past, please.
“Instead of giving money for charity and trying to reduce the income gap between the public,the rich are opening up more business and trying to figure out ways to get richer.”
=> “However, instead of giving money to charities and trying to reduce the income gap between the public, the rich is opening up more businesses and attempting to get richer.” That’s selfishness, not evil.
“Through a careful analysis of Animal Farm, Ashoka and the 1%,it can indeed be said that money,power and fame are the root of all evils and are detrimental for the society’s happiness and tranquility.”
=> “Through a careful analysis of Animal Farm, Ashoka and the study, it can be said that money, power, and fame are the root of all evils and, as such, are detrimental to the society’s happiness and tranquillity.”
Structure-wise, you lack transitions, both between paragraphs and within paragraphs. You also forgot to restate your thesis in your body paragraphs. Some of your examples have virtually no relation to both your thesis and the prompt. And your ED didn’t answer the prompt. While I’m no expert on these things, I think I can safely conclude that you need more practice.
Seeing as you used the categorically thingy, I assume that you used Shaan Patel’s book. It’s just a suggestion, but maybe you should check other sources for tips and advice. I personally recommend Academic Hacker’s videos, silverturtle’s guide, Tom Clements’ How to write a killer SAT essay in 25 minutes, and the collection of past essays that got either 11 or 12 posted in that one thread that I can’t seem to find right now. Anyway, practice more, and you’ll be fine.

5

Found it: http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/409070-sample-sat-12-essays-p1.html

6

Thanks a lot synonyms.I agree with everything you said and will implement all those suggestions in my future essays.
A billion thanks.
A trillion actually.

7

Is conscience a more powerful motivator than money, fame or power?

EXAMPLE 1

This is not a compelling example. Inertia is not an example of motivation. It was no skin off Napoleon the pig’s back to maintain the pleasant inertia of living in the cushy house and letting the other dumber animals do the work. Boxer the horse is a study in the power of conscience as a motivator. His conscience drove him to literally work himself to death. Now, THAT’s motivation!

EXAMPLE 2

Not enough information. The brief description in this example does not establish that the objective of emperor ashoka’s military campaigns was to attain personal money, fame or power. The subjugation of neighboring lands could just as well have been for his country’s economic survival & security.

EXAMPLE 3

What makes you think the rich don’t contribute to charity? Ever heard of the Gates Foundation? Your example is flawed in that it is assume that charity is the cure of poverty. The root causes of poverty are not going to be cured simply by a handout.

CONCLUSION

This is not a careful analysis. You’ve thrown in three inadequately fleshed-out, uncompelling examples. Implicit in your third example is that making money a lot of money is inherently by the exploitation of the poor. Uber & Air BnB are making their owners’ rich, and they aren’t getting rich by exploiting the poor.

THESIS

Since I can easily point our weaknesses in your examples, it seems really puffed up to be throwing around the word “categorically”. The terms “dogmatic” and “provincial” also seem out of place for personal values that are individualistic.

8

@GMTplus7 While I agree that the other two examples need work, I must contest that the Animal Farm example is pretty decent, if needs a bit more elaboration. Inertia definitely wasn’t Napoleon’s motivation when he chased Snowball away and twisted Old Major’s doctrine into such a terrible dogma. Furthermore, Boxer was mentioned several times to have had conscience, yes, and, more importantly, stupidity several times. It was that stupidity and absolute trust in whoever in power that drove him to death, not his conscience. A lot of other animals have conscience, like Snowball, Clover, Benjamin. In fact, it can be argued that most animals on the farm had conscience as a motivation, but not many of them was driven to “suicide”, of a sort, like Boxer was. And since OP was going for the “money and power create evil” angle, it simply makes more sense for Napoleon to be chosen instead of Boxer.
Just because a few rich people contribute doesn’t mean that every rich person contribute, and nowhere in the essay did OP said that charity was the cure to poverty. He/She only said that those rich people should at least try to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor. Listing a few possible solutions such as creating more jobs, investing in new, more efficient technologies, raising the minimum wages, etc…, should get rid of the ambiguity nicely.
“This is not a careful analysis. You’ve thrown in three inadequately fleshed-out, uncompelling examples. Implicit in your third example is that making money a lot of money is inherently by the exploitation of the poor. Uber & Air BnB are making their owners’ rich, and they aren’t getting rich by exploiting the poor.” Yes, this is not a careful analysis, but guess what? It’s a SAT essay. I’m sure OP knew that what he/she wrote wasn’t any kind of careful analysis, hence the ask for help in the first place. However, even so, OP can’t possibly have written “Through this essay that I’ve hurriedly written in 25 minutes because you only gave that much to write about conscience and evil and motivation and what’s not…” What you spewed out was not constructive criticism, it was blind anger, colouring your perception of the essay.
Most people lie through their teeth on the SAT essay. A person doesn’t necessarily believe what he/she writes in the essay, so why are you getting angry over something inane such as a practice SAT essay?
Also, what part of OP’s arguments were “individualistic”? Even as the essay admitted that money and power were more powerful motivator than conscience, he/she was CONDEMNING the attitude, not encouraging it. Pessimistic? Yes. Need more work? Yes. Individualistic? No.
And fancy words are kind of a must in SAT essays. It’s kind of a requirement. Are you sure you have taken the SAT?

9

Spewed? Angry? I’m not angry. I gave VERY specific criticisms of the weaknesses in the essay for the OP to address.

That’s not the green light to use big words willy-nilly. Long words should not appear to be just thrown in there just for the sake of being long.

10

@GMTplus7 ,if the rich were doing so much work for the poor,why is there such a huge income gap?and why is it increasing every year?

Yes,I do understand some parts of your criticism but disagree with most .Yes,the Ashoka example can certainly be more detailed but the problem is that I don’t get that much space.From now onwards,I’ll only be using two detailed examples.I think that works best for me.
Yes,I know that my essay isn’t great.Probably an 8 at best.

@Synonyms ,thanks a lot again. :slight_smile:

11

Q. Should people be valued according to their capabilities rather than their achievements?

——————x—————

The presupposition that people should be valued according to their capabilities rather than their achievements is a categorical truth.Although some romantic critics would argue that achievements define a person,these critics are so dogmatic in their provincial ideology that they fail to notice the reality.Sometimes people go through such difficult conditions that opportunities for achievements become rare and the only way to measure a person’s value is by looking into their capabilities.This universal notion is exemplified throughout history and literature.

In the 1800s,Frederick Douglass,an abolitionist and social reformer,did a lot for the black people.He was initially a slave and nothing was expected from him.But he went on to become one of America’s most famous abolitionist.He gave speeches throughout the country,wrote a plethora of books,and debunked the belief that black men were incapable of acting as independent citizens.Douglass was certainly capable of doing many things and it would be wrong to value him according to his achievements,since he went though insurmountable difficulties and opportunities for achievements were rare.

Another illustration which demonstrates that capabilities are more important than achievements can be demonstrated by analysing the life of the current Indian prime minister,Narendra Modi.Modi was a tea seller in his younger years and didn’t undergo rigorous learning in universities.Nothing was expected from him and he was just a young man with big dreams who couldn’t afford to take part in national competitions pertaining to the subject of the country’s national interests.He had no achievements;he had a will…a will to change the dynamics of the Indian economy and make his nation great again.He joined the party ‘BJP’ ,impressed the leaders,and moved up ranks in his party.Today he is the prime minister of India and has made the country one of the world’s fastest growing economies.Had he been judged on his previous achievements and not on his capabilities,he would never have become the prime minister and would probably still be a tea seller.

Through a careful analysis of the life of Frederick Douglass and Narendra Modi,it can indeed be said that achievements are secondary to capabilities and that keeping this in mind is instrumental for maintaining the society’s happiness and tranquilty.

12

Have I improved?please let me know and grade my essay.