<p>if your talking about quantum mechanics or whatever, for example, but just find the concept to be exhilerating, then how do you relate that to yourself to make it "personal"?</p>
<p>makeHimproud: depends on how you approach it. As is everything. I think Goldfish's point was that you can't reguritate a chain of opinions "I believe so-and-so" without backing it up with "why." I think the "why" is the really unique, personal part, not "what." this goes with quantum mechanics, if you give a really good why, nobody will care what topic you chose.</p>
<p>"the adcom's wont admit you just because you know your quantam mechanics inside and out, anyone can do that, it's just like writing some kind of science research report. these essays are all about you -- so let's keep it that way, and i'm sure your essays will sound better for the adcoms."</p>
<p>Yeah, I wasn't writing about quantum mechanics because I was trying to impress them - add anything technical, and the adcoms will just skip right over it. Quantum mechanics really does excite me a whole lot, and I wrote about it because I knew my passion would come across in the essay. I don't recommend you come up with something obscure for obscurity's sake, because I completely agree, it won't impress them. I just mentioned the name QM and didn't bother to talk about the actual subject at all. Basically, the main idea was:
"Right now I'm really interested in quantum mechanics. I don't know why I am - if I tried to tell you why, it'd be a lie. I like it because I do. Once I talked to a professor at a local university about it, and I found we both were grinning like idiots. I have no idea why, but it really does excite me."
But of course, the essay was a little bit better developed than that. What the adcom probably meant by "assume we know everything" is that describing subjects is complete waste of space, and can't help your essay - focus on what you think about the subject, not the subject itself. And even if something really stupid excites you, write about that - it's the willingness to learn that they're looking for. If you've done well enough in school to have a chance at getting in, then the adcoms know you can learn once you get here.</p>
<p>"Yes, but be careful as to not offend the reader. Religion and politics are very touchy subjects, just keep that in mind."
Agreed. Yeah, push boundaries, but there are right ways and wrong ways to do it:</p>
<p>"I think the pro-lifers are seriously misguided in their reasoning, because" as opposed to "Although I respect the pro-lifers, I sincerely believe that..."</p>
<p>I mean, if you slightly insinuate a belief is stupid, then if you happen to get an adcom that believes in it, then suddenly, poof. The adcom will just bristle and not really read anything else you have to say.</p>
<p>This essay was both the easiest and the most fun for me to write. I knew a lot of people would be writing about stem cells or nanotech. These topics deeply interest me, though, so I decided to talk about one of the less realized consequences of these technologies: the complete cure of aging. Here it is:</p>
<p>[essay]
In recent years, researchers have gained wonderful insights into the workings of the genome, stem cells, and the causes of disease. Technologies derived from these findings have the potential to lengthen life by a significant number of years. I find the prospects of longevity very exciting, and often wonder at the vast implications of extended human life.</p>
<pre><code> I believe longer life is inevitable; how this will affect individual psychology and the dynamics of society remains to be seen. For example, some believe wisdom increases with age. If this is true, it follows that a society with a higher average age will be wiser. However, humans may prove to be more complicated than that; only time will tell.
After examining the prospects of longevity, an amazing question comes to mind. Can virtual immortality be achieved? If yes, the consequences of this would be even more profound than those of lengthened life. The concept of death as natural could vanish from the human mindset. I find it hard to imagine myself living for millions of years; however, I believe these technologies are within our grasp. We are approaching an event horizon, a point beyond which if a person were to live, they could live indefinitely. Past this point, technology could keep a person alive until the next technology came out, and so on. The question of whether or not a human can live forever is captivating; unfortunately, it will take an eternity to discover the answer!
</code></pre>
<p>[/essay]</p>
<p>By the way, you guys should check out the new school of thought called Transhumanism (wikipedia gets the essentials right). It does not stop at the curing of aging, it discusses the effects of biological modification to a massive degree, and the idea that evolution will be a conscious process in the future, independent of reproduction. I didnt want to get too crazy on my essay though, so I just stuck to the longevity stuff.</p>
<p>Stanford is the first and only college to have a Transhumanist student group (stanford always pioneers new ideas!). Of course this isnt the primary thing motivating me to go there, but a little extra perk here and there is nice haha.</p>
<p>So, basically, it would be best for the essays to describe HOW you feel about a certain topic/subject rather than WHAT that particular topic/subject is? Just to summarize your points, Uncle Feezus and others. I really believe Stanford when they say they want to hear YOUR voice, because that is what will separate you from everyone else. They want to see a genuine passion or love of learning, as I've read from their mission/philosophy. Thanks for all the advice and tips, current Stanford undergrads, that you have given us!</p>
<p>I wrote about my research and how its been so intellectually stimulating for the past 3 years.</p>
<p>Did you write about a general topic like "everything that seems so complex is really simple underneath it all" or did you write specific, "cure for aging?"</p>
<p>No I talked about how my specific topic has influenced my thinking over the past few years and why I personally feel my field of research so intellectually exciting.</p>
<p>I believe that the essay wants you to talk about one specific idea that is intellectually exciting so doing something broad would pretty much be ignoring the essay to a degree.</p>
<p>This essay was the only one that had a little humor in it, for me. I wrote about how exciting quantum mechanics are in that they could unlock the secrets of the universe, etc etc but then ended with a little joke. My other essays were very serious, but I like it that way.</p>
<p>I wrote about fate and an experience I had when I found my grandmother's bio, regretting this one though, shoulda conveyed my passion for physics</p>
<p>I talked about Chess. "It's part geometry, part philosphy, and part science." Stuff like that. Just why it makes me, personally, get my brain all fired up and excited to experiment, calculate, etc. Man, I sound like such a terrible nerd. My other essays hopefully debunked that.</p>
<p>since you just used the word debunked, I doubt...jk</p>
<p>Hey, admissions officers love nerds. Just as long as you don't seem antisocial.</p>
<p>"I talked about Chess. "It's part geometry, part philosphy, and part science." Stuff like that. Just why it makes me, personally, get my brain all fired up and excited to experiment, calculate, etc. Man, I sound like such a terrible nerd. My other essays hopefully debunked that."</p>
<p>Yeah I wrote about that for my activity essay.</p>
<p>Yeah, chess is great. Making fun of myself for playing it got me elected ASB president at an urban public school. We made a chessumentary a while ago. It was great. Stanford should like chess players though. TO may have ripped abs, but we have ripped minds.</p>
<p>I can't decide between writing with the idea that "despite all the differences we see on the large scale of things, everything is really the fundamentally the same," most discussing science stuff, but also tying in religion a little, OR discussing a really specific topic, "can coral bleaching actually be an evolutionary process not awry (Adaptive Bleaching Hypothesis, Buddemeier/Fautin 1993)," which is also very exciting due to some of its implications.</p>
<p>The intellectual essays were tough for me at first because I didn't know what to write about. But then, I recalled as a H.S. student that I had a passion about animal behaivor and their societal structure among Rottweilers. I had learned so much about the dogs from the time they were newborn pups to full grown adults. It was a fun research experience.</p>
<p>It sounds like a lot of people are doing specific, non-philosophical things. Is it really much better?</p>
<p>I really think this question is meant to be wide-open and is intended to give applicants a chance to write passionately about an idea/concept/experience that excites them. I think the word "intellectual" is meant to be up for interpretation. I could be wrong but I hope not because my D wrote about salsa dancing and her interest in exploring how dance and music bridge people of diverse cultures and languages. I'll let you all know if it worked!</p>