<p>I've never taken the SAT before and am planning to sit the October test for the first time (despite the fact that I am ,now, a SENIOR). So, yeah I'm kinda in a state of self-loathing depression...
This is one of the few essays that I'm able to produce, please give me your advice on how I can improve the writing's cohesion and persuasiveness. Thank you !!!!!</p>
<p>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.
Much to our disappointment, equality is, and always has been, an idolized myth. The principle of equality relies heavily on ones perception of the world as much as his position in it, thus making it impossible to achieve a universal state of equality satisfying every man. In other words, fairness to a group of people comes at the expense of anothers.
It is implicitly accepted in the Vietnamese education scene that every pupil, regardless of background and personal ability, deserve an equal amount of academic attention as that of his or her peers. Although the nature of this concept is held in high esteem and praised for its fairness in treating students, reality takes an entirely different standpoint as it unfailingly demonstrates the obvious set-backs of such a scheme. As long as students with noticeable rigor and enthusiasm are treated no differently from those who invariably balk the mere task of studying, it can hardly be said that fairness is well exercised. In such a case, the proposed code of behavior not only fails to incite an adequate amount of fairness to the treatment of both but are also likely to cause great resentment in the former.
Another example for the aforementioned disclaimer can be taken from the famous novel Watership Down by Richard Adams, in which the snare rabbits lives are threatened by the very thing they might be prevailed upon to call equality. As long as the matter of equality is concerned, these rabbits have little to ask for. With a big, cozy warren, peaceful surroundings, a suspiciously stable source of food for all, the healthy does and bucks seem to live in perfect harmony and consent. However, this serene facade of the warren is sustained by the lives of its unlucky inhabitants, whose lives are taken away every now and then to provide the farmer with the only reason to keep the rabbit den going. In order to achieve this sort of socialist autonomy , the rabbits are complied to put their own lives on the line, hoping for the best and putting the thought of fairness below the fight for survival. In this case, equality for some rabbits comes at the expense of many others lives, which, to put it directly, is grossly unfair.
The quest for fairness and equality, rather than an ambitious attempt to achieve pragmatic ideals like have always been thought, is , in fact, little more than a harmless romantic pursuit. As the two stated examples clearly signifies, fairness, if ever achieved, is bound to be more personal than universal. </p>
<p>I didn't finish it within the time limit, which is another major fail :((</p>