Please Grade My Essay

Test Preparation SAT Preparation
1

<p>No quote or anything</p>

<p>Prompt: Do you think that the individual good outweighs the common good?</p>

<p>I was once asked by my friend if I would kill a baby to save my own life. I immediately responded yes. He then asked me if I would kill two babies to save my own life. I responded yes again. He continued like this up to five babies, at which point, exasperated, he asked me how many I would kill. My answer: as many as it takes, because all I know to be true and real is myself. In this way, the good of the individual far outweighs that of everyone else.
All one can ever know to be real is themselves. By this, I mean that everything one sees in this world is, for all we know, simply a product of their imagination. If this is true, when the person creating this world (myself) dies, everyone and everything else "dies" with them. In that case, it would benefit everyone else for me to do whatever I can to stay alive. This indirectly benefits the common good by benefiting the individual. The converse is not true.
In a less philosophical sense, it can also be argued that one will never know what others will do with the "good" granted them. For example, when one gives a homeless person money, there is no way to know whether they will spend it on food and clothing or squander it on drugs and alcohol. Similarly, when one gives something to society as a whole, they cannot know whether society will use it to cure poverty or to create war. What one does know is their own capacity for altruism and their own opposition to misanthropy.
The individual good outweighs the common good because on can never be sure that others will even be real or be humble.</p>

2

<p>11 immediately after the first paragraph, and its potential as a dead baby joke amused me for a while.</p>

<p>"All one can ever know to be real is themselves." -- themselves should be himself/herself; pick one.</p>

<p>"By this, I mean that everything one sees in this world is, for all we know, simply a product of their imagination." -- if you use "one" shouldn't you stick with it throughout the sentence, instead of changing to "we" and "their"?</p>

<p>I'd also avoid dealing with "If this is true..." and "it can also be argued..." because you're giving graders the impression that it is not a moral absolute and that it might not be true. Why choose words that tear down your own argument?</p>

<p>And also, with "If this is true, when the person creating this world (myself) dies, everyone and everything else "dies" with them. In that case, it would benefit everyone else for me to do whatever I can to stay alive." I know what point you're trying to make, but I can't make the leap in logic between the two sentences at all. You're trying to argue selfishness as a motive, and yet you're trying to sound like an altruist. I'm not quite sure there's a possible way of being both, logically speaking.</p>

<p>"when one gives a homeless person money, there is no way to know whether they" -- grammar point; should be he/she or just he, instead of "they" because you're referring to one person. You need to watch that same grammar point throughout the essay because misuses occur consistently. I brought it up before, too.</p>

<p>If you fixed up your grammar, I'd give this a 10 because you sound like you know what you're talking about.</p>

<p>Personal opinions:</p>

<ul>
<li>"What one does know is their own capacity for altruism and their own opposition to misanthropy." I don't know how much this supports your case mainly because you'd be willing to kill babies for your own existance.</li>
</ul>

<p>What you're trying to say is that possible potential means little in face of actuality, and that you value your own thoughts and existance too much to give it up to a nameless stranger who's value is yet to be determined. I agree with this entirely, and I like the logical fashion that you present your points in. However, sometimes I think you need to stop hiding behind words and just talk straight.</p>

<ul>
<li>"The individual good outweighs the common good because on can never be sure that others will even be real or be humble." -- too weak as a conclusion. You had a very clearly stated "why I think this" that you should have matched with in clarity.</li>
</ul>

3

<p>Yeah, I noticed some of those errors while typing it up =-\ Particularly the "If this is true..." I guess I should spend five minutes or so editing.</p>

<p>I don't generally use "one" that often in writing, so I didn't know what to do with all the other pronouns, lol. It sounded bad using "one" three times in a relatively short sentence. Would "you" work instead? I know my LA teachers have always said never use "you" but do the SAT people care? It would make it a lot easier, lol.</p>

<p>Truthfully, on the part about benefiting others by staying alive, it didn't sound to me like it made sense, but it seemed like the reader would be able to gather what I meant anyway. I'm saying when you die, everyone in your "imaginary world" dies, too, so not dying is the only way for other people not to die... Which doesn't make sense if you think that they're not real in the first place... But as you said, it sounds like I know what I'm talking about, lol.</p>

<p>With the "What one does know is their own capacity for altruism and their own opposition to misanthropy," (and the previous sentence) I was trying to say something like: You know you will do good for the whole, but there's no guarantee the whole will do good for itself.</p>

<p>I noticed my conclusion was extremely weak, but thought it was better than nothing. Should I have just left it out?</p>

<p>I don't understand what you mean by talk straight. Are you saying my sentences are convoluted? Or that I'm presenting a facade with my rhetoric?</p>

4

<p>On pronouns, the real problem is with the English language. It's always uncomfortable.</p>

<p>I always bow to the wisdom of H.S. teachers, so if they say don't use "you" in an essay, what might they say about "I" or "we" instead?</p>

<p>For example: "All we can ever know to be real is ourselves."
OR... "All I can ever know to be real is myself."
If you stay consistent throughout the essay with either "we" or "I", might that be better? Perhaps you have a teacher who could answer this focussed question, if you slip it to him/her on a piece of paper.</p>

<p>Oh, and speaking of that: I HATE this him/her stuff.
Lately, I've been using the pronoun "s/he"
What is the response from today's English teachers on solving this age-old English language problem with "s/he"</p>

<p>It isn't true in every language. I recall French has pronouns that don't make this kind of trouble.</p>

5

<p>p.s. don't plan a career in pediatric medicine! I know you're just philosophizing about those babies... ;)</p>

6

<p>You make it sound like I wouldn't actually kill infinite babies to save myself, paying3tuitions. I most definitely would.</p>

<p>Another question: Could this "sinister" anecdote cost me points? Or would the checkers just find it refreshing and funny after reading many dull essays?</p>

7

<p>To learn more about what Taggart means, sounding like yourself, check out my post #10 under 7yearman's thread, also called "Please grade my essay" tonight</p>

<p>I think Taggart means something called "writer's voice." </p>

<p>Anyway, you're getting some feedback tonigh and that's great.</p>

8

<p>It may be hard to believe, but I actually DO usually talk in a way in which no one can understand me, particularly when I'm trying to explain something well, lol. If I could use the word "you" I think it would sound a lot better, but I'm pretty sure that's frowned upon by grammarians (I may or may not have made up this word) everywhere.</p>

9

<p>Oooh, on the babies: I was actually teasing in my post, however, you asked a serious question.
And it's something to consider. Hm. (I'm considering...)</p>

<p>On the one hand, you can't really loosen up to write if you're always worried about the reader's imagined biases. </p>

<p>But, on the other hand, there are a few areas that are kind of sacred to all, and babies are right up there. Also, grandparents.</p>

<p>On the third hand (I'm running out of hands here), when you need to write philosophically, there are times when you need the MOST dramatic example, because your point is about life and death, or the meaning of existence.</p>

<p>When I read your essay, I understood it as a philosophic exploration. I did wonder, since you retold it as a story, what kind of guy is this??? So I'd accept it better on an SAT-I WRiting essay than on a college essay app. </p>

<p>If you ever want to write about something kinda pushing-the-envelope like that, anywhere, you can always add in a sentence or phrase that shows you are aware of the heated nature of the example. You could add a parenthetical thought, for example, in para 1, right before your final sentence: "My friend and I understood that we were speaking hypothetically, as neither of us would ever hurt a fly." or some friendly thing like that. </p>

<p>Actually, I did like your catching my attention like that with an attention-grabbing opening. Just be sure, if you're into something really macabre to prove a philosophical point, that you take a moment somewhere in the essay to show that you're aware of this as just "speaking only hypothetically, in order to prove my point in debate..." so the reader stays sympathetic to you as a human being.</p>

<p>Keep in mind that the SAT-I Writing should ONLY be marked on logic and style, and is not an entryway essay for the AdCom to read.</p>

<p>When you get to the essay for the apps...well, then, yes, if you were my son I'd say choose any other way to make your point, but not with killing 5 babies." Because there, you want the reader to really come to LIKE you, and want you on campus, and have no worries about you.</p>

<p>There was one of my S's college admission essays where I actually asked him not to use a certain subject if he could only find a different, less inflammatory way to make the same point. It was just my gut instinct. I thought, "yeesh if I didn't know that kid I'd be imagining a real creep on campus..." He was just illustrating a point, but it made my skin crawl. I figure the AdComs are also just people, parents, etc. As long as it didn't destroy his essay, he didn't mind changing one illustrative example, since it was just a minor phrase.<br>
WHen you write those essays, you want them to LIKE you and not be scared of having you! IMHO</p>

10

<p>sorry I rambled above. To answer you clearly, I wouldn't mind reading about the babies example as a scorer on SAT-I, but I would mind it as an AdCom officer (which I'm NOT) reading it on an admissions application as a personal essay! It'd scare me there.</p>

11

<p>8/12. </p>

<p>This is a well-written essay but errors in grammar and unfinished last paragraph costed you from getting higher score. I like the arguments you made but I'm going to give you some negative points more.</p>

<p>I found introduction to be somewhat unusual and disliked it because I don't think killing enormous number of babies to save one individual is morally right. You have to understand that if you use such kind of example, you better hope that the reader is not pro-life. I know that you're speaking what you think is right but I don't know, after all I read your introduction, I thought, "Is this student saying that Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin were GOOD because they did things to save themselves and slaughtered everyone else? Well, if he's right, then all the history books must be wrong!"</p>

<p>That was just my first initial thought. Essay is very well-written but remember that the writer, even though he/she tries to be objective, IS human being and can be subjective to some matter. I remember reading that you should avoid controversial issues because you never know what that grader'll do to you (and I'm pretty sure he/she won't get fired by being subjective on one essay).</p>

12

<p>To the poster above:</p>

<p>Personally, I found the intro refreshing. The writer did not mention the pro-choice, pro-life argument at all. Neither did he even hint on mentioning the Holocaust and etc. What you inferred is something you wanted to infer. The only thing the writer wished to say (and said very effectively, mind you) was that he held his own life as sacred.</p>

<p>Now on to questions --</p>

<p>What I meant about "talking straight" was that you seemed to be very particular about your vocabulary and extremely concerned about whether you were being inflammatory or not. Don't be afraid of essay-readers. Be as patronizing to people who disagree with you as you want, as long as you're consistent and logical in your arguments.</p>

<p>And as to this: I'm saying when you die, everyone in your "imaginary world" dies, too, so not dying is the only way for other people not to die... My answer is: If it exists in the imagination, those lives and that concern is your own business. Other people don't really live in that existance, and your conceived notions of them hardly matter.</p>