The practice question was “Is honesty always the best policy?,” and I wrote it within the time limit (30 min).
I would be grateful if you would score my SAT Essay out of 12
Thanks for your time~!
~’’~’’’~’’’~’’~’’~’’~’’
With the tide of politics and crime, it may seem that there is a need for additional honesty in society. However, while in those situations honesty helps to promote justice and to preserve peace, in some situations this transparency can have adverse effects. Instead, this openness can lead to pandemonium, turmoil, and discontentment when a person believed he or she was taking the proper course of action. Thus, even though honesty is a respectable ethic to live by, there are exceptions when one should refrain from the practice of this virtue.
For Instance, governments often abstain from the whole truth when in time of crises. During the Cold War, there were a multitude of nuclear threats directed towards the United States. If each and every one of these cases were reported to the general public, fear would station in the hearts of America’s people. Furthermore, war-time propaganda, such as that observed during World War II, was renowned for both its exaggeration and for its effect on the country’s morale. The true number of fatalities was blanketed; in its place was a picture of Uncle Sam. Had the American community heard the unabridged ramifications of the Allied campaign, the fighting spirit of the United States would have instead been a cowering spirit. Thus, it is vital that honesty be veiled in times of political unrest.
Additionally, blatant honesty engenders the consequence of unsparing and judgmental persona. To be honest is to not withhold the truth. If people were to provide their matter-of-fact opinions on others, the conversation would often result in malicious gossip or in the dejection of others. For example, if a woman asks her husband if she looks “nice” in a dress, the husband may fib and agree with his wife in order to preserve her esteem. Refraining from complete honesty is necessary in order to seem approachable.
In conclusion, the assertion that “honesty is the best policy” for every situation holds flaw. There are situations where dishonesty would have much more positive effects than the whole truth. THe circumstance determines whether or not the truth is a weapon of harm or a builder of peace.
~’’~’’’~’’’~’’~’’~’’~’’
It’s a great essay! Just watch out for some grammar mistakes here and there such as the “holds flaw” part. Don’t sacrifice grammar just to sound professional. Graders take off points for that. Also, I think, in terms of balance, the second body paragraph should have some more info. Overall, I would rate it 8/12.
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 few.
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.
please grade my essay and give me suggestions thanks a lot