-
gansai_127
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 1:10 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
Can you please let me know how much the following GMAT essays could potentially score?
SUBJECT:
Human nature, no matter how selfless is appears, is selfish. Discuss
ESSAY:
The argument presented by the author indicates that every action perfomed by humans are inspired by a selfish reason. Though I agree with the the author that a majority of human actions could be correlated to a selfish reason, I don't think that every single action is inspired by a selfish reason.
First of all I would like to bring to everybody's attention the fact, that man is very much a social animal. One of the primary characteristics of a social animal is the presence of a secondary driver, the overall well being of the society, to their actions. Being a social animal, human beings also follow a similar social culture. Human beings also consider the overal well being of the society while acting in a given situation. In most human societies, we have a very sophisticated social code of conduct which intents to result in collective benefits more than pure selfish benefits. As everyday evidence shows us, most of our human societies abide by these social codes of conduct and hence it implies that not all of our actions are inspired purely by selfish reason but also by reasons of common good, even if it is not completely in favour of selfish motives.
Most human beings follow very sophisticated family, moral and/or religious systems, which lays a lot of stress on showing compassion and co-operation to fellow human beings. Parents take care of young children who cannot take care of themselves; adults and children help and take care of elderly people; society takes care of the weak and disabled and underprevilaged - all these are examples of how human beings display selfless actions for the overall benefits of the society in lieu of pure selfish actions. I do not mean to say that human beings do not do some of their actions for selfish reasons, but my point is that there are some actions which are not selfish in nature, but which is performed by humans happily.
Opponents to this argument may well argue that behind all these seemingly selfless activities there are deeper and probably psycological selfish motives. My view is that, more than playing around with semantics and how we call it, it is exactly these actions of being helpful to others, without any thought or expectation of tangible personal returns for such actions; those actions are what we call aas selfless actions. In fact, when a human being takes a decision to either spare his time for a noble cause benefitting somebody else in lieu of being involved in some activity which is purely beneficial for themself, they are making a choice between being selfless and selfish.
To sum up, based on the various reasons above, I strongly disagree to the authors opinion that human nature dictates that every action is inspired by selfish motives. I think human nature is a result of social evolution also, and maintains a healthy balance between selfish reasons and societal benefits before deciding on a course of action.
--------------------
SUBJECT:
"Our service, which includes both designing and placing advertisement, is by far the most effective in the industry. For instance, we recently designed and placed a series of advertisements for an apparel company using a professional golfer as a spokesperson. Before the series of ads, a survey showed that only 8% of people who described themselves as non-golf fans had heard of the apparel company. After the series of ads, despite the golfer making national headlines by becoming the youngest golfer ever to win a major professional tournament, over 80% of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company."
Discuss how well-reasoned you find this argument. Be sure to analyze arguments reasoning and use of evidence. Think about questionable assumptions that underlie the argument and what other explanations might weaken the conclusion. Also, discuss what evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes you would suggest to make the argument logically sound, and what would help you evaluate its conclusion.
ESSAY:
The main claim made in the above argument by the advertising company is that their service in designing and placing advertisements are by far the most effective in the industry. Based on the example and related evidence provided in the extract, where the advertising company used a professional golfer as the spokesman of the given apparel brand, I have serious reservations whether the advertising company's claims about providing most effective advertisements are valid.
Firstly, from the article above I am not clear why the ad company selected a professional golfer as its spokesman. There is no clear mention in the article, whether the apparel brands products had any specific relation to golf or not. If the apparel brand had any relation to golf it is equally unclear why non-golf fans were surveyed for their acquantance with the brand. The extract goes on to mentions that the ad company engaged a professional golfer to promote an apparel brand where a miniscule percent, ony 8%, of non-golf fans had even heard of the apparel brand. All this fails to clarify why the ad company decided to select a professional golfer as its spokesman. Had the article mentioned the rationale for this decision, it would more clear to the reader why the ad company planned the campaign using a professional golfer.
Later in the article, it mentions that after the series of ads, over 80 percent of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company. The article, though, doesn't clarify who the target audience of the survey was. If it had been the same non-golf fans who were surveyed earlier, this information would have had some relevence. But without this clarification, one cannot make much of the results from this survey. The article also mentions that the survey results were 'despite' the golfer making national headlines. This doesn't help clarify whether the ad company considers the result of the survey as a positive indicator or as a diappointing indicator. One is also not clear whether the usage of some the words in the article, like using 'despite' here, is indicative of author's lack of proficinecy in the language or of the ad company's failure in this ad campaign.
To sum up, the argument above seems to be flawed in two ways. One, it seems to represent a strategy from the ad company which is not well explained and seems to be fundamentally flawed without further explanation. Secondly, it seems to be constructured and written quite badly, creating confusion in the reader's mind. Hence I have to say that overall the argument doesn't convince me whether, and if so, how the ad company provides services which are by far the most effective in the industry.
SUBJECT:
Human nature, no matter how selfless is appears, is selfish. Discuss
ESSAY:
The argument presented by the author indicates that every action perfomed by humans are inspired by a selfish reason. Though I agree with the the author that a majority of human actions could be correlated to a selfish reason, I don't think that every single action is inspired by a selfish reason.
First of all I would like to bring to everybody's attention the fact, that man is very much a social animal. One of the primary characteristics of a social animal is the presence of a secondary driver, the overall well being of the society, to their actions. Being a social animal, human beings also follow a similar social culture. Human beings also consider the overal well being of the society while acting in a given situation. In most human societies, we have a very sophisticated social code of conduct which intents to result in collective benefits more than pure selfish benefits. As everyday evidence shows us, most of our human societies abide by these social codes of conduct and hence it implies that not all of our actions are inspired purely by selfish reason but also by reasons of common good, even if it is not completely in favour of selfish motives.
Most human beings follow very sophisticated family, moral and/or religious systems, which lays a lot of stress on showing compassion and co-operation to fellow human beings. Parents take care of young children who cannot take care of themselves; adults and children help and take care of elderly people; society takes care of the weak and disabled and underprevilaged - all these are examples of how human beings display selfless actions for the overall benefits of the society in lieu of pure selfish actions. I do not mean to say that human beings do not do some of their actions for selfish reasons, but my point is that there are some actions which are not selfish in nature, but which is performed by humans happily.
Opponents to this argument may well argue that behind all these seemingly selfless activities there are deeper and probably psycological selfish motives. My view is that, more than playing around with semantics and how we call it, it is exactly these actions of being helpful to others, without any thought or expectation of tangible personal returns for such actions; those actions are what we call aas selfless actions. In fact, when a human being takes a decision to either spare his time for a noble cause benefitting somebody else in lieu of being involved in some activity which is purely beneficial for themself, they are making a choice between being selfless and selfish.
To sum up, based on the various reasons above, I strongly disagree to the authors opinion that human nature dictates that every action is inspired by selfish motives. I think human nature is a result of social evolution also, and maintains a healthy balance between selfish reasons and societal benefits before deciding on a course of action.
--------------------
SUBJECT:
"Our service, which includes both designing and placing advertisement, is by far the most effective in the industry. For instance, we recently designed and placed a series of advertisements for an apparel company using a professional golfer as a spokesperson. Before the series of ads, a survey showed that only 8% of people who described themselves as non-golf fans had heard of the apparel company. After the series of ads, despite the golfer making national headlines by becoming the youngest golfer ever to win a major professional tournament, over 80% of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company."
Discuss how well-reasoned you find this argument. Be sure to analyze arguments reasoning and use of evidence. Think about questionable assumptions that underlie the argument and what other explanations might weaken the conclusion. Also, discuss what evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes you would suggest to make the argument logically sound, and what would help you evaluate its conclusion.
ESSAY:
The main claim made in the above argument by the advertising company is that their service in designing and placing advertisements are by far the most effective in the industry. Based on the example and related evidence provided in the extract, where the advertising company used a professional golfer as the spokesman of the given apparel brand, I have serious reservations whether the advertising company's claims about providing most effective advertisements are valid.
Firstly, from the article above I am not clear why the ad company selected a professional golfer as its spokesman. There is no clear mention in the article, whether the apparel brands products had any specific relation to golf or not. If the apparel brand had any relation to golf it is equally unclear why non-golf fans were surveyed for their acquantance with the brand. The extract goes on to mentions that the ad company engaged a professional golfer to promote an apparel brand where a miniscule percent, ony 8%, of non-golf fans had even heard of the apparel brand. All this fails to clarify why the ad company decided to select a professional golfer as its spokesman. Had the article mentioned the rationale for this decision, it would more clear to the reader why the ad company planned the campaign using a professional golfer.
Later in the article, it mentions that after the series of ads, over 80 percent of people from a second survey had heard of the apparel company. The article, though, doesn't clarify who the target audience of the survey was. If it had been the same non-golf fans who were surveyed earlier, this information would have had some relevence. But without this clarification, one cannot make much of the results from this survey. The article also mentions that the survey results were 'despite' the golfer making national headlines. This doesn't help clarify whether the ad company considers the result of the survey as a positive indicator or as a diappointing indicator. One is also not clear whether the usage of some the words in the article, like using 'despite' here, is indicative of author's lack of proficinecy in the language or of the ad company's failure in this ad campaign.
To sum up, the argument above seems to be flawed in two ways. One, it seems to represent a strategy from the ad company which is not well explained and seems to be fundamentally flawed without further explanation. Secondly, it seems to be constructured and written quite badly, creating confusion in the reader's mind. Hence I have to say that overall the argument doesn't convince me whether, and if so, how the ad company provides services which are by far the most effective in the industry.
