Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
The Surest Indicator Of A Great Nation - With A Free Essay Review
Prompt: "The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position."
I agree with the statement in that indicator of a great nation is represented by the general welfare of its people. But we are not clear here about what "achievements" mean in the statements. Does the achievements of a ruler mean the number of other nations the ruler has conquered or the number of awards an artist has won for his/her work or the number of different explosives or viruses discovered by scientists. If the achievements mean all the above, then a nation's greatness is not represented by these. If the achievements of rulers, artists or scientists take a nation, or the world itself, one step forward by new inventions, great and meaningful arts or great plans to develop the nation and provide help for the people who are in need, then those achievements definitely indicate that it is a great nation.
Every nation earns fame on achievemts of rulers, artists or scientists but a nation cannot be called great when its people do not feel safe and happy about being a resident. The first thing that has to be taken care of by a nation is its people's welfare and growth of the nation as a whole and not just few scientists, rulers and artists in the nation. When people's welfare is considered important in a nation, then the government would provide financial, educational and medical help for those who are in real need, this would naturally result in the nation growing many achievers in different fields.
To sum up, a nation's achievers definitely add to the nation's greatness but not so much as the nation that considers the general welfare of its people very important. When a nation considers welfare of its people and helps people grow, the nation would inturn develop new achievers who would add greatness to the nation.
The essay is possibly too short; it is certainly too short on argument. Your first paragraph indicates at least implicitly that one of the more significant issues here is the extent to which the welfare of a people may depend on the achievements of the rulers and so on. That claim could perhaps be made more explicit. The reason you probably should do that, in fact, is that in the absence of explicit claims, all you are really left with are assertions. What you assert is reasonable, of course, but your essay will be judged on the basis of its ability to construct logical arguments. Note that your second paragraph repeats the problem of the first: it makes a number of reasonable assertions but no argument as such.
Part of the problem of course is the difficulty of this particular prompt. One is inclined to say straight away that one's response would depend, as you say, on what achievements we are talking about; it might also depend on one's definition of "welfare" and, indeed, "great." The latter is probably the most problematic term in the original claim, and so clearing up confusion on that score might be the best way to proceed with an essay like this. Perhaps you can tell from the following how that would allow an argument to unfold:
If by "great" we mean "historically important or influential," then the welfare of the people is of lesser importance; we remember the conquests of Julius Caesar and the writings of Virgil more than the suffering of the slaves and the peoples of the occupied lands in the Roman Empire. Those were the achievements that influenced almost two millennia of European history. If by "great" we mean "intrinsically good and noble" (or something like that), however, etc.