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.
Important Truths Begin As Outrageous Or At Least Uncomfortable Attacks Upon The Accepted Wisdom Of The Time - With A Free Essay Review
Truths or facts always seem to be uncomfortable attacks on the accepted wisdom of a time period. These truths can be from any field for that matter. Scientific facts when discovered are ridiculed if they oppose the existing theories. The same applies to historical as well as socially accepted facts that are found, they might make us change our point of view about certain things.
To bolster the above statements let us take the example of Galileo, who was criticized, when he proved that the earth was round, not flat as it was accepted during his time. But these facts when discovered should be thoroughly studied and should be looked upon before generalizing them, only then can they be called truths. Also the people who discover these facts should not be ridiculed or dismissed for, that would only act as a deterrent to our evolving world. For example, it was an accepted notion for women to not acquire education in India, until a few women who were brave enough to change this thinking. This new found truth, though ridiculed, not only changed the life of the women in the past but has also helped greatly to shape a better future. The people who put forth new ideas should not just be supported but they should also be questioned intelligently about their new findings. The common man should have a broader perspective in today’s ever changing world, so that he can cope up with the ever-increasing changes. He should not only be able to accept these facts but should also apply them or should support them in any which way possible to him.
Thus it is often seen that newly acquired knowledge about existing things which opposes the common notion is often ridiculed but this shouldn’t be the ideal case and people should learn to have a broader point of view for accepting new facts, for it would only help to accept a proved change rather than falsely believing what is convenient.
Although the factual claims that you make are probably not important for a test essay of this kind, in which the focus is on analysis, I may as well point out that Galileo did not prove that the earth was round. The discovery that the earth was round predates Galileo by many centuries; the ancient Greeks knew this fact, for example. In any case, the important problem for your first argument (the second paragraph) is that it doesn't in fact comprise a real argument. Instead of telling us why you agree with the original claim, you tell us instead what ought to be the case. To judge by the prompt, that is not the purpose of the essay, and so you would likely get little credit for such assertions. Note that the second paragraph also does not fully support the claim with which you begin your third paragraph: "Thus it is often seen that newly acquired knowledge about existing things ... is often ridiculed." You cannot prove such a claim with one or two examples. Moreover, your task is to prove a different claim: "Important truths begin ... as attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time." You need to try to develop a general reason for thinking that the original claim might be true
There are many possible examples of discoveries of truths that attacked traditional wisdom (the Copernican revolution, Darwin's discovery of evolution, Einstein discovery of the principle relativity); but an example, even a good one, will only get you so far. You need a way of demonstrating why one should think the example has general significance; that it represents what often happens, as opposed to what just happened to happen in the specific case of the cited example. One could argue, for instance, that a truth is only really "important" if it changes the way that we interpret the world or our place in the world, and if it changes things like that, then it is necessarily an uncomfortable attack on accepted wisdom, because people tend to guard their beliefs jealously; they tend to be heavily invested in their beliefs. This is especially the case if their beliefs are tied to their religion or to their professions. Such attacks are outrageous when the accepted wisdom is so entrenched as to have the appearance of unshakable truth.
Okay, I'm just rambling here, but note that I do it without the help of examples. If I now invoke examples to help illustrate the points I have just made, then I've got an argument that at least pretends to be more or less generally true, and the examples would just be illustrations of the way in which the argument is true, rather than reasons in themselves for believing the general truth of the argument. That's the kind of things that you ought to aim for: 1) abstract reasons that allow you to construct a general argument; 2) concrete examples that serve an illustrative role, showing that the reasons are plausible.