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 Well-being Of A Society Is Enhanced When Many Of Its People Question Authority. - With A Free Essay Review
"The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority. 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."
Ordinary people can see what authorities cannot because leaders are often clouded in their own view about the definition of the well-being of their society. When people express their views to the authorities and after the problems are addressed, the well-being will enhance as the satisfaction of our society will increase. However, there are always some leaders who are not willing to solve problems for the masses; instead, some of them will even squash the petition of people by force, which will otherwise decrease the well-being of our world. In some cases, different perceptions of well-being can also cause unintended problems as there are no perfect one-fit-all solutions in the world.
Back to our history, some great moments came when the soul of people found utterance from long suppression. African-American, a race that has long been discriminated against in the US, found their justice with a series petitions and protests. The famous move for the rights of the black ensured the abolishment of slavery after people’s wish being heard and addressed. In the 1950s, African-American rights were further admitted by the movement led by Martin Luther King Jr., and since then those people can enjoy equal rights with the White. Thus, every time after people questioning their authorities and the authorities addressed the problem, the equality of our society was enhanced, and so does the well-being.
However, there are some issues that are more complicated than racism, such as same-sex marriage. In this case, while liberal people continuously claim this right should be addressed, there are always many people who regard the notion as a taboo and are against it. Therefore, if we simply address this right, the oppositions will be surely dissatisfied. As a result, it is hard for us to decide whether the well-being of our society as a whole has been enhanced because the notion of well-being itself is subjective.
The subjectivity of well-being can be seen most vividly in the Middle East. Afghanistan, a nation that was established with the help of the West, is suffering more than ever before its democracy. While the West's propaganda claims the success of eliminating the threat to their main lands and claims the well-being of our world has been improved, those people in that nation are facing death every day, since the Taliban and some other forces are endlessly trying to regain the region by force. Hundreds of thousands of people have died since the invasion of the West. Now, let us look at Syria. Although the people have expressed their minds to the authorities, the leaders never listened to them and even carried out attacks against their own civilians. Though it was temporarily turmoil before the dawn of democracy, the tragedies happened in Afghanistan and Libya literally make this thought much more implausible. As we can see, what we think is good for us is not necessarily perceived in the same way by other people, so it is hard to say whether the well-being of our society has been enhanced, even if we claim so.
In conclusion, to me, yes, the enhancement of well-being of our society can be gained from accepting the needs of its people, but, more importantly, there are always some people who share a different belief from us, so it is, to some extent, questionable for us to try to conjecture the perceptions of those people. We cannot tell how the North Korean, for example, feel about the status quo. Perhaps, they may not even need the rights to question their long-cherished leaders, whom they might believe is the well-being of their society itself, just as we worship the gods.**
**Hi, Ej: Since I am not a native English speaker, I also concern about my expression of English. Do I properly conduct my view? Do you feel some sentences or words sound wierd?
What you need to focus on here are the issues that are relevant to deciding what are the advantages or disadvantages of having many people question authority in a society. Your essay doesn't really do this, except when it claims, with the aid of the example of the history of African-American resistance in the United States, that sometimes questioning authority can have a positive outcome. You complicate that point a little with the example of the struggle for gay rights, but it's not clear to me exactly what the grounds of this complication are supposed to be. To be sure, there are those today who object to gay rights, but there were also many who objected to the emancipation of African-Americans. (It's not clear, in other words, why you think the well-being of society has certainly been enhanced as a consequence of African-American demands being met, but would not certainly be enhanced if the demands of gay Americans for equal rights were met).
Of course it is true that what constitutes the well-being of society is a subjective notion open to dispute, but what you need to do (in order to answer the given question) is clarify how that consideration shapes your position. There's not much point in invoking that subjectivity just to help you avoid tackling difficult questions, as seems to be the case in your discussion of your second example (gay rights). Moreover, you are entitled (when you're invited to establish your own position) to explain what you understand to be the well-being of society, and then to explain whether you think that is enhanced by people questioning authorities. You don't really do that in your discussion of problems in the Middle East. That discussion is vague and, with respect to the original prompt, tangential. What you need to do is identify and discuss circumstances in which you think questioning authority is good for society, and circumstances in which you think such questioning might not be good for the well being of society. Link that discussion of specific circumstances to general considerations of the impact of questioning authority in society. How does it impact the stability of society? Are there particular circumstances (e.g., times of war or states of emergency), when that might be a more important consideration than would normally be the case? How does questioning impact social progress? Are there particular circumstances in which it advances or retards such progress? How does questioning impact the ability of governments to get things done? Does the value of questioning depend on the motivations of those questioning authority? Does it depend on their political knowledge? And so on. You can't address all the possible questions in a short essay, obviously, but your essay as it stands addresses too few of them.
P.S. I typically don't discuss language issues here, but you are right to be concerned about those issues. For the test itself, I would recommend restricting yourself to relatively simple syntactical structures. Depending on how much time you have, you may find some benefit from undertaking a review of English grammar and mechanics at, for example,