Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Some questions regarding how to write an issue. [#permalink]
14 Jan 2011, 07:01
Generally, I follow the structure -:
1st para- showing both sides of the coin (if there are two sides) and telling exactly where i stand. 2nd para- first point+example. 3rd para-second point+example. 4th para-to refute the other side. 5th para-conclusion.
I face these questions while writing on an issue-:
1) sometimes.. the issue has no two sides. or i fail.. to see it. is it a good strategy than to rewrite the issue itself and then say in just one line where i stand. similar type of thing is done in the sample example shown in OG12th ed.(the example is rated as 6) i mean if there is no harm.. then it saves time not to think much of on the first para. one then just rephrases the issue and writes simply where one stands without even outlining any reason for it.
2) Many a times I fail to have two distinct and independent points. Like in the issue essay given below.. i was used a lot of time to think of something.. distinct from the first point. what to do when stuck in such a situation?? Is one penalised in some way for not coming up with a independent point?? Can one drone on bit more on the first point in the second para as well??
3) Writing the third para.Is it really necessary to write this one.. to get >4?? As done in the issue example appended below..I had no new point to refute the argument.I had no time as well. So i simply referred to the examples above to refute it.And then i wrote a simple statement.But OG in its explanation of score 4 and 6 for the examples given there.. stresses the need to drive in your point using a comparison or a contrast. Is it more important than having a second point?? (if it so then i will probably write this para first and then the third para.)
4) writing the conclusion part. what exactly is the objective here. sometimes in tough issues the points mentioned in the preceding paras are subtle. they just cant be mentioned in a few words. and on these tough issues.. one is not left with much time in the end. is having a short ending like this one.. not preferable. what if the same kind of words are used to describe the points mentioned above.does it demonstrates lack of vocabulary ??
I wrote a lot(here).. but i think all the above boils down to what should be given higher priority when running out of time-:
1.third para vs second point, 2.third para vs conclusion( can a short conclusion suffice) 3. can we have short contrast para(2-3 sentences),short conclusion(2 sentences) or one should skip one of these and save time to look for grammatical errors?
This is the issue which troubled me...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “Of all the manifestations* of power, restraint in the use of that power impresses people most.” *manifestations: apparent signs or indicators
Explain what you think this quotation means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with it. Develop your position with reasons and/or specific examples drawn from history, current events, or your own experience, observations, or reading.
Restraint in the use of power impresses people most.The statement, according to me, addresses the fineline that distinguishes between improper and decisive usage of power. I feel that it is not the power that impresses people but the fact the possessor of power knows the implications of power and responsibilites accompanied along with it. I am of the view that certainly its the restraint in the usage of the power that impresses people most.
The chief reason for my view is that reckless usage of power have always drawn crticism from all sides. For instance, US bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima in Japan is still quoted as one of the worst momemnts of world history.US has been publicly castigated for this bombing by intellectuals and common public in general. Had US restrained itself from using its hydrogen bombs it might have been acclaimed neutral countries as a peace loving nation.This clearly demeonstrates that the improper usage can create negative impact.
Secondly, restraint in the usage of power signifies that the possessor is worthy of possesing the power.For instance, mayor selected by Nebraska in 1978 was accused later of misusing its powers not for public good but for its benefits.Many a times power allocated to a possessor comes along with certain duties. When possesor fails to jusitfy the usage of its power, he or she fails to impress people.Similar kind of situation occured in the example presented above.Thus it becomes highly important for the powerful person to illustrate his/her competency in possesing the powers he or she posseses in order to leave an impact on the people by which those powers bestowed in the first place.
However, some argue that posession of power and its display is necessary to impress people.But as one can see from the examples mentioned above that reckless and imporper display lead to contrary results.To prove the possesion of powers is no justification for its improper usage.
To sum up, restraint in the usage of power goes a long way in leaving a positive impact on the people.Moreover, impertinent usage of power has always drawn criticism.Therefore, I stand with my view.