"The purpose of education should be to provide students with a value system, a standard, a set of ideas—not to prepare them for a specific job."

What is the true purpose of education? This issue can be a contentious one as many groups hold different views in regards to it. On one hand, there are those who believe that education exists to instill students with a value system, standards and a set of ideas. On the other hand, there are those who believe that education is more specialized in nature—that all the training and classes serve to prepare students for a specific job. I am in agreement with the former point of view as I believe that the purpose of education is to provide the basic knowledge of any disciplines and instill general values and ideas that would be beneficial to them as working professionals.

We spend a large part of our lives learning in formal educational institutions, moving from a lower level of education to a higher one. We learn the basics of mathematics, the use of language, and knowledge from various disciplines and as we move up to higher tier of the educational progress, the knowledge that we have gained from preceding levels serve as a foundation for understanding more complex ideas and theories. Though a student's scope of study eventually becomes more specialized as they move up into higher levels of education, it would be incorrect to claim that the educational process is meant for preparing them for a specific job. After all, we cannot assume that a student would know what sort of profession he or she would choose to pursue from a young age. The best thing education can provide is to instill the general ideas, skills and values that is beneficial for future use and help point students towards their area of general interest.

Education serves to hone a student's level of maturity as well as refine their method of thought and research. Through projects in school, students are taught to approach matters in a systematic and efficient manner. They are taught on the proper ways to present a project, the criteria on which a project should be given importance on, as well as foster other important values such a professionalism, teamwork, discipline, as well as time management. The process of education goes beyond the criteria of simply instilling knowledge and skills as students; it also essential for instilling the soft skills that are needed for a student to be successful as a person as well as a professional. For example, a student is able to hone his or her interpersonal skills from working in teams in school, or through interactions during extracurricular activities. Good interpersonal skills can be a very important tool to have as a working professional as it can make or break that great business merger for the company, or negotiate a favorable outcome during a job interview.

Though a student eventually branches out into a more specialized field, like choosing to major in accounting or electrical engineering, ultimately their real training comes from their jobs when they graduate, rather than from school. Why? For one thing, there is no such thing as a 'specific' job. Different organizations require different requirements from their employees. Therefore it is difficult, if not close to impossible to provide a single standardized educational form that can meet the criteria of all the organizations out there. There are many factors besides technical skills to be considered when a new person is hired in a company. Though knowledge and technical skills of the required area of discipline is required, there are many other factors that companies use to evaluate potential hires. Among them being the personality fit of the person into the overall company culture, the person's sense of professionalism to name a few. The educational process provides the minimum requirement that is needed for a student to perform the job, but ultimately it is the hiring organization that provides the specialized training that makes the individual an essential unit of the organization. For example, many companies like Toyota, or Goodrich, who hire fresh graduates from college usually require their new trainees to undergo a tailored rotational program that span a number of years to learn the company's system and values from the bottoms up.

For all the reasons I have presented above, I would like to reiterate my agreement that the purpose of education should be to provide students with a value system, a standard, a set of ideas, instead of just preparing them for a specific job. The purpose of education is to instill within students the basic knowledge, ideas and values that would be beneficial for the student overall, whether it is for personal or professional use. Education also serve to refine the maturity level of the student as well as instill other soft skills. Though education provides the minimum requirement and knowledge that is needed by a student to get a job, ultimately it is the hiring organization that provides the tailored and specialized training that is needed, as it is impossible for the educational process to provide a standardized training that meets the requirements of all hiring organizations.

“The most elusive knowledge is self-knowledge, and it is usually acquired through solitude, rather than through interaction with others.”

It is arguable if self-knowledge is usually gained through solitude, or if it is gained through interaction with others. On one hand, solitude can take away the distractions that is concomitant with social interactions, providing a purer environment for personal reflection and thoughts. On the other hand, interaction with others provide the “mirror reflection” that we use to see and form our self image. However, I believe that self-knowledge is better acquired through interactions with others rather than through solitude.

First, let us take a look at what is self-knowledge. Self knowledge can be defined as a personal understanding of one's individual strengths, weaknesses, likes, dislikes, and generally any other factors that constitutes a person's individual personality. Due to everybody's individual differences, the concept of self knowledge can be very vague and abstract. Therefore to say that self knowledge is the most elusive knowledge is not entirely incorrect.

Humans are inherently social creatures. We have always lived in communities, even from the days when primitive men lived in caves. Interaction with others are an essential part of our lives and through these interactions, we create and build our self image. Charles Horton Cooley had appropriately coined this phenomenon the “looking glass” theory. In essence, we perceive ourselves the way other people sees us. So how does one acquire self knowledge? How do we define ourselves? We may define ourselves with a certain race based on skin color, or by religion, or a certain social class due to our economic status or the types of jobs we hold. Ultimately, all these definitions are formed by interactions with our peers. Without any social experience, we are like empty buckets devoid of true stimulus to provide sufficient insights on makes us the way we truly are. Without interactions with others, we have no way to benchmark our goals, aspirations, or even likes or dislikes. For example, would we have realized about our competitive spirit if we did not have another person to compare it with? Of course, on the flip side, would we have also realize that we do not care for competition had we not experienced it before? Therefore social interactions is an important factor in the search for self knowledge.

It is incorrect to absolutely claim that self knowledge is only gained from social interactions. We do need the external experience that comes from interactions from others to collect materials that make part of our personality. We also need the downtime and solitude to absorb and understand all the information that we have collected. However, self knowledge that is acquired through solitude might not provide a accurate depiction as it is colored by our own personal ego and feelings. By looking at things through our internal lens, we only perceive matters from a one sided point of view. Interactions with others can help temper the internal bias as well as provide refreshing perspectives. For example, a person might think that he or she is really talented at writing music. That might or might not necessarily be true. Constructive criticism can not only help improve the person's music, but also teach him new ways or ideas of to improve his or her future works.

For all the reasons I have presented above, I would like to reiterate my views that self knowledge is better acquired through interactions with others rather than solitude.

"Instead of encouraging conformity, society should show greater appreciation of individual differences."

The issue of whether a society should emphasize more on conformity or individuality can be a controversial one. One one hand, conformity in a society can provide a regulating framework that citizens of a society can follow by. On the other hand, when a society shows a greater appreciation for individualism, it promotes healthy debate and an interaction of ideas from diverse people or groups.

There is no denying that a society is a dynamic, ever evolving entity. We need some form of regulating framework to manage the different dynamics to prevent things from becoming unruly and chaotic. This is where conformity in a society plays an important role. Conformity can cover many aspects of a society. We see conformity in all sorts of form; from the uniforms students wear at school, adherence to professional behavior at work to a mass political ideologies embraced by the people. Conformity can perhaps be best defined as the behavior of following the trends, ideas, characteristics of the majority of the of a social group. Conformity at its best can foster harmony, teamwork and increase the productivity overall. This can be seen in the Japanese society, where its people work fast, efficiently and by established rules. Conformity also has the ability to provide identity and show pride of a social group. For example, the observance of wearing the 'cheongsam', the traditional Chinese dress.

Though conformity has its benefits, there are times where the 'herd mentality' stagnates creativity, which is what that is essential in driving progress in a society. Individual characters are what makes a society as a whole. If everyone were to think and act the same, there would be no variety, no color, no defining characteristics of what makes each individual unique. Pressure on conformity can take its toll on the individual expressions of the people. Take for example the expressions in artistic endeavors. If the majority of the people keep on trying to put constraints on the types of arts that are deem acceptable or viewable by public, no one would push the boundaries of artistic expressions, they would be no avant garde works, there would be no progress to be seen.

The acceptance of individual ideas can provide perspectives from different angles and breed original ideas. This can be seen in the business arena. Sometimes the most successful of business products comes from ideas generated by someone that was never thought of by others before. In this sense, individual personalities and ideas have the ability to generate new ideas and perspectives which helps to drive new discoveries and progress in a society. Also consider the positive effects individual personalities can have on a dysfunctional system. Though most societies strive to provide a functional system or framework, there are some systems or ideologies that are detrimental to its citizens in the long run. Take for example societies where the government infringes on the basic rights of its people. If people were to accept the regime blindly, old archaic systems would not be challenged, no changes would be made, and an unhealthy status quo would be perpetuated. A fresh new idea or movement can be what that pushes for positive changes in the society. Conformity can also be dangerous. A fine example would be members of a cult following the biased and unhealthy views of their leader.

For all the reasons I have presented above, I would like to reiterate my agreement that society should encourage a greater appreciation for individual personalities. Though conformity has its benefits, there is no denying that there should be a greater emphasis on individual differences. Individual differences can provide different perspectives and breed original new ideas. Also, we must consider that conformity at times can be dangerous as it can perpetuate traditional ideas that are unhealthy for the people of society.

“As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts

“As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money.”

The issue of whether public resources should be allocated to support the arts when the people of the society remain in poverty can be a controversial one. On one hand, some say that public resources should first and foremost go to the welfare of the poor. On the other hand, there are those who agree with the idea of using public funds to support the arts, even if the people of the society are hungry or out of work. I disagree with the latter and agree that public resources should first and foremost go into promoting the welfare of the society, of which the reasons I shall analyze below.

There is no denying that the arts provides many benefits to a society. The arts—whether it is music, paintings, or literary works-- plays many roles in enriching a society. It transfers culture and ideas, and reflects the expression of the people of the society at the current time. It can also promote solidarity and provide defining characteristics to communities, such as the hip hop culture of the African Americans. The arts, though an important component of a society, is not necessarily essential to the wellbeing of a society.

If a society is filled with people who are hungry, or unable to find jobs to feed their families, what is the purpose of allocating public resources to support the arts? Drawing from the ideas of Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, human beings would first and foremost seek to satisfy their basic physiological needs before satisfying their psychological needs. If a man was starving from hunger, which would he appreciate more: a loaf or bread of a glimpse of the painting of the Mona Lisa? The answer is obvious. Appreciation and growth of the arts come from an environment where people have sufficient resources and therefore have more financial and intellectual space for artistic pursuits. Take for example the emergence of the Renaissance period. The European society has just surfaced from the Dark ages, a period where there was no economic growth, and people were merely at wars fighting for resources. The Renaissance came about when feudalism was replaced with a form of free enterprise, which promoted a better economic environment. It is clear. Without fulfilling basic needs and wants, there will be no room for growth in the arts as for people are just fighting for basic survival.

Also,consider this other important fact: the citizens of a nation is what that makes up a society. If the people are well provided for, it promotes a stable environment, and increases productivity which in turns potentially increase income for the overall society. Therefore the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate if the poverty or unemployment level of a society is high. To promote a stable and healthy society, public resources should first and foremost go into public welfare. The money should go into providing education for the society, which provides valuable skill sets for citizens to look for a jobs. Or it could go into promoting local industries, which generates more income for the country and more jobs for the people. A society should be built from bottoms-up; to provide for the people before chasing artistic pursuits. Also, if the arts was given higher emphasis before the well-being of the citizens, it creates resentment within the citizens which can potentially compromise the stability of a society.

For all the reasons I have enumerated above, I would like to reiterate my agreement with the topic statement. As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate when the money can go to so many other uses. The basic needs of the people should be provided first before there is room for chasing and promoting artistic pursuits.

(45 minutes) :D:D:D:D

Argument Analysis 12

The following is from an editorial in the Midvale Observer, a local newspaper.

"Ever since the 1950's when television sets began to appear in the average home, the rate of crimes committed by teenagers in the country of Alta has steadily increased. This increase in teenage crime parallels the increase in violence shown on television. According to several national studies, even very young children who watch a great number of television shows featuring violent scenes display more violent behavior within their home environment than do children who do not watch violent shows. Furthermore, in a survey conducted by the Observer, over 90 percent of the respondents were parents who indicated that prime-time television — programs that are shown between 7 p.m. and 9 p.m. — should show less violence. Therefore, in order to lower the rate of teenage crime in Alta, television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time."

My response:

The argument states that television viewers should demand that television programmers reduce the amount of violence shown during prime time to lower the rate of teenage crime in the country of Alta. The argument presented by the author is flawed and unconvincing as it fails to address many important assumptions.

First, the argument assumes that the rate of crimes conducted by teenagers in the country of Alta is directly related to the increase of violence shown on television. Without more specific information, we cannot come to a definite conclusion. The increased rate of crimes committed by teenagers could be caused by any other number of reasons. Teens could be driven to violent crimes due a higher divorce rate in the country, which could affect the psychology of teenage children, or it could be due to increased level of poverty which drives teens to conduct violent crimes. The author should address or acknowledge these other possibilities which could be the cause of the increased teen crime rate instead of omitting it from the argument prompt.

The argument uses several references of studies conducted nationally to bolster their claims. The author failed to mention the authenticity of these studies, or the manner they were conducted. Take for example the national studies mentioned. There are several factors that should be considered while evaluating the qualities of these studies. There was no mention of the geographic regions of where the study was conducted, nor was there any mention of the sample size of the data collected. If the studies were conducted in a concentrated region, it cannot be a sufficient representation of the overall issue. Also, if the sample size of data that was collected was too small, the results of the study can be potentially skewed and biased. Without strong numerical and statistical evidence, the argument is rendered weak and unconvincing.

Turning to the survey conducted by the Observer, one should question the neutrality of the survey. Since it was the Observer that conducted the survey itself, the results could be potentially biased to reflect the views of the local newspaper itself. Not only that, the argument is further weakened by the subjective reasons for supporting less violence on prime time television. Just because 90 percent of the respondents of the survey were parents who supported this argument is not a solid enough evidence for reducing less violence shown on prime time television. Also, for all the reasons I listed above that rendered the national studies as weak evidence, we should also consider the validity of the survey conducted by the Observer. How was the survey conducted? Was it just conducted in one neighborhood? Was the sample size of the survey respondents sufficiently large enough? What was the demography of the respondents ie were they mostly parents or other non-parents? Those are several of the questions that come to mind while looking at the Observer survey. Had the author included these information, it would have strengthened his or her claims.

For all the reasons I have enumerated above, I believe the argument is not logically sound. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the argument irrefutable.

"What most human beings really want to attain is not knowledge, but certainty. Gaining real knowledge requires taking risks and keeping the mind open—

"What most human beings really want to attain is not knowledge, but certainty. Gaining real knowledge requires taking risks and keeping the mind open—but most people prefer to be reassured rather than to learn the complex and often unsettling truth about anything."

There are many ways of looking at the issue topic at hand. There are those who believe that what human beings really seek for is certainty, not knowledge and vice versa. However, this assumes that knowledge and certainty fall into two very distinct separate realms. Overall, I tend to disagree with the absolute statement that was presented in the issue topic. However, there are some sentiments expressed in the topic that has a ring of truth to it. I shall present my views below.

There are several factors to be considered while analyzing the topic statement. Firstly, why would one assume that the quest for knowledge and the quest for certainty are two separate matters? Knowledge can provide certainty, for it provides us solid explanations of many things around us. What really drives the human quest for understanding things around them is eliminate the fear of the unknown, and therefore to provide certainty. For example we now know that natural phenomena like lightning is a buildup and discharge of energy between two positive and negative charged areas of a storm, instead of fearing it as some retribution from the gods the way our ancestors might have believed.

Also, if we say that the sole purpose of the human drive for understanding is just to seek certainty, humans would never have made the progress they have made in various scientific and academic fields. That would have meant that humans would have been complacent once they found the knowledge or certainty they have needed and never would have bothered to push beyond the boundaries of discovery. People would have still believed that the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. Of course, we know that this is not the case. We simply cannot disregard the natural human curiosity and thirst for knowledge. We are constantly testing and retesting the validities of old theories and ideas and seeking newer and deeper understanding of things around us.

There is no denying that as humans, we find solace in the certainty of things. This psychological trend have lasted from primitive times where our ancestors sought to understand natural phenomenon like lightning or rain around them. Due to their rudimentary understanding of natural science, they attributed animistic and religious qualities to explain the unknown to them. Of course, we have made vast progress since then and our methodologies of seeking explanations for things around us has become much more sophisticated. We now have the laws of physics to explain matters like gravitational pull and energy transfers, and chemistry to predict the outcome of combining two reagents and many other scientific areas to bolster our framework of understanding.

Though humans are constantly seeking newer discoveries and testing the validity of old ideas in theories of many scientific and academic fields, sometimes new truths can shock and incite fearful emotions in some people. It can be true that people would rather be reassured than to learn the complex and unsettling truth about anything. Gaining real knowledge does require taking risks and keeping an open mind. However, eventually these new knowledge gained assimilates into our library of 'known' knowledge and becomes part of our framework of understanding and certainty. For example, when Joseph Darwin introduced his theories of revolution, it shocked the world and those who believed otherwise about the origins of man. It was even called blasphemous. Today, it is used as the fundamental idea of many scientific experiments.

For all the reasons I have enumerated above, I would like to reiterate my views that knowledge and certainty does not necessarily have to be separate. Knowledge can be synonymous to certainty for it provides the framework of understanding to how we perceive our world. Though real knowledge can at times take away the reassurance of certainty away from people, real knowledge that is gained eventually becomes part of our understanding and in turn reassures people.

"The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Diffe

"The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Different interpretations come about when people with different personalities look at exactly the same objects, facts, data, or events and see different things."

Many have wondered about the way how students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields. On one hand, there are those who argue that personality plays a stronger role. On the other hand, there are those that argue that their perceptions come stem from their training. I believe that both personality and training play equal roles in how they approach their area of academic study. The topic statement also proposes that different interpretations of data, facts and events come about when different personalities look at it. I tend to disagree with this statement as there are instances where theories and formulas of an academic study put a limit on this.

First, let us take a look at how training influences the way students and scholar view their studies in their academic field. What is the main role of training and education in a scholar's life? To instill the necessary knowledge and skills needed in their academic fields. After all, a mathematician cannot solve complex equations without the knowledge of mathematical formulas. Nor can a psychologist analyze personality disorders without a basic understanding of the theories of the human psyche. A scholar or a student's ability to understand and perform in their academic areas is dependent on their training and education. Their training often span many numbers of years, and during these years formal methods and methodologies are drilled into their minds. Their training inculcates them with the mechanics and knowledge that are used to interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields. Their ideas and views, refined by their education, would definitely be different from a layman's view and in this sense their training influences how they interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields.

Though training does exert a reasonable amount of influence in the way students and scholars perceive their material of study, we should not entirely disregard the influence of individual personalities. After all, students and scholars are not mindless products of their training and education. Their training provides the knowledge and refines their methodologies at handling their material of study but their personalities are the individual lens that color the way they interpret things around them. Each person is unique and have different interests and drives. If everyone was homogeneous, there would be no progress made in any academic field for everyone would generate the same ideas and perceive things in the exact same way. Creativity and different personalities are what drives progress. Think about the colorful personalities of the most famous people of our time. Would anybody else have thought of tying a key to a kite and flying it during a thunderstorm like Benjamin Franklin? Or would any other person have proposed the psychosexual theories by Sigmund Freud?

So it is clear that both personality and training play important roles. Different data interpretations can come about when people of different personalities look at the same objects, facts or events but this is not necessarily true. There are certain restraints that would prevent different data interpretations. Take for example, a math equation. The field of mathematics is more rigid, the product of different formulas and laws that have been tested and proven by forefathers of our past. If a mathematician hits an deadlock in his quest to solving a complex formula, he cannot rewrite or perceive it based on his personal will because the solution is already constrained by all the theories and formulas that he learned. However, in a more subjective field like psychology, different psychologists can take on different psychological knowledge and analytical tools to use on the same patient and come out with different theories.

For all the reasons I have presented above, I like to support my position that both personality and training play equal roles in the way how students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their area of academic study. However, I disagree with the statement that different data interpretations come about when different personalities look at the same material as this is not necessarily true.

Argument Analysis 11

The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.

"In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham."

My response:

The argument states that Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down to make way for a more energy-efficient building in order to save the town considerable amount of money. The reasons listed by the author are not logically convincing as the argument failed to address a number of important assumptions.

First, the argument assumes that tearing down the old town hall would save the town a considerable amount of money. This assumption might prove fallacious as the cost of tearing down the hall and building a newer building might end up costing more than keeping the town hall in the long run. Without reasonable statistics and breakdown of the costs, we cannot assume that tearing down the town hall will guarantee a saving in costs. Other assumptions that was undertaken by the argument included the statement that the town hall had inadequate capacity to accommodate the number of people employed in town. This argument is flawed as there was no mention of the fact that these employed people worked at the town hall itself. The sentence is misleading as these employed people could be working at other buildings or facilities, therefore not a strong indication of the inadequacy of space of the old town hall.

Also, the argument never considered alternative solutions to saving the town money. The argument states that it was costly to maintain utility bills of the old town hall and that the newer larger building would be more energy efficient. This is a contradicting statement as logically it should take less energy to heat up and cool down a smaller building. The newer, larger building might be more energy efficient, but it could be due to newer and more sophisticated heating and cooling appliances. The energy problem of the old town hall could be easily resolved by installing newer equipment, therefore possibly reducing the high utility costs.

Lastly, the argument supports the construction of a newer and larger building by saying that it would be possibly to generate more income by renting out space. Though this is inherently logical, it is not sufficient to justify the tearing down of the old town hall as the old town hall can also be rented out to generate income as well. There are other uses for the town hall to generate income including converting the building into a museum, or using it as a historical landmark to attract tourists to the town.

Thus, because of the reasons I have enumerated, the argument that the Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced with a newer, and more energy efficient building is illogical and unconvincing. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the argument irrefutable.

"Education should be equally devoted to enriching the personal lives of students and to training students to be productive workers."

There are those who believe that education should be purely focused on the professional skills and knowledge that would serve to train students into productive workers. However, there are others that believe that such a view is outdated and that education should also be devoted to enriching the personal lives of students. I am in agreement with the topic statement that education should be equally devoted to both aspects of enriching the personal lives of students and to train them to be productive workers.

There is no denying that in order for a person to be able to do his or her job, he or she would need the sufficient knowledge and skill sets that is required of the job. A surgeon cannot perform surgery if he or she does not have a medical background. An architect cannot draft blueprints for a building if he or she does not have an understanding of the mechanics of architecture. This is where education comes in. Education instills the knowledge that is needed of a student to perform for his or her future job. In today's progressive societies, requirements for professional skill sets in the workplace are becoming increasingly demanding. Employers are demanding for higher qualifications and often times more specialized skills, and the education industry have reflected this trend. A high school diploma used to be adequate back in the days. Now it is commonplace for many to have a university degrees, or perhaps even two degrees. The bar is constantly rising and students are clambering to meet the challenge. There is no wonder that there is a strong emphasis on education to devote itself to training students to be productive workers, both for the benefit of the future career of the student himself as well as the organization that he or she would be working for one day.

However, education should equally devote itself to enhancing the personal lives of students. Education is an essential process in our lives. We spend a big part of our lives in various educational institutions-- from elementary school all the way to college, or perhaps graduate school. Though learning necessary skills and knowledge for future uses are important, there is more to our educational career than just absorbing facts and technical skills. What about the other experiences that the technical educational process cannot offer? By building on the other aspects of the educational process that enhances the personal lives of the students, we inculcate students with other soft skills that no text or classroom training can ever develop. The art of building relationships for instance. This is an invaluable skill for anyone to have, whether it is in their personal lives or in their careers. A business graduate with great interpersonal skills have that ability to crack that great business merger, or negotiate a favorable outcome with business partners. Also, there is another reason why education should equally devote itself to enriching students' personal lives. Many employers today are emphasizing on individual personality fit of employees for their companies. It is clear that there is more to being a productive worker than being a bank of knowledge and skills. Therefore education should go beyond the process of simply instilling students with knowledge; there should be a focus on fostering the individual personalities of the students as well.

For all the reasons mention above, I like to reiterate my agreement that education should be equally devoted to enhancing the personal lives of students as well as provide training to make them into productive workers. Education is important for instilling the necessary knowledge and skills that the students need in order to perform a job. However, education should also enhance students' personal lives as it can foster invaluable soft skills that will be beneficial to the student as a person as well as a professional.

"It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is

"It is possible to pass laws that control or place limits on people's behavior, but legislation cannot reform human nature. Laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds."

The issue of whether legislation or human feelings and thought have stronger roles in influencing human nature can be a contentious one. One on hand, laws are the ubiquitous external factor that regulates people's behavior. On the other hand, the individual human feelings and thoughts are the internal factor that drives individual impulses and behavior. I am in agreement with the fact that laws have the ability to control or place limits on people's behavior, but it does not have the ability to change what is in people's minds and hearts.

There is a reason why laws were created; to prevent aberrant behaviors that are detrimental to society. Laws are prevalent in our daily lives; from economic laws, to criminal laws, commercial laws, it is everywhere. There is no denying that laws and legislations control many areas of our lives. However, laws, with its ability to control to place limits on people's behavior does not guarantee its ability to control the individual thought and feelings. To imply that law has the ability to control what is in people's heart and minds is to imply that everyone is uniform in personality and thought. Of course, we know that is not the case. If a law was unfair, surely there would be dissent and disagreement from the people of society. For example, Myanmar is a country that has been ruled over by a strict military regime for the past decade or so. Though the government imposes many laws and regulations that control numerous aspects of the lives of its citizens, it is unable to silence the voice dissent and unhappiness of its people who are calling for a pro-democracy government.

As humans we are driven by a lot of base impulses and emotions—selfishness, greed, to name a few. Laws can control many of those innate impulses, but there are instances where base desires override the constraints of societal legislation. Sometimes those impulses can be biological-- simply an instinct to fight for survival like a beggar so overcome by hunger that he steals bread from bakery store. These impulses can also be on a higher, more calculated level. Take for example the act of corruption in a society. In Malaysia, many anti-corruption laws in an effort to resolve the problem, but it still remains a big issue in the country. Though many are subtle about it, government officials like police officers still find loopholes and solicit bribes from the citizens of the society. Also, consider those with psychological or emotional disorders. If a person is a kleptomaniac, he or she would continue stealing even if they know it is against the law, because it is due to their compulsive nature.

For all these reasons ,I therefore believe that laws cannot change what is in people's hearts and minds. People are not uniform creatures, and laws that are created cannot satisfy everybody. Also, we are driven by basic human impulses and emotions, and actions manifest in reaction to these impulses despite the constraints of laws and legislations.

"As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and more mysterious."

There are those who argue that with increasing knowledge that we attained over the years, things are made less comprehensible and more complex and mysterious. There is some truth to that statement, however the sentiments expressed by the topic statement is not necessarily correct. As we acquire more knowledge, there are many things that do become more comprehensible to us, but also at the same time it creates more complexities and mystery due to information overload and how it reveals the amount of other knowledge waiting to be discovered.

Knowledge that we have gained over the course of human history have provided illumination of many matters that was once strange and mysterious to our ancestors. During primitive ages, where science was at its most rudimentary form, our ancestors have sought to find explanation for many phenomenon like lightning, or where rain came from. Due to the lack of sophisticated instruments and knowledge, they often attributed natural phenomenon with religious and otherworldly qualities. As we build on the knowledge acquired by our ancestors, our methods for testing the physics of nature became more sophisticated, and explanations and theories became increasingly concrete, and thus many things become more comprehensible to us. Through this, more knowledge is readily made available to us as time passes and we continue to collect and build more and more upon knowledge that was previously gleaned.

However, with new comprehension comes new issues that clouds our understanding and make things more complex and mysterious. In today's day and age, and with the emergence of new technologies, information and knowledge has become so readily available to us. We are constantly bombarded by information from all direction; from the newspapers and other literary materials, from the television, the movies, when we turn on the radio, or even from the billboards when we go for a drive or take a walk. In fact, this excess of knowledge can impair a person's comprehension of things and ability to make informed decisions. The amount of information one needs to sift through compounded by new facts constantly being added is enough to confuse anybody. Hence the appropriate term 'information overload'. There are also other factors to be considered. Knowledge is there if one seeks it; however, the authenticity and the integrity are not always guaranteed. With the amount of information that is available out there, excess does not always mean more comprehension, and it can make matters more complex and confusing to the human understanding.

As we discover and acquire new knowledge, we also realize that we have only tapped the surface of the wealth of knowledge waiting to be discovered. After all, they say the process of learning is never ending; there are always more theories and ideas to explore. With increased knowledge, we also have a more refined sense of inquiry, a more methodical way of approaching an area of study. A greater understanding of the mechanics of a field of an area opens up a world of complexities that we have never considered before. For example, the field of astronomy. As our ancestors first started studying the stars, they only recognized stars and planets by their positions in the sky at different times of the day or year. As the study of the stars progressed through history, our knowledge of astronomy deepened, we realize that there is more to the simplistic ways of studying the stars. Different colors of the stars indicates the lifespan of the planetary bodies, and we discover the movement of meteors and so on, and the gaseous components on different planets. The more we understand, the more complex we realize these studies are and how there are more mysteries that are waiting to be unveiled.

In conclusion, knowledge that we acquire does not necessarily make things less comprehensible. Knowledge that we gain provides us with insight and understanding of many things around us. However, in this modern time and age that knowledge can create complexities and mystery due to the vast amount of knowledge that are out there. Also, the knowledge that we have acquired helps us understand the more complex nature of many studies out there.

"The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lies the value of each."

It is undeniable that both science and art have important roles to play in the place of human society. Art and science, have existed for thousands of years and will exist as long as there is human curiosity and inner impulses. From the early days where men first discovered fires and made primitive drawings on cave walls to the cyber age of today, both the artistic and scientific spheres has evoked a myriad of emotional responses from the discoveries they have made along the way. The topic statement proposes that the function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset and therein lies the value of each. It is true that science can provide reassurance and art can upset. However to place absolute values on either one is erroneous.

The purpose of science was to discover the mechanics and workings of the world around us. Man have long been curious about the environment around us, and sought to understand phenomenon like lightning or the movement of the stars. Science provides a quantifiable quality to many things in our lives. Many of the theories or formulas that we learn today are the product of the discoveries of our forefathers, and in that sense the function of science seeks to reassure us and provide us with a framework of understanding. Art, on the other hand, has a subjective quality to it and is the manifestation of the individual's emotion and impulses. Since individual emotions and impulses are not congruous, a difference in one's viewpoints and perspectives can create a dissonance which upsets the next individual. Each person expresses themselves differently and in art, sometimes one person's art can shock or offend another.

However, it is impossible to attribute absolute values to the functions of art or science, like saying the function of science is to reassure and the purpose of art is to upset. Science have provided reassurance, but there have also been many instances in history where science have upset others,especially during the emergence of new theories and ideas. For example, when Joseph Darwin produced his theories on human evolution, it elicited shock from the people and was even considered blasphemous. Even today, there are different schools of thought regarding his theories. Art can also upset as well as reassure. Religious art, as an example, have provided reassurance to people and their beliefs. Stained glass windows in churches were used to evoke feelings of awe and reverence. Music have been used to promote religious solidarity.

In conclusion, though there are some truths in the topic statement, it is illogical to place absolute values on the functions and purpose of art and science.

Argument Analysis 10

For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.

My response:

The argument concludes that consumers in California would be willing to pay the same price for Gulf Coast oysters as they do for Atlantic Coast oysters if consumers were made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters. The author states a history of consumers in California paying twice the price for Atlantic Coast oysters as for Gulf Coast oysters for the last five years, and that this trend was a result of harmful bacteria found in few raw Gulf Coast oysters. The author supports his argument by claiming that scientists have devised a process that would kill the bacteria. However, the argument presented by the author is weak and flawed as the evidences given were fragmentary.

First, the author clearly assumed that the trend in differences of prices between the two coast oysters were the result of the harmful bacteria found in the Gulf Coast oysters. However, the author did not produce enough compelling evidences to come to this conclusion. The trend in the differences of prices could be due to a number of other reasons including the consumer's taste preferences, or it could be due to binding contracts between Atlantic Coast oyster companies and Californian oyster importers and so on.

Even if the trend in prices was due to the discovery of harmful bacteria found in the Gulf Coast oysters, it cannot be assumed that consumer's perceptions would be changed if they were aware of existence of the bacteria killing process devised by scientists. The author failed to include testimonials from consumers indicating their views and opinions on said issue. The author should take into consideration of the fact that the reputation of the Gulf Coast oysters might already be too damaged to be repaired. Also, the argument did not propose other methods or solutions that can be used as an alternative, implying that this was the only solution to the whole issue.

Lastly, the author failed to mention more important details of the bacteria killing process devised by scientists, potentially misleading readers. The author did not mention if the process was successful, nor did he mention what stages the process was currently in( if it was under testing stages or if it was being used currently). Therefore we are unable to come to the conclusion on the overall issue based on this evidence.

In sum, the argument presented by the author is insufficiently cogent. The evidences presented by author is clearly based on a number of assumptions that are weak and flawed. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the argument irrefutable.

"Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field."

"Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field." Though there are some veritable sentiments raised by this statement, I find myself disagreeing with the absolute quality of the statement. There are both benefits that can be derived from critical judgment from experts of a given field as well as criticisms from sources external to the field.

Experts in a field have the advantage of a greater understanding of their area of expertise due to their education and experience. Through the benefit of their specialized training, they have an understanding of the mechanics and workings behind their given field that the average layman does not have. This is especially true in the technical fields. An engineer building a dam would have a better understanding of the types of materials that would be suitable for specific environments. A doctor would be able to provide a better diagnosis than the untrained person. Therefore there is no denying that critical judgment from an expert in a given field does hold a lot of weight.

However, critical judgment from others who are not experts in the given field should not be discredited entirely. Though not necessarily from an expert, criticisms from sources external to the field can provide insightful views. After all, progress is best made in an environment that generates critical judgment, as it opens the floor for debate and provides perspectives from different viewpoints. Experts, though having greater understanding in their field of expertise, could potentially be limited by established facts and learning from their education or research. For example, it has been often said that politicians are often stuck in their “ivory towers” for they are not experiencing what the common man is going through. Though they are supposedly experts in managing political situations, it would be helpful to gain insight from citizens and how political policies affect their lives.

Also, judgment from external critics can help level out the subjectivity of any study in a given field. After all, we are only humans,and many of our motives are driven by selfish reasons. Experts who work in a given field are also driven by their own biased views and opinions. They could be driven by any number of motivations; for fame, for financial gains, to incite reactions from others and so on. For example, an artist's work, though an expression from the individual artist itself, could benefit from criticism and opinions from non-artist sources. Opinions from from outside sources could provide insights that has never been thought of by the artist himself, as well as provide constructive criticisms on how to improve his future works.

In conclusion, there are both benefits to be derived from critical judgment from both experts and non-experts of any given field. Experts, with their experience and training are able to provide solid critical judgment based on their understanding of the mechanics of the given field. However, critical judgment from external sources also provide perspectives from different views as well as neutralize the biased views that is sometimes generated by experts themselves.

Argument Analysis 9

The nation of Claria covers a vast physical area. But despite wide geographic differences, many citizens are experiencing rising costs of electricity. A recent study of household electric costs in Claria found that families who cooled their houses with fans alone spent more on electricity than did families using air conditioners alone for cooling. However, those households that reported using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electricity than those households that used either fans or air conditioners alone. Thus, the citizens of Claria should follow the study's recommendation and use both air conditioners and fans in order to save money on electricity.

My response:

The author concludes that the citizens of Claria should use both air conditioners and fans to save money on electricity. The author bases his conclusions on a number of assumptions including the differences in electricity costs between households that use fans alone, households that use air conditioners and households that use both fans and air conditioners. However, the argument presented by the author is full of flaws and loopholes which renders the argument weak and unconvincing.

First, the author attempted to establish a correlation between geographic differences and rising costs of electricity. The relationship between the two factors seem spurious as there does not seem to be a logical link between the two factors. Even if there was a logical explanation for the relationship between the two factors, the author failed to explain in detail, which would have provide more credibility to the author's claims.

There are also several weaknesses in the study presented by the author. The author failed to mention where the study was conducted. The author did not mention if studies was all conducted in same area, or in separate areas. If studies was conducted in separate, areas, there might be other reasons why costs of electricity was higher despite different usage of cooling appliances as costs of electricity might be different in certain areas. There could be a number of reasons why prices are different; tariffs, different providers with different prices and so on.

Also, that author omitted the information on how the total electricity costs was spent by the households. Without including that information, the reader cannot conclude that it would be cheaper to use both fan and air conditioners to lower electricity costs. For example,even though the costs for electricity was higher in households that only used fans for cooling, the high costs could be due to other electrical activities. The author should present a total breakdown of how electricity costs was spent in the different households.

In sum, the argument is a result of a number of weak and flawed assumptions. Had the author taken the above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the author's stance irrefutable.

"One often hears about the need for individuals to take responsibility for their own lives. However, the conditions in which people find themselves ha

"One often hears about the need for individuals to take responsibility for their own lives. However, the conditions in which people find themselves have been largely established long before people become aware of them. Thus, the concept of personal responsibility is much more complicated and unrealistic than is often assumed."

Often do we hear statements pertaining to personal responsibility like “Take charge of your life!” or “You make your own destiny.” This is especially relevant in today's time and age where we are given increasing amounts of freedom to make choices and goals in many areas of our lives. However, as easy as it is to produce and verbalize empowering statements, how easy is it to really to take responsibility of your own life? According to the issue topic statement, there are conditions where people are born into or are established largely before they became aware of them, therefore making personal responsibility a harder concept to actualize.

As we take more progressive steps towards a modern and democratic society, we are given more freedom and opportunities to take more responsibility of many aspects of our lives. The “American Dream” is the ideal embodiment of this concept. The premise of the American Dream is: In the “land of opportunities”, anyone, no matter what their background, can work their way up with hard work and perseverance. However, how true is this concept? Is the American Dream truly attainable by the merit of hard work alone? The American Dream does not take into consideration pre-established circumstances that can impede the realization of that dream. People come from different starting points and backgrounds, and there are some that come from backgrounds that provide less opportunities than others. The circumstances which surround such people can affect control over personal responsibility. A boy born into a poor neighborhood might aspire to go to college. However, he might not have the financial means to do so, and even with hard work he might not be able to attain a scholarship that he always wanted. Therefore, the concept of personal responsibility is much more complicated and unrealistic than is often assumed.

Looking through the threads of human history, there are also many evidences that indicate that the concept of personal responsibility was not the choice of the individual. Before the abolishment of the caste system in India, the citizens were put into social classes with no possibility of movement between the social ranks. The concept of personal responsibility was non existent. Status and social responsibility was something that a person was born into, not the personal choice of the individual nor were they allowed to rise above it. The same was for the black slaves before the black emancipation movement. Black slaves did not have any choice in making decisions for themselves as they were treated as the property of their masters. Both are examples of where where social circumstances played a larger role than individual control.

In conclusion, the concept of personal responsibility can be at times unrealistic and over idealized. There is no denying that pre-established circumstances can play a hand in it, therefore rendering the actualization of self responsibility more complicated than is assumed.

Argument Analysis 8

The following is a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"As a local merchant, I wish to support the development of a ski resort in the state park north of our township. Along with many other merchants who favor the proposal by Ski the Slopes, Incorporated, I would, of course, experience a growth in my business. But I also know how much more prosperous, not to mention lively and interesting, our community would be if tourism increased. Since the main opposition comes from a few environmentalists* who do not even live in this community, I see no reason to give in to their views. The First National Bank has finally researched the project and agreed to fund it. As a result, I see no reason to delay development of the resort."

Environmentalists are people who advocate the preservation of the natural environment.

My response:

The author of the letter begins the letter by stating his support of the development of a ski resort in the state park north of the township. He or she is in support of the development because of the growth in his business the development would bring as well as the diversity the community would benefit from the development. Also, he further states that the First National Bank has researched and agreed to fund the project. The letter is based on a number of biased and unfounded assumptions which renders the argument weak.

One of the fundamental weaknesses of the author's claim is the lack of substantive evidence to support his or her argument. The writer is in support of the development because he,along with other merchants of similar views, claims that the development would bring a growth in their businesses. The writer states this as one of the reasons for the supporting the development of the ski resort. The fallacy is that the writer assumed that the development of the ski resort would definitely encourage a growth in his business. The writer failed to produce any statistical or numerical evidence that would indicate the growth of his business should the development be allowed to happen. Also, he mentioned “other merchants” who supported the development but failed to include testimonials that would have strengthened his claim.

The writer also states “how much more prosperous, not to mention lively and interesting” the community would be after the development of the ski resort. The writer did not mention how he came about this statement, or provide any evidence that would guarantee said benefits. This statement is a result of internally biased assumptions.

Also, there was little mention of opposition towards the development of the ski resort, apart from the opposition of environmentalists that do not stay in the area. This is not sufficiently cogent enough to make me support the writer's views. Though the opinions are from environmentalists not from the area, their opinions should be given serious consideration as well for they are experts in their field. To entirely disregard their opinions is to weaken the overall argument of the letter. In presenting his argument, the writer only also failed to include the oppositional views of local residents.

Lastly, the writer mentions states that the endorsement of The First National Bank should also be a reason for supporting the development of the ski resort. However, the motives as for why The First National Bank chose to support the development should be taken under scrutiny, for the Bank might have some partisan interests in the development.

In sum, the argument presented by the writer is weak and full of loopholes. Had the writer taken the above factors into consideration, the argument would have been rendered irrefutable.

"Censorship is rarely, if ever justified."

Censorship can be seen as the process of regulating the types of information that is disseminated to the public. The process of censorship is usually imposed by a higher authoritative power, usually a governmental body. Historically, it has been used by many societies like China and Israel as a tool to manage the moral and political lives of their citizens. The topic statement claims that censorship is rarely, if ever justified. However, there are both benefits and drawbacks to the imposition of censorship of which I shall analyze below.

In today's time and age, we are exposed to a multitude of information that advances in technology has to offer. Whether it is gleaning information from the myriad of literature that are available, or from mediums such as the television or the World Wide Web, we are exposed all sorts of information, useful and dangerous alike. Without censorship acting as a filter, there is no discretion of what information is being exposed, or to who it is exposed to. Nations could be overwhelmed by an influx of information that erodes cultural values. Young impressionable minds could be exposed to violent and sexual content. Teenagers surfing the Internet could pick up a formula to make a homemade bomb. Without censorship acting as a regulating factor, incorrect information could be passed on, spreading libel and slander which can potentially compromise the stability of a society. For example, news regarding sensitive racial issues could start a riot or a state of social unrest.

Though censorship can act as a healthy regulator of sensitive or dangerous information, it could also produce harmful effects. There are several factors that should be considered in regards to the issue of censorship. First, how does one decide what types are information are deem suitable for public knowledge and viewing? The process of evaluating the quality and appropriateness of information can be a subjective one. There are some knowledge that are inherently unsuitable for public knowledge, but there are also many types of information that fall into the gray area. This is perhaps most apparent in the artistic industry. Art is a subjective matter, and is the unique product of the artist alone. The use of sex, nudity and violence are always controversial. However, at what point does censorship act as a healthy filter and start overstepping the bounds on personal creativity and freedom of expression? Creativity and the generation of fresh ideas is what drives progress in a society, and the suppression of such expressions could lead to a stagnation and perpetuate unhealthy herd mentality.

As mentioned above, there have been instances in history and current where censorship has been used as a tool to regulate the moral and political lives of people. Censorship, used appropriately, can help maintain stability and control in a society. However, there are those take take censorship to higher level. Take for example the use of excessive censorship in Myanmar. Ruled by a harsh military regime for years, the government have taken to silencing any voices of dissent by any means, which have culminated in the recent shootings and arresting of monks protesting for democratic rights. Censorship is used as an excessive tool that impinges on the basic rights of its citizens. The government forces a very singular view on its citizens, which creates an environment of fear and suffering. It is very apparent that excessive censorship is unhealthy and acts as an impediment to democracy.

In sum, the use of censorship is not necessarily unjustified at all times. Censorship, if used appropriately can act as a filter of dangerous and sensitive information. However, excessive censorship can also suppress creativity and freedom of expression as well as impinge on basic human rights.

“Progress is best made through discussion among people who have contrasting points of view.”

In today's modern societies, we see an increasing emphasis on the importance of diversity in ideas and thoughts. Many entities, whether it is corporate or government, have long realized the benefits that contrasting views can bring to the table. Many corporations are starting to include 'diversity' as part of their mission statement. Political powers are welcoming input and suggestions from different racial groups and cultures. Progress and discoveries have been made in scientific fields from luminaries who propose forward thinking ideas.

It is no wonder that many that many educational institutions are incorporating the concept of teamwork and open discussion in their curriculum. Discussions in groups of homogeneous views have the potential of producing a limited and myopic framework. Contrasting views opens the floor for debate and enable others to view an issue over a wider spectrum of ideas. As opposed to a group that are in constant agreement,contrasting views and opinions enhances the ability to evaluate the strength and weaknesses of a debated issue. In the business arena, many corporations are starting to realize the magnitude of this benefit and organize themselves in a way that best fosters the exchange of ideas and suggestions. After all, somewhere and somehow among the sea of discussion, the next great business idea can be conceived.

Similar systems of open discussion have been used since the days of the Roman forums, where enlightened men and philosophers gather in an open space to debate current social and political issues. We still see the implementation of this system in many of today's democratic societies. Many of the parliamentary systems of today's societies constitute of separate judicial and legislative branches, not only to even out the distribution of power, but also to assimilate the ideas and opinions that different groups have to offer. On the other hand, a nation run under a tyrannical rule which discourages diversity in ideas and thought tend to stagnate progress.We see this in countries like Myanmar.

In sum, I agree with the statement that progress is best made through discussion among people who have contrasting points of views. Firstly, it enables the exchange of differing ideas and thoughts as well as enhances the ability of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses . Secondly, without contrasting views, discussions tend to be myopic and limited.

Argument Analysis 7

The following is taken from an advertisement placed in a weekly business magazine by the DickensAcademy.

"We distributed a survey to senior management at International Mega-Publishing, Inc. The result of the survey clearly indicates that many employees were well prepared in business knowledge and computer skills, but lacked interpersonal skills to interact gracefully with customers. International Mega-Publishing decided to improve customer satisfaction by sending their newly hired employees to our one-day seminars. Since taking advantage of our program, International Mega-Publishing has seen a sharp increase in sales, an indication that the number of their disgruntled customers has declined significantly. Your company should hire Dickens and let us turn every employee into an ambassador for your company."

My response:

The advertisement concludes that the increase of International Mega-Publishing's sales is attributed to Dickens Academy program. The author of the advertisement supports his or her claim by referencing the results of a International Mega-Publishing Inc. survey indicating the lack of employee interpersonal skills in interacting with customers, as well as an increase of company sales after newly hired employees have undergone Dickens Academy seminar. However, the author bases his or claims on a number of assumptions, many of which are weak and fragmentary.

The author claims the results of the survey that was distributed to the senior management of International Mega-Publishing provides evidence that employees are strong in business and computer skills, but weak in interpersonal skills to gracefully interact with clients. There are a number of weaknesses in this evidence alone. First, the survey was only given to the senior management, which only tests a small group of the employees in the company. It is not a sufficient representation of the interpersonal skills of the employees of the company as a whole. Secondly, the survey only tested the senior management employees,whose primary duties might not be related to customer relations.

Turning to the second anecdotal evidence presented in the advertisement, the author attributed the increase of Mega-Publishing's sales to the efficacy of Dickens Academy's one-day seminar. The author makes supererogatory claims when the increase of sales could be caused by any other number of factors other than the efficacy of the seminar alone. It could be caused by changing market trends, or an error on Mega-Publishing's competitors and so on. Even if the increase of sales was attributed to the effectiveness of Dickens' seminars, we cannot assume that the seminar would be similarly effective for all levels of employees in the company. While the seminar produced positive results for newly hired employees, it might not hold the same effectiveness for upper management employees who have had more experience in the industry.

In sum, the argument presented is weak and full of loopholes. Had the author of the advertisement taken above factors into consideration, it would have rendered the argument irrefutable.

"Facts are stubborn things. They cannot be altered by our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions."

Facts should be objective, clear from personal bias and inclinations. Facts are matters of universal acceptability because it has been tested and validated, and is clear to the eye. The topic statement concludes that facts are stubborn things and cannot be altered by our wishes, inclinations and dictates of passion. I am in concordance with the sentiments expressed because facts are often the product of the observations of our forefathers that have been tested and validated. Also, there are facts that are simply axiomatic and to refute it is to argue with the logical framework we have been taught.

We spend most part of our lives learning facts—facts that we pick up from numerous sources; academic institutions, our parents, the media, our peers and many others. The facts we learn, especially facts that we attain from institutionalized entities, are usually product of our forefathers' observations which have mostly been tried, tested and then presented to us as foundation of how we perceive the world around us. From scientists and philosophers and other luminaries of the past, we learned about the theory of gravitational forces, that the world is round, that the Earth revolves around the sun, and many other theories that we know as fact today. In this sense, established facts and knowledge are not malleable according to our subjective inclinations and desires. By introducing our personal whims, we inject a biased and subjective aspect which could potentially compromise the objective universality of the established fact.

Facts can also be of an axiomatic nature. We attribute certain characteristics to things around us. For example, when we see a cat, we recognize it as a cat based on its feline features, its fur, the paws, its size, its movements and so on. If the animal is universally recognized as a cat, it would be illogical to argue that the animal is a dog, or a cow or any other sort of animal, though we might wish it otherwise. Let us look at another simple illustration. Take for example the situation where there are two employees that are working in a identical environment, with identical workloads. Despite the identical backgrounds, the performance level of one employee exceeds the other. Which employee should be rewarded accordingly?The answer is clear; to reward the employee with higher performance level. It would be unjust to reward the lower performing employee when facts stand clear, especially if personal motivations were involved.

In sum, I would like to reiterate my agreement that facts are stubborn things. They cannot be altered by our personal wishes, inclinations and dictates of passion. To do that is to potentially compromise the objective universality of the established facts and argue with axiomatic truths.