GMAT ISSUE类作文范文-71

Topic:

Commercialism has become widespread. It has even crept into schools and places of worship. Every nation should place limits on what kinds of products, if any, can be sold at certain events or places.

Instructions:

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Sample Essay

Has commercialism become too widespread, particularly in schools, churches, and other places which traditionally have been safe havens from commercialism? If so, does the government have a responsibility to curb the problem? The answer to both questions, in my view, is no.

There is no evidence that commercialism is creeping into our churches. Admittedly, some commercial activity is present in our schools. Food service is increasing outsourced to fast-food chains; a plethora of goods and services is sold in college bookstores and advertised in their school newspapers; and students serve as walking billboards for the companies whose logos appear on clothing. However, this kind of commercialism does not interfere with school activities; to the contrary, in the first two cases they contribute to the efficient functioning of the organization. Outsourcing food service, for example, is a cost-cutting measure which provides additional funding for teaching materials, facilities, and teacher salaries.

I do agree that, in general, commercialism is becoming more widespread, and that one of the byproducts may be a decline in the quality of our culture. Electronic billboards now serve as backdrops for televised sporting events, and Web sites must sell advertising space to justify maintenance costs. Does this mean that government should step in and ban the sale of products in certain venues? No. This would require that government make ad hoc, and possibly arbitrary, decisions as to which products may be sold or advertised at which places and events. These are value judgments that are best left to individual schools, churches, and other organizations. Moreover, the expense of enforcing the regulations may well outweigh the cultural benefits, if any.

In sum, while commercialism is undeniably becoming more widespread, it is minimally intrusive and works to the net benefit of society. As a matter of public policy, therefore, government should not attempt to regulate the extent of commercialism.

 

GMAT ISSUE类作文范文-72

Topic:

Companies should not try to improve employees' performance by giving incentives - for example, awards or gifts. These incentives encourage negative kinds of behavior instead of encouraging a genuine interest in doing the work well.

Instructions:

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Sample Essay

Providing employee incentives can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand. the promise of bonuses or gifts can spur workers to higher achievement. On the other hand, incentives can create resentment and internal competitiveness that are damaging to morale and to the organization. Even so, I think a carefully designed incentive program can operate to the net benefit a company.

Incentive programs are counterproductive when the distribution of rewards appears to be personally biased, when the program recognizes just one kind among many important jobs in the organization, or when there are too few rewards available. For example, if a manager regularly rewards an employee who is perceived to be a favorite, coworkers will be resentful. Or if the company decides to recognize high sales, while ignoring an especially precise cost-assessment from the accounting department, the accountants may feel their work is not valued. Finally, if rewards are too few, some employees will become overly competitive, while others may simply stop trying.

However, incentive programs can be designed to avoid such pitfalls. First, the company must determine that it can provide sufficient rewards to motivate all employees. Then it must set, and follow, clear and non-arbitrary guidelines for achievement. Finally, management should provide appropriate incentives throughout the organization, thereby sending the message that all work is valued. Admittedly, even a thoughtfully designed incentive program cannot entirely prevent back-stabbing and unfair competitive tactics. But watchful management can quell much of this behavior, and the perpetrators usually show their true colors in time.

In sum, I think that the productivity inspired by thoughtful incentive programs will very likely outweigh any negative consequences. In the final analysis, then, I disagree with the speaker's recommendation against their use.

 

GMAT ISSUE类作文范文-73

Topic:

People often give the following advice: "Be yourself. Follow your instincts and behave in a way that feels natural."

Instructions:

Do you think that, in general, this is good advice? Why or why not? Develop your point of view by giving reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Sample Essay

The advice to act naturally or follow one's instincts can, admittedly, be helpful advice for someone torn between difficult career or personal choices in life. In most situations, however, following this advice would neither be wise nor sensible. Following one's own instincts should be tempered by codes of behavior appropriate to the situation at hand.

First of all, doing what comes naturally often amounts to impulsive overreaction and irrational behavior, based on emotion. Everyone experiences impulses from time to time, such as hitting another person, quitting one's job, having an extramarital affair, and so forth. People who act however they please or say whatever is on their mind without thinking about consequences, especially without regard to social situation, may offend and alienate others. At the workplace, engaging in petty gossip, sexual harassment, or back-stabbing might be considered "natural"; yet such behavior can be destructive for the individuals at the receiving end as well as for the company. And in dealings with foreign business associates, what an American might find natural or instinctive, even if socially acceptable here, might be deeply insulting or confusing to somebody from another culture.

Second, doing what comes naturally is not necessarily in one's own best interests. The various behaviors cited above would also tend to be counterproductive for the person engaging in them. "Natural" behavior could prove deadly to one's career, since people who give little thought before they act cannot be trusted in a Job that requires effective relationships with important clients, colleagues, and others.

Third, the speaker seems to suggest that you should be yourself, then act accordingly—in that order. But we define ourselves in large measure by our actions. Young adults especially lack a clear sense of self. How can you be yourself if you don't know who you are? Even for mature adults, the process of evolving one's concept of self is a perpetual one. In this respect, then, the speaker's recommendation does not make much sense.

In sum, one should not follow the speaker's advice universally or too literally. For unless a person's instincts are to follow standard rules of social and business etiquette, natural behavior can harm others as well as constrain one's own personal and professional growth.

 

GMAT ISSUE类作文范文-74

Topic:

The people we remember best are the ones who broke the rules.

Instructions:

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Sample Essay

I strongly agree that rule-breakers are the most memorable people. By departing from the status quo, iconoclasts call attention to themselves, some providing conspicuous mirrors for society, others serving as our primary catalysts for progress.

In politics, for example, rule-breakers Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King secured prominent places in history by challenging the status quo through civil disobedience. Renegades such as Ghengus Khan, Stalin, and Hussein, broke all the human-rights "rules," thereby leaving indelible marks in the historical record. And future generations will probably remember Nixon and Kennedy more clearly than Carter or Reagan, by way of their rule-breaking activities—specifically, Nixon's Watergate debacle and Kennedy's extra-marital trysts.

In the arts, mavericks such as Dali, Picasso, and Warhol, who break established rules of composition, ultimately emerge as the greatest artists, while the names of artists with superior technical skills are relegated to the footnotes of art-history textbooks. Our most influential popular musicians are the flagrant rule breakers—for example, be-bop musicians such as Charlie Parker and Thelonius Monk, who broke all the harmonic rules, and folk musician-poet Bob Dylan, who broke the rules for lyrics.

In the sciences, innovation and progress can only result from challenging conventional theories—i.e., by breaking rules. Newton and Einstein, for example, both refused to blindly accept what were perceived at their time as certain "rules" of physics. As a result, both men redefined those rules, and both men emerged as two of the most memorable figures in the field of physics.

In conclusion, it appears that the deepest positive and negative impressions appear on either side of the same iconoclastic coin. Those who leave the most memorable imprints in history do so by challenging norms, traditions, cherished values, and the general status quo—that is, by breaking the rules.

 

GMAT ISSUE类作文范文-75

Topic:

There are essentially two forces that motivate people : self-interest and fear.

Instructions:

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations or reading.

Sample Essay

The speaker claims that people are motivated only by fear and self-interest. This claim relies on the belief that human beings are essentially selfish, or egoistic. In my view, the speaker oversimplifies human nature, ignoring the important motivating force of altruism.

On the one hand, I agree that most of our actions result in large part from self-interest and from our survival instincts, such as fear. For example, our educational and vocational lives are to a great extent motivated by our interest in ensuring our own livelihood, safety, health, and so on. We might perpetuate bad personal relationships because we are insecure—or afraid—of what will happen to us if we change course. Even providing for our own children may to some extent be motivated by selfishness—satisfying a need for fulfillment or easing our fear that we will be alone in our old age.

On the other hand, to assert that all of our actions are essentially motivated by self-interest and fear is to overemphasize one aspect of human nature. Humans are also altruistic—that is, we act to benefit others, even though doing so may not in be in our own interest. The speaker might claim that altruistic acts are just egoistic ones in disguise—done to avoid unpleasant feelings of guilt, to give oneself pleasure, or to obligate another person. However, this counter argument suffers from three critical problems. First, some examples of altruism are difficult to describe in terms of self-interest alone. Consider the soldier who falls on a grenade to save his companions. It would be nonsensical to assert that this soldier is acting selfishly when he knows his action will certainly result in his own immediate death. Second, the argument offends our intuition that human motivation is far more complex. Third, it relies on a poor assumption: just because we feel good about helping others, it does not follow that the only reason we help is in order to feel good.

In sum, the speaker oversimplifies human nature. All human motivation cannot be reduced to fear and self-interest. We can also be motivated by altruism, and the pleasure we might take in helping others is not necessarily an indication that our actions are selfish.

嘉文博译郑重声明:

(1)

本网站所有案例及留学文书作品(包括“个人陈述”Personal Statement,“目的陈述”Statement of Purpose, “动机函”Motivation Letter,“推荐信”Recommendations / Referemces “, (小)短文”Essays,“学习计划”Study Plan,“研究计划”(Research Proposal),“签证文书”Visa Application Documents 及“签证申诉信”Appeal Letter等等),版权均为嘉文博译所拥有。未经许可,不得私自转载,违者自负法律责任。

(2)

本网站所有案例及留学文书作品(包括“个人陈述”Personal Statement,“目的陈述”Statement of Purpose, “动机函”Motivation Letter,“推荐信”Recommendations / Referemces “, (小)短文”Essays,“学习计划”Study Plan,“研究计划”(Research Proposal),“签证文书”Visa Application Documents 及“签证申诉信”Appeal Letter等等),版权均为嘉文博译所拥有。未经许可,不得私自转载,违者自负法律责任。仅供留学申请者在学习参考,不作其他任何用途。任何整句整段的抄袭,均有可能与其他访问本网站者当年递交的申请材料构成雷同,而遭到国外院校录取委员会“雷同探测器”软件的检测。一经发现,后果严重,导致申请失败。本网站对此概不负责。

北京市海淀区上地三街9号金隅嘉华大厦A座808B

电话:(010)-62968808 / (010)-13910795348

钱老师咨询邮箱:qian@proftrans.com   24小时工作热线:13910795348

版权所有 北京嘉文博译教育科技有限责任公司 嘉文博译翻译分公司 备案序号:京ICP备05038804号