Is ambition positive or negative?

Posted on April 14, 2012 by Mr Writefix

Is ambition a positive or negative characteristic? Is is necessary for success?

In many situations, ambition is highly regarded. Job applications often ask for ambitious candidates. Entrepreneurs are admired for their ambition and energy, and dynamic countries and cities have ambitious plans for growth. Although ambition has a dark side, this essay will show that we should not be scared of ambition.

Ambition is often associated with negative characteristics such as greed, intolerance, and the drive for power. In the movie Wall Street, the character Gordon Gecko said that greed was good: there were no limits to how much money you could make or how big a company could get. Ambition is also often associated with ruthlessness. It can block out human feelings such as friendship, respect for others, or compassion. Finally, ambition is regarded as being solitary: the individual wants power at any price, and the reward is often loneliness or isolation.

However, these negative associations should not stop us from being ambitious. First of all, being ambitious means understanding that we have value and that we can become better. Without plans, we plan to fail, but ambition helps us map out paths for success in our personal, family, or professional lives. Ambition also teaches resilience. When problems occur, ambitious people find a way around them. In addition, being ambitious should make us adaptable and tolerant: by including other people in our ambitions we all move forward. Ambition does not have to mean a solitary goal: it can be a vision for a city, the elimination of a disease or the improvement of a community.

In conclusion, ambition is often portrayed negatively, particularly by people who have failed themselves. We should not let these people get us down. Without ambition, our lives become mechanical and meaningless. We need to celebrate ambition and enjoy the better present and future it brings.

299 words, 14.9 words per sentence on average

Who is valued most in society – old or young? (Short version)

Posted on April 9, 2012 by Mr Writefix

In some countries old age is highly valued, while in others youth is emphasized. Which viewpoint do you agree with?

Many people have a simplistic view of attitudes toward age. They suggest that in Western societies old people are not respected, while in Asian societies elders are revered. Similarly, youth is either highly valued or ignored, depending on the culture. In this essay I will show that some of these views are mistaken.

First of all, old age is valued everywhere. It’s true that in the Far East, people respect grandparents, older leaders, and bosses. However, if we look at Western countries, we also find politicians in their sixties or seventies, despite free elections, and company executives in their sixties, despite strong business competition. In addition, as life expectancy increases, older people are becoming more important as consumers and voters. Finally, even in countries where elders previously could not be challenged, people are realizing that old age does not always mean wisdom. The old way of running families, companies, or countries may not work today.

We see many images of young people on our screens, but does this mean they are valued more? In fact, these images are just marketing: parents spend money on children, and older people spend less on mobile phones or beauty products. Just because shampoo ads portray young women does not mean that young women run companies or countries. There are very few young politicians or company bosses anywhere in the world, apart from exceptions like Bill Clinton or Mark Zuckerberg.

The reality is that although society seems obsessed with youth, older people still have power and wealth. They are the ones who make money and decisions. We must be careful not to confuse images with reality.

271 words, 15.9 words per sentence on average

You can find a longer version of this essay here.

Who is valued most in society – old or young? (Long version)

Posted on April 6, 2012 by Mr Writefix

In some countries old age is highly valued, while in others youth is emphasized. Which viewpoint do you agree with?

In different parts of the world, we find greater or lesser status for some groups in society. Many Asian societies traditionally have a lot of respect for older people, but today in Asia, childhood and youth seems to be getting more and more attention. In this essay I will say why I think it can be unhealthy to place too much value on any group simply because of their age.

Old age is often associated with wisdom. With age comes experience, and in many societies younger family members consult older ones for advice on relationships or problems. In some societies, not just older living family members but ancestors are revered and consulted. However, if old age just involves the same experience over and over again, there may not be much wisdom or flexibility attached to it. People who have held the same position for many many years often are reluctant to change or to allow anyone else to introduce change. Companies or organizations run by older workers may become too conservative to succeed against competition from younger rivals. Many aging political leaders have wrecked their countries by refusing to step down or change policy. It’s clear that age by itself is not a qualification for anything.

But it’s equally foolish to focus too much on youth. Having hundreds of thousands of young graduates and a young, vibrant workforce in a country is usually regarded as an asset, but it can result in many poorly-paid jobs as employees for foreign companies. Both Communist and Fascist governments idolized their youth, but this was often a form of brainwashing, and to provide fodder for factories and armies. Today, Thai, Korean, and Filipino television and magazines are full of impossibly cute children, teenagers with flawless skin, and pop idols. This can create problems of self-esteem for the millions of ordinary people who do not match those images. As public debate and television become even more trivial and self-obsessed, billions of dollars are wasted by people on trying to look and act like children instead of adults with a mind and voice of their own.

In conclusion, an ideal society would have a balance. We should appreciate both the beauty and potential of youth and the advice and experience of old age, but should also be careful to understand the reality of each.

391 words, average 20 words per sentence. Too long for the 40-minute IELTS test, and very complicated. You can read a shorter (271-word) version of the same essay here.

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Short)

Posted on November 28, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some say that economic development is the solution to poverty: others say it is the cause of poverty. What is your opinion?

Many people today have clean water, good food, comfortable houses and money to spend. Billions, however, live in terrible conditions, often without enough to eat. Why is it that, despite all our economic progress, so many people is poor? In this essay I will discuss if the growth of business and capitalism is keeping people in poverty.

It’s easy to blame economic development for many problems. First of all, huge companies exploit the natural resources of countries. Nigeria’s oil, Zimbabwe’s diamonds and the Brazilian forest are used up, but no money goes to the ordinary people. Second, much industry leads to pollution or environmental damage. Huge dam projects in India force people from their homes, and pesticide poisoning kills millions. In addition, companies don’t care about employees. Some even move overnight to different countries, leaving thousands unemployed.

But it’s impossible to turn the clock back and live without economic development. In the first place, any job is better than no job. People need money to buy food, build houses and pay for their children’s medicine. Second, business and trade mean that good governments have money to invest in better infrastructure. They can build better roads, hospitals, sanitation, and schools, thus attracting more development. Finally, large-scale production provides us with cheap clothes, food, electronic goods and other luxuries. Only free trade and open markets can give us this consumer lifestyle, for necessities as well as luxuries.

In summary, we need to balance the greed of corporations with the needs of our people. Everyone deserves a chance to live a comfortable and dignified life.

258 words (The information below is incorrect)

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Long)

Posted on November 28, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Some say that economic development is the solution to poverty: others say it is the cause of poverty. What is your opinion?

Despite levels of wealth one side and development unparalleled in history, billions of people on our planet are still uneducated, poorly housed Other side, sick, inadequately fed or even starving as a result of poverty. Is this a result of economic development, or can a rising tide of economic development give all humans a basic standard and dignity of life? In this essay, I will ask if economic progress is only for one group Thesis: what the essay will do in our society.

It’s important to realize that economic activity alone is not enough Topic Sentence: Economic development does not always mean the end of poverty. to end poverty. In many poor countries, natural resources such as copper, oil or even land are being exploited Idea 1: companies are exploiting land and other valuable resources by local or foreign companies but with little benefit for the local people. Nigeria’s oil wealth and Zimbabwe’s diamonds are examples where money leaves the country or does not help the majority. Secondly, economic activity can have devastating consequences on the environment Idea 2:Economic development can mean environmental problems. Dam projects in India or the clearing of the rainforest can mean local people lose land and livelihoods. Furthermore, multinational companies are not tied to any country. Idea 3: multinational companies have no moral obligations to any country. Businesses move overnight and outsource to find even cheaper labor or resources, leaving unemployed people behind them.

However, we can’t go back to a Stone-Age existence Topic sentence: We cannot live without developing our economies of barter and living in huts. More people than ever have access to electricity Idea 1: benefits of development, clean water, good schools, and medicine than ever before. Clothes, electronic luxuries such as phones, televisions and computers are cheap. All these things have come about through business and trade. They have provided income for governments to improve the life of their people. Secondly, other systems have failed: Idea 2: Communism and protectionism have not worked very well when India and China opened their markets and allowed people to do business, millions of people were lifted out of poverty. And even in countries where companies pay low salaries or do not look after the environment, Idea 3: Even a poor salary is better than no salary there are more opportunities for workers. What seems like a sweatshop in China or Mexico may be a first step in building a modern economy.

In conclusion, we can’t live without economic progress. Conclusion One side (Opinion) All that we and our governments can do is try to make sure that it is in the interests of our society and our environment. Conclusion, future or recommendation.

373 words. The info below is not correct.

Violence on Television (short)

Posted on October 23, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Television news shows many scenes of disasters and violence. What effect can this have on individuals and society?

It’s almost impossible to avoid seeing images of famine, war, natural disasters, and violence on our screens. These graphic images can encourage us to act, or leave us cold. In this essay I will discuss the effects of these constant powerful pictures.

It’s natural to respond to other people’s suffering. When we see hungry children or frightened refugees on our televisions, we want to send money or support. Huge relief efforts such as Live Aid or Action for Haiti have resulted from ordinary people’s reactions. Another natural response is anger. We ask our leaders to act to change the political or economic situation that causes the pain. Some people also take action themselves. They volunteer time in their home communities to raise funds, or even work or fight in the affected region.

Have a look at a longer (400-word) version of this essay

However, the frequency of these painful and violent scenes can also have opposite effects. First of all, it doesn’t seem right to watch tsunamis or other disasters while we are eating breakfast. Some people become obsessed with bad news on the television or internet. Second, it’s also natural to protect yourself and those around you. To reduce the impact on ourselves or our families, we change the television channel or make a joke about the conflict or continent affected. Finally, because the images seem never-ending, we get fed up sending money which does not seem to have any effect. Many people feel powerless and therefore do nothing, until an even more powerful image is forced on them.

In conclusion, these scenes can motivate us to act and help others, or they can discourage and depress us. It’s probably better to think carefully about what we watch and our reasons for watching.

Violence on Television (Long)

Posted on October 16, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Television news shows many scenes of disasters and violence. What effect can this have on individuals and society?

Satellite television and 24-hour news channels mean that viewers are inundated with images of natural disasters, wars and conflict from around the world. While it’s important to know what is going on in our world, it can be depressing or counter-productive to watch repeated images of famine, fighting or fear. In this essay, I will ask if these scenes have a negative effect on us.

Have a look at a shorter, 300-word version of this essay

Most people agree with the need for news organizations to provide us with up-to-date and accurate information, and live pictures convey information in a way that words cannot. For one thing, live footage or pictures allow us to understand the situation very rapidly. People can grasp what is happening much more quickly than by reading long articles. A second point is that pictures allow us to form our own idea of the situation, without input from the reporter or journalist. A picture of a starving refugee baby or of riot police and tear gas does not seem to need explanation. Finally, graphic pictures force us to see the situation as it affects normal people, not the politicians at their meetings or in their expensive cars.

However, the constant barrage of images can be counterproductive. Instead of learning more about the starving baby and what led to the situation, we push the image from our mind. To protect ourselves, we group the images: another typhoon in the Philippines, another earthquake in China, another bomb in Gaza. As more and more images appear we feel more and more powerless and unable to contribute to solving the problem. A second point is that news organizations compete to make their images more graphic: greater carnage, more crying mothers, angrier protestors. We also have to question the reliability of some of the images: are they staged? Many television stations and journalists have their own bias and agenda. The result of this is that watching the news becomes harder and we respond less and less to the situation and to the human suffering.

In conclusion, we need to stay informed but we also need to limit our exposure to the constant tide of news and shocking images. Too much can wear us down or make us callous, and we need to get past the simplistic images and understand the story behind it.

How many subjects in secondary school?

Posted on October 11, 2011 by Mr Writefix

In some countries, secondary education focuses in depth on two or three subjects, while in others students take a large number of subjects. Which system do you think is better?

If you had a medical problem, would you rather go to a specialist or to a general practitioner? There are times when both are needed. In this essay, I will discuss whether studying a wide range of subjects is better than concentrating on one or two areas.

First of all, it’s not surprising that many countries have opted for secondary school systems with a large number of subjects. For one thing, having many subjects helps young people to become more balanced They learn about the world through science, art, music, literature, sport, cooking, woodwork, design, or computing, and they learn skills in each area. A second point is that there is plenty of time to specialize. Now that more people go on to college and futher degrees, there is no need to begin to concentrate too early. In addition, specialization does not allow people to change. As we grow, our tastes may change, and someone who is interested in math at 12 years may suddenly prefer to study music when she is 17.

However, many countries prefer fewer skills in secondary school. In the UK for example, students take only a couple of subjects at A level. This can have several advantages. First of all, it leads to excellence in each subject. Students can learn much more than when they are taking 9 or 10 subjects. Secondly, it makes it easier for students to get into university and to do well. The student already knows the subject in depth, and does not have to make difficult choices. But an important point to remember is that studying one or two subjects in depth does not mean students know nothing about other topics. Doing A-Level chemistry does not mean that you cannot play the violin or excel in Russian.

In my opinion, students should be able to choose between these two options. For some, a wide range of subjects is a better choice, but for others, it’s more interesting to dig deep and specialize in only one or two areas. I believe it depends on the student’s personality, and while most students are adaptable, one or other approach will suit most students better.

What’s the best way to help poor countries?

Posted on June 13, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Many poor countries receive financial help from richer nations, but poverty is still a problem. Should we give other kinds of help to developing countries in order to eliminate poverty? What other kinds of help can we give, or is money sufficient?

There is a saying that the poor will always be with us, and it sometimes seems that despite years of poor countries being helped financially, the need is just as great as ever. Where has all our foreign aid gone? Why has it not helped? In this essay I will discuss whether we need to reconsider the types of aid we give to poorer countries.

There are many different forms of development aid. When we hear about earthquakes or floods, it’s natural that we rush to our cupboards to look for blankets, clothes, and tins of food. These pile up outside collection depots in our country and cost a fortune to ship to the suffering country, where they clog up warehouses for months and often end up on the black market or make local food or clothing businesses unprofitable. Another form of aid is military aid. We generously sell our planes or tanks to our friends in developing countries, or even give them loans to buy our stuff. Since these countries have frequent wars or need to keep down their own population, it’s a good business, for us. A third type of aid is human expertise. We send consultants and economists, engineers and academics, trainers and managers. They drive around in imported four-wheel drives and live in expensive, secure villas, eating imported food.

Of course, financial aid is not perfect either. Too often, our money disappears into the pockets of ministers and generals and their friends, never reaching the needy. However, the right amount of money, given to the right people in the right way, can do more than our jet fighters, expensive generators, and bags of expired pasta can. Money moves quickly: it does not need trucks or petrol or airlifts. It stimulates local business and allows the people to make their own choices about what to buy and what the most urgent needs are, short and long term. If correctly distributed, money gives people independence. Yes, teach people to fish and you teach them for a lifetime, but give them some money, and they can set up a fish canning factory or a shrimp farm, employing and feeding hundreds.

In summary then, money is still a good way to help other people. Of course, it cannot be thrown at the problem, but without cash, every other form of aid is useless. In our blessed, comfortable lives, we cannot function without money – why should we expect the less fortunate to do so?

Do we need so many languages? (short)

Posted on June 11, 2011 by Mr Writefix

Many languages are disappearing every year. Is this a bad thing, or could having fewer languages help bring people together?

Will we all think the same way in future? Or will countries communicate better? In this essay I will look at a future with fewer languages.

Many people worry about threats to their native language. They think they will lose their identity, and fear losing their culture, or even their religion. They worry that we will lose diversity and instead begin to think and act in the same way worldwide. Some even worry about the increased danger of conflict in a world with just five or six major languages.

However, this is too simplistic. It is true that many languages have disappeared and will disappear. But it’s important to remember that languages are alive, not static. English people do not talk like Shakespeare, and Greeks do not talk like Aristotle. Arabic changes, and so do Mandarin and Thai. New languages are developing right now. Second, even if a language changes, ideas remain. Not many Europeans speak Arabic today, but six hundred years ago it was the language of science. No one speaks Latin or ancient Greek, but the ideas of their philosophers still survive. Third, sharing a language is no guarantee against war. Many countries have vicious civil wars where both sides share a language.

In conclusion, our native language is one way of expressing our ideas and worldview. If it’s useful, we should use it, but we should also realize that our identity and potential is not limited to the geographical accident of our birthplace and native language. What’s more important is that we learn to think, reflect, and genuinely communicate with others, regardless of what languages we use.

Writefix.com

Argument essays, graphs, other writing, and speaking for IELTS, PET, and TOEFL

Tag: society

Is ambition positive or negative?

Related Posts:

Who is valued most in society – old or young? (Short version)

Related Posts:

Who is valued most in society – old or young? (Long version)

Related Posts:

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Short)

Related Posts:

Economic development: A solution or cause of poverty? (Long)

Related Posts:

Violence on Television (short)

Related Posts:

Violence on Television (Long)

Related Posts:

How many subjects in secondary school?

Related Posts:

What’s the best way to help poor countries?

Related Posts:

Do we need so many languages? (short)

Related Posts: