Writing Feedback / 'Some empires refused to learn from history' - English Comp. CLEP - practice essay [3]

I wrote this essay to practice for my upcoming English Comp CLEP. The essay question had to do with the phrase "the more things change, the more they stay the same."-- basically I had to state whether I agreed with that or not... etc. Any feedback on what I should pay attention to during the actual test is greatly appreciated! This is the essay:

In order to agree or disagree with the statement, "The more things change, the more they stay the same", an understanding of what it means has to be reached. It would seem that the first segment, "The more things change..." refers to the changes made in technology; human advancement. But the second segment, "the more things stay the same..." assumes that "history repeats itself". This is true. No matter how far advanced we are, we as humans never seem to learn from history; we always fall into the same pitfalls as those preceding us. History is rife with examples in economics, world leaders, and large-scale wars.

Economics would hardly seem to be the same as it was hundreds of years ago. After all, we have moved on from the gold standard and adopted fiat currency: a thing no other generation has done. Or is it? Printing fiat currency produces inflation, and inflation is nothing new. In Roman times, in order to make their gold go a little farther, the empire's minted coins got nicked a little; officials shaved off the sides of the coins until there were enough shavings to make more coins. Eventually they even added a little worthless metal to the mixture, thereby extending the gold a little farther. It was only a matter of time before people realized what was going on, and rejected the system. The Roman Empire collapsed. Today, we are faced with a similar situation. Once again, we haven't learned from our mistakes. The American government has introduced fiat currency, currency that isn't backed at all by gold or any other precious thing, and it is only a matter of time before America and the rest of the world rejects the worthless paper and the American Empire fails. History repeats itself.

World leaders are individuals with amazing charisma, who can point to ideals and stimulate others to follow them towards lofty goals. History textbooks focus on many of these individuals, and point to their successes and failures. But perhaps they fail to notice how similar they all are. Alexander the Great and Saladin, for example, were hugely charismatic leaders, whose ideals unified their peoples and spurred them on to many victories. For Alexander, it was the city-states of Greece; for Saladin, the many factions of Islam. Both of them had loyal armies and a supportive populace, both set up a hierarchy of cohesive leadership with all the right marks. But it all disintegrated when they died. Why? Neither established an authoritative heir, and their charisma had vanished. Over the space of only a few hundred years, Saladin repeated Alexander's mistake.

Even militarily, empires such as Rome and England refused to learn from history. Ever hungry for power, their leaders spurred on, farther and farther, until their forces were spread so thin that their empires broke to pieces. Charlemagne and Neville Chamberlain both inherited the leadership of their empires at the times they fell, and neither recognized the parallels their own times had to Genghis Khan's time. Genghis Khan had spread his frontiers too wide for his armies to secure, so that when he finally died, both the lack of leadership, and the lessened fear their enemies had for them now that he was dead, spurred their collapse.

So it is merely a truism that "the more things change, the more they stay the same." It is merely a matter of time before history repeats itself again. And as long as history continues to be made, it will begin to sound like a broken record. Only when society as a whole recognizes this fact can they understand its consequences and take action to learn from history's mistakes. But this is a phenomenon that is far from occurring. The best that you and I can do is to have personal responsibility and learn from other's mistakes, thereby cutting off the vicious cycle. So, what have you learned from history lately?

Writing Feedback / English Comp. CLEP - "Discontent is vital to growth and development" [7]

I wrote this essay to practice for my upcoming English Comp CLEP. The essay question had to do with the phrase "Nobody ever made any progress by being contented or satisfied. Discontent is vital to growth and development whether we are talking about one person or a whole nation."-- basically I had to state whether I agreed with that or not... etc. Any feedback on what I should pay attention to during the actual test is greatly appreciated! This is the essay:

Although discontent is oftentimes considered to be synonymous with strife, it is in reality a harbinger of progress. Without discontent, no one would seek a better way to complete their tasks, and human invention would come to a stand-still. Men like Leonardo Da Vinci would cease to exist, and revolutions such as America's civil rights movement would never occur. Men would simply accept oppression unquestioningly and contentedly. Even in my own experience, this has proven true.

Leonardo Da Vinci has been dubbed a true "Renaissance man". Throughout his life, he wrote journals and books, created invention after invention, and studied everything from anatomy to astronomy. He was never satisfied with his current knowledge, however vast, but was always investigating some new idea. Leonardo dealt with the discontent he felt over man's inability to fly by concocting all sorts of flying apparatus, thus paving the way for inventors after him to create the hang-glider and the airplane.

When a little old black lady showed her discontent with discrimination by keeping her seat in a public bus, she sparked a movement of discontented African Americans towards one goal: equal rights. Through their collected dissatisfaction, and with the strong clear voice of Martin Luther King, Jr. resounding in Washington D.C., America took a step forward in the direction of equality. Once again, discontent instigated progress.

As an author and painter, even I am subject to feelings of discontent. Pride in my finished works rarely lasts for long, and often I need to force myself to stop painting over mistakes or endlessly trying to improve my "finished" drafts. It is precisely that discontent I feel that goads me on to improving my abilities. If I were content with my current skill, I would never improve. Therefore, I owe a lot to my discontent.

"Nobody ever made any progress by being contented or satisfied. Discontent is vital to growth and development whether we are talking about one person or a whole nation." This is a statement that is amazingly true, and as long as we continue to react to discontent in a constructive manner, the world as a whole will continue to progress and to be shaped by us.

Writing Feedback / English Comp. CLEP essay - "guns outnumber the population" [4]

I wrote this essay to practice for my upcoming English Comp CLEP. The essay question had to do with Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's statement that guns outnumber the population, so it is pointless to attempt to ban them; ammo should be banned instead-- basically I had to state whether I agreed with that or not... etc. I decided to argue the opposite side for exercise. Any feedback on what I should pay attention to during the actual test is greatly appreciated! This is the essay:

Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan is absolutely right. The current arguments over gun control are completely absurd; we can no longer limit the amount of guns that are in the possession of both criminals and law-abiding citizens. And so, his proposal is an adept way of limiting the damage done to society through guns and firearms: a difficult task, but a necessary one. Without some sort of regulation on the amounts of ammo sold in the U.S., it will be very difficult to stem the tide of crime in notorious cities such as New York City and Los Angeles. With a license system, it will be harder for criminals to get ammo, especially if police are allowed to confiscate ammo found in the possession of non-licensed individuals. And best of all, it will be harder for under-aged people to buy ammo, and the likelihood of school shootings will decrease.

Walk the streets of New York City or Los Angeles at night, and you're bound to see a gun or two. And even if you're a cop, you have no legal right to take them from their owners, unless you can prove they have them illegally. Gun control in cities like this is nigh impossible. That is why an ammo control system would limit crime. By limiting ammo to people with responsible backgrounds and making it harder for criminals to obtain it, you limit crime. Criminals already have guns, but they would be limited in their use of them if it was especially hard to obtain ammo.

Another positive result of ammo restriction is that enforcement is easier- the ammo can be confiscated if the possessor does not have a license. Such a law could also have a positive effect of lightening restrictions on when and where people can carry a gun. Those licensed to buy ammo would be free to carry small arms, so that when necessary, they can defend themselves, or assist police. An ammo license could be much like a driver's license; police could ask to see it in potentially dangerous situations.

Possibly the greatest benefit of ammo regulations would be the added difficulty minors would have obtaining ammo. The fear and pain I experienced during the highschool massacre at my school in Colorado is an experience I wouldn't wish on anyone. Perhaps if ammo had been harder for the two killers to get, they would not have killed 12 people and injured so many others. The number of bombs they threw would have been less, and the havoc shorter lived. Having an age limit on who can buy ammo would help to curb highschool massacres like the one at my school.

This world will never be perfect: there will always be fighting. But at least we could curb the amount of violence in our own country by limiting criminal's access to the ammunition they need for their weapons. By restraining the boundaries on who can purchase ammo, tragedies will be less likely to occur. Senator Moynihan's idea is one we should implement as soon as possible.

Writing Feedback / English Comp. CLEP- literary decline [3]

I wrote this essay to practice for my upcoming English Comp CLEP. Any feedback on what I should pay attention to during the actual test is greatly appreciated! This is the essay:

Scholars have noted with disapproval the decline in interest and rise in apathy towards the literature of earlier periods. They are right to feel that way. In the time since the classical, medieval, and renaissance eras, there has been a decline in the quality of literary content. Also, a major moral shift has occurred since those early times, and with the rise of technology, the media has inundated our society, robbing it of any semblance of the attention span it once had.

Ever since the "golden ages" of literature, there have been moral and political upheavals. With every generation, greater distance has been placed between the values of the old authors, and those of modern readers. To read old books now, readers deal with not only archaic language barriers, but also with ethnocentric feelings rising out of culture differences. One almost needs to study the context of The Taming of the Shrew in order to understand the moral principle of wifely obedience to husbands indigenous to Shakespeare's time.

Partly due to the universal decline in attention span, modern literature has conformed to this shortened, abbreviated style. The popular books of this age have lost the richness and color so carefully sculpted in older works. Even in the short space of time between The Lord of the Rings and Eragon; diction, style and clarity have declined rapidly. This is a phenomenon that amplifies the greater the distance of time, and is ever more apparent as time progresses.

Another difficulty contributing to this trend of indifference is technological advancement. While good in some ways for education, television and the internet have practically eliminated the individual attention span. Most people would rather watch a two hour movie than spend the time necessary to read the title's book. Technology has inadvertently fostered a live-for-the-moment attitude in children, which carries over, in most cases, to their adult life.

So it is without reluctance that I agree with the disgruntled scholars of past literature. There is much to be learned from the old works that is worth the conquering of ethnocentrism and the effort invested in understanding them. An attention span is worth cultivating, and time spent reading the "classics" is time well spent.

Writing Feedback / English Comp. CLEP - practice essay "Impossible Goals" [9]

I wrote this essay to practice for my upcoming English Comp CLEP- I practiced writing it in 40 minutes. Any feedback on what I should pay attention to during the actual test is greatly appreciated!

There are no challenges so difficult, no goals so impossible, as the ones we set or ourselves.
Write an essay in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above. Support your discussion with specific reasons and examples from your reading, experience, or observations.

This is the essay:

The goals and challenges you set for yourself are often nearly impossible, but not always. Challenges we face in our lives are sometimes insurmountable, but it takes a keen eye to recognize those that are difficult, but not impossible. In my experience, goals that seem impossible may or may not be, depending upon their true nature. The true nature of goals can be in the categories of truly impossible, seemingly impossible, and unrealistic.

Truly impossible goals are those goals that deal with your ideals or your standard of perfection. For me, that standard is a perfect Christ. My goal is to become like Christ: a truly impossible goal. However, if I strive for this type of goal, I grow as a person. Striving to be perfect in any regard is obviously not plausible, but satisfaction comes from seeing how close you can get. So in that way, they are partially achievable, but full realization of those goals is not possible.

Seemingly impossible goals are goals that appear impossible at first sight, but that are actually achievable. One goal I set for myself in the past that seemed impossible was memorizing the facts for my Business Law CLEP. This I thought was truly impossible! But as my score proved, it was not. Another goal of mine that seemed impossible, but was not, was my goal to build a large shed. With some help from my dad and some power tools, however, this goal was achieved: as the shed in our backyard attests. Thus, seemingly impossible goals are very difficult goals that take time to achieve, but are fully completable.

Lastly, unrealistic goals are goals that are pie-in-the-sky. For example, goals like wanting to be rich and famous by age twenty, or to look exactly like Barbie when you grow up. Some are impossible, and some aren't, but all are unrealistic and fantastic: perhaps even goals that will change on a whim. One goal I set for myself like this one was to make lots of money painting abstract art to sell, and then settle down into a comfortable living creating paintings like Norman Rockwell's. While I'm a good artist in my own way, I know that abstract art would never satisfy my creativity, and that my style is entirely different than Norman Rockwell's. These types of goals aren't taken seriously in your true mind.

So, while the phrase "There are no challenges so difficult, no goals so impossible as the ones we set for ourselves" sounds good, it is only true in a limited sense. We set ourselves many types of goals that seem impossible, but we can only tell if they are truly impossible by striving towards them. So strive for your "impossible" goals-they will grow you as a person, and maybe surprise you by being achievable!