ThePariah
Mar 7, 2014
Writing Feedback / SAT ; Suspect honesty and motives of people? [2]
PROMPT: Is it wise to be suspicious of the motives and honesty of other people, even though who appear to be trustworthy?
It is indeed wise to be suspicious of the motives or honesty of other people, even those who appear to be trustworthy. Several examples from history, a scientific event and a real life situation clearly demonstrate that it is wise to be suspicious of others.
As demonstrated by a warlord in Ancient China from the Three Kingdoms Period named Cao Cao, suspicion of others is almost a life-essential trait of his. When Cao Cao fought on the frontline in many of his large-scale campaigns, he always was highly aware of his peers and afraid that someone would attempt to assassinate him. Therefore one day when a servant approached Cao Cao's bed while he was sleeping, Cao Cao took his dagger under his bed sheets and killed the servant. Rumour was spread that Cao Cao was in a dream state where he would kill anyone who came near him while he was asleep. After that incident, absolutely no one was brave enough to come near his bed for any reason. Therefore it is indeed intelligent be highly suspicious of anyone because Cao Cao would never truly know who has the motives to harm him while he was asleep, it could very well be his own personal guard or his favorite advisor.
As shown by a student named Kaiden who transferred to a new high school, he seemed to meet an amalgam of different individuals, but he thought that he has found the group of friends to hang out with. Kaiden let his guard down and one day after school his "friends" forced Kaiden to give all his money to them, Kaiden refused and was subsequently beat to death by his peers. Therefore whom Kaiden thought were his great new friends were actually bullies and thugs who dealt drugs outside of school. If he was more suspicious of the people that surrounded him, he would've been safe all along. There was no way for him to know any one's true motives, let alone a brand new ecosystem of people.
As demonstrated by the fiasco that occurred between the scientists who discovered the DNA structure, Watson and Crick were two scientists that stole from Aretha Franklin, a scientist who researched DNA, the key in discovering DNA structure. Franklin however, wasn't too worried about anyone stealing her data, she was not suspicious at all. Unfortunately, she should've been more suspicious because Watson and Crick were subsequently called the pioneers of DNA structure and won Nobel Prizes after they claimed the discovery from Franklin who passed away from Ovarian Cancer. Therefore this shows that if Franklin was to be more meticulous and more aware of his peers, she could've been the pioneer of DNA structure instead.
After a thorough analysis of an ancient Chinese Warlord, a transfer high school student and the Watson, Crick and Franklin incident, one can clearly see that it is extremely wise to be suspicious of other people, even those who appear to be trustworthy. No one ever knows the mind of another, thereby unable to predict one's nebulous actions.
PROMPT: Is it wise to be suspicious of the motives and honesty of other people, even though who appear to be trustworthy?
It is indeed wise to be suspicious of the motives or honesty of other people, even those who appear to be trustworthy. Several examples from history, a scientific event and a real life situation clearly demonstrate that it is wise to be suspicious of others.
As demonstrated by a warlord in Ancient China from the Three Kingdoms Period named Cao Cao, suspicion of others is almost a life-essential trait of his. When Cao Cao fought on the frontline in many of his large-scale campaigns, he always was highly aware of his peers and afraid that someone would attempt to assassinate him. Therefore one day when a servant approached Cao Cao's bed while he was sleeping, Cao Cao took his dagger under his bed sheets and killed the servant. Rumour was spread that Cao Cao was in a dream state where he would kill anyone who came near him while he was asleep. After that incident, absolutely no one was brave enough to come near his bed for any reason. Therefore it is indeed intelligent be highly suspicious of anyone because Cao Cao would never truly know who has the motives to harm him while he was asleep, it could very well be his own personal guard or his favorite advisor.
As shown by a student named Kaiden who transferred to a new high school, he seemed to meet an amalgam of different individuals, but he thought that he has found the group of friends to hang out with. Kaiden let his guard down and one day after school his "friends" forced Kaiden to give all his money to them, Kaiden refused and was subsequently beat to death by his peers. Therefore whom Kaiden thought were his great new friends were actually bullies and thugs who dealt drugs outside of school. If he was more suspicious of the people that surrounded him, he would've been safe all along. There was no way for him to know any one's true motives, let alone a brand new ecosystem of people.
As demonstrated by the fiasco that occurred between the scientists who discovered the DNA structure, Watson and Crick were two scientists that stole from Aretha Franklin, a scientist who researched DNA, the key in discovering DNA structure. Franklin however, wasn't too worried about anyone stealing her data, she was not suspicious at all. Unfortunately, she should've been more suspicious because Watson and Crick were subsequently called the pioneers of DNA structure and won Nobel Prizes after they claimed the discovery from Franklin who passed away from Ovarian Cancer. Therefore this shows that if Franklin was to be more meticulous and more aware of his peers, she could've been the pioneer of DNA structure instead.
After a thorough analysis of an ancient Chinese Warlord, a transfer high school student and the Watson, Crick and Franklin incident, one can clearly see that it is extremely wise to be suspicious of other people, even those who appear to be trustworthy. No one ever knows the mind of another, thereby unable to predict one's nebulous actions.
