Writing Feedback / Issue with the accidental findings of many important discoveries or creations. [5]

Hello, please help to evaluate my essay. If possible, please grade it on the 6 point scale. Thank you very much!

Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

The ways we perceive an important discovery or creation as accidental or not depend on considerations of the whole research process. If scientists have transparent goals and orientations prior to their research, then any unexpected finding should only be considered soon-or-later discoveries. Otherwise, their discoveries can be deemed fortuitous. Because the statement is equivocal in this regard, I cannot fully contend to its idea.

First of all, the ambiguous tone in the first half of the statement makes it unpalatable. Discoveries are direct outcomes of meticulous processes including prior plans and subsequent efforts. Any accidental finding that deemed important should only be understood as an attribution and an obvious result along the processes. Issac Newton founded the idea of gravity after fortuitously hit by a falling apple, The accident seemingly attributes to this important discovery in physics and astronomy; however, we cannot neglect the fact that Newton himself was a physicist and he had always oriented his research to answer the operational mechanisms of the earth. His discovery and consequently the foundation of gravity theory was a rising finding during his research progress, and since it was significantly substantial, many is flawed to refer to the theory as an accidental discovery.

The statement is also specious if we acknowledge a fact that important discoveries or creations - though accidentally founded - are not the final answers of a well-planned research, but are merely unexpected results. Early 1900s a group of scientists were assigned the task to search for medical substances that could eradicate infectious bacteria. The scientists had worked hardly, and unexpectedly along the progress they found penicillin - a mild substance that profoundly used to kill minor bacteria. Or Marrie Currie, the famous Poland female chemist, who spent most of life to extract pure Uranium, but "accidentally" garnered Radium. If one solely looks at these substantially findings, it is intuitive to think they are all some luckily creations. Yet further examination of the whole process will prove the otherwise: such important findings are unpredicted outcomes of a meticulous and purpose-driven process. This notion gainsays the ambivalent idea implied by the word "accidental" in the statement.

For proponents of the statement, there are some critical discoveries that are purported purely accidental. Christopher Columbus discovered Americas while his initial plan was to find West India, or Mendel initiated the idea of genes while simply working as a botanist in a garden. Nevertheless, such discoveries were not in any relation with prior intention of researchers because there seemed to be no questions or hypotheses formed at the onset of the research. On the other word, these great discoverers did not have lucid and elaborate plan in advance of their research. Columbus merely sailed cross the sea without any firm evidence that West India might exist. Mendel purely studied characteristics of plants as his job routines required. In essence, their research lacked the clear orientation that should be conspicuous in any formal research. Consequently, we perhaps should not attribute their discoveries as "a crossing accident" while searching for another answer.

Research must always be purpose-driven and well-oriented in order to yield meaningful findings. Any fortuitous finding along the research process, whether it is important or not, should be conceived as a soon-or-later and obvious outcome of the whole process. The statement failed to capture this notion because it presents a sense that many important discoveries and creations are purely accidental. I employed evidence with relevant arguments to delineate its flaw.

Writing Feedback / Arguments with adopting honor codes in order to decrease cheating among students. [NEW]

Hello, please help to evaluate my essay. If possible, please grade it on the 6-point scale. Thank you very much!

According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated. Groveton's honor code replaced a system in which teachers closely monitored students; under that system, teachers reported an average of thirty cases of cheating per year. In the first year the honor code was in place, students reported twenty-one cases of cheating; five years later, this figure had dropped to fourteen. Moreover, in a recent survey, a majority of Groveton students said that they would be less likely to cheat with an honor code in place than without. Thus, all colleges and universities should adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's in order to decrease cheating among students.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

The author recommends adopting an honor codes similar to a college's to decrease cheating among students because the college seems to be successful at using the codes. However, the recommendation lacks persuasive elements because it builds upon precarious arguments. There are certain questions that demand solid answers in order to validate the adoption of the honor codes.

First, the author suggests that all colleges and universities adopt honor codes similar to Groveton's because the college seems to be successful in mitigating cheating. Granted that cheating is indeed decreasing at the college, we do not know for certainty that same success can be expected at other colleges and universities. What we need to know is that whether students at Groveton possess any distinct characteristic that helps them to actually honor the codes. The honor codes appear to promote self-regulation and self-discipline in which students are expected to act in ethical manner in any academic endeavors. Perhaps students at Groveton come from strong ethical foundation, so they uphold the codes very serious and act according with any guidance of the codes. If students from other colleges and universities do not possess such desirable ethical attitudes, we cannot expect them to voluntarily honor the codes or report any suspicion of cheating. Consequently, the recommendation will be more likely to fail to achieve its good intention when honor codes is adopted at other schools.

To further evaluate the author's recommendation, we also need to know if the honor codes are actually upheld at Groveton. Based on the observation of decreasing cheating cases reported, the author implies that adopting the honor codes is a successful method to counter cheating. However, the argument is tenuously weak because the mere declining figure does not guarantee that fewer students are cheating. Students at Groveton, under loose supervision of teachers, may cover cheating for their friends. They may not honor the codes in the first place by not reporting any suspicion at all. If this is the case, the recommendation is seriously weaken because adopting the honor codes may not only fail to prevent cheating, but also worse, provide spare room for students to cheat given the paucity of teachers' monitoring.

Apart from this flawed argument, the decreasing figures of student's cheating at Groveton are also questionable. The figures are reported upon 5-year observations, and there could be a great chance that the number of students at Groveton could have been decreasing over the last 5 years. There could be a case in which the number students at Groveton could have fallen by half, which accordingly make the proportion of student's cheating unchanged during the time. This scenario will subject the recommendation to skepticism. In essence, we need to know if there was any significant change in the number of students at Groveton over the last 5 years.

The last question we want to have a solid answer is the validity of the recent survey at Groveton. There are no indications to suggest that the survey is conducted in an objective manner and is evaluated in equity. Groveton may concoct the survey with intention to buttress and promote their honor codes, and to build any image of a highly ethical college. Or students at Groveton did not response to the survey with honesty. In result, the author's whole argument will fall apart. Perhaps an independent third-party verification is required to assess the true effectiveness of the honor codes when adopted at Groveton College.

While the author's intention to seek an effective approach to prevent cheating among students is appreciated, his arguments are wanting in concrete evidence to justify that an honor codes would be successful. He needs to provide more information about the characteristics of Groveton's students, the intrinsic effect of the honor codes at Groveton, the number of students over the last 5 years and most importantly, the validity of the survey. Unless the answers to these questions are elucidated, the recommendation to adopt an honor codes school-wide will be abnegated.

Writing Feedback / Issue with sponsoring problematic scientific researches [NEW]

Hello, please help to evaluate my essay. If possible, please grade it on the 6 point scale. Thank you very much!

Applications of scientific research have advanced human life and experience, and governments' financial support has been a vital attribution to the successes of such research. The statement, however, undermines this notion by saying that only research whose consequences are transparent would be granted governments' funding. For that all-embracing sense the statement imposes, I cannot fully agree with it.

Uncertainty is the nature of scientific research and this is a widely recognized fact. Scientists start with several hypotheses that they lend credence on, but with some degree of skepticism or diffidence, and after intensive tests and experiments, they either accept or reject the initial hypotheses. If the outcomes are unfavorable, can we conclude that resources committed to the research were wasted? No, because we learn from the failure and make significant progress on what we learn. Who in the early 20th century would have imagined that human can land on the moon someday? After the Third Pandemic in the late 19th century caused by plague bacterium, who would have dreamed of a vaccine that obliterates this deadly virus? Thanks to the effortless support from the governments, especially in terms of financial means, human can achieve such goals nowadays, despite countless debacles during the course: rockets failed dozen of times to propel the space ship in the case of the moon conquest, or hundred of times different tests in vaccine failed to yield desirable results. That being said, governments must maintain considerable commitment, particularly financing, to scientific research in order to achieve some ends, even though uncertainty exists at the inception.

To expound further on the notion that the role of government's finance is significant in scientific studying, one can ask what would have happened if the governments had not funded scientific research whose outcomes were, though nebulous or even perilous, vital to human well-being. Back to the World War II when there was speculation that Germans were purifying uranium to create atomic bomb, the U.S. government had poured millions of dollars into studying the atomic bomb themselves. The intention was purely good will: to counter that advance of Germans and eschew a possible mass destruction from Nazis. Unfortunately, the U.S. government did not foresee, back then, the dangerous menace posed by Iran and North Korea nowadays when these countries develop atomic weapons based on prior studies of the atomic bomb. Another notable case can refer to the development and trial of ZMapp - a medicine that was believed, now is confirmed, to cure the Ebola disease. Scientists in the U.S. and Canada did not know that the medicine would work, but under strong duress that the disease was going uncontrollable, they had no choice but to skip mandatory procedures and mandates to test it on the human. These two cases suggests that governments' role, especially their financing, is demanded for scientific research that have impact on human beings.

There are, of course, hundreds of issues that require immediate funding from governments to solve than some cryptic scientific experiments, and many proponents of the statement will hinge upon this notion to bolster their standing. Their argument is cogent because scientific research is notorious for being time- and money-consuming processes, and no government will risk these resources for precarious consequences. But perhaps only when a research does not solve an immediate need for people, then this point will hold uncontroversial. For example, we are aiming to bring human to the moon on mass scale, but relevant research should not be funded excessively, and some governments actually do not provide funding at all for these types of research.

The reason is understandable: the research cuts grandly into governments' budgets while the outcomes are too ambiguous because of technology's restraints. Given this reasoning, governments can allocate fund to other needed fields, which then make the fund allocation and usage more effectively. However, no funding, even a modicum, is too extreme because who know what would happen in the next 100 years when the world population grows to a figure that our Earth is no longer spare enough for all. That is to say governments must be well prepared for any possibility, and the preparation will include funding research on the issue.

Writing Feedback / GRE-The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority [2]

Hi,

Please help to criticize my essay! If possible, please rate it on the scale of 6 with .5 increment. Thanks very much! Here the prompt.
The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Time allowed: 30'. Time used: 40'.

"As far as the definition of authority may reach, this essay limits it to those who exert power and governance over their people. Would the relationship persist and enhance when it is kept unquestioned? Often we witness unrest and chaos everyday around the world - many caused by the people questioning its authority, yet societies have been far better off when people raise their voice over their own administrators.

A fundamental of philosophy asserts that the human tends to question and fight conflicts and unfairness to have matters solved and developed. That is very true when people start doubting their authoritative forces. While authority should serve the people, some fail to adhere to what seems to be the principle of their responsibility, and no doubt that causes its people to raise their voice. There are policies that one country's citizens find neither adequate nor beneficial to the most. Biased tax favors to those whose wealth is exorbitantly overwhelming, while unfair social grants continue to trouble the poor. Consequently, demonstrations and meeting gathers thousands of people to fight for what they deem ineffective in the ways the authority is carrying out their jobs. That is to say, society is much better served - in which the distribution of economic benefits is symmetrical - when the performance of authority is put into questions.

Not only economy would be enhanced, the social status would be balanced and stabilized should people question those who govern them. Some long-lasting matters of one society have been those involving race, religion, and human rights. Discrimination still exists in the modern world in these facets. However, there are activists and concerned citizens who have been questioning the ways authority treat the topical matters. Many in China question the exact democracy that their government upholds, fighting for the people voice to be heard. Thousands in United States criticize the ways that some police officers treat black people, marching across roads to raise awareness of racial issues. To no surprise, the authority heeds what their people ask, and take actions that their people consider necessary. In that we see the new level of enhancement in many societies.

Yet may questioning the power of authority always bring desirable outcomes? Excessive doubts of authoritative power mislead people who are immature in perception and cognitive resonance, leading to contrasting effects. Disorders in society with unrest and chaos - or worse people and authority engaging in violent clashes - would be an counter point to the mentioned statement. Unfortunately, such undesirable outcomes would cost society immense economical losses because the damages they incur during the course of actions. Recent wide-scale demonstrations in Hong Kong - where people fight for more freedom over China in terms of government control - wiped out millions dollar in one of the most ardent financial market. Certainly, none would hope for such subsequent declines in the well-being of a society.

In general, the well-being of a society would reach higher level - both economically and socially - when people doubt the actions of authority in conscious and well-resonated ways. Only then will a society avoid unwanted effects of the doubt. Arguments and relevant empirical evidence provided in the essay show supports to the stated prompt."

Writing Feedback / GRE issue- Should society try to save every plant and animal species regardless of needed resources? [2]

Please help to correct any grammatical and content flaws. Also kindly grade the essay on the scale from 1 to 6. Your comments are highly appreciated. Many thanks in advance.

Below are the prompt and instructions:

Some people believe that society should try to save every plant and animal species, despite the expense to humans in effort, time, and financial well-being. Others believe that society need not make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species.

Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.

Here is my essay:

Plant and animal species are undoubtedly the vital parts of the human natural habitats. Although extinction of some species are unfortunately inevitable, human kinds should take any actions in their controls to protect all floras and faunas. I strongly support the human endeavors to save every plant and animal species regardless of how much resource is needed.

It is worthwhile to revisit the Darwin's natural selection theorem to tackle this issue. The key finding is that biological diversity is necessary for human development and any evolutionary progress is vital for advanced research. Implicitly, saving plant and animal species allows human to make further studies about how different species adapt to changing environment. Consequently, these findings can be extremely helpful for the human beings. That said, mankind should apply both financial and human resources to save natural kinds.

For certainty, the efforts to save every plant and animal species could be costly. However, we have ignored the future payoffs from such efforts when stating so. Indonesian government and its people have been making arduous actions to maintain and increase the existence of Komodo, a reptile that deemed to be extinct just few decades ago in some Indonesian islands. Now, Komodo dragons have attracted thousands of tourists to visit the islands every year. The increasing tourism has created more jobs for locals, provided revenues for the government, and more importantly, raised more funds to reserve the animal.

But is it worth to save every single plant and animal? Consider the numerous cases of flood and soil erosion in Southeast Asia probably provides a convincing answer. Due to great profits from selling woods, people in these regions has been cutting down hundreds of forests, causing the limitless consequences of natural disasters, in terms of both human casualty and financial damages. Undoubtedly, the loss outweighed the gains. This instance suggests that it is in the hands of human kinds to do anything to protect our environmental habitats.

In conclusion, human efforts to save every plant and animal species are not vain. It is critically important to emphasize that such efforts will be well paid-off in the future, particularly in terms of human progresses in understanding natural development and our own survival. The evidences provided above can be used for the proponents of the statement.

Writing Feedback / GRE Issue: Great nations should be assessed by general welfare of its people [2]

Please help to correct any grammatical and content shortcomings! Thank you very much in advance

Here are the prompt and instructions:
The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Here is my essay:
For a nation to be considered great, we often look at the country's economic achievements, and almost forget to weight the people's level of satisfaction and the society's happiness. Although a nation that produces the more outstanding individuals will most likely be perceived as great worldwide, the ultimate goal of a nation should serve interests of the general and majority. A closer examination at the propensity, welfare and people's satisfaction of different nations in our world supports the statement.

Northern Europe has long been a desirable place to live for people around the world, so it is intuitive to presume nations in the region relatively great. Countries like Denmark, Sweden or Switzland are renowned for their stable and joyful life. Certainly, these countries are not necessarily the hometown of world-famous individuals, at least in comparison with other nations. Yet the nations' people enjoy the safe and stable environment that underscores the welfare of everyone in the society. This is an unarguable indicator of prospective nations.

There is no denying that United States shelters the largest number of exceptional individuals, whose achievements are world-recognized in many areas of life. A quick check at the nationality of Nobel laureates confirms the argument. However, the States never shows up in the top-ten happiest countries in the world, or obtains a relatively high human index (an index to measure the welfare of people in health, education or age). Obviously, the world largest economy still exemplifies a great nation, but not an undoubted and fully one, at least according to its people's self assessments.

This essay narrows the broad term of great nation to the social aspects to make the arguments valid. Despite the immense contributions that excellent individuals make to one nation, the general welfare of its people must be overweighed to assess the greatness of a nation. The reasoning and evidence shown in this essay can be used to strengthen this prompt.

Writing Feedback / GRE Issue: Governments should focus to solve today problems rather future ones [5]

Hi all,

Please help to correct grammatical errors and give feedback on the content of this essay. Thank you very much in advance!

Here is the prompt and the instructions:
Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.

Here is my essay:
A philosophy's assertion states that new problems always arise from the old ones as human attempts to solve conflicts within each problem. It implies that having anticipated problems in the future, it would be wiser to tackle present matters in order to mitigate their consequences. A look back at the world's efforts to solve immediate problems underlines the veracity of the statement.

Current Ebola disease is a clear example to emphasize the needs to address problems immediately. The deadly virus has caused large number of casualties and the WHO has alerted its danger at the worldwide scale. If the world is not tackling this problem seriously, the consequences will be limitless and severe. Obviously, human is still working to combat the increasingly forecast number of other lethal diseases like cancers. However, the urgency to qualify the Ebola outbreak certainly outweighs other future concerns.

Another case should be brought to discussion within this issue is the world's fighting against poverty. It has long been an arduous concern for governments to eradicate hunger and improve living standards. The United Nations even upholds the mission as one of The Millennium Goals. Undeniably, the efforts have been being carried out for decades, yet reports of food and shelter shortage come in relentlessly from every corner of the world. This is a solid evidence to challenge the governments' actions to tackle anticipated matters ineffectively.

Turn a glance at the ways that governments acted on the global financial crisis is another concrete proof supporting the statement. The U.S. government resolutely carried out the quantitative easing plan that lasted for many years, while the European Central Bank cut interest rates aggressively. These were determined actions that reversed the economic downturn. Should the matter have not been handled pressingly by that time, the world's economy might still struggle for positive growth in the presence. Once again, the case implies that serious actions to solve immediate problems are vital to restrain their forward consequences.

Inevitably, human always needs to solve problems to make significant developments, either now or in the future. However, governments should give priority to solve present matters, which pose great obstacles to the ongoing progress of development. The evidences presented above clearly support and strengthen the statement.

Regards,
D.

Writing Feedback / GRE - Impossible to make a significant contribution without strongly influenced by past achievements [3]

Hi all,

Please help to give feedback on my essay writing. The conclusion may sound off track because I was running out of time. Thank you in advance!

The prompt and instructions are as follows:
In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Here is it:
It is unarguably true that every single achievement should be recognized for contribution to progresses within its field, especially ones that set the very first bricks on the field. Nevertheless, past successes play the grounding and incentive role to endeavor further successes as we attempt to breakthrough another limit. A closer examination into science, economy and sports - fundamental fields in our daily life - confirm that significant contributions within each field often are built upon precedent achievements.

The most convincing illustrations undoubtedly come from developments in science. Inventions and new discoveries are born every day, majorly from scientists ruminating on previous ideas or frameworks. It would have been impossible for Einstein to come up with his renowned relativity theory without serious understandings of physics theories proposed by Newton. Would Steve Jobs be able to enhance human's experience with electronic devices without the first creation of desktop? Obviously, Newtonian physics and the human's original computer are undeniably huge achievements. As a result, these examples implicitly articulate an axiom in scientific progression: radical findings always start from past discoveries.

Certainly, it would be unfair not to mention orthodox and successive workings that pave roads for further achievements in every field. In early twentieth century, financial guru Benjamin Graham proposed the concept of value investing, which unprecedentedly changed the ways market participants approach investments. Consequently, the world recognized famous investors like Warrant Buffet or George Soros, who applied Graham's frameworks to advance further investment strategies that are highly appreciated by scholars and practitioners. However, Graham's ideas were partially engendered by a fact that the markets were chaotic at that time as the 1930s Great Depression gloomed, causing panic and imprudence amongst investors. The point is that a failure can be considered a success that makes us realize what our shortcomings are. Ultimately, it could be said that Graham actually built his work based on the successive findings of market failure and flaws.

Finally, past achievements are always motivation for followers to explore and conquer new things. This is unambiguously seen in sports, as the world recognizes new records set by competitive players. Interestingly, the new record creates new threshold for future players to train and compete in order to break it. That is how successes follow successes in sports to prove that human's limits may be unlimited. That also re-emphasizes my assertion that past achievements influence future successes.

In conclusion, remarkable achievements in every field of our life contain traces from previous workings or findings. Although great contributions are highly recognized and encouraged, it is undeniable that past successes, in any form of interpretation, set grounds for these progresses. Evidences represented in this essay can be used to support and strengthen the statement.

Regards,
D.

Writing Feedback / Studying major cities helps to understand the most important characteristics of a society -GRE Issue [3]

Hi all,

I'm preparing to take the GRE and would really appreciate for any feedback on my writing samples. Thanks in advance!

Here is the prompt and instructions:

To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

Here is my writing:

"A group of people, regardless of size, can form a society in which unique characteristics exists. While it is obviously true that studying any society can reveal certain aspects of its characteristics, the scale of the society plays a critical role to determine them in depth and breadth. As a result, major and densely populated cities are where important characteristics of a society are widely observed; therefore, thoroughly understood.

Culture is an unarguably fundamental feature when researching a society as it reflects the people's living traditions and habits. However, walking through a minor community may help only little to capture its cultural diversity. Matamata, a town in New Zealand that became worldwide famous after being chosen for the built-up Hobbit's village in the Lord of the Rings, virtually has no remarkable culture, except its wide grass land and tiny architectures. In stark contrast, the city of Miami, or San Fransico in United States exposes us to the enormous range of ethnics' culture as evidenced by the variety of restaurants, festivals and the presence of large international companies. This is indicative of cultural diversity, an important characteristic of a society, and can be only found in major cities.

Now consider politics, a vital characteristic of any society. Undoubtedly, capital cities are always structured as the political center in any country. From Washington DC, London to Beijing, these major cities are the home to leading politicians regardless of their parties. From democrats, republicans to socialists, they concentrate on the major cities to spread their views and exert their powers. Of course, one would argue that political practices are observable at local cities or rural areas. However, they do not fully represent views of the whole population; thus, limit our understanding in this critical society's characteristic.

Like politics, it would be insufficient not to mention religion in the context of society's characteristics. If you want to gain a complete picture of Islam, you may find yourself looking up for the Muslims' life in Jakarta or Baghdad. Or the populous Bangkok would be your destination should you are looking to study the Buddhism. Obviously, we can still explore these religious beliefs in some minor communities where they practice them, but we can hardly understand them in a larger context for a society.

In conclusion, it is clear that studying major cities helps to understand the most important characteristics of a society. A look at the minor cities, as representatives to sample of a society, certainly does not unveil as much as a closer examination of larger cities. Upon considering the real life examples relevant to cultural, political and religious aspects of a society, the statement appears more accurate and solid."

Best wishes,
Du