Writing Feedback / GRE: People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making. [3]

People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making.
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.

I always believed that human kind is the most complicated creature in whole earth, with different peculiarities and diverse behaviors. Therefore, one should not confidently say something about human race, because there is no such a character which can hold true for all people. Thus I can not totally agree with the claim that people's behavior is mostly shaped with external forces.

People are also considered the only spice in the earth which has an ability to make decisions based on logic. In other words we can make free choices. But what does mean "do free choice". It means making decisions ourselves, decisions which describe our behavior, since behavior is how we act and respond to some events. Decisions we make often are based on our own logic, desires, sometimes also emotions and these factors are not external they are internal forces. Especially nowadays, when in most countries the liberty of a person has reached to quite high level it is not reasonable to claim that mostly people's behavior is based on outside forces.

Unfortunately there still appear conditions where people should consider outside forces while making decisions. Sometimes to have something people undermine their own desires and oblige external forces. For example it is common when people do job they actually do not like, to earn money for living. Or they choose profession from the ones needed in their country and not the one they like. It is also commonplace when people make choices and behave considering public reaction. For example in my country you can not see many young girls in the streets, caffees or pubs in late night, because public do not accept it as a right behavior. Though there are girls who undermine public opinion and live life they prefer, but they are minority.

Though people have an opportunity to make free decisions and live their life without external influences, in some cases outside conditions influence their decisions. Sometimes huge effort is needed to overcome this influence and become free. Many are not able to do this and they make many decisions based on these influences, however there are also many who are able to behave in accordance to their own believes and ideas.

Writing Feedback / GRE: Real estate firms comparison: Adams Realty and Fitch Realty - argument essay [2]

Real Estate Comparison

Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

The argument compares two real estate firms: Adams Realty and Fitch Realty. The author advices a friend to choose Adams Realty to sale a house, because he/she is sure it is better agency. The author opinion is based in several factors, such as number of employees in two firms, average house price and also his/her own experience with mentioned companies. However the author makes several unwarranted assumptions which make the argument unconvincing.

The argument assumes that having more agents shows the superiority of a firm. Thus due to argument as Adams Realty has 40 agents and Fitch only 25, the first firm should be better one. However there is no information about professionalism of agents. It could happen that agents of Adams realty are not as qualified as ones in Fitch, so to manage the same work Adams Realty had to hire more employees than Fitch Realty did. The argument also mentions that many agents of Fitch Realty work part time, assuming that there is not much work to do, so they can afford themselves to work part time. But it could also be that this employees work better and they manage to do their job in less time.

Another unstated assumption the argument makes is that houses in Adams Realty have higher prices than that in Fitch Realty. As an evidence the author mentions that the average price in Adams Realty is higher than that in Fitch Realty. However we know that having higher average does not necessarily mean that all houses have price near to that average. There can be houses significantly cheaper than the average and expensive than the average. Thus here we also need to know the price range in both firms in order to have better apprehension about prices.

Author's opinion is also based on his/her own experience. He/she had listed houses both in Adams Realty and Fitch Realty. A house listed in Adams took less time to sell and had better price than that listed in Fitch. Here author assumes that both of his/her houses had the same quality, same equipment and amenities. But what if his house listed in Fitch Realty was succumbing the one in Adams Realty. In this case it is normal that it took more time to sell this house and it was cheaper.

The argument makes number of unstated assumptions which seriously undermine its validity. Unless these assumptions are addressed adequately, the argument will be weak and unconvincing and we can not surely admit that Fitch Realty is yielding Adams Realty.

Writing Feedback / 'Nowadays we can see the aftermaths of ruining nature' - GRE [4]

Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.

Nature is a precious gift we have and we population of the earth should to everything possible to preserve it in a natural state. Nature is not just picturesque sights we enjoy to visit, or interesting and fascinating animals we admire, it is the environment we live in and even mere changes in it can have inevitable consequences. Thus, I believe that the nature should be preserved in a level of law, established by all nations. My position is based on witnessing the consequences of ruining nature in some areas and on the other hand the result of preservation of nature by government in other places.

Today we can see many examples of disastrous effects of destroying wild nature. These examples vary from cutting forests to not caring for endangered spices which brings to their extinction. It is already five years that young activists in my country struggle to save Teghut forest, which is condemned to be cut because there have been found metal reserved in this area and one organization wants to develop mining industry there. However cutting even a small part of the forest will have disastrous effects near the forests. As conservationists and environmentalists claim, if even a small amount of forests is cut there, huge landslip and collapses will begin. Along with the effect of industrial trash, it will be merely impossible for inhabitants to continue agricultural activities, which now is the only way of their living. This is only one small case, which as you can see can bring to huge negative consequences. Imagine what can happen if hundreds of hectares of areas are deforested. Another case is indifference towards endangered spices. It is proved by biology that even a small ant has its firm place in nature circle and its extinction or immense increase can break connections in this circle.

These were the possible consequences of natural conditions violation. It is obvious that his violations should be prevented in whole world and the best way of doing this is developing respective laws. Many can argue that sometimes it is better for the nation and its economics to use some areas for industrial and economical purposes, even if these areas will be damaged. Most of the proponents of using wild areas for economics argue that doing this will help a nation to grow economically and earn huge amount of money. However if we realize what a disastrous consequences can bring damaging the nature and how much will government and nation pay later to partially recover from these damages it is obvious that it would be better not to change environment at all. Besides preserved nature can also bring money, if nation take care about it, it could become great touristic zone. Nowadays in many countries tourisms brings more income to that country than all its economical organizations or factories.

Nowadays we can see the aftermaths of ruining nature. These consequences are inevitable and can be very severe. However if every nation preserve its wild nature , than we will have not only beautiful place to live in, but also healthy environment, which will make our life more easy and enjoyable.

Writing Feedback / Almost every new invention is somehow connected with the previous achievements in that field; GRE [4]

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.

Almost every new invention in every field is somehow connected with the previous achievements in that field. It is either continuation of something invented in the past or contradiction of what was earlier established. Thus I mostly agree with the claim that every new achievement in each field has somehow been influenced by earlier contributions in that field.

First of all no one can do much contribution in any field without being familiar of the history of that field. Since getting acquaint with some field and understanding previous contributions, we are becoming informed enough and only then we are capable to invest on that field. Saying, if one does not know the rules of physics and is not familiar with the rich history of this science, than he/she can not even solve basic physic problem, not talking about any significant contribution.

Many can argue that there were many inventions in the history which were done by chance without being influenced by previous information. However I will not admit this stance, even inventions done "by chance" have strong basis related to the previous attainments. For example the famous invention of Archimedes, about determining volume of the object by sinking it in the water, which many admit to be done by chance. Even if it was fortuity for him to do this invention, we should also admit that without enough knowledge in physics he would not be able to explain the result of the experiment.

Others can bring examples when many scientists with their contributions have disclaimed the previous achievements. Surely there were a plethora of such cases. However I argue that these contributions, which incidentally almost always had revolutionary influence on the future of its field, have been effected with the previous achievements. Let us consider Kopernik, who was one of the first astronomers who disagreed with the previous hypothesis of universe form and argued that it was the earth which rotates around the sun and not vice versa. However it will be naïve to think that he was not influenced by the previous views of astronomy. Simply this views influenced him negatively, thus he has proved their invalidity.

To sum up, I believe that every new invention in any field is influenced by the previous results on that field. Sometimes this influence makes contributors to improve preceding achievements and get newer and more refined result. Another case is when getting familiar with the previous achievements and views based on them, contributor finds flaws and incorrectness and comes with new and revolutionary thesis.

Writing Feedback / GRE: The replacement of any leader should be considered individually [NEW]

Claim: In any field-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years.
Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

In every aspect of life, being it business, politics or education, changes are vital. Each field needs new methods and mechanisms to grow up, gain more success and in its order make change in peoples life. However it is debatable that to gain such result the change of leaders in every five years is needed. I strongly believe that after several years the feasibility of leaders change should be considered, however if the old chief is still strong-minded and brings success to enterprise, he/she should have opportunity to remain in his/her position.

It is essential for any kind of organization think over the change of the leader after some years. The five year mentioned in the issue is quite reasonable duration. During this time every head can reveal himself/herself as a good or bad leader. For example in my country and in many others government is being elected each five year. For any leader the apprehension of possibility to be replaced will definitely make him/her stay vigilant and work honestly. For example most of the countries, which are being governed by dictators, are known for high level of corruption. This is caused because dictators do not feel they will be replaced or punished. For the educational field it is also very important to have a policy of replacing leaders. I felt it very well when I was at the university, where only few professors were young and it was evident that the university needs more young personal and fresh approaches. Besides, the creativity of individual is not limitless and if such a person, who is no more wit and creative enough, leads an organization, than the time when this institution will become stubborn is not far.

Many people believe that the solution for this issue can be requiring a head of any field to step down every five years. Admittedly, this solution can have positive effects, however I think that in many cases this also can bring to diverse consequences. For example it is well known story that after Steve Jobs was withdrawn from the position of CEO of Apple, the company was near to loose its position in the market. After realizing what the mistake was firing Jobs, he was asked back. This is a good example that person should have opportunity to work and lead an organization as long as he/she is capable to fulfill his/her duties and brings success to the enterprise. So it very important to give to any lead a chance to stay in his/her position longer. Moreover, sometimes being stabilized is more important, and changing leaders frequently can risk the stability of the organization.

To sum up, the replacement of any leader should be considered individually. Surely there are leaders who exhaust their ideas in five years or even in less duration and they definitely should be replaced. However there also individuals who can come up with fresh and creative ideas even after working ten years and it will be unwise to demand this person to leave his/her position. Furthermore, if particular organization values stability more than cardinal changes, it should be very cautious while changing leader very often.

Writing Feedback / 'The argument draws conclusion based on poor and insufficient information'; "Woven baskets" [5]

Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.

Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.

The woven baskets with specific patterns have been found only on the neighborhood of an ancient village of Palea, consequently it was believed that these baskets had been made only in this area. However, recently archaeologists discovered such a basket in Lithos, which was separated from Palea with the Brim River. The author of the argument is sure that Palean people had not passed the river, because it is broad and deep river and it could be passed only with boats, however no Palean boats were found in Lithos. Thus, based on this information the argument concludes that so-called Palean baskets were not intrinsic to Palean. Nevertheless, information provided in the argument is not sufficient to draw such a conclusion. Several evidences are needed, which absence considerably weakens the argument.

One reason why the author believes that Paleans had not passed the Brim River is that no Palean boats were found in Lithos area. Here we need evidence, whether there have been found Palean and Lithos boats in any place. This will help to reveal more about the issue. For example if there has not been found any Palen boat, maybe Paleans did not used to build boats at all. Moreover, if along with this there have been found Lithos boats, than it could happen that Lithos people had traveled to Palean and got baskets there. On the other hand, if no Lithos boats were found, instead Palean boats were found, than the claim of argument will get a bit stronger. Why not much stronger, because even in this case there is probability that Paleans had not leaft their boats in Lithos, that is why archaeologists have not found their remnants. On the other side, from the argument we see that baskets in Lithos have been found recently, so if now there is no boat found there, it does not mean it will not be after some time.

Why argument mentions boats is that the author believes that the only way to cross the Brim River could be boats because of its broadness and depth. However it is known fact that during long periods the relief and climate of the earth can change. For example there is no evidence that in prehistoric times the Brim River existed. It could have been formed later, because of changes in the earth surface. Moreover it could also happen than in those times the river was nor deep neither broad and people could pass it easily without boats or any other equipment. During centuries due to the change of climate this river could have become broader and deeper. Thus here the information about the geographic and climatic conditions of the area in ancient times is needed.

The argument draws conclusion based on poor and insufficient information. There are several evidences, which can have important impact in its validity. The presence of these evidences mentioned above can remarkably strengthen the argument, while their lack weakens it.

Writing Feedback / It is vital for arts to have prolific conditions to thrive and be accessible for people [7]

Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.

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.

The ideal case would be if every art and artist does not need external funding and can maintain itself. Unfortunately, nowadays we are far from this ideal case. Undoubtedly, everyone will admit that supporting arts and making it available to all people is important thing to do. On the other side if someone funds some field, it is bringing risk for that field not to be as free as before and lose its impartiality. Thus often it is challenging task for artists or art representatives to choose between funding and preservation of their integrity. From my point of view, they should choose the golden mean. That is, accept a funding if the supporter is sincere and does not require changes on their ideals. However, if sponsor has requirements which will cause lose of their ideas and integrity, they should refuse it.

Government is the main organization, which should be concerned about thriving of arts in their country. Arts are one of the ways to introduce nation in a world, and having flourished arts is advantageous for a country. For example if someone sees paintings of famous Armenian painter Martiros Saryan, he/she will find enormous information not only about the country's picturesque nature, but also about its people, their lifestyle, traditions and history. Moreover, arts also can have huge educational function for its own nation too, especially for youth. So government should make sure that it is available for all people. For example in my country every year takes place a cultural event called "The night of museum", fund by the government. This day almost all museums in whole country are free for entrance.

However many people believe that for arts accepting funding from a government can have bad consequences such as losing independence. They claim, if government suggests funding for arts, it will also require something in return. Surely no one is insured that this will not happen and certainly if it does happen, than I believe artists should refuse any support. However I believe that the funding of government is the most "safe" for arts. As I explained above, government already has motivation for funding arts in the country. On the other side "government" is a managing body, elected by nation, and mostly it presents the interests of that nation. It is not an individual, which can have sharp preferences and will require artists to do something to please their taste.

To sum up, I believe that it is vital for arts to have prolific conditions to thrive and be accessible for people. However these conditions can be created only with sufficient support, getting which often brings a threat of losing independence. In such a situation artists should try to find a support which will not oblige them to lose their integrity. In my opinion mostly this kind of support can provide a government.

Writing Feedback / GRE: Nation's culture and traditions are mainly maintained and generated in major cities [3]

Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.
Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

The issue suggests that nation's culture and traditions are mainly maintained and generated in major cities, that is why government should provide sufficient financial support to these cities. Undoubtedly every government should be concerned about protection and maintenance of cultural values and traditions in their countries. However it is debatable whether culture and traditions are presented in major cities or not. Thus government should find out the places which present culture of the nation and support these places. Besides, government should also find out which cultural institutions need funding and which can support themselves and help the former.

It is not necessarily true for every major city to be the cultural center of the country. There is plethora of big cities which are known to be industrial centers rather than cultural. Mostly these cities do not have many cultural institutions which identify the nation or country, neither you can find many traditions preserved there. For example Hong Kong, which is one of the biggest cities not only in China but also in the world, is known as one of the most important industrial and business center. Hardly anyone can say that this city presents Chinese nation, its culture and traditions, thus government should not fund it for these purposes.

In contrast, there are also many major cities, which surely present the culture and traditions of the nation. For example let consider Paris, which is known to be one of the most beautiful cities in the world and can be considered as the cultural center of France. Many museums, castles and palaces in Paris present history, culture and traditions of French. However, French government does not need to provide much funding to many cultural institutions in Paris. For example Louvre, the most famous museum in the world, has millions of visitors in a year, and its income can be sufficient for its own maintenance. And this can be true for many other museums too.

On the other hand in some countries small towns and provinces are the places, where nation's culture and traditions are preserved better. Moreover, these small towns often do not have sufficient income to maintain themselves and preserve traditions and cultural centers, thus they need funding from government and from other sources. For example Tatev: an ancient monastery in Armenia, which is one of the most famous places here. Until several years ago there was not even a proper road to get there. After government drew its attention to this place, rebuilt the roads, built the highest ropeway in the Europe there, it became easier to get to the place. Now it is one of the most popular places in Armenia and every year more and more tourists visit it.

It is very important that every government cares about places in the country, which present nation's culture and preserve its traditions. However it is also important to find which places are really the ones that have this role. Sometimes major cities do not present culture or traditions of the country. Another case is when cultural centers in major cities have sufficient income to maintain themselves. Furthermore, it is also common when small towns present nation's cultural face and traditions better, however they need financial support to maintain and preserve their role.

Writing Feedback / GRE: It is very responsible task to create school nationwide curriculum [2]

A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they
enter college.
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.

It is very responsible task to create school nationwide curriculum. For every nation its school program illustrate what fields and courses that nation prizes and what they want their children to learn. Though I agree with one part of the statement that is there should be required courses which students will take in school, however I also admit a possibility that student should also be given opportunity to chose some classes based on their preferences and strengths. First of all I believe that there are courses that are very important and children should take them, however I also thinks that from the early age children should be given chance to choose courses which they like.

Almost in every nation there is set of courses that are required in schools and all students take these classes. These are mainly courses which help children to shape some knowledge base, which will be useful for them throughout whole their life, moreover it will help them to choose their further occupation. The examples of these courses can be mathematics, native language, history, etc. Mathematics not only helps students to learn some more or less deep methods of problem solving techniques, calculations, but also teaches student to critical thinking and logic, which is necessary for every one, no matter what occupation he/she has. Or taking native language, undoubtedly everyone should possess native language, should know write and speak correctly. I remember we had a language course at the university and when once we asked our professor why we need this course, it does not relate to our profession, she responded that we will need it every time when writing papers, theses, though these materials mostly contain professional information, all this information should be written in a correct and acceptable language.

Apart from these courses, which appear in almost every nation's school programs, each nation can add other required courses too. This mainly shows us which sphere is valued in that particular country. For example in my country the game of Chess is highly valued from earlier times and several years ago in Armenia Chess was added to the schools' required curriculum.

While it is necessary to have required courses for all students, it is also important to give each student opportunity to choose other courses based on his/her preferences. First of all this will help them to think over about what they like from the earlier ages. Furthermore by choosing individual courses they will reveal their strengths and afterwards it will be easier for them to choose further study field in universities and colleges. For example in my school we could choose second foreign language ourselves. Personally I chose English, but there were students who chose French, or German.

To sum up it is equally important to have required classes in schools and provide classes that students are free to choose. From the first type of courses students gain lifelong knowledge and from the selecting some courses they learn to think carefully and understand what preferences they have.

Writing Feedback / GRE: Scandals are really a way of information spreading, yet it often spread unwarranted information [2]

Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

We live in a world full of different problems: environmental, social, racial. Many of these problems require more public attention in order to be overcome. There are many ways to inform people about some problem and one of these methods is scandals. Though scandals can sometimes bring some good, I believe they mostly prove to be the worst way of informing public. Scandals mostly contain not inexact information. Besides, the masses who pay attention to scandals mostly do not care about the problem it presents, they just like scraps. And after all there are better methods of public information.

Many people believe that scandals spread information about a problem which needs attention and make people aware of it. It is partially true, scandals truly share some information. However mostly this information is exaggerated and contains some incorrectness. This erroneous information is being spread with facts in order to make people more excited and annoyed about some problem. However this incorrectness will mislead people who accept it as exact fact. They will not know what is truth and what is imaginary and eventually can not defeat the problem moreover they can panic population. For example in my country there are many online newspapers which does not care about truth much, their main purpose is to increase their ratings. Thus they often share superficial, unchecked or even incorrect information only to make people to read their news.

There are many people for whom scandals are the main source of information about some problems. They accept almost every piece of information and scrap they get as a plain truth. This is resulted by the fact that they do not know much about that problem. Moreover, getting information about a particular problem only from scandals, which as I mentioned above usually include incorrect information, they continue to be unaware. Thus this resembles to some kind of close loop, which make these careless people to remain oblivious. Furthermore, as I have noticed, mostly people who rely on scandals as a source of information about some problem, in fact does not care for that problem. Every time, when they find another scandal about other problem, they easily shift to that new one and often forget about the previous.

Scandals really can draw public attention on the issue discussed. However if government or some association also wants that problem to be solved, they need other methods of information distribution, which will be more relying and will not mislead population. This kind of methods can be public discussions with people well aware of a problem, or spreading flysheets with problem description and the suggestions which can help solve it, even advertisements justified by informed people can be useful.

To sum up, scandals are really a way of information spreading, however it often spread unwarranted information, which not only does not help to solve some problem, but can even hinder its solution. Moreover, people who rely on scandals, does not gain through understanding of a problem, thus can not help to solve it. And at last there are many other helpful and better methods of information distribution.

Writing Feedback / GRE It is hard task to find the best way of exploring and understanding characteristics of a society [4]

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.

It is hard task to find the best way of exploring and understanding characteristics of a society. One can live whole life in one society, but still be unaware of some of its peculiarities. Thus I believe that for understanding one society thoroughly one should investigate its minor countries and small towns along with studying major cities. Studying major cities will help the researcher to get mostly a general picture of a society or particular nation, however living in rural sites will reveal peculiarities of a society which will be hard to notice in major cities.

Major cities have huge amount of population and frequently this population consist of people of different nations, religions, and not only the inhabitants of that country. Thus the life in major cities often is multicultural and multicolor. Moreover life in such cities is usually rushing and even sometimes it looks like mechanized. In such conditions, where everyone is busy with his/her own businesses and stopping for one minute just for speaking to a stranger will mean to fail some urgent work, a newcomer will find hard to understand many characteristics which will describe that society. Of course, if one lives in such a city very long time, integrates to it and becomes a part of it, than he/she will be aware of its characteristics such as how people treat to different situations, which customs and mentality they have. But even in this case one can't confidently say that he/she is acquaint with that nation, because mostly people in major cities became more modern over the time, and they lost many characteristics which their predecessors possessed and which can still be found in minor settlements.

Unlike big cities, small towns and countries represent nation's characteristics and coloring better. This is the result of maintaining traditions and customs they have, making them the part of everyday life. These traditions characterize society better than other things, and by exploring them one can get closer to the understanding of that society. For example in Armenia we have a lot of traditions or holidays, many of which have a history of centuries. However a few of these traditions are present in the life of residents of big cities. Mostly they know about these customs, but they do not follow them of celebrate. In contrast, in rural places most of these customs are not only being preserved but also they are part of the life of people. And this does not mean that people in countryside are backward, they just are more loyal to their traditions. Of course living long time in countryside will also be beneficial to understand the society better, however even a few days will be enough to get huge information about the society. For example as soon as you get to a village here, you will find how hospitable people are, they will invite you to their homes, will care about you so that you do not feel any trouble. It is hard to see such an open-heart treatment in cities.

It is truly hard for a stranger to fully understand a particular society. For his/her knowledge and understanding to be precise, he/she will need to spend a long time both in main cities and in rural sites. Living in big cities will give him/her global information about the nation, their mentality, thinking etc., whereas spending time in rural places will help him/her to get more acquaint with the customs and traditions of the society, which helps to characterize a nation.

Thanks in advance :)