Option #1. Evaluate a significant experience, achievement, risk you have taken, or ethical dilemma you have faced and its impact on you.
I saw it everywhere: peers, parents, and politicians alike engaging in hopelessly ineffective debates on any and all social issues. "These are the reasons why I am right," one party would declare. "No, your thinking is completely wrong," the other would fire back. I often wondered how a correct stance on a controversial topic could exist. In my formative confusion, I decided I needed to establish my own views. Despite having generally liberal predispositions, one exception was my stance on welfare. Perhaps it was the fact that I felt entitled to all of what little pocket money I had, that led me to believe that individuals shouldn't be mandated to provide for others. Still, as I determined my values, I knew it was not as simple as picking sides. It seemed wrong to settle for one solution that rejected the valid points of the other. As it turns out, the only way I could understand this dilemma was through a deeply personal experience with my cousin, Tom.
During winter break of my freshman year, I visited my aunt's house as per tradition. Tom, whom I was very close with, had recently turned eighteen and yet was just as restricted as he had always been; Tom was a paraplegic by birth. Gratefully, his parents were hard-working and fully-supportive, providing him an otherwise privileged upbringing. As I caught up with Tom during this visit, I noticed he had acquired a multitude of gadgets. A flat screen television loomed overhead, a powerful computer stood grandly on the desk, a smartphone rested on its dock; Tom had all but bought an electronics store. His wealth struck me as peculiar, considering he was unemployed and attending college. When I asked how he could afford such commodities, he revealed that he received a monthly check from the government.
At that moment, I fell silent as a flurry of thoughts went through my head: "Aren't I against this?" "Does my own disabled cousin not deserve some spending money?" Most disturbingly, "Am I a bad person?" The implications forced me to reexamine the nature of controversy. My experience gave me a new perspective on the issue, one that not everybody shares or even has the chance to have. I realized that despite of all our commonalities, our unique experiences are what define us.
To this day, I do not know my own stance on the issue, nor many other social issues, for that matter. What I realized from that winter trip, however, was much more valuable than the correct answer; I had learned there is no correct answer. I cringe when I hear a crude rejection of a belief, and I see how narrow-mindedness arrests compromise, and thus, progression. I vow that no matter what community I find myself in, I will stay receptive to contrasting perspectives.
I saw it everywhere: peers, parents, and politicians alike engaging in hopelessly ineffective debates on any and all social issues. "These are the reasons why I am right," one party would declare. "No, your thinking is completely wrong," the other would fire back. I often wondered how a correct stance on a controversial topic could exist. In my formative confusion, I decided I needed to establish my own views. Despite having generally liberal predispositions, one exception was my stance on welfare. Perhaps it was the fact that I felt entitled to all of what little pocket money I had, that led me to believe that individuals shouldn't be mandated to provide for others. Still, as I determined my values, I knew it was not as simple as picking sides. It seemed wrong to settle for one solution that rejected the valid points of the other. As it turns out, the only way I could understand this dilemma was through a deeply personal experience with my cousin, Tom.
During winter break of my freshman year, I visited my aunt's house as per tradition. Tom, whom I was very close with, had recently turned eighteen and yet was just as restricted as he had always been; Tom was a paraplegic by birth. Gratefully, his parents were hard-working and fully-supportive, providing him an otherwise privileged upbringing. As I caught up with Tom during this visit, I noticed he had acquired a multitude of gadgets. A flat screen television loomed overhead, a powerful computer stood grandly on the desk, a smartphone rested on its dock; Tom had all but bought an electronics store. His wealth struck me as peculiar, considering he was unemployed and attending college. When I asked how he could afford such commodities, he revealed that he received a monthly check from the government.
At that moment, I fell silent as a flurry of thoughts went through my head: "Aren't I against this?" "Does my own disabled cousin not deserve some spending money?" Most disturbingly, "Am I a bad person?" The implications forced me to reexamine the nature of controversy. My experience gave me a new perspective on the issue, one that not everybody shares or even has the chance to have. I realized that despite of all our commonalities, our unique experiences are what define us.
To this day, I do not know my own stance on the issue, nor many other social issues, for that matter. What I realized from that winter trip, however, was much more valuable than the correct answer; I had learned there is no correct answer. I cringe when I hear a crude rejection of a belief, and I see how narrow-mindedness arrests compromise, and thus, progression. I vow that no matter what community I find myself in, I will stay receptive to contrasting perspectives.