Evaluate a significant risk your have taken or ethical dilemma you have faced and discuss its impact on you.
Every decision we make carries with it some degree of risk: Some risks have instantaneous effects, while others may take time to fully present themselves. Some can lavishly reward us, while others may ceaselessly haunt us. I had an extremely important decision to make, and I chose the easier one; not because I was lazy, but because I understood what would be the outcome of my judgment.
Applying to high school was the start of my road to college. None of my family members had ever been to college, so bestowed upon me was a great deal of pressure to do so. I had the opportunity to take the Specialized High School Admissions Test, but I did not. I chose the easier road, and went to my zoned school, Benjamin Cardozo High School. It was a risk, but I contemplated the odds: I would be ranked higher in my class, and I would get higher scores because of the easier curriculum in the non-specialized school. I assured myself that I made the right decision by going to Cardozo.
As I filled out the application for high school, I juggled my thoughts around, still trying to find reasons to justify my decision to go to a non-specialized high school: Wouldn't going to a specialized high school help when I apply for college because of the higher credentials? On the other hand, wouldn't my grades be higher at the "easier" school, and consequently make my transcript look better with all the inflated grades?
I handed in my application the next day, confident with my decision. There was no doubt that I would be going to Benjamin N. Cardozo High School. I was apprehensive about whether or not I would be accepted into the DaVinci program (the honors math and science program at Cardozo). I ended up not making the program initially; however, after much hard-work and dedication, I re-applied for the DaVinci program again at the end of freshmen year, and was successfully accepted for the start of sophomore year till the end of my high school career.
"The most essential factor is persistence - the determination never to allow your energy or enthusiasm to be dampened by the discouragement that must inevitably come." James Whitcomb Riley's quote demonstrates the necessity of persistence in one's life; the ability of a person to go on despite opposition, obstacles, or discouragement that they may face in the future. Even though I took a chance, and failed, my perseverance allowed me to be accepted into the DaVinci program. The inevitable truth is that the future will always bring obstacles, and if a person fails to overcome those obstacles, the true potential of an outcome will never be known.
Tell us about a book, artwork, or lab experiment that changed the way you see the world. What was it about the work that affected you? How did your world become different?
I am neither a devoutly religious person, nor an atheist. I've read this book called "One Heartbeat Away", by Mark Cahill. He talks about how the universe was created, and how it was impossible for the universe to be created by chance. He used an amazing analogy comparing the inner-workings of a watch with the complex components of the universe. "If you placed all the pieces of a watch into a shoebox and shook it for ten minutes, do you believe it would shake into a functioning watch? Of course not. What if you shook it for a year? Would a functioning watch then come out of the box? Say you were able to shake it for five billion years; would you then have a functioning watch? There is no possible way for that to happen."
This passage made me think about the beginning of the universe, and how it started. In school, everybody learns about the Big Bang Theory as the explanation for the origin of the universe, and consequently, life. But what we did not learn was that the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for the catalyst of the event; rather, it describes and explains the events that ensue after the Big Bang. The Big Bang theory is the accepted explanation for the beginning of the universe. It is a theory, not a principle.
I don't believe that life was created by chance as many seem to think. The requirements that enabled life on earth to exist are too precise and specific for mere chance to create it, just a slight difference can be hazardous. Cahill provides examples of how specific and how perfect the Earth is for life to arise. Some aspects of the solar system shown in Earth include the position, the rate of rotation, the moon, the crust, the atmosphere, and the constituents of Earth. If the Earth were any closer or farther from the sun, it would be too hot or too cold and would be inhabitable. The rotation of the Earth is essential because if it were slightly changed, all plant life would be both severely burnt in the morning, and frozen at night. The moon is at a distance where tides are harmless. If the moon were closer, the tides would submerge the continents. The thickness of Earth's crust and the depth of the oceans seem to be perfectly designed to absorb carbon dioxide and oxygen. The atmosphere protects the Earth from radiation, as well as burn up twenty million meteors per day. The delicate ratio of oxygen and carbon dioxide is essential to all life forms. All of these aspects of design are so perfect, how could all of this be made by mere chance?
The book has many other analogies, but this one made me the most curious. As Nancy Willard once said, "Sometimes questions are more important than answers". As curious individuals, questions are bound to be asked, and most will be answered. The ones that are not answered are to be contemplated, evaluated, and analyzed. As children, kids always raise the question of the beginning of the universe. They will wonder and some will rely on religion for the answer, others will trust science. Neither approach can be clear-cut nor exact, neither can be proven.
Any kind of comments will be appreciated.
Constructive criticism is useful.
Thanks
Every decision we make carries with it some degree of risk: Some risks have instantaneous effects, while others may take time to fully present themselves. Some can lavishly reward us, while others may ceaselessly haunt us. I had an extremely important decision to make, and I chose the easier one; not because I was lazy, but because I understood what would be the outcome of my judgment.
Applying to high school was the start of my road to college. None of my family members had ever been to college, so bestowed upon me was a great deal of pressure to do so. I had the opportunity to take the Specialized High School Admissions Test, but I did not. I chose the easier road, and went to my zoned school, Benjamin Cardozo High School. It was a risk, but I contemplated the odds: I would be ranked higher in my class, and I would get higher scores because of the easier curriculum in the non-specialized school. I assured myself that I made the right decision by going to Cardozo.
As I filled out the application for high school, I juggled my thoughts around, still trying to find reasons to justify my decision to go to a non-specialized high school: Wouldn't going to a specialized high school help when I apply for college because of the higher credentials? On the other hand, wouldn't my grades be higher at the "easier" school, and consequently make my transcript look better with all the inflated grades?
I handed in my application the next day, confident with my decision. There was no doubt that I would be going to Benjamin N. Cardozo High School. I was apprehensive about whether or not I would be accepted into the DaVinci program (the honors math and science program at Cardozo). I ended up not making the program initially; however, after much hard-work and dedication, I re-applied for the DaVinci program again at the end of freshmen year, and was successfully accepted for the start of sophomore year till the end of my high school career.
"The most essential factor is persistence - the determination never to allow your energy or enthusiasm to be dampened by the discouragement that must inevitably come." James Whitcomb Riley's quote demonstrates the necessity of persistence in one's life; the ability of a person to go on despite opposition, obstacles, or discouragement that they may face in the future. Even though I took a chance, and failed, my perseverance allowed me to be accepted into the DaVinci program. The inevitable truth is that the future will always bring obstacles, and if a person fails to overcome those obstacles, the true potential of an outcome will never be known.
Tell us about a book, artwork, or lab experiment that changed the way you see the world. What was it about the work that affected you? How did your world become different?
I am neither a devoutly religious person, nor an atheist. I've read this book called "One Heartbeat Away", by Mark Cahill. He talks about how the universe was created, and how it was impossible for the universe to be created by chance. He used an amazing analogy comparing the inner-workings of a watch with the complex components of the universe. "If you placed all the pieces of a watch into a shoebox and shook it for ten minutes, do you believe it would shake into a functioning watch? Of course not. What if you shook it for a year? Would a functioning watch then come out of the box? Say you were able to shake it for five billion years; would you then have a functioning watch? There is no possible way for that to happen."
This passage made me think about the beginning of the universe, and how it started. In school, everybody learns about the Big Bang Theory as the explanation for the origin of the universe, and consequently, life. But what we did not learn was that the Big Bang theory cannot and does not provide any explanation for the catalyst of the event; rather, it describes and explains the events that ensue after the Big Bang. The Big Bang theory is the accepted explanation for the beginning of the universe. It is a theory, not a principle.
I don't believe that life was created by chance as many seem to think. The requirements that enabled life on earth to exist are too precise and specific for mere chance to create it, just a slight difference can be hazardous. Cahill provides examples of how specific and how perfect the Earth is for life to arise. Some aspects of the solar system shown in Earth include the position, the rate of rotation, the moon, the crust, the atmosphere, and the constituents of Earth. If the Earth were any closer or farther from the sun, it would be too hot or too cold and would be inhabitable. The rotation of the Earth is essential because if it were slightly changed, all plant life would be both severely burnt in the morning, and frozen at night. The moon is at a distance where tides are harmless. If the moon were closer, the tides would submerge the continents. The thickness of Earth's crust and the depth of the oceans seem to be perfectly designed to absorb carbon dioxide and oxygen. The atmosphere protects the Earth from radiation, as well as burn up twenty million meteors per day. The delicate ratio of oxygen and carbon dioxide is essential to all life forms. All of these aspects of design are so perfect, how could all of this be made by mere chance?
The book has many other analogies, but this one made me the most curious. As Nancy Willard once said, "Sometimes questions are more important than answers". As curious individuals, questions are bound to be asked, and most will be answered. The ones that are not answered are to be contemplated, evaluated, and analyzed. As children, kids always raise the question of the beginning of the universe. They will wonder and some will rely on religion for the answer, others will trust science. Neither approach can be clear-cut nor exact, neither can be proven.
Any kind of comments will be appreciated.
Constructive criticism is useful.
Thanks