Stanford Supplement: Intellectual Vitality- Illuminati Conspiracy

Hi i'm currently working on the Stanford supplement and I've done the what matters to you essay, so I started the intellectual vitality essay. My main issue was the topic, for I had two possible choices: talking the "looking" and "seeing" a more philosophical talk, or conspiracy theories (focusing on the Illuminati). i wrote a VERY rough first draft and wanted all of your helpful opinions on whether I should use this essay and get my AP Lit and Lang professors to tweak it for me, or switch to my other topic.

I dont want Stanford to think I'm a big lunatic, unless they want that... I would like all the help I get, and gladly will return the favor upon request. THANKS :)

The likelihood of a single party taking over the world used to seem as impossible as finding gold at the end of a rainbow. However, during an AP History class discussion my teacher brought up possible conspiracies that were correlated to the failed formation of the League of Nations. He mentioned how the League of Nations, presented by Woodrow Wilson, was rejected by Russia's Czar not to keep the world in a state of turmoil, but out of a state of uniform turmoil. Although my teacher moved on to the next chapter, my mind stayed on this conspiracy possibility. I realized that there were many "gray areas" in the League of Nations: why was America, the original proposer, not part of the League? Why did Russia avoid the League?

I turned to books and websites about conspiracy theories and tackled this subject for weeks. I pondered why Wilson would propose an idea, and implement it, only to have his Senate refuse his request to join the League; could there be something or someone Wilson knew that our Senate was oblivious to? Why did Russia avoid the League so vehemently? This is when I was introduced to the Illuminati concept.

The Illuminati was launched in the 1760s, seeking to achieve a "one world government." Financed by the International Bankers, they sought to weaken the governments of Europe and build up such a debt they would have no other people to turn to. The disturbing scheme the Illuminati has designed is "the show must go on." The basis of all Illuminati acts is to make the world financially and physically drained. Looking back in history, it seems more than likely that the Napoleonic Wars and the World Wars are all part of the large plot to seize and control the world. After weeks of solidifying pro and con arguments about the existence of the Illuminati, I concluded there were too many flaws in significant historical events to not account for an ultimate hierarchy of power. From the extensive research I learned there is always a bigger picture to a conflict.

Hi)
In this rough draft you mostly talk about how you got acquainted with the concept of Illuminati organization and explain what it means. There is not much personal output and thoughts, so i guess you might want to elaborate on that.

Thank you for the advice! This was one of the reasons I was hesitant to write about this because once i get started on the Illuminati, I continue to ramble and miss the direct prompt. I ended up with WAY too much info on the illuminati and reduced it to fit 2000 characters, but yeah I know I should omit some general info and put some personal thoughts in.

But if you can, may you tell me if my idea of elaboration on personal thoughts is correct? Do I elaborate on the effect my research has had on me? Include an example or so?

Well, as I said before, your current version of the essay doesn't have much personal output, so I can't tell whether you personal thoughts are right or wrong etc.

Revise your essay and post it here and so could answer those questions.


I reread your essay and feel the arguments you gave to support Illuminati theory are not actually strong enough.


You could include your own thoughts on this

Well, there is an improvement in your essay in overall narrative, but points like Schiff setting up Nikolai's murder and Schiff ordering the US president himself are vague and really beg for more explanation

With the limit of 2000 characters, adding additional info without going over limit seems to be very hard. if you have any other historical examples that could be connected to Illuminati and be well explained without too much words, you might try them out. Illuminati conspiracy theory is a very interesting topic, but it requires a lot of explanation and thus a lot of writing. I'm afraid that you might even need to shift your topic to philosophy.((

Ah okay, I knew that Illuminati was too big a topic to be explained in 2000 characters :/ I'll turn to doing a more philosophical argument on the difference between looking and seeing.

Would you like to edit my first draft whenever I post it?

Sure, go on.

Okay so here is my totally new intellectual vitality short essay. I expect it'll contain many grammatical errors, for I just finished this rough draft and I'm immediately posting on here to get your feedback. So it'd be great if you tell me if my flow or general essay is up to par, and if there's any blatant grammar error, please point it out. :) THERE ARE NO WORDS THAT CAN PROPERLY EXPRESS MY GRATITUDE TOWARDS YOU!!!

1. Stanford students possess intellectual vitality. Reflect on an idea or experience that has been important to your intellectual development.

The distinction between looking and seeing is a concept that enthralls me. When learning transcendentalism, I was introduced to Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, and particularly, Henry David Thoreau. While providing information on Henry David Thoreau's life, my teacher presented a quote by Thoreau: "The question is not what you look at, but what you see." In the hindsight of a naïve freshman, this quote seemed redundant because when you look at an object, you are also seeing an object. When you look at something, you also see it; they are interchangeable terms. However, after reading Thoreau's Walden, I began to place more emphasis on scenery. Observing the trees and the sun made me wonder...can there really be a difference between seeing and looking? Indeed the trees are green, but I also recognized that trees serve to provide us with oxygen. Similarly, the sun is a radiant yellow, but it is also the main source of energy for both plants and humans. These two objects provided me the information needed to affirm if there is any distinction between looking and seeing.

Looking at the sun as a giant blotch of yellow is impossible because it has been inculcated into our minds that the sun is the main source of energy for all living organisms. Even looking at a mere color, like black, is impossible to do without believing it is associated with something sinister. The reason we cannot merely look at an object, without seeing its significance is simple: we have been conditioned to conceive tangible objects as a practical part of life. It's nearly impossible to abandon the perspectives we see objects with. Thousands of generations have passed, and thousands of generations are still to come, and although the lifestyles will change, we will still identify the sun as a source of energy, and trees as a source of oxygen.

here are my suggestions





try adding some more complex examples of your observations and elaborate more on how this new idea impacted your life.