Hello everyone :)
This is my short(?) essay for UChicago, it is my first draft and is still missing a conclusion.
However, I just wanted to ask for some opinions on my take on the essay.
Thanks in advance and good luck on ur apps as well. :)
I will read your essays in return!
Observation, Hypothesis, Experiment, Analysis, Conclusion; since the 17th century, the scientific method has been the generally accepted way to investigate, explore, and acquire new knowledge. The actual process of intellectual discovery, however, is rarely so simple or objective. The human mind often leaps from observation to conclusion with ease, rushes headlong into hypothesis-less experiments, or dwells on the analysis, refusing to conclude.
Tell us about your non-scientific method. (Diagrams, graphs, and/or visual aids allowed within your essay.)
Since the advocation of secularization, the scientific method has long been introduced as the only way to learn. However, Bill Nye the Science Guy may not even be capable of explaining the dramatic phenomenas that occur in our chaotic society today with induction and deduction. To shed light into my logic-and reason-hungry brain, I chose to escape into my little perfect world. I have developed my own non-scientific method - reading. This may be a cliched or a novel idea to some, but reading, as I know it, is the perfect way for me to acquire knowledge and expand my intellectual horizon. And yes, I have been exposed to the so called "scientific methods." My conclusion, you ask? Being given the ever-so-obvious outcome of a lab by your kind physics teacher is not the right way to learn.
When I was around the age of seven and having been just introduced to the English language, I already held a big book in my hand. It was, literally and figuratively, the Big Book of Knowledge. Colorful and filled with detailed photographs, it covered topics from The Earth, to Food and Farming, to Cats. After so many years, the big book doesn't seem so big anymore, however, it still weighs heavily of knowledge and reminded the first days of my career as a reader. One can still see the carefully highlighted prefixes and suffixes and the chinese definitions I labeled in a pink pencil above words such as "incests" and "ancestors." Without doubt, reading wasn't an easy task for me then, however, it was certainly the most accessible and the most irresistible way for the eight-years-old me to learn about the basic structure of the Empire State Building and the different types of food you can make out of maize.
As I grew older, I further explored the process of reading. Being able to be absorbed into the 19th century world as Anne Elliot with Jane Austen one day then flawed democracy system of America as a liberal with Chris Hedges the other became almost magical. I observed a book's cover, hypothesized its content, experimented with the texture of the paper, analyzed the font, and concluded that the best way to read a book is to just read it.I did not fuss over the details of the process as you would in a scientific investigation. I just kept on reading. Every idea was beautifully arranged and clearly presented to me, waiting for me to absorb and digest them. I read faster and faster until my eye muscle couldn't catch up with my brain, or was it the other way around? I was not only introduced to the morals behind every novel, but was also familiarized with many complex theories that upholds non-fiction readings. I learned anything from the theory of Inverted Totalitarianism to the Cognitive Neuroscience of decision making.
Since the Age of Reason(or some other wording, I think "advancement of secularization" was a bit awkward) , the scientific method has long been regarded as the only way to learn.
Being given the ever-so-obvious outcome of a lab by your kind physics teacher is not always the best way to learn. Be careful here, maybe rework this a bit--many could argue that reading is like being handed an answer, as you're not experiencing it yourself.
The ideas here are really good--I think you can go further with them though. Maybe talk about how reading novels and poetry is a non scientific way of learning how to feel emotion, to cope with loss, to explore the world, etc. I like that, even when talking about your non scientific method of reading, you use scientific words like "analyze", "hypothesized" etc.
Nice work!
Heres my conclusion!
As I navigated the lives of four men with Julian Barns and explored the sea with Ernest Hemingway, I came to realization that reading has taught me things that I will never be able to learn with scientific methods. Reading touched the softest part of me as a human being - my emotion, my moral, and even my dignity. As there is no such thing as a perfect system, the classical scientific method may be overrated in that it asks human to become a cold, objective robot; everything we wish, but can never be. On the other hand, my own non-scientific method confronted the flawed world we live in, and gave me the courage to change it with the knowledge and experience gained through the lens of others. Reading will always be my method of exploring the world and of expanding my cosmopolitan horizon.
Tell me if you like it!
I would definitely change "incests" to "insects". Completely different meaning, although it's probably just an honest mistake on your part. Still, probably not a good impression to make :D
Also, for your conclusion, I think you should pluralize "emotion" and "moral". Love the cosmopolitan horizon bit; it sounds very classy! Although, I'm not quite sure what it means...
Your essay is really good! I like the way you described reading - it makes it very methodical without being scientific.
