Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation must be the achievements of its
rulers, artists, or scientists.
Reason: Great achievements by a nation's rulers, artists, or scientists will
ensure a good life for the majority of that nation's people.
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.
It is true that the greatness of a nation can be measured by the achievement of
its leaders, artists and painters. However, this statement is not true in a number
of cases. There are other indicators of the greatness of a nation, for example the economy,
or the condition of the population.
Let us consider the the claim. It is true that the achievements of a leader, or
an artist or a scientist can make a nation great. In fact, some of the greatest
nations on earth, for example Japan or America or France. Such nations do boast
a good number of Nobel Laureates, Artists who have been recognazied and remembered
for decades, sometimes centuries. Some of the greatest leaders in history have
established laws, or established sets of laws, which form the basis of modern laws
in nations, or have inspired great ideoligies among countless people.
Now let us turn to why such achievements are not the only indicators of greatness.
The state or condition of the general population is a factor that can affect how
a nation is perceived. For example, the literacy rate of a nation or the living
standards of families. A nation can boast a huge number of achievements of
prominent people. But it is wrong to simply assume that the literacy rate or
living standards of people is in direct proportion with the number of achievements.
. There may be a huge rcognition for prominent people, but the population may not be very well off, and hance that nation cannot be considered grate.For example, let us consider India. India does boast a number of Prize winners in
various science competitions, and a Nobel laureate in literature. India had great leaders like Gandhi and Nehru. Yet 268 million
people in India live without elelctricity and only 21 million people live in developed cities.
developed cities. Given this possibilty, the claim is weakened.
On to the second point. The state of the economy is a huge factor in determining
the greatness of a nation. A nation may not boast a large number of overachievers
but yet may have a strong economy and prosperous tranqulity. Let us consider china.
While the Chinese Communist Party is somewhat less than respectable, and the fact that there may not be as many recognized people as compared to Europe or America, China has the second
largest economy in the world (China Jostled Japan to 3rd place some time ago).
This is due to the fact that the Chinese population in general is very industrious. This in
turn allowed China to turn from nothing into a nation to be recknoed with, within a two decades after
some inital impetus.
Considering the two arguements, the reader may be able to understand that althought the
achievements of leaders, artist and scientists may indicate how great a nation is. Achievements
are not the only factor determining how great or prosperous a nation is. There are other factors
beyond the number of achievements, and all factors of a nation must be considered in order to truly determine whether
a nation is great or not.
P.S jkjeremy if you're reading this, I hope it is a slight improvement compared to my previous writings.