Currently, utilitarianism has pervaded into our culture. It is generally borne in on people that the outcome of doing something is constantly more significant than the process. Admittedly, it is outcome that determines out social status. For instance, a clerk will be promoted by his or her boss when he or her has successfully signed a lucrative contract. Nevertheless, bon no account is outcome the only thing that matters. The process of trying to achieve something offers us more valuable experiences and pleasure than the outcome. Therefore, the process of doing something may matter more than the outcome. The support of my opinion comes from the reform of Franklin D Roosevelt and my preparation for a English speaking competition.
Franklin D Roosevelt, the US president from 1933 to 1945, had learnt the significance of governmental interference in the process of his earlier unsuccessful administration. In the Great Depression, Franklin D Roosevelt, taking the advice of several Yale economists, adhered to the 'laissez' style administration, namely, leaving market autonomy without any governmental interference. Nevertheless, one year later, no repercussion in market could be observed. The administration, though deemed as a fiasco, was by no means a bane. In the process, Roosevelt had witnessed the futility of 'laissez' theory. He realized that on no account is governmental interference negligible. Compelled by this belief, Roosevelt devised the creative 'New Deal', which was characteristic of intense governmental interference and revived the stock market to pre-depression level. Admittedly, Roosevelt didn't achieve a pleasant outcome in his earlier administration. However, in the process, he had learnt crucial lesson concerning economy, which served as the cornerstone for his successful 'new deal' .
Similarly, my opinion can also be illustrated by my previous experience of participating in a English speaking contest. In the contest, I had obtained more pleasure from the process of preparation than from the final victory. In ninth grade, diffident as I am, I was encouraged by my father to enroll in a English speaking contest. During the one month before the contest, I frequently went to the local English corner to talk in English with people all over. Every weekend, I went to my friends' for invaluable advices concerning my pronunciation and grammar. Eventually, I obtained the first prize in this competition. This victory, glorious as it was, didn't offer me as much pleasure as the process of preparing for it. In my preparation, I had found that I became extroverted and willing to talk to and help others. It is the process of preparing for the contest, rather than its outcome, that converts me from a diffident boy to a confident contestant.
From the examples of me and FDR, we can see how people benefit more from process than outcome. Admittedly, by no means should we ignore the outcome. However, the process may matter more than the outcome. While it's the outcome of SAT that pushes us to a good college, it is the process of studying for SAT that teaches me to think critically.
Franklin D Roosevelt, the US president from 1933 to 1945, had learnt the significance of governmental interference in the process of his earlier unsuccessful administration. In the Great Depression, Franklin D Roosevelt, taking the advice of several Yale economists, adhered to the 'laissez' style administration, namely, leaving market autonomy without any governmental interference. Nevertheless, one year later, no repercussion in market could be observed. The administration, though deemed as a fiasco, was by no means a bane. In the process, Roosevelt had witnessed the futility of 'laissez' theory. He realized that on no account is governmental interference negligible. Compelled by this belief, Roosevelt devised the creative 'New Deal', which was characteristic of intense governmental interference and revived the stock market to pre-depression level. Admittedly, Roosevelt didn't achieve a pleasant outcome in his earlier administration. However, in the process, he had learnt crucial lesson concerning economy, which served as the cornerstone for his successful 'new deal' .
Similarly, my opinion can also be illustrated by my previous experience of participating in a English speaking contest. In the contest, I had obtained more pleasure from the process of preparation than from the final victory. In ninth grade, diffident as I am, I was encouraged by my father to enroll in a English speaking contest. During the one month before the contest, I frequently went to the local English corner to talk in English with people all over. Every weekend, I went to my friends' for invaluable advices concerning my pronunciation and grammar. Eventually, I obtained the first prize in this competition. This victory, glorious as it was, didn't offer me as much pleasure as the process of preparing for it. In my preparation, I had found that I became extroverted and willing to talk to and help others. It is the process of preparing for the contest, rather than its outcome, that converts me from a diffident boy to a confident contestant.
From the examples of me and FDR, we can see how people benefit more from process than outcome. Admittedly, by no means should we ignore the outcome. However, the process may matter more than the outcome. While it's the outcome of SAT that pushes us to a good college, it is the process of studying for SAT that teaches me to think critically.
