"The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people. "
Prompt: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
issue:
A nation can be described from many aspects, such as its people's well-being, the power of its military, its arts and technology status in the world, etc. So the "great" can be evaluated from these aspects. Therefore in my opinion, the surest indicator of a great nation is not existed. Neither the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists nor the general welfare of its people can represent the surest indicator of a great nation.
It should be admitted that the achievements of elites represent an indicator of a great nation, because it reflects the arts, technology or politics status of a nation. For example, the Qing dynasty had some excellent palaces in the Forbidden City and world famous china and paintings that exported to all over the world, especially the England. So you can say it's great in art. But if you want to say that it's a great nation, you will be wrong. Because the ordinary people in Qing dynasty had no chance to enjoy them, even look at them. Most of them still lived in poverty. And when the British warships came to China, the Qing Dynasty almost collapsed. We find that the military of China lagged behind England for 100 years. So the Qing dynasty cannot be called a great nation in Military.
The general welfare of its people is also a good indicator, because it can reflect the standard of life of the country. For example, China, in the 1960s, had very good and equal welfare. All the Chinese had house to live and job to work. The medicine and education, even food, are free. But that didn't mean the people are happy, or the nation is great, because they have no right to suspect the government. They can only extol their leader and the nation, no matter whether they really want to do that. So considering the people's freedom, you may think it is a horrible nation.
So， we can find that the achievements of elites or the general welfare of its people can only represent a one-sided indicator of great nation. And they can only reflect the extent of greatness in a single field. If you want to evaluate the greatness of nation, you need take in account not only these two factors, but also justice, Democracy, military power and so on.
Prompt: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
issue:
A nation can be described from many aspects, such as its people's well-being, the power of its military, its arts and technology status in the world, etc. So the "great" can be evaluated from these aspects. Therefore in my opinion, the surest indicator of a great nation is not existed. Neither the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists nor the general welfare of its people can represent the surest indicator of a great nation.
It should be admitted that the achievements of elites represent an indicator of a great nation, because it reflects the arts, technology or politics status of a nation. For example, the Qing dynasty had some excellent palaces in the Forbidden City and world famous china and paintings that exported to all over the world, especially the England. So you can say it's great in art. But if you want to say that it's a great nation, you will be wrong. Because the ordinary people in Qing dynasty had no chance to enjoy them, even look at them. Most of them still lived in poverty. And when the British warships came to China, the Qing Dynasty almost collapsed. We find that the military of China lagged behind England for 100 years. So the Qing dynasty cannot be called a great nation in Military.
The general welfare of its people is also a good indicator, because it can reflect the standard of life of the country. For example, China, in the 1960s, had very good and equal welfare. All the Chinese had house to live and job to work. The medicine and education, even food, are free. But that didn't mean the people are happy, or the nation is great, because they have no right to suspect the government. They can only extol their leader and the nation, no matter whether they really want to do that. So considering the people's freedom, you may think it is a horrible nation.
So， we can find that the achievements of elites or the general welfare of its people can only represent a one-sided indicator of great nation. And they can only reflect the extent of greatness in a single field. If you want to evaluate the greatness of nation, you need take in account not only these two factors, but also justice, Democracy, military power and so on.
