True success can be measured primarily in terms of the goals one sets for oneself.
To claim that a true success can be assessed chiefly by taking the goals one set for oneself, is an oversimplification. Although the goals behind successes are important, there are different aspect which regarding the situation, take precedence over evaluating the goals.
To begin with, many are counterexamples attesting that having a good intention toward a victory is not a considerable matter, when a damaging measure is taken toward that triumph. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, is the proverb summarizing my point. The unjustifiable acts have been done by the human beings which even their presumably good intentions cannot justify them. Consider those who advocate the success of the United States of America in World War II say that U.S.A’s aim was only to finish the World War. Of course, termination of genocides in the World War is merited. But ending of a war cannot be a true success when it is achieved by turning 129.000 people into ashes by atomic bombing toward the victory of the U.S.A.. Therefore the means of attainment of a purpose is a preponderating factor than is what primarily aimed per se.
Secondly, a true success is measured also by assessing what benefits go to whom_ whatever was the purpose of the achiever. In this sense, consider many researchers who made huge accomplishments out of serendipity. In discoveries and inventions, the researcher who is in search of answering a question, accidentally finds an answer to another question. For instance, uranium salts which spontaneously emit lights, accidentally darkened the negative films and was discovered by Henri Becquerel. While he was not intended to find this phenomena, can we not attribute a true success to his discovery which further made X-ray photography possible? Indeed we can, since the benefits of all the human beings of this discovery is important, rather than what was the intention of its discoverer.
However, the author is not entirely wrong in claiming that goals are an important factor behind any true success. A veneer of success, shatters when it is divulged that one has set a selfish and a dishonest aim for oneself. Becoming a doctor, for instance, is a success in having a career, since it takes a long time for one to become a doctor. But, where one who is becoming a doctor only recognize patients as costumers to derive money from, the goal here undermines the success because it is selfish and inhuman. Therefore, we see that to evaluate a goal we should take into consideration a set of different factors.
In short, as discussed, when a goal is succeed, there are different aspects that we should take into account. Besides evaluating the goal behind a success, we should also analyze the measures taken toward to realize a goal, and also evaluate what benefits gets to whom after it is accomplished.
- Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals. 80
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 73
- Claim: Major policy decisions should always be left to politicians and other government experts.Reason: Politicians and other government experts are more informed and thus have better judgment and perspective than do members of the general public. 40
- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a journal on environmental issues Over the past year the Crust Copper Company CCC has purchased over 10 000 square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia Mining copper on this land will in 80
- College students should be encouraged to pursue subjects that interest them rather than the courses that seem most likely to lead to jobs. 80
Comments
Full essay evaluations
Comments 1: if you are not sure the words, don't use them.
Definitions of 'per se'
adverb
by or in itself or themselves; intrinsically.
"it is not these facts per se that are important"
synonyms: in itself, of itself, by itself, in and of itself, as such, intrinsically, by its very nature, in essence, by definition, essentially
comments 2: what do you mean 'after "U.S.A."'?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 480 350
No. of Characters: 2302 1500
No. of Different Words: 239 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.681 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.796 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.858 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 170 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 88 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.857 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.948 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.28 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.508 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.147 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
hi again, I need your help to
hi again, I need your help to be sure whether using "per se" is correct:
"Therefore the means of attainment of a purpose is a preponderating factor than is what primarily aimed per se."
Here I think it is OK? is it?
And next question:
Should I use a punctuation after an abbreviation? In here my sentence is ended with U.S.A.. Is it correct to put two punctuation in a raw?
Oceans of thanks
Q1: it is OK. Take 'what
Q1: it is OK. Take 'what primarily aimed' as a noun.
Q2: One punctuation is enough.
have I used "per se" at the end of paragraph 2, in a correct way?
+
can I use "." after "U.S.A.", at the end of a sentence?