People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are also the most critical of it.
The author of the statement above ties the commitment of individuals to being critical of a policy or idea. However, we cannot tell it for sure that the commitment and being critical toward a policy or idea come together. Although on some occasions it may hold true, the author has made a fallacy of hasty generalization linking the commitment and the being critical to a cause.
People adhere to a policy or idea no matter they are critical of it or not. The first main reason is the money. Especially in the poor nations, always there are people who do things to earn money regardless that they are critical of it or not. Consider the assassins. Are they as critical to the idea of killing people as they are commit to murdering? Most of them do this merely for money. The thirst of money and power made people to commit to ideas. Such a commitment is a way toward meeting their quenchless thirst of power and money, rather than something they intellectually hold as valid and being critical of it.
Secondly, one might commit to a cause because he or she is brainwashed not to think otherwise. One of the main pillars of such systems is to block the target's mind in order not to think critically. Still nowadays, many “legitimate villainies” are done in terms of ideological laws. The religious terrorists are taught that it is the will of God to take the other lives. As the God is depicted in their mind as an irritable entity, they do not dare to question the killing orders, under the title of God’s will. It is the scare of a false God that such people perpetrate the most vicious things blindly, not that they are a bit critical toward it.
However, we should also maintain that it is possible that commitment and being critical toward a cause can come together. When an advocate knows that there are lots of problems with a policy, and the problems are least by taking such a policy, he/she is also the most committed person to that cause as there is not any better way to take. But, there is no way to prove this by an example; obviously, when one openly criticizes a cause, can barely be a defender of that cause either. For instance, it is possible that Gandhi was the most critical person toward social disobedience, but there is no evidence affirming that.
In short, as discussed, there is no firm relation between the commitment to a cause and being critical toward it, as the author wrongly assumes. However, it is tenable that someone be both adherent to a policy or idea, and at the same time, be the most critical of it. But, even this cannot be proved by examples, since one who backs a cause cannot also criticize about it publicly.
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2019-06-05 | Prodyut Das | 58 | view |
2019-06-05 | Prodyut Das | 58 | view |
- Evidence suggests that academic honor codes, which call for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeavors and to notify a faculty member if they suspect that others have cheated, are far more successful than are other methods at deterring che 70
- claim: Any piece of information referred to as a fact should be mistrusted, since it may well be proven false in the future.Reason: Much of the information that people assume is factual actually turns out to be inaccurate. 80
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 80
- The vice president of human resources at Climpson Industries sent the following recommendation to the company's president."In an effort to improve our employees' productivity, we should implement electronic monitoring of employees' Internet use from their 75
- Any leader who is quickly and easily influenced by shifts in popular opinion will accomplish little. 83
Comments
Can I expect 5 if I use more
Can I expect 5 if I use more diverse words? And is the outline good for 5 or above?
You can think in your ways,
You can think in your ways, here goes another angle:
The topic looks paradoxical, but it happens:
One possible explanation for the paradox is that individuals most firmly committed to an idea or policy are often the same people who are most knowledgeable on the subject, and therefore are in the best position to understand and appreciate the problems with the idea or policy.
Another possible explanation is that those who are committed to an idea or policy would be more concerned and loyal to it, so they tend to be critical of it with the earnest inclination to improving it.
There are many relevant examples that can lend credence to this explanation for the paradox nature of the speaker's claim:
For instance, Edward Teller, the so-called "father of the atom bomb", was firmly committed to America's policy of gaining military superiority over the Japanese and the Germans; yet at the same time he attempted fervently to dissuade the US military from employing his technology for destruction, while becoming the most visible advocate for various peaceful and productive applications of atomic energy.
Another example is George Washington, who was quoted as saying that all the world's denizens should abhor war whenever they may find it. Yet it was the same general who played a key role in the Revolutionary War between Britain and USA.
A third example was Einstein, who while committed to' the mathematical soundness of his theories about relativity could not reconcile them with the equally compelling quantum theory which emerged later in Einstein's life. In fact, Einstein spent the last twenty years of his life criticizing his own theories and struggling to determine how to reconcile them with newer theories.
flaws:
No. of Words: 481 while No. of Different Words: 205
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 24 15
No. of Words: 481 350
No. of Characters: 2120 1500
No. of Different Words: 205 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.683 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.407 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.44 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 68 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.042 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.233 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.298 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.507 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.126 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5