GMAT优秀作文参考范本（4）

飘香哈达

组别版主
性别
生日1900-1-1
积分3514
帖子2895
注册时间 2007-11-27

个人空间
相册

飘香哈达 2008-06-10 10:55 | 只看楼主 树型| 收藏| 小中大 1 ^#

GMAT优秀作文参考范本（4）

31.

Financial gain is certainly one factor to consider when selecting a career. But
many people do not, and should not, focus on this factor as the main one. The role that
money plays in career choice should depend on the priorities, goals and values of the
particular person making the choice.

The main problem with selecting a career primarily on the basis of money is that
for many people to do so would be to ignore one's personal values, needs, and larger
life goals. Indeed, many people appreciate this notion when they choose their career. For
example, some people join one of the helping professions, such as nursing, teaching or
social work, well aware that their career will not be financially lucrative, Their choice
properly stems from an overriding altruistic desire, not from an interest in financial gain.
Others choose to pursue intellectual or creative fulfillment—as writers, artists, or
musicians—knowing that they are trading off dollars for non-tangible rewards. Still
others forego economic gain to work as full-time parents; for these people, family and
children are of paramount importance in life. Finally, many people subordinate
economic prospects to their desire to live in a particular location; these people may
place a high value on recreation, their physical health, or being near a circle of friends.

Another problem with focusing primarily on money when selecting a career is that
it ignores the notion that making money is not an end in end of itself, but rather a means
of obtaining material goods and services and of attaining important goals—such as
providing security for oneself and one's family, lifelong learning, or freedom to travel
or to pursue hobbies. Acknowledging the distinction, one may nevertheless select a
career on the basis of money—since more money can buy more goods and services as
well as the security, freedom, and time to enjoy them. Even so, one must strike a
balance, for if these things that money is supposed to provide are sacrificed in the
pursuit of money itself, the point of having money—and of one's career selection—has
been lost.

In conclusion, economic gain should not be the overriding factor in selecting a
career. While for a few people the single-minded pursuit of wealth may be fulfillment
enough, most people should, and indeed do, temper the pursuit of wealth against other
values, goals, and priorities. Moreover, they recognize that money is merrily a means to
more important objectives, and that the pursuit itself may undermine the achievement of
these objectives.

32.

In order to determine whether advertisements reflect a nation's ideas, it is
necessary to determine whether advertisements present real ideas at all, and, if so,
whose ideas they actually reflect. On both counts, it appears that advertisements fail to
accurately mirror a nation's ideas.

Indisputably, advertisements inform us as to a nation's values, attitudes, and
priorities—what activities are worthwhile, what the future holds, and what is
fashionable and attractive. For instance, a proliferation of ads for sport-utility vehicles
reflects a societal concern more for safety and machismo than for energy conservation
and frugality, while a plethora of ads for inexpensive on-line brokerage services reflects
an optimistic and perhaps irrationally exuberant economic outlook. However, a mere
picture of a social more, outlook, or fashion is not an "idea"—it does not answer
questions such as "why" and "how"?

Admittedly, public-interest advertisements do present ideas held by particular
segments of society—for example, those of environmental and other public-health
interest groups. However, these ads constitute a negligible percentage of all
advertisements, and they do not necessarily reflect the majority's view. Consequently, to
assert that advertisements reflect a nation's ideas distorts reality. In truth, they mirror
only the business and product ideas of companies whose goods and services are
advertised and the creative ideas of advertising firms. Moreover, advertisements look
very much the same in all countries. Western and Eastern alike. Does this suggest that
all nations have essentially identical ideas? Certainly not.

In sum, the few true ideas we might see in advertisements are those of only a few
business concerns and interest groups; they tell us little about the ideas of a nation as a
whole.

33.

People are more likely to accept the leadership of those who have shown they can
perform the same tasks they require of others. My reasons for this view involve the
notions of respect and trust.

It is difficult for people to fully respect a leader who cannot, or will not, do what
he or she asks of others. President Clinton's difficulty in his role as Commander-in-
Chief serves as a fitting and very public example. When Clinton assumed this
leadership position, it was well known that he had evaded military service during the
Vietnam conflict. Military leaders and lower-level personnel alike made it clear that
they did not respect his leadership as a result. Contrast the Clinton case with that of a
business leader such as John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, who by way of his
training and experience as a computer engineer earned the respect of his employees.

It is likewise difficult to trust leaders who do not have experience in the areas
under their leadership. The Clinton example illustrates this point as well. Because
President Clinton Sacked military experience, people in the armed forces found it
difficult to trust that his policies would reflect any understanding of their interests or
needs. And when put to the test, he undermined their trust to an even greater extent with
his naive and largely bungled attempt to solve the problem of gays in the military. In
stark contrast, President Dwight Eisenhower inspired nearly devotional trust as well as
respect because of his role as a military hero in World War II.

In conclusion, it will always be difficult for people to accept leaders who lack
demonstrated ability in the areas under their leadership. Initially, such leaders will be
regarded as outsiders, and treated accordingly. Moreover, some may never achieve the
insider status that inspires respect and trust from those they hope to lead.

34.

The potential benefits of mandatory public service must be weighed against
administrative problems and concerns about individual liberty. On balance, the costs to
a nation and to the participants would probably exceed the benefits.

Admittedly, a colorable argument can be made for mandatory public service. It
would help alleviate "free-rider" problems, where those who do not contribute benefit
from the efforts of those who do. It would mitigate pressing social problems—with
education, public health and safety, and the environment. It might instill in participants a
sense of civic duty, community, and individual responsibility. Finally, it has worked on a
smaller scale, particularly in urban areas, where renewal projects succeed in making
communities safer, healthier, and more prosperous.

Far more compelling, however, are the arguments against mandatory public
service. First, who would make assignments and decide what projects are worthwhile,
and how would compliance be assured? Resolving enforcement issues would require
government control, in turn requiring increased taxes and/or cuts in other social
programs, thereby nullifying the benefits of mandatory public service. Second, a
mandatory system would open the floodgates to incompetence and inexperience. Finally,
the whole notion seems tantamount to Communism insofar as each citizen must
contribute, according to his or her ability, to a strong state. Modern history informs us
that such systems do not work. One could argue that mandatory public service is simply
a tax in the form of labor rather than dollars. However, compulsory labor smacks of
involuntary servitude, whereas financial taxes do not.

In conclusion, logistical and philosophical barriers to mandating public service
outweigh its potential benefits for the nation as well as for participants.

35.

I agree with the speaker that decisions and actions of businesses are too often
"infected" by short sighted motives. Admittedly, attention to immediate results and
short-term goals may be critical, and healthy, for survival of a fledgling company.
However, for most established businesses, especially large corporations, failure to
adequately envision the long-term implications of their actions for themselves and for
others is all-too common and appropriately characterized as a "disease."

The business world is replete with evidence that companies often fail to envision
the long-term implications of their actions for themselves. Businesses assume excessive
debt to keep up with booming business, ignoring the possibility of a future slowdown
and resulting forfeiture or bankruptcy. Software companies hastily develop new
products to cash in on this year's fad, ignoring bugs and glitches in their programs that
ultimately drive customers away. And manufacturers of inherently dangerous products
cut safety corners to enhance short-term profits, failing to see the future implications:
class action liability suits, criminal sanctions, and shareholder revolts.

Similarly, businesses fail to see implications of their actions for others. Motivated
only by the immediate bottom line, movie studios ignore the deleterious effects that
movie violence and obscenity may have on their patrons and on the society at large.
Captains of the energy industry pay lip service to environmental ramifications of
unbridled energy use for future generations, while their real concern is with ensuring
near-term dependence on the industry's products or services. And manufacturers of
dangerous products do a long-term disservice to others, of course, by cutting corners in
safety and health.

In sum, I think the criticism that businesses are too concerned with immediate
results and not concerned enough with the long-term effects of their actions and
decisions is for the most part a fair assessment of modern-day business.

36.

The relationship between teamwork and individual strength, energy, and
commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic
manner depends on: (1) the goals toward which the traits are directed, (2) the degree of
emphasis on teamwork, and (3) the job of the individual within an organization.

A person's ability to work effectively in a team is not in consistent per se with
personal strength, energy, and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manngr—for
example, through pilfering or back stabbing—these traits can operate against the
organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm's goals, these traits can motivate
other team members, thereby advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton
and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best individual
qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling a strong sense of team and
common purpose.

Nevertheless, over-emphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an
organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers;
otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue emphasis on teamwork may quell
initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting team goals. Also, teamwork can be
overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic
individuals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle healthy competition, thereby
defeating a firm's objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is
critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step fashion
toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout deadline.

In sum, individual strength, commitment, and energy can complement a strong
team approach; as long as individual autonomy is not undermined, all can operate in a
synergistic manner to achieve an organization's goals.

37.
Because scientific knowledge is increasingly important in our technological world
and in the practical world of jobs and careers, schools should devote sufficient time to
teaching mathematics and science. This is not to say, however, that schools should
devote less time to the arts or humanities. To the contrary, in a technological age the
study of arts and humanities is probably more important than ever—for three reasons.

First of all, studying the arts and humanities can help students become better
mathematicians and scientists. For example, recent studies of cognitive development
show that studying music at an early age can strengthen a child's later grasp of
mathematics. And understanding philosophical concepts has helped scientists recognize
their own presuppositions, and frame their central questions more accurately.

Secondly, studying the creative and intellectual achievement of others helps
inspire our own creativity and intellectual questioning. This is particularly important in
an era dominated by technology, where we run a serious risk of becoming automatons
who fit neatly into the efficient functioning of some system.

Finally, technology is valuable as an efficient means to our important goals. But
neither technology, nor the science on which it is founded, decides which goals are best,
or judges the moral value of the means we choose for their attainment. We need the
liberal arts to help us select worthwhile ends and ethical means.

In conclusion, schools should not devote less time to the arts and humanities.
These areas of study augment and enhance learning in mathematics and science, as well
as helping to preserve the richness of our entire human legacy while inspiring us to
further it. Moreover, disciplines within the humanities provide methods and contexts for
evaluating the morality of our technology and for determining its proper direction.

38.

The speaker claims that simple courtesy and good manners are disappearing from
modern life, and that the quality of our lives is therefore deteriorating. While I do
encounter frequent instances of discourtesy and bad manners, I also encounter many
instances of the opposite behavior. For this reason, and because negative experiences
tend to be more memorable and newsworthy, I find the speaker's claim to be dubious.

Most people encounter multiple instances of ordinary courtesy and good manners
every day—simple acts such as smokers asking whether anyone minds if they light up,
people letting others with fewer items ahead in grocery-store lines, and freeway drivers
switching lanes to accommodate faster drivers or those entering via on-ramps.
Admittedly, most people also encounter discourtesy or poor manners on a daily basis—
people using obscene language in public places where young children are present, and
business associates intentionally ignoring phone calls, to name a few. However, such
acts do not prove that good manners and courtesy are disappearing; they simply show
that both courtesy and discourtesy abound in everyday life. Thus the claim that courtesy
and good manners are disappearing grossly distorts reality.

Another -reason that the claim is suspect is that we tend to remember negative
encounters with people more so than positive ones, probably because bad experiences
tend to be more traumatic and sensational, if not more interesting to talk about. The
news stories that the media chooses to focus on certainly support this rationale.
However the fact that we remember, hear about, and read about discourtesy more than
about courtesy shows neither that discourtesy is increasing nor that courtesy is
decreasing. It simply shows that negative experiences leave "stranger impressions and
tend to be more sensational. In fact, I suspect that if one were to tally up one's daily
encounters with both types of behavior, one would conclude that good manners and
courtesy are far more prevalent than the opposite behavior.

In conclusion, the speaker's claim that common courtesy and good manners are
disappearing is not born out by everyday experience. I suspect the speaker has failed to
consider that negative experiences leave stronger impressions on our memory and are
more interesting to relate to others than positive ones.

39.

Are professional success and a fulfilling personal life mutually exclusive?
Probably not, although it is more difficult today to achieve both.

Undeniably, today's professionals must work long hours to keep their heads above
water, let alone to get ahead in life financially. This is especially true in Japan, where
cost of living, coupled with corporate culture, compel professional males to all but
abandon their families and literally to work themselves to death. While the situation
here in the states may not be as critical, the two-income family is now the norm, not by
choice but by necessity.

However, our society's professionals are taking steps to remedy the problem. First,
they are inventing ways—such as job sharing and telecommuting—to ensure that
personal life does not take a backseat to career. Second, they are setting priorities and
living those hours outside the workplace to the fullest. In fact, professional success
usually requires the same time-management skills that are useful to find time for family,
hobbies, and recreation. One need only look at the recent American presidents--Clinton,
Bush, Reagan, and Carter—to see that it is possible to lead a balanced life which
includes time for family, hobbies, and recreation, while immersed in a busy and
successful career. Third, more professionals are changing careers to ones which allow
for some degree of personal fulfillment and self-actualization. Besides, many
professionals truly love their work and would do it without compensation, as a hobby.
For them, professional fulfillment and personal fulfillment are one and the same.

In conclusion, given the growing demands of career on today's professionals, a
fulfilling personal life remains possible by working smarter, by setting priorities, and by
making suitable career choices.

40.

With the growth of the global economy and the need for international cooperation,
every human being has assumed a role as citizen of the world. Does this mean that our
roles as citizens of our respective nations are thereby superseded by our role as world
citizens, as the speaker suggests? Not at all. Good citizenship at one level is often
compatible with good citizenship at another. In fact, being a good citizen in one social
domain can help one be a better citizen in another.

Good global citizenship is not incompatible with good citizenship at other levels.
Consider, for example, one's efforts as a citizen to preserve the natural environment.
One particular person might, for example: (1) lobby legislators to enact laws preserving
an endangered redwood forest, (2) campaign for nationally-elected officials who
support clean air laws, and (3) contribute to international rainforest preservation
organizations. This one person would be acting consistently as a citizen of community,
state, nation and world.

Admittedly, conflicting obligations sometimes arise as a result of our new "dual"
citizenship. For example, a U.S. military official with an advisory role in a United
Nations peace-keeping force might face conflicting courses of action—one that would
secure U.S. military interests, and another that would better serve international interests.
However, the fact that such a conflict exists does not mean that either action is
automatically more obligatory—that is, that one's role as either U.S. citizen or world
citizen must invariably supersede the other. Instead, this situation should be resolved by
carefully considering and weighing the consequences of each course of action.

Moreover, being a good citizen in one social context can often help one be a better
citizen in another. For example, volunteering to help underprivileged children in one's
community might inspire one to work for an international child-welfare organization.
And inculcating civic values—such as charity and civic pride—may give rise to
personal traits of character that transfer to all social domains and contexts.

In sum, although our "dual" citizenship may at times lead to conflicts, one role
need not automatically take precedence over the other. Moreover, the relationship
between the two roles is, more often than not, a complementary one—and can even be
synergistic.

TOP

<<上一主题|下一主题>>

1/1页1 跳转到页

会员博客

会员相册

GMAT优秀作文参考范本（4）

GMAT优秀作文参考范本（4）