People's behavior is determined largely by forces not of their own making. 

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.

The aphorism "You can do whatever you put your mind to!" seems to represent the pith of modern western, American, thought on human will and behavior. However, this claim oversimplifies an individual's strength against society. Although to a point, an individual can choose to behave exactly as one is willing, however, a helpless individual is bound to be affected (whether positively or negatively) by the forces of society. 

The Outlier, the single best-selling non-fiction of our time, author Gladwell compares two of the most intelligent individuals in America. Two men who had the top IQ's in America came out with different results in their lives. One man became a leading politician who was the mastermind behind the famous Manhattan Project, the other lived a rather mundane life in Ohio. What caused this divergence? Gladwell, agreed by many of his readers, points to the importance of perspiration over innate talent in guaranteeing an individual's success. The popularity of his conclusions in this book represents many people's belief that an individual can shape one's own success working sedulously enough.

It is true that one needs to put in the hours to succeed and become an outlier in the field, but one should not overlook the circumstances that allow for individuals to put in the effort. Bill Gates was born into an affluent family and had access to a computer lab at 17, at a time when computers were not widespread. It was because his high school had decided to invest in a computer lab that Bill Gates was able to toil numerous hours on the computer. A combination of luck and effort shaped his success.

Gainsayers to the claim that people's behaviors are determined largely by external forces would provide self-made millionaires as one of their most compelling evidence, that they were born into poor families and made themselves up. However, the rarity of such examples proves just that it is extremely difficult to overcome situations one is born into. If people's behavior were determined largely by their own making, it would not be as difficult for people to overcome poverty that has been handed down to them spanning multiple generations. The case is similar for minorities in corporate America. Strong-willed individuals work assiduously to climb the corporate ladder yet report to facing the "glass ceiling" or the "bamboo ceiling." It is reductionist to simply say to these people to "try harder" because "you can do anything you put your mind to!".

In conclusion, if an individual puts great effort into realizing his or her will, he or she is highly likely to achieve it. However, this does not mean that individuals are able to behave entirely according to their internal will. Situations not of their making will inevitably affect an individual's behavior and decisions. External forces may largely determine an individual's success.

Cetadone, a new therapy for the treatment of addiction to the illegal drug tarocaine, has been proven effective in a study by Regis Hospital in the western part of New Portsmouth. The study involved local tarocane addicts who responded to a newspaper ad offering free treatment. Participants who received cetadone and counseling were 40% more likely to recover than were patients assigned to a control group and receiving only counseling. conventional therapies have only a 20% recovery rate. Therefore the best way to reduce deaths from tarocaine overdoes throughout all of New Portsmouth would be to fund cetadone therapy for all tarocaine addicts.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to determine whether the argument is reasonable. Be sure to explain what affects the answers to these questions would have on the validity of the argument.


The author recommends the funding of cetadone for all tarocaine addicts, claiming the new treatment will reduce deaths from overdose throughout all of New Portsmouth. The author bases his logic on some fallacious grounds that must be strengthened through answering some critical questions.

The author bases his argument solely on the results of a study. Although the data he or she provides has to be taken as is, some parts of the study are questionable.

The first concerns sampling method of the study: Is the sample in the study representative of the population? Because the final recommendation is for "all of New Portsmouth," the sample should be appropriately representative of the whole population of tarocaine addicts in New Portsmouth. The author states that participants of the study responded to a newspaper ad offering free treatment. The sample was not randomly selected from the pool. Participants opted in. This could bias the sample accordingly. Perhaps people who were poorer volunteered, which may have biased the participants, in that the sample gathered may have less healthier diets, confounding the results of the study. Showing that, despite the sampling method, the sample gathered was random enough to represent the population would strengthen the author's recommendation.

A control group was used, differentiating no drug use and drug use. However, the author does not mention that the control group received a placebo. Could the results have been a placebo effect? The patients receiving the drug may have been biased if they knew they were receiving the new treatment. If the control group were not given a placebo, then the author's recommendation relies on weak evidence, because we are not certain that the increased recovery is attributable to cetadone.

The recommendation seems overly confident that cetadone therapy is the absolute panacea for all tarocaine addicts of New Portsmouth. Will Cetadone work for all tarocaine addicts in all of New Portsmouth? The study results blatantly tell us that cetadone did not work for 100% of participants. Less than half, 40%, of the participants who received Cetadone recovered from this addiction.  It is unwarranted to claim that this therapy will work for all tarocaine addicts of New Portsmouth.

Details about the sampling method and how the study was conducted will need to be outlined to assess the validity of the author's recommendation.


--

comments:
did not leave enough time to finish with flourish.
- missed some details in reading the prompt that would have given more solid support points
(study was conducted on western part of New Portsmouth -- recommendation applies to all of New Portsmouth -- is this fine to extrapolate?)
did not finish reading the instructions ...

Argument - Home heating oil

Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced twenty days with below-average temperatures, and local weather forecasters throughout the region predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Because of these developments, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil.

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation. 


The author provides a couple pieces of evidence to recommend investing in Consolidated Industries, contending that the company that has major business in retail sale of home heating oil will be profitable because of an increased demand for the following several years. The validity of this recommendation can be questioned on many grounds. Critical questions must be answered in order to assess the validity of this recommendation. 

The author makes the major assumption that what happened in the past will certainly happen in the future. Will the weather pattern actually continue for several more years? It is one thing to forecast the weather, but a forecast does not guarantee the weather for years to come. Will the following years actually be as cold as the forecasters are predicting? Although the facts cannot be disputed that the region experienced below average cold weather for the past few years, it is difficult to forecast into several years into the future. If the following years do not experience the same coldness, Consolidated Industries may not see a profit surge amidst the less-than-expected chill.

Even if the years to follow do turn out to be as cold, will people actually use more heating oil, or even keep using heating oil? The author assumes yes, without apt justification. There are many possibilities for people not choosing to use heating oil. Perhaps heating oil has been costly and people want to switch to a cheaper option with so many cold days. The author mentions new homes will further increase the demand. It is also a leap to assume that the new homes would continue use the traditional method of heating. Modern development could allow for these homes to be heated with a different type of fuel. In such a case, the new homes built in this region will not increase the demand for heating oil, and therefore do nothing to Consolidated Industries' profits. 

The author makes the bold recommendation to Invest in Consolidated Industries without considering why other investment options would not be as profitable. The author essentially is assuming that all customers of heating oil will buy from Consolidated Industries. Even if the future were to prove cold, and the people to demand more heating oil, the author fails to mention why those people would choose Consolidated Industries over competitors. Seeing a good market opportunity, other companies could jump in to compete for a share of the profit, thereby reducing the effect of the increased demand on Consolidated's profitability. 

While the author presents an interesting recommendation, the logical chain has several gaps that cannot be justified with the given information. The author could strengthen his claim by

(did not finish :( ...)  

Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. 

     Ever since the Industrial Revolution, modernity has been wiping out wilderness areas to develop them for human use. Nowadays, a heightened concern for the environment has been calling for preservation laws. Such laws presume that preserving nature in its state is the responsibility of mankind and that it is in the long-run better for humanity. However, pressing such laws may not always be the best. Nations should contain laws to preserve wilderness areas that are not harmful to the lives of humans. 

    One of the cardinal reasons for preserving wilderness areas is the idea that humans--at the top of the food chain and able to exercise morality--hold such a responsibility. Furthermore, taking care of the environment can, in turn, be beneficial to humanity. With present-day hours replete with technology, concrete buildings, and asphalt roads, the modern person retreats to a replenishing vacation in the comfort of Mother Nature. Preserving the wilderness means preserving the variety of animal species. An extreme example is the De-militarized Zone (DMZ) in the border of North and South Korea. The land has been left at its wartime state for nearly half-a-century; the DMZ shows the vast array of wild animals and plant species that are impossible to observe in industrialized towns and cities. In such cases that nature enriches human lives, nations should preserve wilderness areas in their natural state. 

    

   However, nations should take precaution in deciphering the effects of certain wilderness areas. The law should not enforce the preservation of all wilderness areas without discrimination.  Some areas may be deleterious to human life. Some areas in Africa have mosquito-ridden swampy areas that are dangerous for nearby inhabitants. Such areas, if left at their natural state, fosters Malaria, a fatal disease. In such cases, the government should work to develop those areas for the welfare of its people.

 

  Not all wilderness areas are alike. Nations must not pass laws that indiscriminately call for a preservation of all wilderness areas. Preservation laws should mandate that one consider the area's effect on the lives of its people. All in all, as long as the wilderness in question is not harmful to humans, nations should preserve nature in its state to ultimately enrich the lives of modern-day people.

To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest and moral ethical standards.

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.

--------- 

What is an effective leader? Any great leader must be able to make quick, smart decisions and manage his people well. However in the case of public officials, an effective leader must be able to stir up the public's opinion. Along these lines, I strongly agree to that a public official  must be moral and ethical in order to be an effective leader. Two compelling real-life cases bolster my assertion.

Recently, there was much wringing of hands as well as fulminations by the public around some of Governor Chris Christie's actions in New Jersey. To give an example from many, Gov. Christie blocked off a few lanes in a specific part of New Jersey that caused inconveniences for people. Not only was this found intentional, but it was also found immoral because he had done this egregious thing because of a personal malicious feeling towards the officials in that part of town. The public was enraged. This incident raises the question whether an effective leader must necessarily possess high moral standards. Christie had previously been deemed as an effective leader, in so far as being considered for the presidential nominee. However, this one incident more than piqued the public and its view soured towards him. After this and a couple more similar cases, the public is unlikely to consider Christie an effective leader suited for any better position. A public official must, therefore, maintain his or her scruples.

An analogous case in history is compelling in this regard. Emperor Napoleon is still considered to be among men who amassed the most political power in the history of the world. However, even he, at times, did not show the highest ethics and morals. He was traveling with his troops and stopped at Jaffa, inevitably because most of his troops had been afflicted with an infectious disease. Many were dying. It is said that Napoleon ruthlessly killed off many soldiers so that the disease would be contained. The Emperor is said to have returned to France blaming the disease for the death of most of his troops. Napoleon's immoral acts was not limited to this one event. Although history may have forgotten much of Napoleon's misdoings and remembers him as a once-powerful leader, this must not have been true for the people under his government. For the people who are actually under the person's power, a moral leader would make the effective leader.

In sum, public officials must have high morals to win the hearts of the public, and hence be an effective leader.


-----
comments:
practice writing more so I'm not lagged in searching for words.
logical structure at the expense of wording is better.

Argument 2. Central Plaza

The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism throughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels."

Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.



The author recommends that Central Plaza prohibit skateboarding to increase its sales. The author claims that the decrease in sales is due to the increase in skateboarding. This may be a specious argument that calls for answers to some critical questions. 

All questions ultimately lead to the central question: Did skateboarding really cause the decline in business? 

The author notes that sales in Central Plaza "steadily decreased" while skateboarding "increased dramatically" in the past two years. Just how did these figures coincide? Perhaps the sales gradually and slowly decreased over the whole span of two years, and skateboarding was a surge in the last month or so of this same period. In this case, it would be unreasonable to make the connection that skateboarding was the determining factor in decreasing sales, and thus the author's recommendation would fail. 

On a few aspects, the author assumes a causation where the relationship simply may be one of correlation. The author needs to provide tangible evidence that increased skateboarding directly detracted people from shopping in the area. He may provide surveys of shoppers that ask them how they feel about the skateboarders crowding the Plaza, how their presence is affecting the shoppers' inclination to shop at the stores, how their perception of the Plaza has changed, etc. 

Is it the skateboarders who vandalized and littered in the Plaza, or did they somehow indirectly affect others to vandalize and litter? The author provides no evidence that skateboarders vandalized the property. He may provide surveillance clips, if it were indeed their deed. Skateboarders may not have to do anything with the people who are vandalizing (perhaps a gang moved into town). Maybe teenage delinquents chose this Plaza to hang out with their skateboarding friends. Another possibility is that increased skateboarding indirectly affected littering by rendering the mood that let people think the Plaza is a place to do so. Perhaps people associate skateboarders with delinquency, and think it is permissible in the area to engage in those acts for themselves. The latter possibility of skateboarders indirectly affecting people's perception of the Plaza as a place to litter and vandalize may be more difficult to capture, however, it is a critical question that must be answered to weigh the author's recommendation. 

In sum, the author must provide tangible evidence to answer whether the effect is due to causation or simple correlation. If there is significant proof that increased skateboarding affected decreased sales, the author's recommendation to prohibit skateboarding to recover sales may produce the intended outcome.

Issue 127. Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.

Issue 127. Knowing about the past cannot help people to make important decisions today.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.


    Knowledge about the past does not guarantee an outcome when applied to today's decisions. However, such knowledge informs people to make smarter decisions. 

    People who accede that knowledge about the past cannot help make today's decisions would argue that every situation is unique, and therefore, a successful decision in the past cannot be applied to achieve the same today. Take for example, the movement of stock prices. One cannot make decisions about the future from past behavior with certainty. In such a case, one cannot guarantee that a decision made today based on Company A's previous stock prices will be successful. However, many believe that being informed of past behavior will help them make smarter decisions. 

    We learn history to learn from past mistakes to make better decisions today. Granted, we will not be faced with the exact same circumstances today. However, today's quagmire will parallel at least one instance from the past. For example, take the case of the nuclear bombings that ended World War II. Because humanity observed the atrocities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the cataclysm effected by nuclear weapons, not only those in power but all of humanity knows we must take heed in deciding to employ such weapons in the future. Knowledge of what happened in the past is informing people to be more careful in making decisions. 

    Previous records of natural disasters help us to make more informed decisions today. Hurricane Sandy was a destructive force that wiped out a part of the nation, leaving many to despair. Speculators claim, however, that the extent of the damages would have been lessened if smarter measures were taken. Recently, in preparing for Storm Hercules, the government based its decisions on Sandy to be smarter in facing a forthcoming natural disaster of similar scale. 

    Even intuitive decisions are informed by knowledge formed in and of the past--a bestselling author, Malcolm Gladwell, claims in his book "Blink". Gladwell explicates that those successful decisions that were made in a blink of a second are actually a product of years, often decades, of experience. A head firefighter shouts at his crew to leave the burning house and a moment later, the whole house crumbles down. During an interview afterwards, the firefighter recalls that his decision was intuitive. He had not deliberated his decision. However, Gladwell proves that it was his years of experience as a firefighter that helped him at once to gather up knowledge of past experiences to quickly--although subconsciously--make a smart decision. 

   Although gainsayers may claim that past knowledge cannot guarantee the outcome of current decisions, learning from the past will veritably inform us to make smarter decisions.