<p>Prompt: Is the world changing for the better?</p>
<p>Since the dawn of mankind, the world has experienced a multitude of change. Whether for good or for bad, when viewed holistically, the human species has advanced from its nascent state, and taken Planet Earth along with it. The easiest perspective with which to analyze positive change is irrefutably the past, and by applying the empirical precedents present within history, one can see how far the world will improve in the future. Philosophy, science, and the present state of affairs all point to a world that changes for the better.</p>
<p>Friedrich Hegel, a German philosopher in the Enlightenment period, created the Hegelian dialectic, which explains the relentless human advance toward perfection. His dialectic operates around a thesis-antithesis-synthesis construct, with every event a resolution of previously contradictory ideas. For example, the period of Transcendentalism combined the principles of Puritanism and the Enlightenment into a “higher” state of thinking. Not only is history itself a manifestation of the Hegelian dialectic, but every natural object is as well. Hegel perceived contradiction within each living entity, contradiction that would drive them toward positive change as well. The Hegelian dialectic predicts the never-ending movement toward the Absolute, a synthesis where no contradiction exists. So far, Hegel’s philosophy has been correct: man continues to grow.</p>
<p>In a similar vein, Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection illustrates the natural propensity to change for the better. According to Darwin, within a population, those who possess the most favorable mutations will live to reproduce and continue their trait. Eventually, the entire species will evolve and retain this trait. Mankind itself has utilized this practice, and just like the rest of the living world, it has embedded the “survival of the fittest” mentality within his conscience. Therefore, every action man takes, whether good or evil, will always be a result of a desire for positive change. Incidentally, most humans have coinciding moralities which outweigh those who possess distorted view of “positive change.” Biological evolution is merely the root of evolution in all facets of life, for as a whole, the world is evolving. </p>
<p>With some of the underlying assumptions revealed, present-day society does show positive change. The most notable change revolves around the explosive growth in technology . For example, the Internet has established previously non-existent lines of communication all over the world. At the same time, economies are more connected in a push toward globalization. Though hegemony has shifted from the once dominant United States of America, areas such as the Middle East, Africa, South America, and Asia are growing at incalculable rates. All of this change cannot be definitively designated as positive, but these rays of hope still permeate through what is now the Information Age.</p>
<p>I know the most conventional way to answer this topic would be talking about what exactly is going on in the world today, and how its good/bad. However, I think this 2 theoretical examples –> reality can work…only I probably didn’t pull it off. I should have revised both the first sentence of the last paragraph and the last sentence (haha the concluding sentence doesnt even make sense, I just wanted to fill it out before time ran out). It would probably read “but it is evident that the vicissitudes of the Information Age are promising”…or something like that, if I made myself time to revise it.
So, what kind of score do you think this would get? Is it better to just do a simpler essay and play safe, rather than try to do something more complex and fail to get the argument crystallized by the end? I noticed that there have been several essays on this topic recently on CC - and also Cuong can really use philosophy in his examples! I’d appreciate any comments.</p>
I think the best way to prepare for the essay is just to keep doing them; I’ve used Hegel at least 3-4 times in an SAT essay already, and since I know some of his nuances (enough to get by on an essay at least), it gets easier to write about him after each time. The same can be said for other examples. I wrote about Darwin at least 3 times in SAT essays, out of like 20.</p>