If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.
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.
Each individual and entity often has a different set of goals to achieve, which frequently requires a careful analysis of the process towards them. Some argue that the idea of achieving these goals is what ultimately counts and any means to do so is justified, as the prompt states. Others, on the other hand, emphasize the importance of evaluating whether a certain way to attain them is more ideal than another, in terms of, say, morality. This is undoubtedly a subjective matter in nature, but a quick reflection on a few past events, ranging from a series of corporate frauds in recent years to historical non-violent movements, lends credence to the view that the statement can be a dangerous idea.
First, the idea that any means can be justified as long as the goal is worthy can lead to extreme actions that result in devastating outcomes. If we revisit the recent history of corporate frauds, committed by profit-driven, often greedy corporations, it is evident that how one achieves certain goals should be in fact carefully considered. For instance, the case of HSBC’s involvement in money laundering for drug cartels shook the world, revealing the company’s mentality to do whatever takes to achieve one goal - to secure profits. Not only was this action illegal, but it also led to destabilization of the financial market, thereby negatively affecting millions of lives across the globe. Therefore, although there is nothing wrong with aiming for higher profits per se, if we justify any means as long as the goal is worthwhile, we could trigger such detrimental actions.
Another example that illustrates the ways in which how to achieve a goal is equally important is historical debate on violence. For example, Martin Luther King Jr. is known for his advocacy for non-violent social justice movements. In a tremendous effort to fight against the Jim Crows laws, he believed that violence as a means to do so would only beget more violence. Given the social landscape in which the black community was constantly brutalized by the police as well as a white supremacy group, he could have easily resorted to violence but instead chose to draw on reason and logic. This insight into human nature coupled with his judgement about the importance of the non-violent means to achieve a worthy goal called equality serves as evidence that how one achieves that goal demands a careful and sober analysis. Hence, it stands to reason that the presented statement does not always hold true.
Yet, while the examples above clearly call for a careful view of the statement, we cannot go as far to conclusively argue that the mentality to “do whatever takes” always entails negative ramifications. To give an example, it is not uncommon for a student to be taught the importance of being resilient when he or she faces a challenge in the process of accomplishing a goal, such as getting an A for mathematics. If this mindset is carefully nurtured and encouraged, the student can learn to be resourceful and proactive enough to come up with solutions to the challenge by asking himself or herself what would be possible through proper means. However, as this still requires a clear guidance by the teacher to ensure that certain actions such as cheating cannot be justified under any circumstance, it is fair to argue that this mindset nontheless needs to be considered with caution.
In summary, while there are numerous arguments to be made for both sides, the cases of HSBC and Martin Luther King Jr. exemplify the idea that any means taken to achieve a goal cannot be justifiable as long as the goal is a worthy one. Striving to achieve a challenging goal should be encouraged in certain cases, but justifying actions that are not only illegal or immoral but also destructive to others in this process cannot be supported.
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the manager of WWAC radio station."To reverse a decline in listener numbers, our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock-music format. The decline has occurred despite population growth i 88
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 81
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.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 23
- Any leader who is quickly and easily influenced by shifts in popular opinion will accomplish little.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 50
- According to a recent report, cheating among college and university students is on the rise. However, Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code, which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic en 34
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 403, Rule ID: DT_DT
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'an' or 'A' is left.
Suggestion: an; A
...f accomplishing a goal, such as getting an A for mathematics. If this mindset is car...
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'still', 'therefore', 'well', 'while', 'for example', 'for instance', 'in fact', 'in summary', 'such as', 'as well as', 'on the other hand']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.2125 0.240241500013 88% => OK
Verbs: 0.161111111111 0.157235817809 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0972222222222 0.0880659088768 110% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0625 0.0497285424764 126% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0263888888889 0.0444667217837 59% => OK
Prepositions: 0.123611111111 0.12292977631 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0444444444444 0.0406280797675 109% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83067302828 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0430555555556 0.030933414821 139% => OK
Particles: 0.00138888888889 0.0016655270985 83% => OK
Determiners: 0.109722222222 0.0997080785238 110% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0194444444444 0.0249443105267 78% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0194444444444 0.0148568991511 131% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 3853.0 2732.02544248 141% => OK
No of words: 646.0 452.878318584 143% => OK
Chars per words: 5.96439628483 6.0361032391 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0414809386 4.58838876751 110% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.376160990712 0.366273622748 103% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.286377708978 0.280924506359 102% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.195046439628 0.200843997647 97% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.137770897833 0.132149295362 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83067302828 2.79330140395 101% => OK
Unique words: 332.0 219.290929204 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513931888545 0.48968727796 105% => OK
Word variations: 66.0840302782 55.4138127331 119% => OK
How many sentences: 21.0 20.6194690265 102% => OK
Sentence length: 30.7619047619 23.380412469 132% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5518634731 59.4972553346 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 183.476190476 141.124799967 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.7619047619 23.380412469 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.857142857143 0.674092028746 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.21349557522 19% => OK
Readability: 59.3996756597 51.4728631049 115% => OK
Elegance: 1.52222222222 1.64882698954 92% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.386538174557 0.391690518653 99% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.105707374363 0.123202303941 86% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0604411499511 0.077325440228 78% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.552497732899 0.547984918172 101% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.113047102771 0.149214159877 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167247434722 0.161403998019 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0518055979577 0.0892212321368 58% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.45329700942 0.385218514788 118% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.00214946187369 0.0692045440612 3% => Paragraphs are so close to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.285037010331 0.275328986314 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0122825997363 0.0653680567796 19% => Paragraphs are similar to each other.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 10.4325221239 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 5.30420353982 170% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.88274336283 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 11.0 7.22455752212 152% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 3.66592920354 191% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 2.70907079646 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 18.0 13.5995575221 132% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.