OG 1

The essay gives you an opportunity to show how effectively you can develop and express ideas. You should, therefore, take care to develop your point of view, present your ideas logically and clearly, and use language precisely.

Your essay must be written on the lines provided on your answer sheet—you will receive no other paper on which to write. You will have enough space if you write on every line, avoid wide margins, and keep your handwriting to a reasonable size. Remember that people who are not familiar with your handwriting will read what you write. Try to write or print so that what you are writing is legible to those readers.

Important Reminders:

·A pencil is required for the essay. An essay written in ink will receive a score of zero.

·Do not write your essay in your test book. You will receive credit only for what you write on your answer sheet.

· An off-topic essay will receive a score of zero.

·If your essay does not reflect your original and individual work, your test scores may be canceled.

You have twenty-five minutes to write an essay on the topic assigned below.

Essay 1

Most historical eras are defined largely by the ideas of the ruling classes, those who have money and power, as well as invested interest in maintaining a dominant position in society. However, modern society has not achieved technological, social, and cultural progress by listening blindly to kings and popes. Questioning authority has been, and still is essential to mankind’s advancement; without fresh ideas and challenges to convention, society would rot under autocrats and plutocracy.

Scientists, though they may be respected and revered today for expertise and knowledge, needed to fight for acceptance and recognition once upon a time. The Scientific Revolution saw the emergence of many discoveries and ideas concerning physics, astronomy, and biology. Galileo Galilei, deemed“the father of modern physics,” “the father of modern observational astronomy,” and “the Father of Modern Science,” was perhaps the most important contributor to the change in Western thinking in the 16th century. Whereas the Catholic Church, as well as the majority of people believed that Earth was the center of around which our universe revolves, Galileo supported heliocentrism, which is the idea that the solar system revolves around the Sun. While writing his major work on this theory, Galileo refused to simply support the geocentric view of the earth that his ally, the powerful Pope Urban VIII, asked him to advocate. The scientist even publicly ridiculed the authoritative idea of geocentrism, and alienated the Church, which placed him under house arrest for the rest of his life. However harsh this punishment was, Galileo’s unswaying opposition to the Church’s incorrect beliefs contributed to the birth of scientific thinking and rationality. Galileo proved that the only way to change widely accepted and faulty beliefs was to challenge those with the power to demand loyalty to such ways of thinking.

For many centuries, in most cultures around the world, the primary roles of women were those of mothers and wives. Though the social role of females served a practical purpose for the continuation of civilization, the traditional niche for women was deeply unsatisfying and limiting. In the 1960s, the second feminist movement, led by women like Gloria Steinem and Betty Friedan, advocated equal rights, both legally and socially. Problems such as unequal wages, sexual harassment, and unfair custodial laws were combated by protests, lawsuits, advocacy, and even bra-burning; eventually the country, as well as government leaders, began to change attitudes toward female societal roles. Ultimately, this Second-Wave Feminist Movement contributed to the creation of equal rights laws allowing women to attend the same public schools, hold the same jobs, and receive the same opportunities as men. Now there are more young women than men attending universities in America, which demonstrates the progress the country has made toward spreading out economic and political power evenly between the sexes.

Whether authority ought to be feared or revered is irrelevant. History proves that advancement is only possible when individuals question the validity of widely-held beliefs and practices, or refuse to take at face-value the words of powerful authorities.

Essay 2

There is no question about the importance of challenging the opinions of authorities; friction is necessary for progress. However, there is such a thing as badly timed and unfounded criticism. In the issues of national security and priorities, the public must give the government the benefit of the doubt that decisions are being made for the greater good. If the public elects and entrusts authorities with the improvement, safety, and well-being of the nation, then certain classified information and personal behaviors must either be hidden or left as private matters.

Recently, the Australian founder of the website WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, illegally posted over hundreds of thousands of classified documents on the Iraq and Afghan wars online in objection to these military activities, allowing the public unprecedented access to top-secret military information. Assange, a computer hacker with a reputation as a genius, fully opposes the U.S. military’s conduct and approach to the wars, and has made these papers available to incite public protest against the fighting. However, Assange purposely did not eliminate the names of hundreds of Afghan and Iraqi citizens providing intelligence to the U.S. government, thus endangering these individuals by exposing them to the terrorist organizations. Assange’s actions have not only harmed the West’s interests, but also endangered thousands of average citizens needlessly. Peaceful protesting and criticism are usually a beneficial option when criticizing authority, but Assange chose to ignore the consequences of his particular type of rebellion. This is a prime example of senseless opposition to authority; actions that are selfish and frivolous will cost precious lives, time, and money.

The Lewinsky Scandal of 1998 is another example of nonsensically questioning the actions of authority. When the former president of America Bill Clinton was accused of having sexual relations with intern Monica Lewinsky while in his second term, the public was stirred up into frenzy by prosecutor Kenneth Starr, Linda Tripp, and a legal team of attorneys who sought to impeach the ultimate authority in the U.S.. However, while adultery is considered a moral sin, it is also widely acknowledged to be a private matter between husband and wife, only extending to immediate family. While the New York Times and other major papers printed juicy, front-page news of the trial’s scintillating results day after day, hundreds of thousands of tax-payer dollars were being spent on persecuting a man whose loyalty to both the country and its citizens had shown no wavering. Clinton’s accomplishments as a president and former governor were overlooked simply because he had an affair with a 22-year-old girl. Ultimately, what Starr and Tripp proved by criticizing the president’s behavior was only that he was not a loyal spouse, but in no way did they prove that Clinton was not a capable, qualified, and steadfast leader. When criticizing authority, there must not only be a viable reason to do so, but also a legitimate purpose as well. The Clinton trial proved that there was no beneficial or useful point to publicly shaming a president.

There are many instances in history that prove the usefulness of questioning leaders and commonplace ideology. Ghandi and Martin Luther King, Jr. protested for noble purposes. However, senseless and public criticism is not only a waste of time and money, but also dangerous to innocent lives and national morale.