Issue Essay:No field of study can advance significantly unless it incorporates knowledge and experience from outside that field.

No field of study can advance significantly unless it incorporates knowledge and experience from outside that field.

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.

At a first glance the statement seems very much convincing to me, however thorough research put me to partially agree with the statement. The author states that unless we have information and experience form out the field, we cannot significantly advance in main concentration.

I partially agree with the statement, although it is important for everyone to have knowledge of the other fields, but to have experience is not mandatory. I would like to support my argument with a pragmatic example. Suppose if I am medical officer I should have enough information about the working conditions of the labor in various industries, so that I can give them precautions for their health safety. Moreover I can treat according to the working condition they are exposed to; however it is not essential for me to have experience as a worker.

The shortcoming of the having a comprehensive experience of the other field it that, firstly, it is not possible for anyone to spent enough energy to have experience of the other fields, and neither it is pragmatic. Additionally if we invest enough time and energy to have experience of the other fields, we would deviate from the main concentration, which is neither productive nor pragmatic approach.

Secondly, in the current competitive age, unless we have information about many other fields we are unable to progress. For example, in order to survive in this competitive environment we should we able use internet efficiently.

I would like to add another example, I am a student of Economics, in order to have more understanding of the field I should have proper understanding of mathematics, as well Statistics. In case I have abstruse understanding of the fields I will not be able to interpret result of the economic results; as a result I will have a spurious understanding of things.

Similarly an engineering student needs to have command over mathematics, as long as he is going to play with the formulae. But in case he fails to understand the mathematical calculations in his studies he will not be able to bring out proper result.

Thirdly, there are some universal subjects, there is a dire need of understanding these subjects, due to reason that, no subject of can survive without them. Among these subjects is mathematics, which is backbone of the all subjects. The point does not end here, every other field, including business, medicine, social sciences and arts are inter dependent on each other.

Forth, I would like to mention some exceptional cases, in which even though if a person has not knowledge of the other fields, still he can survive. This rule applies if one does anything as amateur. We can take example of paintings, and writing. In these field event the professional do not have enough knowledge of other fields, they progress far beyond.

Concluding, with the emerging competition among the various fields there is dire need of understanding of knowledge of other fields. To best of my understanding, until and unless various fields incorporate knowledge and experience of other fields it is hard to progress efficiently.

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

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

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.

Human behavior is effected by many of the aspects his surroundings. They include the lessons which have been taught by our parents, schooling, and the company.

A man is a social animal; therefore each aspect of his behavior is determined by the environment in which he lives.

We can take many examples in our daily lives. For example a kid who is exposed to domestic violence, it contributes too much in his life either in negative way or positive way. His attitude would not be similar to a kid who belongs to a family having a very good family environment, and who has been pampered in every aspect of life.

Socio-economic conditions effects humans’ life in many ways. A person’s attitude would be according to the environment he has been exposed to. A positive and a healthy environment carves the personality of an individual to a decent personality, contrarily an individual who has been exposed to negative environment would be involved in the social evils. It is a common factor that those people who have been under the limitation of economic instability, they involve in crimes and theft. Such traits of the people become dominant when they practice it at a larger scale.

Therefore I agree with the statement that the behavior of an individual is a wholly determined by the forces including the socio-economic factors and their behavior is not their own making.