One of the strengths of this essay is the way in which it thoughtfully considers the opposing claim: that great thinkers are primarily the product of fine education, and that, being "well schooled in the classics," they are far removed from everyday life. The writer notes that, while it "may be a benefit to study classics," it is nevertheless true that being "well schooled in diverse disciplines" will simply "refine and hone an ability to study human nature" in its everyday manifestations. This observation is indicative of the writer's sophisticated grasp of the complexities of the issue.
The writer goes on to demonstrate the intellectual "power of the commonplace" by skillfully developing two compelling examples from academic life: philosophy and literature. Aristotle is cited as a philosopher who studied the "more mundane motions of daily life." Similarly, the writer explains, twentieth-century existentialists, in attempting to understand man's relation to the universe, found inspiration in the commonplace.
Another strength in this essay is the way it introduces an idea and then builds on that idea as the argument unfolds. For instance, in a discussion of the existentialists in the second paragraph, the writer expands on an earlier point about "thinkers" in general: the existentialists may have "exploited their uncommon education and intellect," but the "basis for their movement was ordinary human behavior and existence." It is logical connections such as these that make for a coherent and well-focused discussion.
The writer uses language fluently and controls sophisticated syntax throughout the essay: "I would argue that although it may be a benefit to study classics and be well schooled in diverse disciplines, these pursuits merely refine and hone an ability each and every person has, the ability to study human nature."
This is not a flawless paper: word choice, for example, is not always precise. But the essay's cogent analysis, effective organization, and sophisticated sentence structure merit a solid score of 6.
SAMPLE-2 (score 5)
I can agree with the statement above that, "The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things. " The statement is an accurate description of how many people form great ideas from ordinary things in life. Sports are all great ideas that are made from commonplace things. What makes sports some of the best ideas is not what they began as but what they evolved into.
All athletic competitions began from commonplace things being brought together for the purpose of entertainment, excercise, and social interaction. Many of the sports people enjoy today are the results of someone's idea creating a new dimension of our lifestyle out of an ordinary object. Baseball, basketball, and track especially show that the idea of creating something wonderful out of ordinary objects is true.
Who would have thought that a stick and a ball would spawn into a national pastime, a generational tie between father and son, , a national bond between all races, and a multibillion dollar industry. Baseball began when someone decided to throw a ball at someone with a stick and that person with the stick would then try to hit the ball. What a simple concept and what a wonderful consequence.
Today the simple game of baseball is played all over the world. It is a sport that crosses international divides of religion, race, and politics. This one simple game, a bat hitting a ball, can bring the whole world together. But baseball is just one sport that shows the ablitiy to bridge cultural gaps.
When Mr. Naismith nailed a peachbasket to a post and threw a ball into it he had no idea that millions of people would be playing his game today. Mr. Naismith invented the game of basketball, which most everyone has played at some point in his or her life. Throwing a