Context feedback please (: Thank you!

[Apink!]

Hi guys (:
I would appreciate any feedback given on this Context piece! Please criticise as much as you can (:

Prompt:'Only through multiple perspectives can we understand reality.'

We had all been through an experience where our reality – although at the time, seemingly correct- turns out to have been markedly misled by our distorted emotions and self-interests before we have considered other’s interests. Our reality is always, and inevitably so, refracted through the prism of own subjectivity, one that filters out our own reality through our emotions, past experiences and innate personality. Subsequently, without considering other’s perspectives, we often become trapped within a narrow view of who we are, and our environments, and find ourselves living in a delusional world where our egocentrism play a central role in shaping our reality. In a society where other’s perspectives become increasingly important, it is vital that we are considering multiple perspectives. Taking account of other people’s opinions have also helped the advancement of human knowledge and intelligence and sometimes shutting off other’s perspectives is like isolating ourselves from the rest of society. However, it is important to note also, that by accounting many perspectives, we risk of exposing ourselves to sometimes contradicting realties, and this can, rather than helping us “understand” reality, confuse us further about what the truth is.

Multiple perspectives can only exist because of subjectivity that is part of the human condition. We have been exposed to all unique experiences throughout our lives with different culture, society, home environment as well as our innate temperament that we had been born with. No matter how much we try, it is impossible for us to remove fallible nature of humans out of the ever-revolving loop when we are looking at reality, even inside the scientific world. Much of what we perceive as truth and “reality” is much often derived from research, from “obesity epidemic” headlines and how sugar is healthy for us. Driven by logic and observing by our senses, scientific method is much of an empiricist view. Philosophers, such as Aristotle worked out basic rules or basic logic and scientific method that is still respected today, but solely relying on our senses to find out what is truth and what is “reality” is very limited – as what research could prove to us that God exists, about love, hope and spirit that is very much part of human nature?- Hence, by only considering one view essentially limit us out of a whole picture of reality. This notion is not, however trapped within the complexity of the philosophical world, but rather is parallel to our everyday world as well. Robert Drewe’s memoir the Shark Net centres around a young teenager Drewe and Perth murders (of Eric Cooke) that was very much part of Drewe’s life in Perth. At the start of the memoir, Drewe is found in the courtroom as a journalist, witnessing the trial of Eric Cooke. All the people in the courtroom thinks that Eric is “good as convicted”, but Drewe finds it difficult to fit the headline “Maniac Killer At Large”. This is partly because Drewe had a personal encounter with Eric during adolescence when he came to his house to help host a party. It is also evident that this had helped Drewe had considered Cooke’s reality as well, evidence by his writing of “Saturday night boy”. Here, Drewe does not portray Cooke as a thoughtless killer, but shows a humanitarian side of Cooke – as a father of an autistic child, helping him say the word “starfish” and a helpless child under the violence of his father and inattentive mother. Indeed, it is Drewe’s consideration of Erick Cooke’s reality that helps him step closer to what is true, who considers other aspects of an issue, apart from the media and the public’s perception of him as a heartless murderer- a perception formed solely on what are facts. Considering not only our reality, but others as well assist us forming a more accurate reality, although it is impossible to achieve complete truth. By exposing us to many different realities, we can often have sympathy others and find similarities between people who first are seemingly different. Being able to consider others’ perspectives is a crucial skill in forming a more homogenous, peaceful society.

Although considering multiple perspectives can help us widen our knowledge of the world, and gain an insightful view of our reality through the eyes of others, “only” considering perspectives can be unwise. Often something in our ego makes it difficult for us to admit to our mistakes, and this can lead to self-centred realities, in which we view everything in our perspectives. Thinking that our parents are depriving us of freedom when they were meaning to protect us from dangers of the world especially in adolescence, and developing resentment against our friends for growing distant from us, when they have been involved in a difficult event are all every-day situations where our selfishness- the need to be cared for, the need to belong- triumphs and clouds our reality. Referring to a recent event of Nino Napoli, director of school resources, “stealing” money from the education department to go one a “European holiday” is a current event which encompasses this notion. In addition to taxpayer-funded trip to London, he had also been putting the money onto his sons’ bank account, totalling up to $125,000 over seven years. While an average reader may perceive him as a “disgrace” to Australian politics, and deserving punishment, when asked “you stole money from the Department of Education?”, he commented that they were “strong words” – when in fact, they are just the truth. Here, Napoli is an individual whose reality is primarily shaped by his ego. In fact, considering other’s realities is just like viewing many limited realities distorted by selfishness and unnecessary emotions, and it is a common occurrence in our society. Considering, “multiple perspectives” from such people is not likely to help us any further towards truth. Simply having a lot of faulty puzzle pieces will not help us to put the puzzle together at all – what is important is to have correct puzzles, even though they may be smaller in number. Through multiple opinions, we can consider a wider view of the world, but only when those perspectives are of honest quality, minimally tainted by our innate egocentrism.

Similarly, over-reliance on other people’s perspectives can confuse us further on what truth is, rather than being able to understand reality better. With information overflowing in our world, that is constantly being contradicted and proved once again, we often fall into pitfalls of confusion of what to believe in. One has to look no further than the relatively current issue of Global Warming where conflicting interests occur. Many environmentalists such as the WWF urge us to cut down on energy use in order to slow down the Earth from heating up, expressing unwavering opinion that “urgent action” is needed to fight Global Warming. Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott publicly commented that “Climate change is absolute crap”. Both are backed up by scientists, and facts. Often, when we consider many, and especially conflicting perspectives, we have more difficulty understand what is real, and what is not. In fact, this is phenomenon is also evident in our individual lives – rather than in a world-related issue. In Robert Drewe’s The Shark Net, it is evident that young Drewe was perplexed by his parents’ expectation which was often contrasting to what his friends believed in. Dorothy and Royce abide by religious morality, and is firm in belief that teenagers should not experiment sexually before they are married. However, it is evident that Drewe and his friends, being a teenager do what teenagers usually do- sneaks into clubs, go to Rottnest Island. With two conflicting perspectives from the equally important groups of his life, Drewe results in feeling guilt when he does break his parent’s ideals. The feeling of guilt ultimately hints at Drewe’s uncertainty of reality – if he had been sure that what he does is not against his conscience, he would not guilt at all but rather happy that he got away with it. Likewise, if sneaking out of wholly crossing the line, he would not have snuck out in the first place. Often, when considering other’s perspectives, especially those that we value and cherish we often place others’ perspective prior to our own. When we do this, and both turn out to be contradicting each other, we become trapped within its consequences- a reality shaped by neither our own ideas, nor wholly of other’s opinions; a being floating by without real understanding of what reality is.

Contemplating other’s perspectives can help us understand our world more comprehensively, but only if it is done correctly. It can help us lessen the amount of our ego that shape our reality, and see the world from a different, fresh, and sometimes confronting perspective. Shutting off other’s realities, and sole focusing on ours and risk us being emotionally isolated with the society, and prevent us from integrating into the world. But it is important to discern which perspectives we should consider, that may assist us to bring us one step close to the truth, and avoid muddling up our actuality. It may be important to note that it is solely up to each individual whether multiple perspectives can benefit their understanding of the world, as two people owning the same knife can either use it productively (as a cooking utensil) or inflict pain on others (weapon).

Thank you (:

[heids]

Hi guys (:
I would appreciate any feedback given on this Context piece! Please criticise as much as you can (: OK!  Firstly, it's grammatically incorrect to have a colon after an open parenthesis.  Please invert them.

Edit: Apologies.  I seriously have only discussed your language usage and grammar.  That's not your only flaw (lol harsh ) but I focused on it because a) it's easier to pick up and b) when I get bogged down in your long sentences, I struggle to actually get what on earth you're talking about.  So then I can't comment on your contention/structure/fleshing out of ideas, because I don't even know quite what I just read.  (you said to be harsh so I'm not holding back, please forgive)

Prompt:'Only through multiple perspectives can we understand reality.'

We had all been through an experience where our reality – although at the time, seemingly correct- turns out to have been markedly misled by our distorted emotions and self-interests before we have considered other’s interests. Our reality is always, and inevitably so, inevitably refracted through the prism of own subjectivity, one that filters out our own reality through our emotions, past experiences and innate personality. Subsequently, without considering other’s others' perspectives, we often become trapped within a narrow view of who we are, and our environments, and find ourselves living in a delusional world where our egocentrism plays a central role in shaping our reality. In a society where other’s others' perspectives become increasingly important, what do you mean? what society are you talking about, in what way is it 'increasingly' important? it is vital that we are considering multiple perspectives. Taking account of other people’s opinions have also helped the advancement of human knowledge and intelligence stick to present tense and sometimes shutting off other’sagain, others' perspectives is like isolating ourselves from the rest of society. However, it is important to note also, cut out any words that don't actually help your point, also no comma needed that by accounting many perspectives, no commawe risk of exposing ourselves to sometimes contradicting realties, full stop.  Rather than helping us 'understand' reality, this can instead further confuse us about what the truth is. and this can, rather than helping us “understand” reality, confuse us further about what the truth is.
sentences too long - this stuff seems good to me, but... still chop sentences in two.

Multiple perspectives can only exist because of subjectivity that is part of the human condition PLEASE!!! The words 'human condition' do not guarantee good marks, don't try to force it in where it doesn't quite fit. . We have all been exposed to all unique experiences throughout our lives with different cultures, societyies, and home environments comma as well as our innate temperament that we had been are born with. You need an example of how this works. No matter how much we try, it is impossible for us to remove fallible nature of humans out of the ever-revolving loop what's the loop got to do with it? when we are looking at reality, even inside the scientific world. Much of what we perceive as truth and “reality” is much often derived from research, from “obesity epidemic” headlines and how sugar is healthy for us how is this relevant?. Driven by logic and observing by our senses, scientific method is much of an empiricist view. Philosophers, such as Aristotle commaworked out basic rules or basic logic and scientific method that is still respected today, but solely relying on our senses to find out what is truth and what is “reality” is very limited – as what research could prove to us that God exists, about love, hope and spirit that is very much part of human nature?- Hence, by only considering one view essentially limit us out of a whole picture of reality. This notion is not, however trapped within the complexity of the philosophical world, but rather is parallel to our everyday world as well. wordy and redundant sentence Robert Drewe’s memoir the Shark Net underline text centres around a young teenager Drewe and Perth murders (of Eric Cooke) that was very much part of Drewe’s life in Perth. At the start of the memoir, Drewe is found in the courtroom as a journalist, witnessing the trial of Eric Cooke. Try 'As a journalist, Drewe witnesses Eric Cooke's trial' – covers the same content in waaayyyy fewer words.  All the people in the courtroom thinks that Eric is “good as convicted”, but Drewe finds it difficult to fit the headline “Maniac Killer At Large”. This is partly because Drewe had a personal encounter with Eric during adolescence when he came to his house to help host a party. It is also evident that this had helped Drewe had considered Cooke’s reality as well, evidence by his writing of “Saturday night boy”. Here, Drewe does not portray Cooke as a thoughtless killer, but shows a humanitarian side of Cooke – as a father of an autistic child, helping him say the word “starfish” and a helpless child under the violence of his father and inattentive mother. Indeed, it is Drewe’s consideration of Erick Cooke’s reality that helps him step closer to what is true, who considers other aspects of an issue, apart from the media and the public’s perception of him as a heartless murderer- a perception formed solely on what are facts. Shorten this, taking out any unnecessary textual details. Considering not only our reality, but others as well comma assist us forming a more accurate reality, although it is impossible to achieve complete truth. By exposing us to many different realities, we can often have sympathy others and find similarities between people who first are seemingly different. Being able to consider others’ perspectives is a crucial skill in forming a more homogenous, peaceful society.

Although considering multiple perspectives can help us widen our knowledge of the world, and gain an insightful view of our reality through the eyes of others, “only” considering perspectives can be unwise. After reading that TS, I don't have a clue what you're going to talk about.  The first 2/3 of the sentence were about the paragraph before – don't do that – and then the last bit of the sentence, the actual TOPIC sentence, doesn't make sense, like I don't get what you mean.  Often something in our ego makes it difficult for us to admit to our mistakes, and this can lead to self-centred realities, in which we view everything in our perspectives. Thinking that our parents are depriving us of freedom when they were meaning mean to protect us from dangers of the world comma especially in adolescence, and developing resentment against our friends for growing distant from us, when they have been involved in a difficult event are all every-day situations where our selfishness- the need to be cared for, the need to belong- triumphs and clouds our reality. Woah… one long sentence!!! Chop it into 2-3 sentences, cause reading it I just get lost and tangled.   Referring to a recent event of Nino Napoli, director of school resources, “stealing” money from the education department to go one a “European holiday” is a current event which encompasses this notion. In addition to taxpayer-funded trip to London, he had also been putting the money onto his sons’ bank account, totalling up to $125,000 over seven years. Shorten this: This is evident in Nino Napoli, the director of school resources, 'stealing' up to $125,000 from the education department to go on a European holiday.  Firstly, cut out unnecessary details/facts that are just there to show that you know what you're talking about – stick to relevant, important stuff.  Also, you don't need a complex introduction of 'referring to a recent event… is a current event which encompasses this notion', this is verbose.  While an average reader may perceive him as a “disgrace” to Australian politics, and deserving punishment, when asked “you stole money from the Department of Education?”, he commented that they were “strong words” – when in fact, they are just the truth. Here, Napoli is an individual whose reality is primarily shaped by his ego. In fact, considering other’s others'!!! realities is just like viewing many limited realities distorted by selfishness and unnecessary emotions, and it is a common occurrence in our society what is? considering others' realities?. Considering, no comma “multiple perspectives” from such people is not likely to help us any further towards truth. Simply having a lot of faulty puzzle pieces will not help us to put the puzzle together at all – what is important is to have correct puzzles, even though they may be smaller in number. Through multiple opinions, we can consider a wider view of the world, but only when those perspectives are of honest quality, minimally tainted by our innate egocentrism. Interesting points, but isn't it unlikely that your own perspective will be 'correct'?  It's just as likely to be faulty as anyone else's… surely if you have lots of different perspectives to compare with, even if they're wrong, you're more likely to be able to weed out the faulty bits?  This just assumes that you'll be right, but everyone else is wrong.
Anyway, I can't see that this discussion ties in with your topic sentence – revise please.

Similarly, over-reliance on other people’s perspectives can confuse us further on what truth is, rather than being able to helping us understand reality better. With information overflowing in our world, that is constantly being contradicted and proved once again, we often fall into pitfalls of confusion of what to believe in. One has to look no further than the relatively current issue of Global Warming where conflicting interests occur. Again, really wordy introduction – 'This occurs with the highly debated issue of global warming' – cut out 'one has to look no further', and you don't have to mention whether it's current or not. Many environmentalists such as the WWF urge us to cut down on energy use in order to slow down the Earth from heating up, expressing unwavering opinion that “urgent action” is needed to fight Global Warming. Meanwhile, Australian Prime Minister, Tony Abbott comma publicly commented that “Climate change is absolute crap”. Both are backed up by scientists, and facts. Often, when we consider many, and especially conflicting perspectives, we have more difficulty understand what is real, and what is not. In fact, this is phenomenon is also evident in our individual lives – rather than in a world-related issue. Again, wordy/unnecessary transition.  Try, 'Similarly, on an individual level… and dive straight into the text. In Robert Drewe’s The Shark Net, it is evident that young Drewe was perplexed by his parents’ expectation which was often contrasting to what his friends believed in. Dorothy and Royce abide by religious morality, and is firm in belief that teenagers should not experiment sexually before they are married. However, it is evident that Drewe and his friends, being a teenager do what teenagers usually do- sneaks into clubs, go to Rottnest Island. With two conflicting perspectives from the equally important groups of his life, Drewe results in feeling feels guilt when he does break his parent’s ideals. The feeling of guilt ultimately hints at Drewe’s uncertainty of reality – if he had been sure that what he does is not against his conscience, he would not guilt at all but rather happy that he got away with it. Likewise, if sneaking out of wholly crossing the line, he would not have snuck out done so (a bit too casual) in the first place. Often, when considering other’s perspectives, especially those that we value and cherish commawe often place others’ perspective prior to our own note that you contradicted this earlier, saying that people DON'T listen other people's perspectives due to our ego. When we do this, and both turn out to be contradicting each other, we become trapped within its consequences- a reality shaped by neither our own ideas, nor wholly of other’s opinions; a being floating by without real understanding of what reality is. Stop trying to sound fancy.  This isn't poetry, and you've got to understand what you're saying.

Contemplating other’s perspectives can help us understand our world more comprehensively, but only if it is done correctly. It can help us lessen the amount of our ego that shape our reality quell our ego, and see the world from a different, fresh, and sometimes confronting perspective. Shutting off other’s realities, and solely focusing on ours and can risk us being emotionally isolated with the society, and prevent us from integrating into the world. But it is important to discern which perspectives we should consider, that may assist us to bring us one step close to the truth, and avoid muddling up 'confusing' – less casual our actuality. It may be important to note that it is solely up to each individual whether multiple perspectives can benefit their understanding of the world, as two people owning the same knife can either use it productively (as a cooking utensil) or inflict pain on others (weapon). seems stuck on the end without have been developed – a nice point, but seems a bit out of the blue and I wouldn't finish on a random image unless it felt like an 'uplifting' image.

Thank you (:


My main point is the same as with the other: simplify your sentences a bit, make them shorter, fix commas, and cut out unnecessary verbose waffle words.
Once you've got that, THEN your structure and discussion will be easier to deal with – it's harder to see your flow when it's 'blocked up' a bit with unnecessary words and looonnnngggg sentences.

Nonetheless, good essay you have excellent expression if you can simplify it a bit, and some great ideas (good to see you putting in external examples) - though sorry I haven't commented much on your ideas and structure, more your wording.

[Apink!]

Hi bangali_lok!
Sorry for the extremely long reply! (I didn't see your reply )

Thank you so much for a detailed feedback (:
I think it will help me immensely to improve on my next piece of writing (:

Much thanks!!