- 相关推荐
2017GMAT考试满分作文
导语：为了帮助大家提高GMAT写作水平，百分网小编为大家带来GMAT写作满分范文，希望对大家GMAT备考有所帮助，需要的朋友们可以看看
GMAT写作题目
“Clearly, government has a responsibility to support the arts. However, if that support is going to produce anything of value, government must place no restrictions on the art that is produced.”
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above? Develop your position by giving specific reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
GMAT写作满分范文：
The speaker here argues that government must support the arts but at the same time impose no control over what art is produced. The implicit rationale for government intervention in the arts is that, without it, cultural decline and erosion of our social fabric will result. However, I find no empirical evidence to support this argument, which in any event is unconvincing in light of more persuasive arguments that government should play no part in either supporting or restricting the arts.
First, subsidizing the arts is neither a proper nor a necessary job for government. Although public health is generally viewed as critical to a society’s very survival and therefore an appropriate concern of government, this concern should not extend tenuously to our cultural “health” or well being. A lack of private funding might justify an exception; in my observation, however, philanthropy is alive and well today, especially among the new technology and media moguls.
Second, government cannot possibly play an evenhanded role as arts patron. Inadequate resources call for restrictions, priorities, and choices. It is unconscionable (无节制的;过度的) to relegate normative (conforming to or based on norms *normative behavior* *normative judgments*) decisions as to which art has “value” to a few legislators and jurists (法学家;法理学家: one having a thorough knowledge of law; especially: JUDGE), who may be unenlightened in their notions about art. Also, legislators are all too likely to make choices in favor of the cultural agendas of those lobbyists with the most money and influence.
Third, restricting artistic expression may in some cases encroach upon the constitutional right of free expression. In any case, governmental restriction may chill creativity, thereby defeating the very purpose of subsidizing the arts.
In the final analysis, government cannot philosophically or economically justify its involvement in the arts, either by subsidy or sanction. Responsibility lies with individuals to determine what art has value and to support that art.
满分作文二：
A powerful business leader has far more opportunity to influence the course of a community or a nation than does any government official.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
GMAT写作满分范文：
Historical examples of both influential public officials and influential business leaders abound. However, the power of the modern-era business leader is quite different from that of the government official. On balance, the CEO seems to be better positioned to influence the course of community and of nations.
Admittedly the opportunities for the legislator to regulate commerce or of the jurist to dictate rules of equity are official and immediate. No private individual can hold that brand of influence. Yet official power is tempered by our check-and-balance system (制约平衡制度) of government and, in the case of legislators, by the voting power of the electorate. Our business leaders are not so constrained, so, their opportunities far exceed those of any public official. Moreover, powerful business leaders all too often seem to hold de facto legislative and judicial power by way of their direct influence over public officials, as the Clinton Administration’s fund-raising scandal of 1997 illuminated all too well.
The industrial and technological eras have bred such moguls of capitalism as Pullman, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Gates, who by the nature of their industries and their business savvy, not by force of law, have transformed our economy, the nature of work, and our very day-to-day (adj. 日常的, 逐日的) existence. Of course, many modern-day public servants have made the most of their opportunities—for example, the crime-busting (bust: to break or smash especially with force;) mayor Rudolph Giuliani and the new-dealing President Franklin Roosevelt. Yet their impact seems to pale next to those of our modern captains of industry.
In sum, modem business leaders by virtue of the far-reaching impact of their industries and of their freedom from external constraints, have supplanted lawmakers as the great opportunists of the world and prime movers of society.
GMAT写作题目
“All citizens should be required to perform a specified amount of public service. Such service would benefit not only the country as a whole but also the individual participants.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
GMAT写作满分范文：
The potential benefits of mandatory public service must be weighed against administrative problems and concerns about individual liberty. On balance (adv. 总而言之), the costs to a nation and to the participants would probably exceed the benefits.
Admittedly, a colorable (adj.似是而非的) argument can be made for mandatory public service. It would help alleviate “free-rider” problems, where those who do not contribute benefit from the efforts of those who do. It would mitigate pressing social problems—with education, public health and safety, and the environment. It might instill in participants a sense of civic duty, community, and individual responsibility. Finally, it has worked on a smaller scale, particularly in urban areas, where renewal projects succeed in making communities safer, healthier, and more prosperous.
Far more compelling, however, are the arguments against mandatory public service. First, who would make assignments and decide what projects are worthwhile, and how would compliance be assured? Resolving enforcement issues would require government control, in turn requiring increased taxes and/or cuts in other social programs, thereby nullifying the benefits of mandatory public service. Second, a mandatory system would open the floodgates to incompetence and inexperience. Finally, the whole notion seems tantamount to Communism insofar as each citizen must contribute, according to his or her ability, to a strong state. Modern history informs us that such systems do not work. One could argue that mandatory public service is simply a tax in the form of labor rather than dollars. However, compulsory labor smacks (v. 带有..风味) of involuntary servitude, whereas financial taxes do not.
In conclusion, logistical and philosophical barriers to mandating public service outweigh its potential benefits for the nation as well as for participants.
GMAT写作题目
“People are likely to accept as a leader only someone who has demonstrated an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects others to perform.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
GMAT写作满分范文：
People are more likely to accept the leadership of those who have shown they can perform the same tasks they require of others. My reasons for this view involve the notions of respect and trust.
It is difficult for people to fully respect a leader who cannot, or will not, do what he or she asks of others. President Clinton’s difficulty in his role as Commander-in-Chief (n. 总司令) serves as a fitting and very public example. When Clinton assumed this leadership position, it was well known that he had evaded military service during the Vietnam conflict. Military leaders and lower-level personnel alike made it clear that they did not respect his leadership as a result. Contrast the Clinton case with that of a business leader such as John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, who by way of his training and experience as a computer engineer earned the respect of his employees.
It is likewise difficult to trust leaders who do not have experience in the areas under their leadership. The Clinton example illustrates this point as well. Because President Clinton lacked military experience, people in the armed forces found it difficult to trust that his policies would reflect any understanding of their interests or needs. And when put to the test, he undermined their trust to an even greater extent with his naive and largely bungled attempt to solve the problem of gays (美俚> 同性恋者, 尤指男性同性者) in the military. In stark contrast, President Dwight Eisenhower inspired nearly devotional trust as well as respect because of his role as a military hero in World War II.
In conclusion, it will always be difficult for people to accept leaders who lack demonstrated ability in the areas under their leadership. Initially, such leaders will be regarded as outsiders, and treated accordingly. Moreover, some may never achieve the insider status that inspires respect and trust from those they hope to lead.
GMAT写作题目
“Businesses and other organizations have overemphasized the importance of working as a team. Clearly, in any human group, it is the strong individual, the person with the most commitment and energy, who gets things done.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
GMAT写作满分范文：
The relationship between teamwork and individual strength, energy, and commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic manner depends on: (1) the goals toward which the traits are directed, (2) the degree of emphasis on teamwork, and (3) the job of the individual within an organization.
A person’s ability to work effectively in a team is not in consistent per se with personal strength, energy, and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manner—for example, through pilfering or back stabbing—these traits can operate against the organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm’s goals, these traits can motivate other team members, thereby advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best individual qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling a strong sense of team and common purpose.
Nevertheless, over-emphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers; otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue emphasis on teamwork may quell initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting team goals. Also, teamwork can be overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic individuals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle healthy competition, thereby defeating a firm’s objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step (锁步) fashion toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout (: the public introduction of a new aircraft; broadly: the widespread public introduction of a new product) deadline.
In sum, individual strength, commitment, and energy can complement a strong team approach; as long as individual autonomy is not undermined, all can operate in a synergistic manner to achieve an organization’s goals.
【GMAT考试满分作文】相关文章：
GMAT作文满分写作套路02-02
GMAT考试流程具体介绍03-11
GMAT考试词汇备考技巧06-08
GMAT考试介绍和报考资格06-08
备考GMAT考试数学练习题04-18
GMAT考试逻辑基础练习题06-08
2023年GMAT考试必背逻辑笔记02-28
2023年最新GMAT考试的报名流程06-20
GMAT语法解题策略01-04