perspective of the essay

How to Write a Perspective Essay?

Understanding the Importance of Perspective Essays

A perspective essay is a powerful tool that allows individuals to express their thoughts and opinions on a particular topic from their unique standpoint. Unlike other types of essays, a perspective essay requires a deep understanding of the subject matter and the ability to convey personal experiences, observations, and beliefs effectively. By sharing different perspectives, individuals contribute to a diverse and inclusive society where ideas are valued and respected.

Choosing a Compelling Topic

When selecting a topic for your perspective essay, it's important to choose something that you are passionate about and have a strong opinion on. Whether it's a social issue, political ideology, or personal experience, your topic should resonate with your audience and make them eager to read your insights. Research the chosen topic thoroughly to ensure you have a solid foundation of knowledge to build upon.

Gathering Evidence and Conducting Research

Before diving into writing your perspective essay, it's crucial to gather relevant evidence to support your claims and arguments. Conduct thorough research using credible sources such as books, scholarly articles, and reputable websites. Take notes, highlight important information, and carefully analyze different viewpoints to strengthen your own perspective.

Structuring Your Perspective Essay

The structure of a perspective essay is similar to other types of essays. It consists of an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. The introduction should grab the reader's attention and provide a brief overview of the topic and your stance. The body paragraphs, which are the core of your essay, should present your arguments, supporting evidence, and counterarguments. Finally, the conclusion should summarize your main points and leave the reader with a thought-provoking closing statement.

Writing with Clarity and Coherence

When writing your perspective essay, aim for clarity and coherence. Use clear, concise, and precise language to articulate your ideas. Structure your paragraphs logically, ensuring a smooth flow of thoughts. Support your arguments with relevant examples, anecdotes, or statistics to engage your audience and strengthen your position. Remember to acknowledge and address opposing viewpoints respectfully, demonstrating open-mindedness and critical thinking.

Formatting and Stylistic Considerations

While the content of your perspective essay is crucial, don't overlook the importance of formatting and style. Use appropriate heading tags, such as H2 or H3, for each section and subsection to improve readability and assist search engines in understanding the structure of your content. Enhance the visual appeal of your essay by using bullet points or numbered lists to break down complex information into digestible chunks. Incorporate relevant keywords naturally throughout the text to optimize your chances of ranking higher in search engine results.

Editing and Proofreading

Once you've completed your perspective essay, take the time to review, edit, and proofread it carefully. Pay attention to grammar, spelling, punctuation, and sentence structure. Ensure your ideas flow smoothly and coherently. Remove any unnecessary repetition or tangential information. Consider seeking feedback from peers, teachers, or online communities to gain valuable insights and improve the overall quality of your essay.

Example Perspective Essay: The Power of Empathy

The following is an example of a perspective essay on the power of empathy:

Empathy, the ability to understand and share the feelings of others, is a remarkable human trait that holds immense power. In a world filled with turmoil and division, empathy acts as a bridge, fostering understanding, compassion, and connection. It enables us to step into someone else's shoes, see the world through their eyes, and recognize their struggles and challenges.

When we embrace empathy, we break down barriers and cultivate a sense of unity. It allows us to transcend our personal biases and preconceptions, opening our minds to a multitude of perspectives. Empathy promotes inclusivity and acceptance, nurturing a society where diversity is celebrated and everyone feels valued.

One powerful aspect of empathy is its ability to spark positive change. By understanding the experiences of others, we become motivated to take action and address social injustices. Through empathy, we recognize the need for equality, justice, and human rights. It fuels our determination to create a better world for ourselves and future generations.

In conclusion, writing a perspective essay is an opportunity to express your thoughts, opinions, and experiences in a unique and compelling way. By following the steps outlined in this guide, you can confidently tackle the task of writing a perspective essay. Remember to choose a captivating topic, conduct thorough research, structure your essay effectively, and write with clarity and coherence. By sharing your perspectives, you contribute to the rich tapestry of ideas that shape our society.

Dissertation Help Service - Studybay

Cheap Coursework Writing Service - Studybay

Law Coursework Help - Studybay

How to Write a Good Discussion Paper?

Commentary Essay Example, Writing Guide, and Tips

ᐉ Coursework Help Online ☑️ Courseworks Assistance

Labeling Theory: A Detailed Overview

MBA Dissertation Writing Service - Studybay

My Most Embarrassing Moment Essay: Don't Be Shy To Tell

Write My Essay for Me ✏️ Online Essays Writing - Studybay

Calculate for all schools

Your chance of acceptance, your chancing factors, extracurriculars, what is a perspective essay.

Hi everyone, I just came across a term 'perspective essay.' I haven't heard of this before, so can anyone give me a quick overview of what it is and how to write one? Thanks!

Hi there! A "perspective essay" refers to a type of paper that presents the writer's viewpoint or opinion on a specific topic as a form of personal reflection. The primary goal of a perspective essay is to show your unique perspective and establish a clear argument or position on the subject matter.

To write a perspective essay, follow these steps:

1. Choose a topic: Pick something you're passionate or knowledgeable about, as it makes for a more compelling read. Make sure the topic is not too broad, and it should be something that has room for debate or discussion.

2. Develop a thesis statement: This is the central point of your essay and should clearly state your perspective on the topic. Your thesis statement should be concise, well-defined, and easy to understand.

3. Organize your thoughts: Outline the structure of your essay before you start writing. This can help you ensure that your thoughts flow seamlessly from one point to the next and prevent you from drifting off-topic.

4. Write the introduction: Engage your readers by providing some context or background information about the topic. Then, present your thesis statement, which will act as the guideline for the rest of your paper.

5. Present your arguments: Use the body paragraphs to discuss your main points or arguments that support your thesis statement. Be sure to provide evidence by citing relevant sources, examples, or personal experiences to solidify your claims.

6. Address counterarguments: It's essential to offer a balanced perspective by considering opposing viewpoints. You can either dedicate a separate paragraph for counterarguments or address them throughout your body paragraphs. This allows you to demonstrate critical thinking and shows that your opinion is well-informed and well-reasoned.

7. Write the conclusion: Sum up your main points and restate your thesis in a different way. Leave your reader with a thought-provoking statement or question that encourages further discussion and reflection.

8. Revise and edit: Carefully review your essay for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and clarity. It's always helpful to have someone else proofread your work to identify any errors or areas that could be improved.

Remember that in a perspective essay, it's not about being right or wrong — it's about presenting your viewpoint effectively and persuasively. Good luck and happy writing!

About CollegeVine’s Expert FAQ

CollegeVine’s Q&A seeks to offer informed perspectives on commonly asked admissions questions. Every answer is refined and validated by our team of admissions experts to ensure it resonates with trusted knowledge in the field.

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

How to Write Brown’s Perspective Essay

This article was written based on the information and opinions presented by Shane Niesen and Vinay Bhaskara i n a CollegeVine livestream. You can watch the full livestream for more info.

What’s Covered:

Why this prompt is important, avoiding admission officers’ biases, why someone else should read your essay.

The second Brown University supplemental essay asks students to respond to the following prompt:

Brown’s culture fosters a community in which students challenge the ideas of others and have their ideas challenged in return, promoting a deeper and clearer understanding of the complex issues confronting society. This active engagement in dialogue is as present outside the classroom as it is in academic spaces. Tell us about a time you were challenged by a perspective that differed from your own. How did you respond? (200-250 words) 

In this article, we discuss why this prompt is so important, how to be aware of a reader’s bias, and why having someone else proofread your essay is essential. 

Brown’s second essay is all about being challenged by a perspective different from your own. One of the trickiest parts about this essay is to avoid focusing on presenting the two perspectives and the battle between them. This is not the point of the prompt. Brown admissions officers want to read about your perspective and your thought process when challenged. 

The goal of this prompt is to demonstrate how you think about the world, address challenges, and approach conflict. There is no avoiding conflict in life—over the past few years, for example, our society has experienced a great deal of friction due to opposing perspectives—so do your best to share your thought process around conflict. Dive into how you approach being confronted with differing opinions. 

There are a few questions that you can home in on for this prompt. You can write about your perspective, who challenged you, how it felt being challenged, and if that changed your perspective. This doesn’t mean you have to write about the exact time and place when your mind changed—maybe you felt even stronger about your beliefs after being challenged. The point is that you want to demonstrate that this confrontation had some sort of impact on you. 

Don’t be afraid to step away from the broader issues in our society or politics. Try to focus on a personal situation for this prompt. This will not only make you stand out from the crowd, but it will also help you avoid the biases of the admissions officers. Of course, admissions officers are aware that they will read the essays of students who share different perspectives than their own, but by writing about a personal conflict or issue, you’re more likely to avoid this issue entirely. 

Appealing to the admissions officers is a crucial part of your essay. You want the reader to like you or at least empathize with your perspective. This is why you should check yourself and your opinions while writing. You can do this by sharing your essay with someone else and asking for feedback. If that person tells you that they didn’t like how you talked about your opinion, that’s a sign that the admission officers won’t like it either. 

Ask your reader for feedback on the structure and content of your essay. A big mistake that students make is spending too much time narrating the problem rather than reflecting on the story. Your essay will ideally contain deeply personal topics, so most of it should focus on your emotions and headspace.

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

How To Write a Critical Perspective Essay

When you are faced with an essay title that incorporates the phrase “deliver a critical perspective on…”, the temptation can be to think that this means finds fault with a concept. However, in academic terms, taking a critical perspective means being able to demonstrate knowledge of different attitudes, interpretations, and viewpoints on the subject, and from this, being able to deliver a considered and informed opinion. In effect, a critical perspective essay requires to you to be able to show that there may be multiple ways to approach the main subject under discussion, but also to pick out, through analysis, which is the most viable perspective.

Sounds easy enough doesn’t it? If you follow our guide to producing the perfect critical perspective essay than yet it really is easy. An easy way to understand critical examination and thus arrive at a critical perspective is to remember that critical examination or evaluation picks out what is relevant or noteworthy to ensure understanding of how a thing (framework, hypothesis, phenomenon) works.

The aim of a persuasive essay is to convince your reader that your opinions and perspectives are correct. This can be done with a combination of emotive language and hard evidence to back up your viewpoint. You have to make the reader believe in the value of your opinion or standpoint, and sometimes to make the reader act. Fortunately, there are a number of techniques and approaches that can be used to ensure your persuasive essay presents a coherent, logical argument that cannot be denied by the reader.

In terms of structure, persuasive essays are relatively simple. Your arguments or opinions need to be clearly stated, reinforced, and backed with facts and evidence. Your summation, or conclusion should ensure that the reader is very clear about where you stand on the issue, so you need to be consistent throughout.

Planning your critical perspective essay

Stage one is identifying what it is you are being asked to critically evaluate and then take a perspective on. Typical essay titles include, “Discuss critical perspectives on the role censorship in modern music”, “Critically evaluate the main perspectives on the impact of social media on body image and state your own views on the subject”. In both cases, you are being asked to look at both sides of the argument and identify your own views.

Stage two requires identifying the key sources that will form the framework and rationale for your perspective. Whilst a critical perspective essay is essentially your own viewpoint, it is important to demonstrate how you have arrived at that view, based on research, evaluation of the evidence and an objective assessment of the facts.

Stage three draws up an outline of the arguments /points you wish to make in your essay and put them in a logical order. Chronologically works well but so does giving greater importance to key themes and then moving into sub-themes.

Writing your Critical Perspective Essay

Introduction.

Your introduction should be clear and unambiguous in stating the topic under question. Frequently a good essay will use either a clear statement (declarative) or a question which reflects the essay title. This tells the reader what you are discussing. The second part of the introduction should draw in your reader and motivate them to read more, as well as a clear statement of your own perspectives and how you intend to prove that they are correct (a thesis statement). Your introduction should conclude with a brief background to the topic and current views in the area. What this achieves is placing your work and perspective into a clear context for your reader.

The body text of your essay should have a focus of one paragraph per point / argument or topic so that the flow of information and argument is consistent. This is where an effective plan can help you clearly structure your essay. For each paragraph, you should introduce the main point/theme you are discussing before moving on to an explanation of your perspectives and why they are accurate in terms of the context of the work.

The explanation should then be followed by presentation of evidence that backs up your point of view. Here you can use quotes, statistics and other illustrative evidence but always ensure that your sources are credible and from trustworthy sources, as well as being correctly cited in the text and listed at the end of the work. An important element of every paragraph, and one most frequently missed by students is the linking of paragraphs, both to the opening statement and to the next point. Without linking the paragraphs an essay lacks cohesion and logical flow.

There are some key tips for critical perspective essay writing that help to reinforce the view you are trying to put across. These include repetition, which means making similar points in a range of ways, with different evidence. Repetition of points is not appropriate, but re-stating or reaffirming a perspective is crucial to ensuring that the reader comes to the same opinion as you.

A further valid approach is to indicate understanding of opposing perspectives. These should be stated, again with appropriate evidence from reliable sources. However, you should also add in reasons, backed by evidence as to why these perspectives are incorrect, which again reaffirms your own critical perspective.

The conclusion of your critical perspective essay should deliver a summation of all the points, bringing them together and reaffirming your original statement of opinion. A strong conclusion can ensure that your readers will be swayed by your arguments and thus take the same perspective on the issue that you have evidenced as being accurate.

Some Key phrases for a critical perspective essay

To ensure your essay is clearly persuasive, include some of the following words and phrases:

• I am certain that…
• It clearly follows that…
• Regardless…
• Although it may seem…
• Considering…. this clearly indicates that …….
• I believe that…
• By the same token…
• Furthermore…

You may also like

• What Is a Perspective Essay?

KRISTINA BARROSO

25 jun 2018.

Unless you happen to love writing, and it comes naturally to you, you probably aren’t a big fan of writing essays. If you're like most people, though, you likely do enjoy telling others what you think. Even if you don’t like to write, a perspective essay can be fun because you get to express yourself in ways that most other types of essays don’t allow. Whether you are completing an English class assignment, preparing for the essay component of a standardized test like the ACT or submitting a piece for possible publication in a media outlet, knowing how to write a quality perspective essay is a useful addition to your repertoire of skills.

Explore this article

• How to Choose a Topic for a Perspective Essay
• Perspective Essay Format

1 What Is a Perspective Essay?

A perspective essay is an opportunity to voice your thoughts and opinions on a given topic. The primary purpose of a perspective essay is to express your views and then provide adequate support for those views using concrete examples. Support and analysis of your opinions is what sets a perspective essay apart from randomly spouting your thoughts on things without bothering to back them up.

2 How to Choose a Topic for a Perspective Essay

If you have many strong opinions, it may be difficult to decide what you want to write about. The best rule of thumb when it comes to choosing a topic for a perspective essay is to select one that you genuinely care about. Something you are passionate about will be far easier to write and will likely lead to a better piece than a topic you aren’t all that interested in. Consider writing about current events that intrigue you or a controversial issue that you have strong feelings about. No matter what topic you ultimately choose, be sure to take a clear position on it. A perspective essay is not the place to be neutral. Pick a side and support it with a healthy mixture of opinion and facts.

3 Perspective Essay Format

Perspective essays typically adhere to the standard format of an introductory paragraph followed by multiple body paragraphs and a conclusion. The introduction should start out with a hook that draws in the reader and a thesis statement that outlines the most important points that the essay will focus on. Each paragraph in the body of the essay should elaborate on, and provide evidence for, each of the points mentioned in the introduction. The conclusion should summarize the essay and restate your thesis in a new way. Since a perspective essay includes your personal experiences, it should be written in the first-person point of view.

• 1 California State University at Northridge; Basics, Format, Tips
• 2 Reference: How to Write a Perspective Essay?
• 3 Study Hub: The Essay Guide: Adopting a Critical Perspective
• 4 Rutgers: Perspectives Application Essay Guidelines

About the Author

Kristina Barroso earned a B.A. in Psychology from Florida International University and works full-time as a classroom teacher in a public school. She teaches middle school English to a wide range of students from struggling readers to advanced and gifted populations. In her spare time, she loves writing articles about education for TheClassroom.com, WorkingMother and other education sites.

Related Articles

How to Write a Journalistic Essay

What Are Good College Essays?

How to Write a College Essay

What Is a Reflection Essay?

What Is a Narrative Response?

How to Write Your Argumentative Essay

How to Close an Informative Essay

How to Write a 100-Word Essay

What Is a Lead-in Statement?

How to Separate the Mind From the Body Consciously

How to Write a 10th Grade Book Report

Good Ways to Start a Comparison and Contrast Essay

How to Make a Good Introduction Paragraph

How to Develop Analytical Skills

How to Write a Conclusion for a Literary Analysis Essay

The Difference Between Discursive & Argumentative Essays

How to Write a Rough Draft

What Makes Up a Well-Written Essay in High School?

How to Write an Autobiography for a Portfolio

What Is Informal & Formal Essay Writing?

Regardless of how old we are, we never stop learning. Classroom is the educational resource for people of all ages. Whether you’re studying times tables or applying to college, Classroom has the answers.

• Accessibility
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Copyright Policy
• Manage Preferences

© 2020 Leaf Group Ltd. / Leaf Group Media, All Rights Reserved. Based on the Word Net lexical database for the English Language. See disclaimer .

Advertisement

Does perspective taking matter for writing? Perspective taking in source-based analytical writing of secondary students

• Published: 19 February 2021
• Volume 34 , pages 2081–2101, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

• Minkyung Cho 1 ,
• Young-Suk Grace Kim   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4328-3843 1 &
• Carol B. Olson 1  

1125 Accesses

6 Citations

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Perspective taking, one’s knowledge of their own mental and emotional states and inferences about others’ mental and emotional states, is an important skill for writing development. In the present study, we examined how perspective taking is expressed in writing and how it is related to overall writing quality. We analyzed seventh graders’ source-based analytical essays ( N  = 195) to investigate (1) the extent to which students incorporated perspective taking in their essays, (2) how the extent of perspective taking in essays differ by students’ sex and English learner status, and (3) the extent to which perspective taking in writing is associated with overall writing quality. Findings revealed that students wrote more from their own perspective than that of others. Moreover, the results of multi-level analyses suggested that female students exhibited more varied perspectives but there was no meaningful difference by English learner status. Lastly, greater extent of perspective taking, particularly that of higher level of perspectives (i.e., dual perspective), was associated with better writing quality, after accounting for students’ demographic backgrounds (e.g., sex, poverty status, English learner status) and essay length. These results underscore the importance of writing from multiple perspectives on writing quality.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Social perspective taking: a benefit of bilingualism in academic writing.

Examining my-side bias during and after reading controversial historical accounts

The Development of Rhetorical Preferences in the Analytical Writing of Spanish Students from Elementary to Higher Education

Applebee, A. N. (1984). Writing and reasoning. Review of Educational Research, 54, 577–596.

Article   Google Scholar  

Atkinson, L., Slade, L., Powell, D., & Levy, J. P. (2017). Theory of mind in emerging reading comprehension: A longitudinal study of early indirect and direct effects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 164, 225–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.04.007 .

Barzilai, S., & Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2015). The role of epistemic perspectives in comprehension of multiple author viewpoints. Learning and Instruction, 36, 86–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.12.003 .

Barzilai, S., & Weinstock, M. (2015). Measuring epistemic thinking within and across topics: A scenario-based approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 42, 141–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.06.006 .

Bazerman, C., Applebee, A. N., Berninger, V. W., Brandt, D., Graham, S., Matsuda, P. K., et al. (2017). Taking the long view on writing development. Research in the Teaching of English, 51 (3), 351–360.

Google Scholar  

Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). Two models of composing process. In Psychology of written composition (pp. 3–29). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Carvalho, J. B. (2002). Developing audience awareness in writing. Journal of Research in Reading, 25 (3), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.00175 .

de Villiers, J. G., & de Villiers, P. A. (2009). Complements enable representation of the contents of false beliefs: The evolution of a theory of theory of mind. In S. Foster-Cohen (Ed.), Language acquisition (pp. 169–195). London: Palgrave Macmillan. ( in Linguistics ).

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Diazgranados, S., Selman, R. L., & Dionne, M. (2016). Acts of social perspective taking: A functional construct and the validation of a performance measure for early adolescents. Social Development, 25 (3), 572–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12157 .

Ferretti, R. P., & Fan, Y. (2016). Argumentative writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 301–315). New York: The Guilford Press.

Ferretti, R. P., & Graham, S. (2019). Argumentative writing: Theory, assessment, and instruction. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32, 1345–1357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09950-x .

Fitzgerald, J., & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development. Educational Psychologist, 35, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3501_5 .

Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2017). Reading and writing connections: How writing can build better readers (and vice versa). In Improving reading and reading engagement in the 21st century (pp. 333–350). Singapore: Springer.

Howlin, P., Baron-Cohen, S., & Hadwin, J. (1999). Teaching children with autism to mind read . Chichester: Wiley.

Hughes, C. (1998). Finding your marbles: Does preschoolers’ strategic behaviour predict later understanding of mind? Developmental Psychology, 34, 1326–1339.

Hunt, K. W. (1965). A synopsis of clause-to-sentence length factors. The English Journal, 54, 300+305-309.

Kellogg, R. T. (2008). Training writing skills: A cognitive developmental perspective. Journal of Writing Research, 1 (1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2008.01.01.1 .

Kim, H. Y., LaRusso, M. D., Hsin, L. B., Harbaugh, A. G., Selman, R. L., & Snow, C. E. (2018). Social perspective-taking performance: Constructs, measurement, and relations with academic performance and engagement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 57, 24–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2018.05.005 .

Kim, Y.-S.G. (2015). Language and cognitive predictors of text comprehension: Evidence from multivariate analysis. Child Development, 86, 128–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12293 .

Kim, Y.-S.G. (2017). Why the simple view of reading is not simplistic: Unpacking the simple view of reading using a direct and indirect effect model of reading (DIER). Scientific Studies of Reading, 21, 310–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2017.1291643 .

Kim, Y.-S.G. (2020a). Structural relations of language, cognitive skills, and topic knowledge to written composition: A test of the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW). British Journal of Educational Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12330 .

Kim, Y.-S.G. (2020b). Interactive dynamic literacy model: An integrative theoretical framework for reading and writing relations. In R. Alves, T. Limpo, & M. Joshi (Eds.), Reading-writing connections: Towards integrative literacy science (pp. 11–34). Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-38811-9_2 .

Kim, Y.-S., Al Otaiba, S., Wanzek, J., & Gatlin, B. (2015). Towards an understanding of dimension, predictors, and gender gaps in written composition. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037210 .

Kim, Y.-S.G., & Park, S. (2019). Unpacking pathways using the direct and indirect effects model of writing (DIEW) and the contributions of higher order cognitive skills to writing. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32 (5), 1319–1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9913-y .

Kim, Y.-S.G., & Schatschneider, C. (2017). Expanding the developmental models of writing: A direct and indirect effects model of developmental writing (DIEW). Journal of Educational Psychology, 109 (1), 35–50. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000129 .

Klare, G. R. (1974). Assessing readability. Reading Research Quarterly, 10, 62–102.

Kuhn, D., Cheney, R., & Weinstock, M. (2000). The development of epistemological understanding. Cognitive Development, 15, 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2014(00)00030-7 .

Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22, 545–552. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611402512 .

Kuhn, D., & Moore, W. (2015). Argumentation as core curriculum. Learning: Research and Practice, 1 (1), 66–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2015.994254 .

Lapsley, D. K., & Murphy, M. N. (1985). Another look at the theoretical assumptions of adolescent egocentrism. Developmental Review, 5 (3), 201–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(85)90009-7 .

LaRusso, M., Kim, H. Y., Selman, R., Uccelli, P., Dawson, T., Jones, S., et al. (2016). Contributions of academic language, perspective taking, and complex reasoning to deep reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9 (2), 201–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2015.1116035 .

Lawrence, J. F., Niiya, M., & Warschauer, M. (2015). Narrative writing in digital formats: Interpreting the impact of audience. Psychology of Language and Communication, 19, 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2015-0012 .

MacArthur, C. A. (2007). Best practices in teaching evaluation and revision. In S. Graham, C. A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practices in writing instruction (pp. 141–162). New York: Guilford.

Magnifico, A. M. (2010). Writing for whom? Cognition, motivation and a writer’s audience. Educational Psychologist, 45 (3), 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2010.493470 .

Maki, H. S., Voeten, M. J. M., Vauras, M. S. M., & Poskiparta, E. H. (2001). Predicting writing skill development with word recognition and preschool readiness skills. Reading and Writing: An interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 643–672.

McCutchen, D. (2006). Cognitive factors in the development of children’s writing. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 115–130). New York: The Guilford Press.

Midgette, E., Haria, P., & MacArthur, C. (2008). The effects of content and audience awareness goals for revision on the persuasive essays of fifth- and eighth-grade students. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21 (1/2), 131–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9067-9 .

National Governors Association for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSIELA%20Standards.pdf .

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2012). The Nation’s report card: Writing 2011 (NCES 2012–470) . Washington, D.C: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Nussbaum, E. M., & Kardash, C. M. (2005). The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.97.2.157 .

Nystrand, M. (1989). A social-interactive model of writing. Written Communication, 6 (1), 66–85.

Olson, C. B., Matuchniak, T., Chung, H. Q., Stumpf, R., & Farkas, G. (2017). Reducing achievement gaps in academic writing for Latinos and English Learners in grades 7–12. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109 (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000095 .

Pitts, L. (2010). Sometimes, the earth is cruel. The Dallas Morning News . Retrieved from https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2010/01/14/leonard-pitts-sometimes-the-earth-is-cruel/ .

Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, T. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Reilly, D., Neumann, D. L., & Andrews, G. (2019). Gender differences in reading and writing achievement: Evidence from the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). American Psychologist, 74 (4), 445–458. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000356 .

Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Glina, M., & Anderson, R. C. (2009). Measurign argumentative reasoning: What's behind the numbers? Learning and Individual Differences , 19 , 2019–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2008.11.001 .

Rosenblatt, R. (1982). The man in the water. Time . Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,925257,00.html .

Rubin, D. (1984). Social cognition and written communication. Written Communication, 1 (2), 211–245. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088384001002003 .

Ruffman, T., Slade, L., Rowlandson, K., Rumsey, C., & Garnham, A. (2003). How language relates to belief, desire and emotion understanding. Cognitive Development, 18, 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0885-2014(03)00002-9 .

Selman, R. L. (1981). The development of interpersonal competence: The role of understanding in conduct. Developmental Review, 1, 401–422.

StataCorp. (2017). Stata statistical software: Release 15 . College Station: StataCorp LLC.

Taylor, K. S., Lawrence, J. F., Connor, C. M., & Snow, C. E. (2019). Cognitive and linguistic features of adolescent argumentative writing: Do connectives signal more complex reasoning? Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 32, 983–1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9898-6 .

Wolfe, C. R., & Britt, M. A. (2008). Locus of the myside bias in written argumentation. Thinking & Reasoning, 14, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546780701527674 .

Wollman-Bonilla, J. E. (2001). Can first-grade writers demonstrate audience awareness? Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 184–201. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.36.2.4 .

Download references

Funding was provided by Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (Grant No. P50HD052120), and Institute of Education Sciences (Grant No. R305A180055) awarded to the second author, and Institute of Education Sciences (Grant No.  R305C190007) awarded to the second and the third author.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Education, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, USA

Minkyung Cho, Young-Suk Grace Kim & Carol B. Olson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Young-Suk Grace Kim .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cho, M., Kim, YS.G. & Olson, C.B. Does perspective taking matter for writing? Perspective taking in source-based analytical writing of secondary students. Read Writ 34 , 2081–2101 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10136-7

Download citation

Accepted : 01 February 2021

Published : 19 February 2021

Issue Date : October 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-021-10136-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Perspective taking
• Adolescent writing
• Higher order thinking skill
• Writing quality
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

What this handout is about

This handout will define what an argument is and explain why you need one in most of your academic essays.

Arguments are everywhere

You may be surprised to hear that the word “argument” does not have to be written anywhere in your assignment for it to be an important part of your task. In fact, making an argument—expressing a point of view on a subject and supporting it with evidence—is often the aim of academic writing. Your instructors may assume that you know this and thus may not explain the importance of arguments in class.

Most material you learn in college is or has been debated by someone, somewhere, at some time. Even when the material you read or hear is presented as a simple fact, it may actually be one person’s interpretation of a set of information. Instructors may call on you to examine that interpretation and defend it, refute it, or offer some new view of your own. In writing assignments, you will almost always need to do more than just summarize information that you have gathered or regurgitate facts that have been discussed in class. You will need to develop a point of view on or interpretation of that material and provide evidence for your position.

Consider an example. For nearly 2000 years, educated people in many Western cultures believed that bloodletting—deliberately causing a sick person to lose blood—was the most effective treatment for a variety of illnesses. The claim that bloodletting is beneficial to human health was not widely questioned until the 1800s, and some physicians continued to recommend bloodletting as late as the 1920s. Medical practices have now changed because some people began to doubt the effectiveness of bloodletting; these people argued against it and provided convincing evidence. Human knowledge grows out of such differences of opinion, and scholars like your instructors spend their lives engaged in debate over what claims may be counted as accurate in their fields. In their courses, they want you to engage in similar kinds of critical thinking and debate.

Argumentation is not just what your instructors do. We all use argumentation on a daily basis, and you probably already have some skill at crafting an argument. The more you improve your skills in this area, the better you will be at thinking critically, reasoning, making choices, and weighing evidence.

Making a claim

What is an argument? In academic writing, an argument is usually a main idea, often called a “claim” or “thesis statement,” backed up with evidence that supports the idea. In the majority of college papers, you will need to make some sort of claim and use evidence to support it, and your ability to do this well will separate your papers from those of students who see assignments as mere accumulations of fact and detail. In other words, gone are the happy days of being given a “topic” about which you can write anything. It is time to stake out a position and prove why it is a good position for a thinking person to hold. See our handout on thesis statements .

Claims can be as simple as “Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged,” with evidence such as, “In this experiment, protons and electrons acted in such and such a way.” Claims can also be as complex as “Genre is the most important element to the contract of expectations between filmmaker and audience,” using reasoning and evidence such as, “defying genre expectations can create a complete apocalypse of story form and content, leaving us stranded in a sort of genre-less abyss.” In either case, the rest of your paper will detail the reasoning and evidence that have led you to believe that your position is best.

When beginning to write a paper, ask yourself, “What is my point?” For example, the point of this handout is to help you become a better writer, and we are arguing that an important step in the process of writing effective arguments is understanding the concept of argumentation. If your papers do not have a main point, they cannot be arguing for anything. Asking yourself what your point is can help you avoid a mere “information dump.” Consider this: your instructors probably know a lot more than you do about your subject matter. Why, then, would you want to provide them with material they already know? Instructors are usually looking for two things:

• Proof that you understand the material
• A demonstration of your ability to use or apply the material in ways that go beyond what you have read or heard.

This second part can be done in many ways: you can critique the material, apply it to something else, or even just explain it in a different way. In order to succeed at this second step, though, you must have a particular point to argue.

Arguments in academic writing are usually complex and take time to develop. Your argument will need to be more than a simple or obvious statement such as “Frank Lloyd Wright was a great architect.” Such a statement might capture your initial impressions of Wright as you have studied him in class; however, you need to look deeper and express specifically what caused that “greatness.” Your instructor will probably expect something more complicated, such as “Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture combines elements of European modernism, Asian aesthetic form, and locally found materials to create a unique new style,” or “There are many strong similarities between Wright’s building designs and those of his mother, which suggests that he may have borrowed some of her ideas.” To develop your argument, you would then define your terms and prove your claim with evidence from Wright’s drawings and buildings and those of the other architects you mentioned.

Do not stop with having a point. You have to back up your point with evidence. The strength of your evidence, and your use of it, can make or break your argument. See our handout on evidence . You already have the natural inclination for this type of thinking, if not in an academic setting. Think about how you talked your parents into letting you borrow the family car. Did you present them with lots of instances of your past trustworthiness? Did you make them feel guilty because your friends’ parents all let them drive? Did you whine until they just wanted you to shut up? Did you look up statistics on teen driving and use them to show how you didn’t fit the dangerous-driver profile? These are all types of argumentation, and they exist in academia in similar forms.

Every field has slightly different requirements for acceptable evidence, so familiarize yourself with some arguments from within that field instead of just applying whatever evidence you like best. Pay attention to your textbooks and your instructor’s lectures. What types of argument and evidence are they using? The type of evidence that sways an English instructor may not work to convince a sociology instructor. Find out what counts as proof that something is true in that field. Is it statistics, a logical development of points, something from the object being discussed (art work, text, culture, or atom), the way something works, or some combination of more than one of these things?

Be consistent with your evidence. Unlike negotiating for the use of your parents’ car, a college paper is not the place for an all-out blitz of every type of argument. You can often use more than one type of evidence within a paper, but make sure that within each section you are providing the reader with evidence appropriate to each claim. So, if you start a paragraph or section with a statement like “Putting the student seating area closer to the basketball court will raise player performance,” do not follow with your evidence on how much more money the university could raise by letting more students go to games for free. Information about how fan support raises player morale, which then results in better play, would be a better follow-up. Your next section could offer clear reasons why undergraduates have as much or more right to attend an undergraduate event as wealthy alumni—but this information would not go in the same section as the fan support stuff. You cannot convince a confused person, so keep things tidy and ordered.

Counterargument

One way to strengthen your argument and show that you have a deep understanding of the issue you are discussing is to anticipate and address counterarguments or objections. By considering what someone who disagrees with your position might have to say about your argument, you show that you have thought things through, and you dispose of some of the reasons your audience might have for not accepting your argument. Recall our discussion of student seating in the Dean Dome. To make the most effective argument possible, you should consider not only what students would say about seating but also what alumni who have paid a lot to get good seats might say.

You can generate counterarguments by asking yourself how someone who disagrees with you might respond to each of the points you’ve made or your position as a whole. If you can’t immediately imagine another position, here are some strategies to try:

• Do some research. It may seem to you that no one could possibly disagree with the position you are arguing, but someone probably has. For example, some people argue that a hotdog is a sandwich. If you are making an argument concerning, for example, the characteristics of an exceptional sandwich, you might want to see what some of these people have to say.
• Talk with a friend or with your teacher. Another person may be able to imagine counterarguments that haven’t occurred to you.
• Consider your conclusion or claim and the premises of your argument and imagine someone who denies each of them. For example, if you argued, “Cats make the best pets. This is because they are clean and independent,” you might imagine someone saying, “Cats do not make the best pets. They are dirty and needy.”

Once you have thought up some counterarguments, consider how you will respond to them—will you concede that your opponent has a point but explain why your audience should nonetheless accept your argument? Will you reject the counterargument and explain why it is mistaken? Either way, you will want to leave your reader with a sense that your argument is stronger than opposing arguments.

When you are summarizing opposing arguments, be charitable. Present each argument fairly and objectively, rather than trying to make it look foolish. You want to show that you have considered the many sides of the issue. If you simply attack or caricature your opponent (also referred to as presenting a “straw man”), you suggest that your argument is only capable of defeating an extremely weak adversary, which may undermine your argument rather than enhance it.

It is usually better to consider one or two serious counterarguments in some depth, rather than to give a long but superficial list of many different counterarguments and replies.

Be sure that your reply is consistent with your original argument. If considering a counterargument changes your position, you will need to go back and revise your original argument accordingly.

Audience is a very important consideration in argument. Take a look at our handout on audience . A lifetime of dealing with your family members has helped you figure out which arguments work best to persuade each of them. Maybe whining works with one parent, but the other will only accept cold, hard statistics. Your kid brother may listen only to the sound of money in his palm. It’s usually wise to think of your audience in an academic setting as someone who is perfectly smart but who doesn’t necessarily agree with you. You are not just expressing your opinion in an argument (“It’s true because I said so”), and in most cases your audience will know something about the subject at hand—so you will need sturdy proof. At the same time, do not think of your audience as capable of reading your mind. You have to come out and state both your claim and your evidence clearly. Do not assume that because the instructor knows the material, he or she understands what part of it you are using, what you think about it, and why you have taken the position you’ve chosen.

Critical reading

Critical reading is a big part of understanding argument. Although some of the material you read will be very persuasive, do not fall under the spell of the printed word as authority. Very few of your instructors think of the texts they assign as the last word on the subject. Remember that the author of every text has an agenda, something that he or she wants you to believe. This is OK—everything is written from someone’s perspective—but it’s a good thing to be aware of. For more information on objectivity and bias and on reading sources carefully, read our handouts on evaluating print sources and reading to write .

Take notes either in the margins of your source (if you are using a photocopy or your own book) or on a separate sheet as you read. Put away that highlighter! Simply highlighting a text is good for memorizing the main ideas in that text—it does not encourage critical reading. Part of your goal as a reader should be to put the author’s ideas in your own words. Then you can stop thinking of these ideas as facts and start thinking of them as arguments.

When you read, ask yourself questions like “What is the author trying to prove?” and “What is the author assuming I will agree with?” Do you agree with the author? Does the author adequately defend her argument? What kind of proof does she use? Is there something she leaves out that you would put in? Does putting it in hurt her argument? As you get used to reading critically, you will start to see the sometimes hidden agendas of other writers, and you can use this skill to improve your own ability to craft effective arguments.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Anson, Chris M., and Robert A. Schwegler. 2010. The Longman Handbook for Writers and Readers , 6th ed. New York: Longman.

Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, Joseph M. Williams, Joseph Bizup, and William T. FitzGerald. 2016. The Craft of Research , 4th ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ede, Lisa. 2004. Work in Progress: A Guide to Academic Writing and Revising , 6th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Gage, John T. 2005. The Shape of Reason: Argumentative Writing in College , 4th ed. New York: Longman.

Lunsford, Andrea A., and John J. Ruszkiewicz. 2016. Everything’s an Argument , 7th ed. Boston: Bedford/St Martin’s.

Rosen, Leonard J., and Laurence Behrens. 2003. The Allyn & Bacon Handbook , 5th ed. New York: Longman.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay

Introduction, rene descartes, meditations on first philosophy, second meditation summary and analysis, analysis and definition of “i”, other definitions of self, works cited.

Throughout history, the philosophical perspective of “self” has received myriad descriptions and analyses from many philosophers, researchers, and even scholars. In gaining this understanding, these people are important in explaining how the knowledge of this concept affects the world and how people perceive themselves and their ultimate relationships with others.

An understanding of “self,” therefore, affirms a person’s identity in a social environment, allowing him/her to recognize others besides oneself (Sorabji 13). In other words, the way human beings socialize solely depends on how they perceive themselves and others through daily social interactions.

Innumerable philosophers, including Socrates and Aristotle, have immensely contributed towards gaining clarity in defining “I.” Yet, it is believed that some have been quite outstanding with regard to their input. In this category lies Rene Descartes, whose findings remain essential in defining the concept of “self” and how this definition affects people’s thinking and interactions.

This paper goes far ahead in synthesizing Descartes’ findings to achieve a concise definition of the word “I” that seems reasonable and critical from a philosophical perspective of the “self.” This essay further digs into several research findings unearthed by renowned scholars and experts who have devoted their time and resources to studying and exploring the definition and how it influences interpersonal relationships in one’s life.

By compiling ideas from an array of thinkers, this philosophy of “self” essay intends to explore the implications of defining “I” in a given manner and how such a stance would affect our self-reflection and perceptions of ourselves or how we treat ourselves. The survey also focuses on how these definitions would affect our knowledge of ourselves and the world outside our “selves.”

Born in 1596 in France, Rene Descartes was a great philosopher, thinker, writer, and mathematician who spent his adulthood in the Republic of Dutch. He has arguably been dubbed as the father of modern philosophy with special emphasis on the Western school of thought (Smith 1).

As a result, his pieces of writing remain key reference materials for scholars across the global plane. For example, meditations continue to serve as principal textbooks in most universities’ philosophy departments today. His contribution to mathematics set unbeaten records, with his efforts being widely applied in calculus and geometry. In the development of natural sciences, his input cannot go unnoticed.

He believed philosophy was a mega entity encompassing all aspects of knowledge expressed through it. Although most of the works and thoughts have been widely considered, there has been a strong emphasis on Meditations on First Philosophy. As mentioned before, this essay will emphasize the second meditation in defining the concept of “I,” also known as “self.”

These meditations are considered the origin of modern Western philosophy. In this coverage, Descartes criticizes most of Aristotle’s arguments and designs questions that have remained debatable in the world of philosophy today. He breaks from the norm created by Aristotle that knowledge is achieved through human senses and that mental statuses usually resemble what they are. As such, Descartes is able to develop brand new concepts about the mind, ideas, and matter (Frankfurt 185).

In this portion of his findings, Descartes explains the nature of the human mind and that it is better than the body. His research revolves around the search for certainty and ignores every idea that carries any slightest doubt. Throughout his memory, Descartes believes that whatever he happens to see is actually meaningless and may not ever exist in real life (Descartes 17).

As a result, we can view place and movement as mistaken notions in human life since lack of certainty is the only certain thing that exists in his life. This is essential in defining ourselves and our existence.

Is it possible for Descartes to believe that he does not have a body and senses, yet he exists? What about the nonexistence of the physical world, as proposed by the author? Ironically, he can only posses these doubts of nonexistence if he truly exists.

In other words, one can only be misled by the devil from within if he does exist. As such, “I” has to exist in order to doubt and be deceived by the evil one. Nevertheless, it can generally be viewed that “I” is a necessary and true preposition when suggested by somebody or conceived in one’s own mind (Descartes 72).

After conceiving the existence of “I,” the mediator does not stop at this particular point but aims at defining and explaining the meaning of the “I am.” This approach makes it possible to be certain that we possess a soul which augments our thinking, nourishment, movement, and sensibility. Furthermore, human beings have a body (Frankfurt 185).

Regardless of these initial doubts, many people sink into a ditch of doubts and hang on to the fact that one has the ability to think. In other words, our existence does not solely depend on the above-mentioned attributes of human beings, but we have no doubt about our breathing power.

This implies that thinking is essential for a person to exist regardless of whether he has other qualities like body and soul, among others. By the fact that thinking defines “self,” it is possible to relate it with human existence and consider it inseparable from being. From a general perspective, we can view one’s self as simply “thinking something.”

The definition of “I” is enshrined in Descartes’ cogito argument based on its formulation in Latin, “cogito ergo sum,” translated as “I think, therefore, I am.” This line is quite famous in the history of philosophy and is most probably regarded as the origin of Western philosophy and other schools of thought that developed after Descartes. In this line, the mediator gets in touch with a grip of certainty after his continuous disbelief is manifested in the First Mediation (Frankfurt 186).

In essence, the cogito exposes a different view of the world and states that the mind is the only thing in the world that can know itself. Notably, understanding our mind first before any other thing has remained rooted in Western philosophy, even though the main point of contention has been the connection between the mind and the real world. From this perspective, the mind is no longer an aid to understanding the world but an internally locked thing (Frankfurt 186).

In analyzing Descartes’ Second Meditation, it is of immense significance to note the existing differences between “I think, therefore I am” as described in the Discourse Method from the general formulation derived from meditations.

At this point of the synthesis, it is imperative to mention that the proposition “I am, I exist” holds only when it is put forward by a specific individual and conceived by the person’s mind. The mediation is further divided into an argument of three steps, which are: whatever thinks exists, I think therefore, and I exist (Frankfurt 188).

However, in understanding “self” through syllogistic reading and analysis, denied by Descartes in other pieces of writing is the fact that there is no reason why “whatever thinks exists” should not be doubtful as portrayed by the mediator. This reading approach further analyzes the cogito as a conclusion that has been reasoned out at a specific point in the doubtful mind of the mediator, even when inferences that have been well reasoned out are called to doubt (Frankfurt 189).

The question we need to ask ourselves in this definition of self is the path somebody takes to know the cogito when everything else is doubted. As a result, several proposals have been put forth as reading formats and methodologies aimed at simplifying this reading process and step (Frankfurt 202). It would be impossible for a person to say he/she exits or even thinks of existence without being in a real state.

Consequently, the truth is achieved by the utterance concerning the concept of existence. In this line of thought, it can be argued that the existence of a person can only be confirmed by oneself in the present tense, “I am.” It is also important to double emphasize the fact that cogito can only work when one is talking about thought. One cannot say: “I sleep, therefore I am,” since the act of sleeping can be doubted. In explaining this, one cannot doubt the act of thinking because doubt on its own is a form of thought.

Besides cogito , the mediator also affirms that he “thinks,” leading to an argument commonly referred to as sun res cogitans (Rorty 215). This comprises three controversial views regarding one being a “thinking thing.” In this approach, it is essential to comprehend the meaning of “thing” and “think” to establish their definitive relationship with “I am.”

There are two approaches to defining “self” at this point. This can be done both epistemologically and metaphysically. In other words, body and mind cannot be one since one has got either to know both of them or none of them. As a matter of fact, the existence of the body ceases since one is a “thinking thing with delinked body and mind. This gives way to the conclusion that one is a “thing that thinks.”

With preciseness, “I” can be defined as the “thing that thinks.” In addition, “I” possesses other attributes besides being able to think, understand, and be willing to do certain things. These qualities include but are not limited to imagination and the use of the senses. In the understanding of “I,” it is worth noting that senses and imagination cannot be trusted (Rorty 214). This is because imagination can trigger all forms of things that may not necessarily be real.

How can one identify wax? This is made possible through a sense of taste, color, smell, size, shape, and hardness, among others. When heated, the wax changes some properties but can be identified despite the deviation from the initial form. Due to the fact that wax can be identified even when its shape is infinitely changed, it suffices to mention that this cannot be possible via imagination but through the intellect alone and proper mental scrutiny.

Based on this argument, it can be concluded that the mind knows better than the body. In this approach, the human view is that one has to know the mind more than any other thing in his or her life as a way of understanding the self better (Rorty 214). There is no doubt in perceiving the identity of something, and these actions of thought clearly imply that the item exists in reality. Therefore, confirming one’s existence is the core of ascertaining the nature of the mind through the intellect alone.

As mentioned before, various authors have defined and described the concept of “self” throughout history. According to Sorabji, the idea of “self” is real in human history. He argues that the “self” comes to play when the owner of a body is intertwined with existing psychological states (Sorabji 13).

He further notes that in explaining the “self,” there is a stream of consciousness that lacks the owner. In his description of this analogy, Sorabji asserts that his definition of “self” fits other members like animals as embodied owners of the body. Based on this approach, Sorabji further double emphasizes the fact that there is a need to protect the human way of life and not only base it on its relationship with the “self” or the interaction between members of a given stream (Sorabji 13).

The broadness of “self” also encompasses the picture of human beings developing into male or female, baker or teacher, son or daughter, Indian or American, among other development attributes. Importantly, these cannot be visualized through the metaphysical conceptualization of the “self” because of its narrowness in determining the nature of the pictures to be adopted. Additionally, the pictures are not considered to be essential and are likely to be altered under extreme pressure (Sorabji 14).

However, visualized pictures are important in describing a complete image of selfhood, even though they can be philosophically studied differently. “I am” is also described by the use of unique features, which make human beings different from other creations (Sorabji 14). In essence, thoughts and actions people execute are usually a result of the self. It can be described as a substance that persists through time. This is to say that actions and thoughts experienced at different times of the day or in life may also concern the “self.”

In most cases, philosophical definitions of “self” are discussed based on the first-person attributes. This is because third-person definitions do not identify unique identification properties. Viewed from a different point, the “self” can be principally described through the discourse and conduct of a person.

As a result, intentions can only be deduced from something being observed through actions undertaken by an individual. Of great significance is the fact that the characteristics of a given “self” have the full potential of determining its real identity (Rorty 215).

Based on this analogy, it can be argued that “I” can be divided into various concepts as defined by specific qualities and attributes. For instance, the “self” can be viewed as an illusion (Sorabji 17). This is common in ancient spiritual traditions in which the human identity is conceived as a mere illusion for the existence of individual human beings. This identification further ensures that there is a boundary between humanity and other forms of creation, especially in terms of characteristics and abilities.

In general, individual existence is considered as the representation of a human being and advocates fighting for its rightful position in the world (Rorty 216). Moreover, “self” is linked with time and mind, which determine obsessive thinking based on the future than emphasizing the present. Most religions advocate for the dissolution of humans for human nature to prevail in the world. This is commonly known as nirvana, presence, or enlightenment.

Besides viewing the self as an illusion, other philosophers approach the concept by considering the “self” as an activity. Among these philosophers were Aristotle and Plato, who defined the human soul as the principal essence of humanity but posited against differences in existence.

Unlike Plato and other religious traditions who supported separate existence, Aristotle viewed the human “self” as an activity of the body which lacks the properties of becoming immortal (Sorabji 17). To be specific, the soul is viewed as the activity of any living body. In defining the soul, Aristotle divided his argument into four major parts, including the desiderative, calculative, rational, and scientific parts.

Another renowned philosopher and psychologist today who defines “self” is Dr. Phil. He believes that a person dwells on a state of fictional self or authentic self as created by the Supreme Being. According to Dr. Phil, most people define who they are by explaining what they are doing, where they are, or their role in society.

However, Dr. Phil argues that one’s authentic self encompasses the genuine existence of a person’s identity (McGraw 1). This is to say that an authentic self demonstrates core human qualities. Additionally, the self is made up of the part of an individual that is not defined by profession or a given role in society. It consists of an individual’s talents, skills, and wisdom.

The psychologist further argues that an authentic self revolves around a person’s uniqueness, including abilities, rather than what he/she is expected to do or become. This, therefore, implies that when an individual does not live to the standards of his authentic self, he adopts a fictional self that has emptiness and incompleteness (McGraw 1).

It is doubtless that the definition of “self” has a wide range of implications. For instance, this knowledge affects the way human beings view themselves differently from animals. It gives them an understanding of their uniqueness and potential in using their senses to recognize their surrounding and their imagination ability.

Additionally, the definition of self impacts how we interact with and perceive others. In other words, human beings are able to appreciate others regardless of their shortcomings and differences since each one of them possesses unique qualities and attributes.

Although numerous philosophers have devoted their lives to defining the “I am” concept, Rene Descartes is regarded as the father of Western philosophy and a great contributor to several schools of thought. In particular, Meditations on First Philosophy has widely been used as learning at teaching materials across the globe.

Descartes, Rene. Meditations on First Philosophy . Sioux Falls: NuVision Publications, LLC, 2007. Print.

Frankfurt, Harry. Descartes’ Discussion of His Existence in the Second Mediation. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis, 2004. Print.

McGraw, Phillip. “Self Matters.” Dr. Phil , 2012. Web.

Rorty, Amélie. Essays on Descartes’ Meditations . California: University of California Press, 1986. Print.

Smith, Kurt, “Descartes’ Life and Works.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2012. Web. < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2010/entries/descartes-works/ >.

Sorabji, Richard. Graeco-Roman Varieties of Self. New York, NY: Springer, 2008. Print.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, August 28). Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay. https://ivypanda.com/essays/who-am-i/

"Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay." IvyPanda , 28 Aug. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/who-am-i/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay'. 28 August.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/who-am-i/.

1. IvyPanda . "Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/who-am-i/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Philosophical Perspective of Self Essay." August 28, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/who-am-i/.

• Rene Descartes: A Brief Perspective
• David Hume: The Ideology of Self
• Descartes' and Buddhist Ideas of Self-Existence
• A Miracle as an Extraordinary Happening Occurring in the Physical World
• Philosophy Is Worth Doing
• Proof of an External World
• Rene Descartes and John Locke
• Sophist Reasoning: Reality Perception

A Historical Novel Charts the Inner Life of the Philosopher al-Ghazali

Ahmed vall dine’s fictional account of the 12th-century intellectual invites a reinterpretation of our own times.

After more than two months of arduous toil, a middle-aged man with tattered clothes and bleeding feet finally stands before the gates of the ancient city. His drained appearance belies the tranquility he feels inside, running down to the very depths of his soul. “How long does one have to travel to find oneself?” he wonders, and “Why was it necessary to undertake such a journey simply to move from one side of one’s heart to the other?” The seeker stares in awe at the majestic walls of Damascus, revered for keeping out the invading hordes that stood before it in siege for 20 long years. But alas, he realizes, “no walls are more impenetrable than those of the heart!” And will history remember someone who strove for 20 years so that his heart might finally open to the light?

With this enticing opening scene, Ahmed Vall Dine’s latest novel takes the reader on a journey into the inner world of one of the most celebrated figures in Islamic history: the 12th-century philosopher and spiritual savant, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali. Vall Dine is a veteran correspondent for Al Jazeera, but the Mauritanian writer’s interests stretch beyond the newsroom and deep into the archive, bridging the present with the past. “Danishmand” (“The Wise Master”) is his fifth book; his first — published in 2012 — was an autobiographical account of his incarceration in Moammar Gadhafi’s prison cells during the Arab Spring. (The English translation, “In Gaddafi’s Clutches,” has just been published by Dar Arab in the United Kingdom.) The 2012 memoir was followed by two novels in quick succession, published in 2018 and 2019. In 2021, Vall Dine returned to his journalistic roots and published a book-length essay on the rise and fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Poetry has always been regarded as the repository of Arab historical memory; it is the “Diwan al-Arab.” Still very much appreciated among Arabic speakers, poetry is nevertheless no longer the dominant form of literary expression. The Arab world’s encounter with modernity not only introduced new forms of living, but new forms of literary expression as well, and the historical novel has rapidly gained prominence in modern Arabic literature. Contemporary Arab writers have increasingly embraced the genre to revisit the past, but it finds its best expression when the creative reimagining of the past is effectively utilized to stimulate reflection and offer commentary on the present.

With “Danishmand,” Vall Dine once again returns to the historical fiction genre and reimagines a tumultuous chapter in the Islamic past in a way that makes us think about our present predicament. In his first foray — “Al-Hadaqi” (2018) — Vall Dine explored the life and times of the ninth-century Iraqi polymath Abu Uthman Amr ibn Bahr al-Jahiz, who lived and wrote in the Abbasid Golden Age. Al-Jahiz is still revered and widely read in the Arab world today but remains an obscure figure in Anglophone literary circles, enjoying the attention of only a small group of academics and scholars of Arabic literature.

In contrast, al-Ghazali is arguably one of the most scrutinized figures in the Islamic intellectual tradition and is equally renowned in the West. His works were translated and studied in Latin Christendom, and while he is fortunately not one of the five Muslims confined to hell in Dante’s “Inferno,” he is mentioned in the “Convivio,” the Florentine poet’s reflection on the various disciplines of knowledge prevalent in his time. Rene Descartes, the 17th-century father of modern epistemology, is believed to have possessed a Latin translation of al-Ghazali’s autobiography, “The Deliverance From Error” (“Al-Munqidh min al-Dalal”), which was annotated in his own hand. On this basis, historians of philosophy have suggested that Islamic thought influenced European philosophy well beyond the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. Al-Ghazali’s books still enjoy wide circulation, and countless studies have been written on his life and thought, including novels (in Arabic and Persian). To this respectable legacy, Vall Dine now adds another work of historical fiction, carefully composed in consummate Arabic prose.

Apart from the opening prologue that is set in the middle of the story — on the brink of the looming quest — the book unfolds chronologically, following the life trajectory of the young orphan boy, Muhammad, from the dusty streets of the small town of Tabaran in the district of Tus, in 12th-century Khorasan, to the major centers of Nishapur, Isfahan, Baghdad, Damascus and Jerusalem. The unfolding narrative ultimately follows the path back to the final resting place of the wise master in his hometown in northeastern Iran, not too far from present-day Mashhad.

Part 1 of the novel — “Al-Yatim” (“The Orphan”) — opens with two young boys, Muhammad and his brother Ahmad, striving to scratch out a meager existence along with their recently widowed mother. Their father has left a small inheritance for the boys’ education with a loyal friend, but these funds have been depleted and the dying man summons them to discuss their future. The family friend expresses regret over not being able to provide for them himself due to his own state of abject poverty and failing health. Nonetheless, he has found a way for the boys to receive a religious education, one that will provide for them materially and fulfill their deceased father’s wish for his sons to become scholars. He arranges for them to be enrolled at a religious seminary that provides food, accommodation and clothing for its students. On weekends, the boys are able to visit their mother, now relieved of the burden of providing for her sons. The young Muhammad’s prodigious intellect instantly sets him apart from his peers and his teachers predict a bright future for him. In time, Muhammad is able to secure a scholarship to study at the great Nizamiyyah Seminary in Nishapur, under one of the foremost scholars of the age, Abu al-Maali al-Juwayni.

In the second part of the novel — “Danishmand” (“The Wise Master”) — the precocious student has grown into a great scholar whose reputation begins to rival that of his recently deceased teacher, al-Juwayni. His success draws the attention of the great Seljuk Vizier Abu Ali Hasan ibn Ali Tusi, known by the honorific Nizam al-Mulk (“Organizer of the Realm”), founder and patron of the eponymous Nizamiyyah schools. Al-Ghazali is thus drawn into the world of politics and court intrigue. The caliph in Baghdad is no more than a titular figure: True power resides in the hands of Seljuk Sultan Malik Shah, son of the great Alp Arslan. Nizam al-Mulk served Alp Arslan and pledged loyalty and service to the murdered sultan’s 19-year-old heir. Now, almost two decades later, the Seljuk realm is relatively secure and Nizam al-Mulk is at the height of his influence. There are nonetheless always pretenders to the throne, and the powerful esoteric sect of Assassins led by the enigmatic Hasan-e Sabbah — the Old Man of the Mountain — is determined to usurp power from the Seljuks. The assassins are Shiite Ismailis — loyal to the Fatimid caliph in Cairo — and wreak havoc in the Islamic East through a concerted campaign of killing, targeting leaders and scholars.

By now the Danishmand has joined the entourage of the great vizier, written a book refuting the creed of the Ismailis and served as an emissary of the court on numerous occasions. Nizam al-Mulk appoints al-Ghazali to teach at the Nizamiyyah in Baghdad — the most important of his schools — located in the cultural and intellectual capital of the Islamic world and in close proximity to the court of the Sunni caliph. The Seljuk Empire is thrown into chaos shortly thereafter, when Nizam al-Mulk is assassinated during Ramadan in 1092. His murder is followed by the sudden death of Sultan Malik Shah a month later. Malik Shah’s sons are instantly dragged into an internecine battle over the throne, and al-Ghazali is inadvertently drawn into their power struggle, acting as an emissary among the rival heirs, their mothers and the caliph.

When the caliph dies two years later, al-Ghazali abruptly abandons his teaching post and flees into self-imposed exile. The third part of the novel — “Al-Harib” (“The Escapee”) — thus begins with the famous scholar exchanging the luxurious garments of the court for the coarse apparel of an ascetic traveler, setting off on the road to Damascus and simultaneously taking the first steps toward self-discovery. The third part thus takes off from where the novel began, and we now get a clearer sense as to why the author refers to the prologue as a rebirth (“Al-Milad al-Thani”).

In Part 4 — “Al-Nasik” (“The Ascetic”) — we accompany the seeker as he navigates the pathways of his newly discovered soul. In the closing part of the novel — “Bi Qalb Salim” (“With a Content Heart”) — we return to Tabaran, the final resting place of the Danishmand. The Wise Master has not only found contentment, but more importantly has also left behind a unique inheritance, a guide along the path that leads to felicity. His spiritual sojourn helped him produce his magnum opus, a work of genius ambitiously titled “The Revival of the Religious Sciences” (“Ihya Ulum al-Din”).

Vall Dine’s novel is a sprawling work that gives one much pause for reflection. Apart from its lyrical Arabic prose, the book is also characterized by the kind of thick description common in social anthropology, exploring the meanings of the plot’s events to its characters. His creative retelling of al-Ghazali’s life story is also very faithful to the documented history of the great scholar’s life and times. One has only to turn to Frank Griffel’s excellent study, “Al-Ghazali’s Philosophical Theology,” to get a sense of this. The first two chapters of Griffel’s book provide us with the most detailed account of the historical figure and draw on a variety of sources in both Arabic and Persian, the languages in which al-Ghazali wrote and conversed.

Vall Dine embellishes the historical record by paying admirable attention to detail and his portrayals of dress, social norms, book culture and culinary practices draw on historical sources and travelogues written in the period in which the novel is set. For example, samosas make an appearance at the Ramadan banquet hosted by Nizam al-Mulk just before he is assassinated. These mince-filled triangular pastries, popularly associated with Indian cuisine today, made their first appearance in the Persian chronicle “Tarikh-i Bayhaqi” (“Bayhaqi’s History”) by the 11th-century Khorasani historian Abu al-Fadl al-Bayhaqi.

While the novel is certainly illuminating in its grasp of social history, it goes much further, offering an enlightening perspective on the philosophy of history as well. Vall Dine goes against the grain of the common idea of history as unfolding along a single continuum leading to a perfect social order. While this idea of “the end of history” has been championed and popularized by Francis Fukuyama in recent times, the tradition stretches back to the early 19th-century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and his philosophically grounded account of a linear history, ending at a point when society has reached its apogee and civilization is perfected.

The narrative thrust of the novel instead strongly affirms a cyclical conception of history, a theory clearly articulated by Abd al-Rahman ibn Khaldun, the 14th-century historian and social theorist. Ibn Khaldun poignantly stated that “Civilization is detrimental to societal development.” This unique insight emerged from the realization that the material affluence required to promote the pursuit of progress and the development of civilization would always be the exclusive preserve of powerful elites. The amassing of great fortunes by these elites is inevitably accompanied by the desire to maintain exclusive rights over such wealth, and, as such, the masses will always be left out in the cold. On the basis of this insight, Ibn Khaldun argued that the course of history is cyclical. Powerful civilizations reach a peak but ultimately collapse, because the path to power leaves too many stranded along the way.

In al-Ghazali’s epoch, Islamic civilization was still ascendant, and the contrast between the novel’s context and our own gives a compelling version of the civilizational cycle. The fact that Vall Dine is able to creatively reimagine the past in a way that stimulates us to think about the present is not only a strong indication of the maturation of the genre of historical fiction in contemporary Arabic literature but also an acknowledgment of the author’s mastery of his craft. Vall Dine does not have to openly lament Islamic civilization’s fall from grace; rather, he presents a cogent portrait of what it looked like in al-Ghazali’s era.

In the novel, Arab and Persian elites are at the top of the social hierarchy, with the Turkish military castes rapidly integrating into these ranks. The subaltern classes are made up of Byzantine slave girls prized for their beauty and groomed for service, similar to the court eunuchs castrated in Christian lands and sold into slavery to be trained as bureaucrats and keepers of the harems of powerful men. Similarly, the violent hordes threatening the realm are the white barbarians of Europe who have been mobilized by Pope Urban II and his cohort of religious zealots, setting out to reclaim Jerusalem for their faith. This portrayal of the European barbarian hordes — notorious for their bloodlust and aversion to bathing — marching on Jerusalem via Constantinople, where Christians were far more civilized, constitutes a compelling narrative strand that orders society into a clearly delineated civilizational hierarchy.

The detriments of high civilization are acutely felt by al-Ghazali, especially in relation to his scholarly peers who vie for attention and courtly prestige. Their immersion in material pleasures and pursuits has brought about a spiritual malaise. The “sharia,” or sacred Islamic law, has been reduced to no more than positive law, “fiqh,” a utilitarian jurisprudence defined by legal stratagems and hermeneutic flexibility. Stated in the language of our times, the Islam that al-Ghazali sees being practiced by his peers has effectively been secularized.

The Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor has convincingly argued that modernity is defined by an immanent frame, that is, a refusal to address any issues beyond the sensory world, meaning that we live in an era largely bereft of any transcendent grounding. Stated differently, our existence is dominated by secular time. Taylor therefore holds that modern society is defined by radical horizontality, where there are no high points and where we are no longer rooted to “something other.”

Al-Ghazali, too, developed an acute awareness that the world around him was flattening out, and he therefore sought salvation by attempting to reconnect with the divine. From this vantage point, his journey marks the traversing of the boundaries of secular time and a reentry into the realm of sacred higher time, which is why he appositely refers to the new Islamic discipline formulated in his magnum opus as the “Science of the Path to the Afterlife” (“Ilm Tariq al-Akhirah”).

Vall Dine has not simply written a work of historical fiction. By imaginatively documenting the life story of one of the most prominent sages in the Islamic intellectual tradition, he has effectively taken us along with al-Ghazali on his spiritual quest. On this journey, we learn that even a work of fiction is able to traverse the boundaries of the secular and deliver us into the realm of the sacred.

Become a member today to receive access to all our paywalled essays and the best of New Lines delivered to your inbox through our newsletters.

Bosnia’s Dark Past and Murky Present, and a Vision for the Future — With Jasmin Mujanović

Kazakhstan’s growing role in the global energy transition may come at a cost to local communities, an indian singer stirs mubarak nostalgia for egyptians, how a satirist captured the maladies of the islamic golden age, how the turbulent politics of medieval central asia shaped a polymath’s achievements, the wine critics of early islam, sign up to our newsletter.

Will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

Los Angeles Angels | Angels reliever Adam Cimber says new…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)
• High School

Los Angeles Angels

Los angeles angels | angels reliever adam cimber says new perspective has helped him on the mound, cimber, who has two young kids, said thinking about his family and faith ahead of baseball have helped him to be more successful on the field.

The Angels reliever has a 2.60 ERA through his 18 games, and four of the five runs he allowed were in one game. He’s also stranded all 12 of the runners he’s inherited.

It is still something of a small sample size, and it’s not totally out of character for Cimber, who had a 3.49 ERA coming into the season.

Nonetheless, he says there is something different about this season. He’s now the father of a 2-year-old son and a daughter who is about to celebrate her first birthday, and he said the combination of his family and faith has helped him put baseball in the right perspective.

“I started prioritizing the other things in my life that I want to be, and the identity that I want, the person I want to be, the identity I want to have,” Cimber said. “It’s not baseball. That makes baseball easier too, when you realize that baseball is just what you do; it’s not who you are.”

Cimber, 33, said when he’s at home in the morning playing with his kids, he’s not thinking about the fact that he might inherit runners on the corners in a tight game later that day.

“I think this year I’m trying to live life in the moment,” Cimber said. “When those moments come and I’m in that moment on the mound, just attack with everything you got. If it works out, awesome. If it doesn’t, there will be more moments.  Next one, you just try to attack again. Chose to be happy and live life in those moments.”

Whatever the reasons for Cimber’s effectiveness, the Angels are thrilled with the early returns from a player who signed a one-year, $1.65-million deal last winter.

Only one reliever in the majors has inherited more runners without allowing any to score this season. Detroit Tigers right-hander Alex Lange has stranded all 13 of the runners he’s inherited.

Manager Ron Washington said Cimber’s success with runners on base is because of the way he pitches, with a release point that has dropped well below sidearm.

“He throws strikes and he has a funky delivery,” Washington said. “It’s tough to really lock into. And if he was one of those that had that funky delivery and couldn’t hit the strike zone with it, it wouldn’t be as effective, but it’s effective because he throws strikes and he’s coming from that funky angle.”

HOT AND COLD

First baseman Nolan Schanuel got a day off on Sunday, even though the Angels were facing a right-hander.

Schanuel hit .093 in his first 13 games, followed by .388 in his next 13, and then .133 in the last eight.

“Well, that’s baseball,” Washington said. “It goes in ebbs and flows, especially when you are a young kid. A veteran, when he finds his stuff at the beginning of a year, it’ll be a while before he loses it. This kid finds it. He loses it. He finds it. He loses it. He’s the one that has to decide how to hold on to it. And only way he’s gonna be able to hold on to it is to experience playing and and start believing. And I’m not saying he doesn’t believe in himself. But we are all trying to find that consistency. And he’s also trying to find that consistency. So it’s gonna be a battle until he locks it in.”

Los Angeles Angels | Angels offense continues to struggle while Patrick Sandoval endures one bad inning

Los angeles angels | tyler anderson, jo adell lead angels past royals.

• Los Angeles Angels | Angels’ Jo Adell continues to find his stride after early career struggles
• Los Angeles Angels | Carlos Estévez suffers 3rd blown save of season in Angels’ loss to Royals
• Los Angeles Angels | Angels’ Brandon Drury has no regrets about trying to play through hamstring issue

As outfielder Jo Adell continues his strong start to the season , questions persist about whether Washington should move him up from the bottom of the order. Washington tried him briefly up in the order a couple weeks ago, and he didn’t like the way Adell seemed to change his approach. Now, he’s content to keep him where he is. “When you’ve got a kid that hasn’t had success, and he’s having success … I’m not going to test Jo Adell right now,” Washington said. “That’s not to say somewhere in the season he might not hit fourth, but right now I’m happy where he is and he’s not bugging me about moving.” …

Infielders Luis Rengifo (virus) and Miguel Sanó (knee inflammation) were both on the field doing drills before Sunday’s game. The Angels are hoping that Rengifo will be back sometime in the next week, and there’s no timetable for Sanó.

Angels (RHP José Soriano, 1-4, 4.32) vs. Cardinals (LHP Matthew Liberatore, 1-1, 3.54) at Angel Stadium, 6:38 p.m. PT Monday, Bally Sports West, 830 AM.

• Newsroom Guidelines
• Report an Error

More in Los Angeles Angels

Los Angeles Angels | Angels’ Jo Adell continues to find his stride after early career struggles

Los Angeles Angels | Carlos Estévez suffers 3rd blown save of season in Angels’ loss to Royals

trending now in US News

'Boardwalk Empire' star Steve Buscemi punched by maniac in random...

Howard University cancels graduation mid-ceremony after furious...

Jerry Seinfeld booed by anti-Israel protesters who walk out of...

Concertgoer partially paralyzed after singer's stage dive into...

Democratic senator rips Hillary Clinton's 'dismissive' criticism...

Top NYPD cop pepper sprays himself breaking up anti-Israel...

NYC-Dublin live video art installation already bringing out the...

Rising Yankees star Anthony Volpe attributes his early MLB...

Democratic sen. chris van hollen rips hillary clinton’s ‘dismissive’ criticism of anti-israel protesters.

• View Author Archive
• Get author RSS feed

Thanks for contacting us. We've received your submission.

Sen. Chris Van Hollen on Sunday dinged Hillary Clinton for being “quite dismissive” in recent comments questioning the knowledge and perspective of anti-Israeli protesters who have stormed college campuses across the country.

Last week, Clinton went on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” and derided some of the protesters saying they “don’t know very much at all about the history of the Middle East or frankly about history in many areas of the world.”

Van Hollen (D-Md.) contended that many of the student demonstrators had legitimate concerns about the Israel-Hamas war unfolding half a world away.

“I thought…that Secretary Clinton’s comments, in that regard, were quite dismissive of students’ concerns about the awful humanitarian crisis and high civilian death toll in Gaza,” Van Hollen told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“I believe that the great majority of the students are protesting, are following very closely what’s happening in Gaza,” he went on. “They see what’s a very high civilian death toll.”

Clinton explained that she has “had many conversations” with younger people over the past seven months since the war erupted in the wake of the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack that killed an estimated 1,200 Israelis.

She then underscored her husband, former President Bill Clinton’s efforts for a breakthrough in a two-state solution in the 1990s.

“An offer was made to the Palestinians for a state on 96% of the existing territory occupied by the Palestinians with 4% of Israel to be given to reach 100% of the amount of territory that was hoped for,” she recalled.

But then-Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat rejected that offer.

Hillary Clinton has been a professor of public affairs at Columbia University, which was engulfed by heavy protests, anti-Israel encampments, and the occupation of Hamilton Hall amid campus strife over the conflict.

Van Hollen also stressed that campuses should protect students’ rights to free speech and “make sure that students feel safe on campus” as well as “stamp out antisemitism and hate.”

Earlier in the interview, the Maryland senator defended President Biden’s decision to put a pause on the shipment of 2,000-pound bombs to Israel over concerns it’s planning to mount a ground assault on the southern Gazan city of Rafah.

“Remember, the president of the United States warned [Israeli] Prime Minister [Benjamin] Netanyahu repeatedly that if there was an all-out invasion in Rafah that the United States would make policy changes,” he said.

“Netanyahu has repeatedly ignored the President of the United States, ignored the president’s efforts to try to reduce civilian casualties, ignored our efforts to try to get more humanitarian assistance into Gaza and ignored the priority of trying to bring back the hostages.”

Last week, the State Department released a report that stated it is “reasonable to assess” Israel violated international humanitarian law in Gaza.

Around that time, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Mark Milley said, “Before we get self-righteous about what Israel is doing,” the US should recognize that it has fought wars with significant civilian death tolls, citing events from World War II.

“The United States has not been perfect — far from perfect. But since World War Two, we’ve adopted many more measures to try to restrict civilian harm,” Van Hollen said of Milley’s comments.

Netanyahu publicly estimated that roughly 16,000 civilians have been killed along with 14,000 terrorists in seven months of fighting in the Gaza Strip.

Share this article:

Advertisement

The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: a Psychological Perspective

This essay about extrinsic motivation explains how external rewards and consequences influence our behavior. It distinguishes extrinsic motivation from intrinsic motivation, emphasizing that while intrinsic motivation comes from within, extrinsic motivation is driven by external factors like money, praise, or penalties. The essay illustrates how different factors such as immediacy of rewards, personalization, and cultural values can affect the effectiveness of extrinsic motivators. It also discusses the overjustification effect, where too much focus on external rewards can diminish internal interest in an activity. Practical applications in educational and workplace settings are explored, suggesting ways to balance extrinsic motivators with intrinsic interests to enhance both performance and personal satisfaction. The essay underscores the importance of understanding extrinsic motivation to effectively influence behavior in various aspects of life.

How it works

Extrinsic motivation isn’t just a term you’d hear in a psychology class; it’s a real-world force that nudges us into action every day, often without us even noticing. It’s about those external rewards that push us to do things, whether it’s the promise of a pay raise, the fear of a parking ticket, or even just a thumbs-up from a friend. This kind of motivation is like the carrot and stick of the old adage, pulling us toward rewards and pushing us away from penalties.

Let’s break it down with a few everyday examples. Consider why you might take on extra work hours. Sure, part of it could be your dedication, but a big chunk of your willingness probably comes from knowing there’s a bonus in store at the end. Or think about students cramming for exams—not always out of love for the subject, but because they want to nail a good grade.

But here’s where it gets tricky—relying too much on these external rewards can actually mess with your internal drive. Imagine you love painting, and you start selling your artwork. If your focus shifts purely to what sells best, you might find that painting becomes more of a chore than a passion. Psychologists call this the “overjustification effect,” where your internal interest dwindles because the external rewards take over.

The thing about these external motivators is they’re not one-size-fits-all. They can vary wildly from person to person and situation to situation. For instance, immediate rewards usually have a stronger pull than the promise of something down the line. A quick bonus might motivate a team more effectively than a potential end-of-year profit share. Similarly, tailoring rewards to personal interests can boost motivation more than generic one-size-fits-all perks.

The influence of culture also can’t be ignored. In societies where group success is prized over individual gains, recognition from peers or contributing to the team’s success might spur someone more than personal accolades.

So, how do we use this knowledge effectively without turning every action into a transaction? It’s all about balance. For educators, it means using grades and praise as tools, but also connecting lessons to students’ interests to keep the intrinsic joy of learning alive. For managers, it involves designing rewards that not only boost productivity but also make work fulfilling, aligning with both company goals and personal development.

Understanding extrinsic motivation is crucial because it plays into how we shape our behaviors and choices in almost every area of life. By getting a handle on what pulls us towards these external rewards—or pushes us away from potential penalties—we can better navigate our decisions and grow in ways that align with our deeper goals and values. It’s about leveraging those external factors to not only achieve more but also find greater satisfaction in what we do.

Cite this page

The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/

"The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/ [Accessed: 12 May. 2024]

"The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed May 12, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/

"The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/. [Accessed: 12-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Role of Extrinsic Motivation in Shaping Behavior: A Psychological Perspective . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-role-of-extrinsic-motivation-in-shaping-behavior-a-psychological-perspective/ [Accessed: 12-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Advertisement

Supported by

The Un Certain Regard Section Offers a Different Perspective at the Cannes Film Festival

While not receiving the same attention as the main competition, the sidebar is where you often glimpse the future of cinema.

• Share full article

By A.J. Goldmann

The British filmmaker Molly Manning Walker was on vacation in Rome on May 26, 2023, when her phone rang. A week earlier, her feature debut “ How to Have Sex ” had premiered at the Cannes Film Festival. Now, festival organizers were calling because her movie, about a group of 16-year-old girls who spend a debauched booze and sex-soaked summer vacation on the Greek island of Crete, had won a prize that would be announced at that evening’s closing ceremony back on the Côte d’Azur.

“I had to drive to the nearest airport really quickly and get on the next plane and I ran in three minutes after the film had been announced,” Manning Walker, 30, recalled in a recent phone interview.

She wasn’t exaggerating. She did, in fact, bolt into the cinema wearing a lime green T-shirt and black tennis shorts. “ What the hell is going on? ” she asked the audience in disbelief. The answer was that “How to Have Sex” had won the top award in Un Certain Regard, the sidebar section at the festival that is known for recognizing films by new and emerging directors.

While the starry main competition at Cannes — which begins on Tuesday, and this year features new work by David Cronenberg, Francis Ford Coppola, Yorgos Lanthimos and other established filmmakers — attracts most of the media’s attention, Un Certain Regard, which translates to “a certain look,” is where one can most reliably glimpse where world cinema is headed. In the words of Thierry Frémaux, Cannes’s artistic director, “U.C.R. discovers and celebrates the new generation and expands the frontiers of cinema.”

In an email interview, Frémaux, who heads the viewing committee that selects the films that screen at the festival, said that Un Certain Regard’s purpose was “to bring out new trends, new paths, new countries of cinema. It’s a selection that favors young filmmakers, especially female directors, and prepares the emergence of future generations.

“We’re looking for style, originality, narrative force and conviction,” he wrote.

Peter Bradshaw , the chief film critic for The Guardian, said Un Certain Regard was a game changer when it was founded in 1978 by Gilles Jacob, Frémaux’s predecessor.

“It doubled the size of the official festival, basically,” Bradshaw explained in a phone interview. “Twenty extra titles in what is a very important sidebar — it’s taken very seriously — and with that sidebar it created a huge challenge to the other festivals because, you know, other festivals which might have wanted those titles find they’re being hoovered up by Un Certain Regard,” he said, since the films that screen at Cannes are typically world premieres.

In addition to attending Cannes as a critic since 1999, the year he started at The Guardian, Bradshaw was also a member of the Un Certain Regard jury in 2011 that was headed by the Serbian director Emir Kusturica, a two-time winner of the Palme d’Or, the festival’s top prize.

The Un Certain Regard awards, Bradshaw added, are particularly valuable for emerging filmmakers like Manning Walker, since it means that “you can come away from Cannes with a prize which is absolute gold for a distributor or sales agent.”

Lately, Un Certain Regard has launched many of Cannes’s most discussed films, such as the lavish Austrian drama “Corsage” (2022), the rugged Icelandic epic “Godland” (2022) and the polarizing Belgian film “Girl” (2018), about a transgender ballet dancer.

In his email, Frémaux stressed that the same committee curated the entire festival program, the “sélection officielle,” which includes various noncompetitive sections in addition to the main slate competition and Un Certain Regard. How a film winds up in one section or another, he stresses, is anything but arbitrary.

“The most important thing is that each film, for what it is, finds its best place,” he said. Noting that young filmmakers, including first-time directors, can be selected for the main competition and even win prizes there, Frémaux explained that sometimes a film initially selected for Un Certain Regard has ended up in competition.

“It’s important to take risks, as this allows us to make new discoveries,” he said. At the same time, he emphasized that Un Certain Regard is where many filmmakers feel most at home at Cannes, away from the hue and cry of the main competition. But he also cautioned against the perception of Un Certain Regard as the festival’s second tier.

“When U.C.R. was created, it did indeed look like an inferior section,” he said, but added that “U.C.R. has indeed found a real identity in recent years, because we’ve changed its mission. It’s no longer the ‘second division,’ it’s a section in its own right.”

“Even without Un Certain Regard, you can’t see everything,” Bradshaw said of the often-hectic experience of being at Cannes. “But it does create a new level of FOMO, because you think, ‘Oh my goodness, there’s some brilliant movie that everybody’s talking about,’ and ‘you might not have seen it because it’s slightly off the beaten track.’ And of course, once that gets out, everybody scrambles to try and see the hot film that everybody’s talking about. In a way, Un Certain Regard is almost brilliantly constructed to create this alternative reality,” he said.

Over the past decade, many of the filmmakers most closely associated with Cannes got their start in Un Certain Regard. A decade before Bong Joon Ho’s “Parasite” (2019) won both the Palme d’Or, and the Academy Award for best picture, the Korean director’s film “Mother” stunned the Un Certain Regard audience. And the Swedish filmmaker Ruben Ostlund , who won Palmes for “The Square” (2017) and “Triangle of Sadness” (2022), took home the Un Certain Regard jury prize for “Force Majeure” in 2014.

Another example is Xavier Dolan, the 35-year-old French Canadian auteur who serves as the Un Certain Regard jury president this year. Two of his films, “Heartbeats” (2010) — made when Dolan was 21 — and “Laurence Anyways” (2012), were shown in Un Certain Regard. His next two features “Mommy” (2014) and “It’s Only the End of the World” (2016) both won top prizes in the main competition.

The jury this year also includes Luxembourg-born Vicky Krieps, who won the Un Certain Regard prize for best actress for “Corsage”; the Moroccan filmmaker Asmae El Moudir, winner of last year’s Un Certain Regard directing prize; the French director Maïmouna Doucouré, whose 2020 film “Cuties” weathered controversy over its portrayal of young girls in a hypersexualized culture; and the American film critic and historian Todd McCarthy. They will judge an international lineup of 18 films, including eight feature debuts.

“Last year was a great year,” wrote Frémaux of Un Certain Regard, calling out “How to Have Sex,” El Moudir’s award-winning documentary “The Mother of All Lies,” and Thomas Cailley’s dystopian fantasy, “The Animal Kingdom,” which went on to win five César Awards (the French equivalent to the Oscars).

“I believe that what young filmmakers are putting forward this year is also very exciting, you will see,” Frémaux added.

As Un Certain Regard’s reputation as a reliable launchpad for the best of world cinema has grown, some consider it even more interesting and vital than the main competition. Among certain critics, Bradshaw of the Guardian suggested, this attitude has practically become a cliché.

“And sometimes that’s true, and sometimes it’s not,” he explained.

“It’s very important as part of Cannes’s presence in terms of international cinema that they can cover the waterfront in Un Certain Regard and find some prize winners and really good movies that can become critical darlings all over the world,” he added.

Manning Walker, who is currently developing her second feature as part of a residency in Paris sponsored by Cannes’s program for emerging filmmakers, the Cinéfondation, said that winning Un Certain Regard’s main prize piqued audience interest in “How To Have Sex,” and also helped it get taken seriously in the industry.

“Through Cannes, we got to travel really far with the film,” she said.

Explore More in TV and Movies

Not sure what to watch next we can help.a.

Andy Serkis, the star of the earlier “Planet of the Apes” movies, and Owen Teague, the new lead, discuss the latest film in the franchise , “Kingdom of the Planet of the Apes.”

The HBO series “The Sympathizer” is not just a good story, it’s a sharp piece of criticism on Vietnam war movies, our critic writes .

In “Dark Matter,” the new Apple TV+ techno-thriller, a portal to parallel realities allows people to visit new worlds and revisit their own past decisions .

The tennis movie “Challengers” comes to an abrupt stop midmatch, so we don’t know who won. Does that matter? Our critics have thoughts .

If you are overwhelmed by the endless options, don’t despair — we put together the best offerings   on Netflix , Max , Disney+ , Amazon Prime  and Hulu  to make choosing your next binge a little easier.

Sign up for our Watching newsletter  to get recommendations on the best films and TV shows to stream and watch, delivered to your inbox.