Career success - relate to other people or study hard?

[hieppham90]

Topic: For future career success, is relate well to other people more important than studying hard at school?Agree or not

---***---

Everyone wants to be successful in his career, but how to reach the goal is a problem that everyone meets. Some people try to have a good relationship with people to reach the goal, whereas others tend to work hard at school to do so. In my opinion, it’s more important to relate well to other people to succeed in future career.
Firstly, there is no job in which we donot interact with many types of people, so the skill of dealing well with them and not being stressful under strain of colleagues is very important. Relating well with people is very important to be successful in one’s career, at the same time, however hard we study at school, we still cannot make any progress in the relationship with people, but we actually find ourselves more and more indulgent in books and dry knowledge.
Secondly, the knowledge that we get from teachers is not enough. Because it is mere theory, and what we need is the application of that theory into the real life. But does sitting still in front of books, pens and datas do us any good? My answer is No. We can remember the knowledge well, but we cannot know how it is when it comes into life and happens actually so that we can see with our own eyes. So how does relating well with people help us in this case? A student in a college always craves for an opportunity to practice what he learns from his teachers. So a chance to work for an effectively organized company requiring applied knowledge is invaluable for him. And he can get this chance only by broadening his relationship with people, especially those who run a business or manage some kinds of administration, etc.
Last but not least, the success in his future job depends deeply on the combination of skills and knowledge. But one cannot cover all the necessary knowledge on his own, because knowledge is extremely large. He can be good at certain fields, but not good or even bad in others. And the interaction with people who are professional at such fields is indispensable. Studying hard can provide us with basic knowledge about the job, but relating well with people not only opens the door to opportunities but also supports our study.
All in all, success in future job can be achieved in many ways, in many times and for many purposes. Considering all the factors, it is concluded that we must enhance the relationship to get a successful job in future. However, my essay is not against studying hard but supports the way of balancing between studying and relating with people.

[Raymott]

Topic: For future career success, is relating well to other people more important than studying hard at school?Agree or not
This topic is incorrectly phrased. It's a question. You can't agree or disagree with a question. Do you understand this point?

---***---

Everyone wants to be successful in his career, but how to reach the goal is a problem that everyone meets. Some people try to have a good relationship with people to reach the goal, whereas others tend to work hard at school to do so. [Really? Where did you get the idea for this rather strange dichotomy? If a topic says "Is A more important than B", you cannot simply assume that there are only two factors and that a choice needs to be made between them. You have to in the essay, but you can't assume that this is a choice in real life.]

In my opinion, it’s more important to relate well to other people to succeed in future career.
Firstly, there is no job in which we do not interact with many types of people [Yes there are. Perhaps "There are few jobs ... "], so the skill of dealing well with them and not being stressful under strain of colleagues is very important. Relating well with people is very important to be successful in one’s career, [You've said that] At the same time, However hard we study at school, we still cannot make any progress in our relationship with people by doing so, but we actually find ourselves more and more indulgent in books and dry knowledge. [You haven't shown that this is a bad thing. You shouldn't insert a word like 'dry' unless you're going to explain it. This is an objective essay in which you are meant to give evidence for your opinions. If it were meant to be a piece of persuasive or polemical prose, you could use such rhetorical effects - but they are not rational.]

Secondly, the knowledge that we get from teachers is not enough, because it is mere theory [Really? A teacher has never taught you how to do something?] , and what we need is the application of that theory into the real life. But does sitting still in front of books, pens and data do us any good? My answer is No. [This is a very strange thing to assert. And it's unnecessary. If you are arguing that A is more important than B, you don't have to argue that B is useless. And you shouldn't unless it's true. But now you've painted yourself into a corner, because neither the teacher (a person) nor books are useful. Also, my point above about rhetoric applies again. The assumption that studying hard involves sitting still in front of books is an obvious straw man.]
[Corrected to here].

We can remember the knowledge well, but we cannot know how it is when it comes into life and happens actually so that we can see with our own eyes. So how does relating well with people help us in this case? A student in a college always craves for an opportunity to practice what he learns from his teachers. So a chance to work for an effectively organized company requiring applied knowledge is invaluable for him. And he can get this chance only by broadening his relationship with people, especially those who run a business or manage some kinds of administration, etc.

Last but not least, the success in his future job depends deeply on the combination of skills and knowledge. But one cannot cover all the necessary knowledge on his own, because knowledge is extremely large. He can be good at certain fields, but not good or even bad in others. And the interaction with people who are professional at such fields is indispensable.
Studying hard can provide us with basic knowledge about the job, but relating well with people not only opens the door to opportunities but also supports our study. [A valid point]
All in all, success in future job can be achieved in many ways, in many times and for many purposes. Considering all the factors, it is concluded that we must enhance the relationship to get a successful job in future. However, my essay is not against studying hard but supports the way of balancing between studying and relating with people.
[Your essay is substantially against studying hard. It does not come close to addressing a balance between studying and relating. Your conclusion should be either that i) studying hard is more important or that ii) relating well to other people is more important. Your essay argues for ii.
Actually the question leaves open the possibility that relating is not more important but just as important as study. But you haven't argued for that.

R.

[Ann1977]

I'd be happy if they'd just lose the textbook they're working from.

It's telling all these students to say "Firstly, secondly, last but not least."

I can hardly think of three worse transitions.

And evidently it's telling them that the conclusion should sort of become a last-minute compromise or temporizing -- maybe even a statement that reverses their own position.

Why are these students all using the same textbook anyway? Are they all from the same classroom?

And how did they all get stuck with such bad advice? Couldn't the book at least have included TWO examples of transitions? Or more than one ordering principle (a temporal one)? And using "firstly" for even that is just terrible. I can't even BEGIN to describe what is wrong with "last but not least."

Providing two examples of transitional guides would at least have given these students the idea that this is not a mechanical operation, but instead calls for some exercise of imagination, taste, and judgment.

For one thing
In addition
Finally

One
Another
But the most

[Raymott]

I'd be happy if they'd just lose the textbook they're working from.
I thought you said that some structure was worse than none.

Why are these students all using the same textbook anyway? Are they all from the same classroom?

Maybe you could ask the OP. A lot of posters recently have been from Vietnam.

And how did they all get stuck with such bad advice? Couldn't the book at least have included TWO examples of transitions? Or more than one ordering principle (a temporal one)? And using "firstly" for even that is just terrible. I can't even BEGIN to describe what is wrong with "last but not least."
I'd given up reading closely by then. But the learner has no doubt heard it from somewhere - maybe from an English-speaking person?

Maybe you should find out what book they're all using, then write a better one and make some money.

[Ann1977]

Maybe you should find out what book they're all using, then write a better one and make some money.

There are really good textbooks on this craft out there.

And I know I said that any structure at all is better than none.

But when I made that rash statement, I hadn't taken into consideration

firstly

secondly

last but not least

There ARE things worse than no structure at all!!!

[hieppham90]

R.

Thank you very much for your consideration. I like your way of commenting, its straightforward, detailed and sincere. I very hope to read your comments on my next essays.

I'd be happy if they'd just lose the textbook they're working from.

It's telling all these students to say "Firstly, secondly, last but not least."

I can hardly think of three worse transitions.

And evidently it's telling them that the conclusion should sort of become a last-minute compromise or temporizing -- maybe even a statement that reverses their own position.

Why are these students all using the same textbook anyway? Are they all from the same classroom?

And how did they all get stuck with such bad advice? Couldn't the book at least have included TWO examples of transitions? Or more than one ordering principle (a temporal one)? And using "firstly" for even that is just terrible. I can't even BEGIN to describe what is wrong with "last but not least."

Providing two examples of transitional guides would at least have given these students the idea that this is not a mechanical operation, but instead calls for some exercise of imagination, taste, and judgment.

For one thing
In addition
Finally

One
Another
But the most

I cannot distill the idea of you... I donot see anything wrong with my transition which is "firstly - secondly - last but not least". Is the sentence "last but not least" a ridiculous one??? Please point out clearly what you want to say, I would be greatful...
Thank you for your straightforward comment. I hope to read your comments in my next essays. :)

[Ann1977]

Thank you very much for your consideration. I like your way of commenting, its straightforward, detailed and sincere. I very hope to read your comments on my next essays.



I cannot distill the idea of you... I donot see anything wrong with my transition which is "firstly - secondly - last but not least". Is the sentence "last but not least" a ridiculous one??? Please point out clearly what you want to say, I would be greatful...
Thank you for your straightforward comment. I hope to read your comments in my next essays. :)

I hope this link will expand the kinds of ordering you can use. If you read on to the next section, you will find some suggestions for "signposts" (as this author calls transitions) that are more appropriate than "firstly, secondly, last but not least."
Essay Writing - Google Books

This link has a bunch of transition words sorted out by organizing principle:
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/transitions.htm