Objective Summary Essays - Soups, Chicken Soup,

Objective Summary: The story is about a child's expectance of a family life filled with love and comforts, which is contrast with his real working class family life. Subjective Evaluation: Soto, back to his age of nine, dreamed to live in a family life that was uncomplicated in its routine. In reality, Soto lived in a working class family; he tried to change his family to imitate the perfect families he absorbed from television. I think many people have done what Soto did to fulfill the dream of a perfect family they wanted. I am not excluded from this either. I have an experience of attempting to change my family life. It was one year later after my family first came to the US in 1995. I learned many new things in this country that I never knew in China, and I appreciated some living styles in American culture. As I tended to like the styles of American life, I expected my family like them, too. The thing I wanted my family to change was the cooking style. I hated to cook Chinese dinner because it took so long to prepare. There are four kinds of food which are considered essential parts of Chinese dinner: rice, soup, vegetable, and meat; they are usually cooked separately. I was not the one who was good at cooking in my family, but I did have to cook when I came home earlier than my parents and two sisters still at work. One day, when we were sitting together at the dinning table for dinner, I suggested to my family that we could have sandwiches and precooked food from the supermarket as our dinner since many American families do. My parents looked at me in bewilderment. Son, you must be kidding, right? Those sandwiches and precooked food do not give you enough nutrition for growing up, my dad said. And precooked food is not good for your health, my mother kept on. My elder sisters showed no interest in my idea. I grew frustrated from their reaction, but I did not give up. Evening after evening, I kept bringing up the idea at the dinning table. My mother finally permitted me to make one American dinner for the family. That day, I went to the supermarket to buy bread, ham, and chicken soup right after school. I planned on making ham sandwiches and chicken soup for the dinner. The dinner was ready and served at our usual dinnertime. My mother tasted a spoon of the chicken soup and said, It tastes like brine, nothing but salty. Why don't they put some shark fins in it? She refused to have another spoon. My sisters only had a small bite of their sandwiches and then put them down; my father barely finished one. Even I could not have another one after finishing two. That night, my parents and sisters had instant noodle for dinner. Such a result was out of my expectation, but I had to accept it. From then on, the subject of changing cooking style is never brought up to the family conversation. I think Soto had the same feeling as I did when he found out that there was no way to change his family to be the perfect family he expected. When he realized that, he went out to look for work; being different from him, I tried to bring up another subject to the family conversation.

Should We Trust the Wisdom of Crowds?

Should We Trust the Wisdom of Crowds?An essay sample that asks the question should we trust the wisdom of crowds can be found in essays by Eric Hoffer, Daniel Bell, and some anonymous individual. It was published in 1933 by The Home Economics Association. The essay includes a variation on an essay topic; Should we trust the wisdom of crowds? What we learn from this essay is the tendency for crowds to lean towards the majority opinion and ignore or reject the minority opinions.There is a second version of this essay that opens with the statement: We should trust the people in control to have true wisdom. The difference is this second version is offered in one place. We will read the essay in a work, the same work from which we are currently reading. The second version is not presented in a different work. Neither version is actually offered in different works, but both are presented in the same work.Both versions have two questions that need to be answered. The first question is, 'Do you believe in crowds?' The second question is, 'Do you believe in wise crowds?' Each question contains a group of people that are acting in self-interests. In order to answer those questions, the author must make a determination about what is likely to occur under any given set of circumstances.Consider the smart and wise groups who are often referred to as a 'quorum.' When a quorum assembles they usually meet in public places to discuss future actions. The group becomes a group of like minded individuals who all want the same outcome - the best option.In this situation, when the group is all together it can be expected that each will have their own view and opinion, but no group will be clearly in control of their group. Thus there is no wise crowd that can be considered.It is easy to see why the wise crowds will act for the good of the whole group and for the same group as a whole. When a group has been divided the members have not necessarily acted for their own betterment but f or the group's benefit as a whole. If a group of people makes up a group they do not act in self-interest but in the interest of the group.When the group becomes a group of individuals, each is acting for their own self-interest, they may well 'vote' as a group, but not as a wise group, and thus can not be called a wise crowd. The wise majority opinion will generally prevail when the group is in a group, and the majority opinion does not generally have to mean the majority vote.The intelligent group that has been divided often act as a group as they engage in discussion and debate and yet they do not constitute a group that can be considered a wise crowd. While the intelligent group may be able to collect and organize the opinion of a very large number of members to bring their point of view to a vote, it does not mean the group can be called a wise crowd. And the wise crowds in the latter case cannot be considered by the intelligent group that can collect and organize their thought s.