Pipes

Types of essays on social studies exam. How to write an essay on social studies and get maximum points for the exam

Philosophy,
Economy,
Political science,
Jurisprudence.

historical facts;
personal experience and observations;

3. Theoretical part

4. Factual part

5. Conclusion

remember, that

remember the terminology

write straight away

If you are “floating” in the topic

Essay similar to an essay, usually has a free composition and a small size. Although the task should seem easy, for some reason it frightens the students and takes them by surprise.

You will need

- educational literature;
- computer.

Instructions

Think over a rough work plan. As a rule, an essay consists of a short introduction, which reveals the essence of the topic; the main part, which sets out the opinions of scientists on the subject of the story; the attitude of the author of the work to these opinions, as well as the conclusion, which provides brief conclusions about the research done. The last page of the essay indicates the sources used.

Select the required material. Write down the various points of view of scientists on the chosen topic on paper and note the order in which statements are used in your work.

Video on the topic

note

Check that all literature used is up to date. Textbooks should be no older than 8-10 years, periodicals - no older than 3-5 years.

To avoid being branded as a plagiarist, provide all citations with links indicating the author, title of the publication, and imprint.

Helpful advice

When writing an essay, you should not use a lot of literature so that the work does not turn out to be too long and overloaded with unnecessary information.

When working with literature, it is not necessary to copy notes onto paper; you can immediately make them on the computer. This makes it easier to edit text.

When writing an essay, be careful and try not to make mistakes. After finishing the work, read it and correct any mistakes.

Essay By statement This is a short essay in which you can demonstrate your knowledge not only in a specific discipline, but also information from related scientific subjects.

Instructions

Choose one statement from those proposed as topics for the examination paper on which you will write an essay. It is important that it is clear and close to you. Remember that to justify your position regarding these words, you will need to make clear arguments, and not just appeal to the fact that “this is immoral” or “this makes no sense in modern life.” Think about what areas of knowledge you have in order to justify this information.

Reveal the meaning of the statement. To do this, simply describe what exactly the author wanted to say with these lines, as you see it. For each person, the same things mean different things, so your version cannot be correct or incorrect, any adequate thought has to exist. precisely in the context given by the scientific subject on which the essay is written. For example, you should not disclose value added tax in the sense if in the statement it is mentioned exclusively in the economic aspect.

Give reasons for your opinion. To do this, use the knowledge gained in the process of other sciences, but do not “get hung up” on this information. Additional justification is good if it only emphasizes your rightness. For example, when writing an essay on the statements of political figures, be sure to remember what historical events might have influenced his beliefs.

Formulate your own point of view regarding the statement. If you partially or completely disagree, suggest your own version of the phrase. Be sure to give reasons for exactly what you disagree with and why your position is more appropriate. Rely on your own experience, on the facts of social life.

Sources:

how to make an aphorism

Writing an essay is the last task in the Unified State Exam in social studies. And when preparing for an exam, it is this that raises the most questions. What are the requirements for the work, how is it assessed, and how to get the maximum score for a social studies essay?

What is a task

A mini-essay on the Unified State Exam in social studies is an alternative task. This means that the exam participant can choose from several proposed options the one that is closer and more interesting to him.

Essay topics are short quotes - aphorisms related to the five blocks of the curriculum, one for each. The thematic areas of statements are as follows:

Philosophy,
Economy,
Sociology, social psychology,
Political science,
Jurisprudence.

Of the five statements, you need to choose only one (the closest or most understandable) and write a mini-essay that reveals the meaning of the chosen aphorism and contains illustrative examples.

The “weight” of the social studies essay in the final points is quite small: about 8% of the total points. A perfectly written paper can earn only 5 primary points out of 62 possible, about 8%. Therefore, you should not approach the work as fundamentally as when writing essays on the Russian language or essays on literature.

The compilers of the Unified State Examination themselves suggest taking 36-45 minutes to write an essay on social studies (this is exactly the time period indicated in the specification). For comparison: an essay on the Russian language takes 110 minutes, and a full-length essay on literature takes 115.

All this suggests that the approach to social science should be different: there is no need to create a “masterpiece”, there are no mandatory requirements for presentation style (or even literacy), and even the volume of work is not regulated. Here it is not necessary to write 150-350 words of text: after all, the task is positioned as a “mini-essay” and if you manage to reveal the idea briefly and succinctly, this will be welcome.

It is enough to simply demonstrate knowledge of the subject and the ability to find suitable examples to support your point of view - and express your thoughts coherently and convincingly on the exam form.

Criteria for assessing essays in social studies on the Unified State Exam

The essay is scored based on three criteria in total. To earn the maximum five points, you must meet the following "required minimum":

Reveal the meaning of the original statement, or at least demonstrate that you correctly understood what its author meant (1 point). This is a key point: if you did not understand the quote and received 0 points on the first criterion, the work will not be assessed further.

Demonstrate knowledge of theory(2 points). Here, to get a high grade, it is necessary to analyze the meaning of the statement, using the knowledge acquired during the study of the school social studies course, remember the main points of the theory, and use the terminology correctly. Incomplete compliance with the requirements, deviation from the original topic or semantic errors will result in the loss of one point.

Ability to find relevant examples(2 points). To receive the highest mark on this criterion, you must illustrate the problem with two (at least) examples - facts that confirm the main idea of the essay. Moreover, they must be from sources of different types. Sources can be

examples from fiction, feature films and documentaries;
examples from popular science literature, the history of various branches of science;
historical facts;
facts gleaned while studying other school subjects;
personal experience and observations;
media reports.

If only personal experience is used as examples or examples of the same type are given (for example, both from fiction), the score is reduced by a point. A zero for this criterion is given if the examples do not correspond to the topic or if there is no information at all.

Social studies essay writing plan

There are no strict requirements for the structure of the essay - the main thing is to reveal the meaning of the statement, demonstrate knowledge of the theory and support it with facts. However, given that you don’t have much time to think about it, you can stick to a standard essay plan that includes all the necessary elements.

1. The optional part is the introduction. General statement of the problem (one or two sentences). In an essay on social studies, this point of the plan can be omitted and go straight to the interpretation of the proposed aphorism, but schoolchildren often find it difficult to deviate from the usual compositional scheme, when the “gist of the matter” is preceded by general reasoning. Therefore, if you are used to starting with an introduction, write it, if this is not important for you, you can omit this point, the points will not be reduced for this.

2. Revealing the meaning of the original statement– 2-3 sentences. There is no need to quote in full; it is enough to refer to its author and state the meaning of the phrase in your own words. It must be remembered that, unlike an essay in Russian, where it is necessary to isolate a problem, an essay in social science can be devoted to a phenomenon, a process, or simply a statement of fact. To reveal the meaning of a statement, you can use templates like “In the proposed statement, N.N (a famous philosopher, economist, famous writer) considers (describes, talks about ...) such a phenomenon (process, problem) as ..., interpreting it as ... " or “The meaning of the statement ( expressions, aphorisms) N. N is that...”

3. Theoretical part(3-4 sentences). Here it is necessary to confirm or refute the author’s point of view, relying on the knowledge gained in class and using special terminology. If you agree with the author’s point of view, then, by and large, this part is a detailed translation of the original phrase into “textbook language.” For example, if the author called children’s games in the yard a “school of life”, you will write about what institutions of socialization are and the role they play in the process of an individual’s assimilation of social norms. Here you can also quote quotes from other philosophers, economists, etc., confirming the main idea of the text - however, this is not a mandatory requirement.

4. Factual part(4-6 sentences). Here it is necessary to give at least two examples confirming the theses put forward in the previous paragraph. In this part it is better to avoid “general words” and talk about specifics. And do not forget to indicate sources of information. For example, “experiments devoted to” have been repeatedly described in popular science literature; “as we know from the school physics course...”, “writer N,N. in his novel “Untitled” he describes the situation…”, “on the shelves of the supermarket opposite my school you can see...”.

5. Conclusion(1-2 sentences). Since an essay on social studies on the Unified State Exam is, by and large, a proof of a certain theoretical position, you can complete the essay by summing up what has been said. For example: “Thus, both real-life examples and reading experience suggest that...”, followed by a restatement of the main thesis.

remember, that the main thing is to correctly reveal the meaning of the statement. Therefore, when choosing from the proposed options, take a quote whose interpretation is beyond your doubts.

Before you start writing the text, remember the terminology on this topic. Write them down on a draft form so you can use them later in your work.

Choose the most suitable examples on this topic. Remember that examples from literature may not be limited to works of the school curriculum - in the social studies exam you can use any literary works as arguments. We should not forget that relying on reading experience in the case of social studies is not a priority: remember cases from life; news heard on the radio; topics discussed in society and so on. Also write down the selected examples on the draft form.

Since literacy, style and composition of the text are not graded, if you are confident enough to express your thoughts in writing, it is better not to waste time writing a full draft. Limit yourself to drawing up a thesis plan and write straight away- this will help save time.

Start the essay after you have answered all other questions.– otherwise you may not fit in the time limit and lose more points than you gain. For example, the first four tasks with detailed answers (based on the text read) can give a total of 10 primary points (twice as much as an essay), and formulating answers to them usually takes much less time than writing a mini-essay.

If you are “floating” in the topic and you feel that you cannot write an essay with maximum points - do this task anyway. Every point is important - and even if you only manage to correctly formulate the topic and give at least one example “from life” - you will receive two primary points for your social studies essay on the Unified State Exam, which is much better than zero.

Every graduate who is interested in preparing for the Unified State Exam in social studies will be faced with the task of writing an essay. From several proposed quotes, the student must choose one thesis and write an essay. There will be some changes to this final challenge in 2018. Now you can get a maximum of 6 primary points for a correctly completed essay (before 2018, the maximum you could get was 5 primary points). The word “problem” (which is raised by the author) has been replaced by the word “idea”. But this is completely unprincipled. The main thing is that the value of the essay has increased, which means you need to double your efforts to get the maximum score.

So, the value of the mini-essay has increased, so you need to take the most significant task of the exam seriously. First, you should study the criteria for assessing essays in social studies in 2018.

The main criterion: revealing the meaning of the statement. It is necessary to correctly identify the idea put forward by the author and (or) put forward a thesis on the topic, which will be substantiated with the help of arguments. If there are 0 points for this item, the entire work is not counted.
Lack of theoretical justification for your point of view. It is necessary to explain the meaning of the concepts given in the quotation, using theory (definitions and statements from textbooks), reasoning (cause-and-effect justification for what you think about this) and conclusions (your opinion, supported by arguments). If there is no theoretical content, the result is 0.
New criterion! Factual error: if (from the point of view of the science of social science) you presented an erroneous position, made an incorrect conclusion, illogical reasoning, mixed up a term, etc., then you face 0.
Thematic incompatibility of an example or fact with the topic, conclusion and reasoning. Only those arguments that correspond to the stated topic will be counted. Incorrectly displayed and incomplete statements will also not be counted. You can get as much as 2 points for this point if both examples are correct. Facts must be formulated in detail and accurately, because a mistake can cost you the loss of points. Examples can be given from personal experience, other subjects (fiction, history, geography), the media (from magazines, newspapers, television and radio programs).

Essay plan

In order to write an essay for the maximum score according to the above criteria, first of all, you need to strictly adhere to the format or structure of the essay. So, the essay plan for the Unified State Exam in social studies is as follows:

Identification of the problem and its interpretation.
Agree or disagree with the author’s position (explain why)
Argumentation of one's own position.
Conclusion

We will examine each of these points in detail in the next paragraph.

Structure and writing algorithm

Problem Identification

When identifying a problem, the graduate should, first of all, comprehend the thesis proposed by the author and highlight some problem (idea) in it. More often than not, quotes include a variety of issues and their interpretations. It is better for the student to stop at one and consider it in detail, following further the points of the essay structure. You can highlight several problems (ideas) contained in the thesis and reveal them, but, in my opinion, the time frame of the exam will not allow you to thoroughly reveal several ideas at once and give arguments to them. You can identify the problem using cliche phrases, for example:

In his statement, the author wanted to draw attention to the problem associated with...;
The main idea formulated by the author of the quote..., I see...;

It is important that the words “problem” and (or) “idea” are included in the essay, otherwise they may be given 0 points for their absence. In the process of explaining the problem raised by the author, it is necessary to use social scientific terms and give them definitions; include material that was included in the school curriculum of the course.

Your opinion

In the second paragraph you should write about agreement or disagreement with the author about the problem. Just saying “agree” or “disagree” is not enough. Here it is important to write the reason on which you rely. This reason may generalize the arguments that follow. The cliche phrases are obvious:

“I completely agree/disagree with the author’s opinion...”
“It’s hard to disagree with the author’s opinion...”

You can also include theory from a social studies course at this point. With its help, you will competently and reasonably explain why you adhere to your voiced opinion. Please note that it is easier to agree than to prove the opposite, so if you are not confident in yourself, do not run into ideological polemics with invisible examiners, but do your job impartially and detachedly. It is not at all necessary to express your real views on certain issues.

Arguments

The next point is the most complex and voluminous part of the essay. Making suitable arguments is often difficult. It is necessary to give at least 2 arguments that CLEARLY illustrate this problem. The main thing at this point is specificity. Examples containing “a lot of water” will be scored 0 points. Your arguments can be examples from fiction and scientific literature (history, chemistry, biology and other disciplines), biographies of great people, situations from films, TV series, life and personal experience. It is important to consider that these statements should be from different sources, for example, from personal experience and fiction. You cannot get the maximum score for examples taken from one area. Let's say that even if both arguments taken from books perfectly illustrate the problem, you will not be able to get the maximum score. Each argument should have a separate paragraph. Cliché phrases:

“To confirm my point of view, I will give the following argument...”
“An argument that can confirm my point of view is...”

Conclusion

The last point is the conclusion. The conclusion summarizes the thoughts above. This part is no different from what you have to write in essays on the Russian language and literature. Cliché phrases:

“Thus, we can conclude that...”,
“To summarize, I would like to note that...”

It will be enough to write 2-3 sentences in the output.

Essay example

We wrote especially for you . If you are interested in a specific topic on which you find it difficult to write an essay, write to us at

Examples of essays on social studies for the Unified State Exam

Essay samples

“A child at the moment of birth is not a person, but only a candidate for a person” (A. Pieron).

It is necessary to understand what meaning A. Pieron put into the concept of man. At the moment of birth, the child is already a person. He is a representative of a special biological species, Homo Sapiens, who has the inherent specific features of this biological species: a large brain, upright posture, prehensile hands, etc. At the moment of birth, a child can be called an individual - a specific representative of the human race. From birth, he is endowed with individual traits and properties unique to him: eye color, body shape and structure, the design of his palm. This can already be defined as individuality. Why then does the author of the statement call the child only a candidate for a person? Apparently, the author had in mind the concept of “personality”. After all, man is a biosocial being. If a person is given biological traits from birth, then he acquires social ones only in a society of his own kind. And this happens in the process of socialization, when the child learns, through education and self-education, the values of a particular society. Gradually he turns into a personality, i.e. becomes a subject of conscious activity and has a set of socially significant traits that are in demand and useful in society. It is then that he can fully be called a human being. How can this assumption be confirmed? For example, on March 20, 1809, in Sorochintsy, a son was born into the family of the landowner Vasily Gogol - Yanovsky, baptized with the name Nikolai. This was one of the landowner's sons born on this day, named Nicholas, i.e. individual. If he had died on his birthday, he would have remained in the memory of his loved ones as an individual. The newborn was distinguished by characteristics characteristic only of him (height, hair color, eyes, body structure, etc.). According to the testimony of people who knew Gogol from birth, he was thin and weak. Later, he developed traits associated with growing up and an individual lifestyle - he began to read early, wrote poetry from the age of 5, studied diligently at the gymnasium, and became a writer whose work was followed by all of Russia. He showed a bright personality, i.e. those features and properties, signs that distinguished Gogol. Apparently, this is precisely the meaning that A. Pieron intended in his statement, and I completely agree with him. When a person is born, he must go through a long, thorny path in order to leave a mark on society, so that descendants will proudly say: “Yes, this man can be called great: our people can be proud of him.”

“The idea of freedom is connected with the true essence of man” (K. Jaspers)

What is freedom? Independence from the powers that be that money and fame can give? No bars or overseer's whip? Freedom to think, write, create without regard to generally accepted canons and tastes of the public? This question can only be answered by trying to figure out what a person is. But here's the problem! Every culture, every era, every philosophical school gives its own answer to this question. Behind each answer is not only the level of a scientist who has comprehended the laws of the universe, the wisdom of a thinker who has penetrated the secrets of existence, the self-interest of a politician or the imagination of an artist, but there is also always hidden a certain position in life, a completely practical attitude towards the world. And yet. From all the various, contradictory ideas about man, one general conclusion follows: man is not free. He depends on anything: on the will of God or gods, on the laws of the Cosmos, the arrangement of stars and luminaries, on nature, society, but not on himself. But the meaning of Jaspers’s expression, in my opinion, is that a person cannot imagine freedom and happiness without preserving his personality, his unique, inimitable “I”. He does not want to “become everything,” but “wants to be himself in spite of the universe,” as the author of the famous “Mowgli” R. Kipling wrote. A person cannot be happy and free at the cost of trampling on his personality, renouncing his individuality. Truly ineradicable in a person is the desire to create the world and oneself, to discover something new, unknown to anyone, even if this is achieved at the cost of one’s own life. Becoming free is not an easy task. It requires from a person the maximum effort of all spiritual forces, deep thoughts about the fate of the world, people, about his own life; a critical attitude towards what is happening around and towards oneself; search for the ideal. The search for the meaning of freedom sometimes continues throughout life and is accompanied by internal struggle and conflicts with others. This is precisely where a person’s free will manifests itself, since from various life circumstances and options, he himself has to choose what to prefer and what to reject, what to do in this or that case. And the more complex the world around us, the more dramatic life is, the more effort is required from a person to determine his position and make this or that choice. This means that K. Jaspers was right in considering the idea of freedom to be the true essence of man. Freedom is a necessary condition for his activity. Freedom cannot be “gifted,” because unsought freedom turns out to be a heavy burden or turns into arbitrariness. Freedom, won in the fight against evil, vices and injustice in the name of affirming goodness, light, truth and beauty, can make every person free

“Science is merciless. She shamelessly refutes favorite and habitual misconceptions” (N.V. Karlov)

We can completely agree with this statement. After all, the main goal of scientific knowledge is the desire for objectivity, i.e. to study the world as it exists outside and independently of man. The result obtained should not depend on private opinions, preferences, or authorities. On the path to searching for objective truth, a person passes through relative truths and errors. There are many examples of this. Once upon a time, people were absolutely sure that the Earth was disk-shaped. But centuries passed, and the journey of Fernando Magellan refuted this misconception. People learned that the Earth is spherical. The geocentric system that existed for millennia was also a fallacy. The discovery of Copernicus debunked this myth. The heliocentric system he created explained to people that all the planets in our system revolve around the Sun. The Catholic Church forbade the recognition of this truth for more than two hundred years, but in this case, science really turned out to be merciless to people’s misconceptions. Thus, on the way to absolute truth, which is final and will not change over time, science passes through the stage of relative truths. At first, these relative truths seem final to people, but time passes and with the emergence of new opportunities for a person to study a particular area, absolute truth appears. It refutes previously acquired knowledge, forcing people to reconsider their previous views and discoveries.

“Progress only indicates the direction of movement, and it is indifferent to what awaits at the end of this path - good or evil” (J. Huizinga).

It is known that progress is the movement of the development of society from simple to complex, from lower to higher. But the long history of mankind proves that moving forward in one area leads to a rollback in another. For example, replacing an arrow with a firearm or a flintlock with an automatic rifle indicates the development of technology and related knowledge and science. The ability to kill a mass of people at once with deadly nuclear weapons is also unconditional evidence of the development of science and technology of the highest level. But can all this be called progress? And therefore, everything that has appeared in history as something positive can always be contrasted as something negative, and very much that is positive in one aspect can be said to be negative in another. So what is the point of the story? What is the direction of its movement? What is progress? Answering these questions is far from easy. The very abstract concept of progress, when trying to apply it to the assessment of certain events specifically - historically, will certainly contain an insoluble contradiction. This inconsistency is the drama of history. Is it inevitable? But the fact is that the main character of this historical drama is the man himself. Evil is, as it were, inevitable, because a person sometimes receives as a result something for which he did not strive at all, which was not his goal. And the objective fact is that practice is always richer, always exceeds the level of achieved knowledge, which gives rise to a person’s ability to use what has been achieved differently in other conditions. Evil, therefore, like a shadow, pursues good. Apparently this is what the author of this statement meant. But I would like to continue the discussion and encourage people, especially scientists, to think about their future discoveries. After all, to define what is truly progressive there is a concept developed throughout the history of mankind. Expressed by the word “humanism,” it denotes both the specific properties of human nature and the assessment of these properties as the highest principle of social life. What is progressive is what is combined with humanism, and not just combined, but contributes to its elevation.

“Revolution is the transition from untruth to truth, from lies to truth, from oppression to justice, from deception and suffering to straightforward honesty and happiness.”

(Robert Owen)

A revolution is often called a social explosion, which is why, in my opinion, a revolution does not completely solve the problems that have arisen in life.

In Russia's historical past, the most significant revolution was the October 1917 revolution. Its most important result was the beginning of the construction of communism, which meant a radical change in the life of the entire country. And if this is the same truth, justice and honesty that Owen speaks of, then why is Russia now trying with all its might to join the Western model of development and doing everything to become a capitalist country in the full sense of the word? And this despite the fact that in Soviet times Russia achieved a lot: it became a superpower, was the first to carry out a human flight into space, and won the Second World War. It turns out that the revolution did not lead our country to the truth. Moreover, by the end of 1991, Russia found itself on the brink of economic disaster and famine.

Is it necessary to talk about social revolutions, if even during the scientific and technological revolution in the modern world many questions arise. Among them are environmental problems, rising unemployment, and terrorism.

On the one hand, during the scientific and technological revolution, healthcare is improved, the most hopeless patients are saved from death by the efforts of doctors, and on the other hand, weapons of mass destruction, including bacteriological ones, are produced. The media daily cover millions of events taking place in all corners of the planet, informing and educating people, but at the same time, the media act as a manipulator of human consciousness, will, and reason.

Many more examples of revolutions can be cited, but the conclusion remains clear: a revolution is a multilateral and contradictory process, during which the problems being solved are replaced by others, often even more complex and confusing.

Religion is wisdom justified by reason

I completely agree with this statement and want to prove the truth of this saying using the example of famous BOOKS that contain such wisdom that humanity will always turn to.

New Testament. It is already 2 thousand years old. With his birth, he created an unprecedented, unprecedented excitement in hearts and minds, which has not calmed down to this day. And all this because it contains wisdom that teaches humanity kindness, humanism, and morality. This book, written simply and without any embellishment, captures the greatest mystery - the mystery of human salvation. People can only fulfill these Great Wisdoms: do not kill, do not steal, do not offend your neighbor, honor your parents. Is this bad wisdom? And when people forget to implement these wisdoms, misfortune awaits them. In our country, during the years of Soviet power, people were excommunicated from this book. All this led to the destruction of the spirituality of society, and therefore to lack of will. And even the communists, when drawing up their law - the Moral Code of the Communist, took as a basis the moral principles contained in the Bible. They just exposed them in a different form. This proves that the wisdom of this book is eternal.

Koran. This is the main book of Muslims. What is she calling for? Particular attention is paid to nobility, which, in turn, implies respect for parents. The Koran teaches Muslims to be firm in word and obligatory in deeds and actions. It condemns such base human qualities as lies, hypocrisy, cruelty, and pride. Is this bad wisdom? They are reasonable.

The given examples prove the correctness of the above statement. All world religions contain such wisdom that instructs people only to do good deeds. Showing people the way at the end of the tunnel.

Science reduces our experiences of fast-flowing life.

One cannot but agree with this statement. Indeed, with the advent of science, the progress of mankind began to accelerate, and the pace of life of human society is accelerating every day. All this happens thanks to science. Before its appearance, humanity moved rather slowly along the path of progress. It took millions of years for the wheel to appear, but it was only thanks to scientists who invented engines that this wheel could be driven at a higher speed. Human life has accelerated dramatically.

For thousands of years, humanity has had to look for answers to many seemingly unsolvable questions. Science did this: the discovery of new types of energy, the treatment of complex diseases, the conquest of outer space... With the beginning of the scientific and technological revolution in the 50-60s of the 20th century, the development of science became the main condition for the existence of human society. Time requires a person to quickly solve global problems on which the preservation of life on Earth will depend.

Science has now come to every home. It serves people by truly reducing the experiences of fast-paced life: instead of washing by hand - an automatic washing machine, instead of a floor rag - a washing vacuum cleaner, instead of a typewriter - a computer. And what can we say about the means of communication that have made our globe so small: in one minute you can receive a message from places located on different ends of the world. The plane takes us in a few hours to the most remote corners of our planet. But just a hundred years ago it took many days and even months. This is the meaning of this statement.

Political strength is strong if and only if it is based on moral strength.

Of course, this statement is correct. Indeed, a politician must act based on moral laws. But for some reason, many people associate the word “power” with the opposite opinion. There are many supporting examples of this in history, ranging from ancient Roman tyrants (for example, Nero) to Hitler and Stalin. And modern rulers do not shine with examples of morality.

What's the matter? Why do deeply moral norms, such as honesty, conscience, commitment, truthfulness, in no way fit into political power?

Apparently, a lot has to do with the nature of power itself. When a person strives for power, he promises people to improve their lives, restore order, and establish fair laws. But as soon as he finds himself at the helm of power, the situation changes dramatically. Many promises are gradually forgotten. And the politician himself becomes different. He already lives by different standards, he has new views. Those to whom he promised are increasingly moving away from him. And others appear nearby who are always ready to be at the right moment: to advise, to suggest. But they no longer act in the interests of society, but in their own selfish interests. As people say, power spoils a person. Perhaps this is true. Or maybe there are other reasons? Coming to power, a politician understands that he is unable to cope with the burden of problems that the state faces: corruption, the shadow economy, organized crime. In such difficult conditions, there is a retreat from moral principles. We have to act tough. It seems to me that it is better to rephrase this statement as follows: “A political fortress is strong if and only if it is based on the force of law.” For politics, this makes the most sense. Only the laws must also be moral...

Very often, graduates preparing for the Unified State Exam in social studies choose this strategy - they write all the quotes on the issues of one science out of the five offered in. This does not seem to be the right way to prepare! Without regularly working with quotes on other topics, you narrow your choice in the exam, do not repeat the material in essay form, and risk that on the Unified State Exam you will come across a quote that you cannot explain.

A more effective way to prepare for writing an essay in social studies is to combine knowledge of several writing templates with regular completion of a large number of tasks 29 on different topics. We have already presented you with one of the most and Today - an example of a polemical essay template.

What is a polemical essay?

In most cases, we immediately agree with the author of the quote, adapt to his thought and justify it with arguments. The majority of those taking the Unified State Exam in social studies consider this to be correct, if only because they are “afraid” to argue with the wise. However, sometimes a thought is so all-encompassing that it is seen differently. Let's give an example of how to write a polemical essay, expressing a thought that corresponds to the author's thoughts. Let's take the following quote:

29.2 Economics.

Gary Becker is a distinguished American economist, winner of the 1992 Nobel Prize in Economics for his fundamental research in economic behavior. This thought sounds quite logical from his lips.

Becker G. Nobel Prize Laureate in Economics.

However, it is immediately clear that this thought reduces all human behavior to one thing - the satisfaction of material needs. What about spiritual ones? So let's try to argue!

We do it right away K1(“the meaning of the statement is revealed, understood”).

The author of this statement claims that any action of people is explained by simple economic feasibility. But then how can we tell our children what love, happiness, self-sacrifice and patriotism are? I fundamentally disagree with Becker's opinion.

We express our opinion here. We do this in the most convincing way: “... to our children”! We continue to argue, show intelligence and knowledge of related sciences - philosophy, history. This is criterion 3 (K3).

I remember the famous quote from the great Russian writer and philosopher F.M. Dostoevsky that “all the happiness of mankind is not worth one tear of one child.” It was to happiness and revenge that A. Hitler led his people, freeing up “living space” for the Germans in the East. Everyone remembers what this led to. One hundred million dead and a sea of shed tears are living proof of this.

A social studies essay can look beautiful and literary. We use the statements of other famous people, we use the effects: “a tear of one child”, “a sea of shed tears”. Now you need to fulfill criterion 2 (K2), apply terms, theoretical provisions (the quote refers to the science of economics, let me remind you).

The period of initial accumulation of capital, as is known from the course of economics, precedes the formation of capitalism and the market. Entrepreneurs strive to obtain start-up capital at any cost for further business development. However, from the point of view of morality, humanism, and universal human values, these periods in history look like “dark pages.” This includes the robbery of colonies, the destruction of entire peoples (North American Indians, for example), and the “criminal nineties” in Russia.

Terms used capital, initial accumulation, entrepreneurship. Confirmed with examples from social practice. We draw a conclusion, formulate our own point of view (if you criticize, suggest)! We show our life experience and continue to use terms.

To paraphrase the author, we can say that “happiness is in money.” But it seems to me that it is in the smile of relatives, physical and spiritual health, usefulness to society. Therefore, I believe that any human behavior is not justified by the desire for material wealth. They are important, but not paramount!

To summarize, here is our essay:

29.2 Economics.

I have come to the conviction that the economic approach is comprehensive, it is applicable to all human behavior" (G. Becker)

The author of this statement claims that any action of people is explained by simple economic feasibility. But then how can we tell our children what love, happiness, self-sacrifice and patriotism are? I fundamentally disagree with Becker's opinion.

I remember the famous quote from the great Russian writer and philosopher F.M. Dostoevsky that “all the happiness of mankind is not worth one tear of one child.” It was to happiness and revenge that A. Hitler led his people, freeing up “living space” for the Germans in the East. Everyone remembers what this led to. One hundred million dead and a sea of shed tears are living proof of this.

The period of initial accumulation of capital, as is known from the course of economics, precedes the formation of capitalism and the market. Entrepreneurs strive to obtain start-up capital at any cost for further business development. However, from the point of view of morality, humanism, and universal human values, these periods in history look like “dark pages.” This includes the robbery of colonies, the destruction of entire peoples (North American Indians, for example), and the “criminal nineties” in Russia.

To paraphrase the author, we can say that “happiness is in money.” But it seems to me that it is in the smile of relatives, physical and spiritual health, usefulness to society. Therefore, I believe that any human behavior is not justified by the desire for material wealth. They are important, but not paramount!

Short rules for writing an essay:

We continue to comply with the writing of Unified State Exam essays in social studies in any template:

1. Our essay is as short and specific as possible!

2. We immediately reveal the meaning of the quote and perform K1.

3. We apply the terms of the science to which the quote relates, we perform K1!

4. We present facts from other sciences, show our horizons, and perform K3.

5. We show intelligence, link facts and conclusions to the topic.

6. We defend our point of view correctly, but confidently!

Good luck writing social studies essays regularly!

Here is another example for you to practice a polemical essay from the Unified State Exam 2016, try writing it, we will discuss it in the comments, as well as in our group

Hello! In this article you will see a number of essays written for the maximum score according to all criteria of this year’s Unified State Exam. If you want to learn how to write an essay on society, I have written an article for you that reveals all aspects of doing this work

Political Science Essay

“Silent citizens are ideal subjects for an authoritarian ruler and a disaster for democracy” (Roald Dahl)

In his statement, Roald Dahl touches on the problem of the dependence of the level of political participation of citizens on the current regime in the state. Undoubtedly, this statement does not lose its relevance to this day, because the activity with which people take part in the life of the country is directly related to its basic foundations and laws. Moreover, this issue can be considered based on both the realities of a democratic society and an authoritarian one.

Theoretical argument

The meaning of Dahl's words is that the lack of developed civic consciousness plays into the hands of rulers within an authoritarian regime, but has a negative impact on the state, where the main power is concentrated in the hands of society. I completely share the point of view of the author of the statement, because we can always find examples of this both in the past and at the present time. And in order to prove the significance of Dahl’s statement, it is worth first considering it from a theoretical point of view.

In itself, political participation is nothing more than a set of actions taken by ordinary members of the political system in relation to its “top” in order to influence the latter. These actions can be expressed both in the usual reactions of citizens to any changes, in people’s speeches on various channels, websites, radio stations and other media, the creation of various social movements, and in participation in ongoing elections and referendums. In addition, political participation can be classified according to the number of people involved (individual and collective), compliance with laws (legitimate and illegitimate), activity of participants (active and passive), etc.

Civil society receives the greatest freedom within the framework of a democratic regime, the main characteristic of which is the concentration of all power in the hands of the people. The freedoms of citizens are significantly limited in the realities of an authoritarian society due to the constant government surveillance of citizens. A completely civil society is controlled by the state within the framework of totalitarianism.

As a first example confirming Dahl’s point of view, we can cite a well-known historical fact. During the so-called “Thaw”, the Soviet Union under the leadership of N.S. Khrushchev moved from Stalin's totalitarian regime to an authoritarian one. Undoubtedly, the dominance of one party continued to exist, but at the same time freedom of speech was significantly expanded, many repressed people were returned to their homeland. The state relied on the support of the population, partially increasing the range of its rights and opportunities. This directly illustrates the interaction between civil society and the state apparatus under an authoritarian regime.

The next example confirming Dahl’s position could be the event that was widely covered two years ago in the media – the annexation of Crimea to Russia. As you know, a referendum was held on the peninsula (the highest opportunity for the expression of the will of the people within the framework of democracy), which showed the desire of the Crimeans to join the Russian Federation. Residents of the peninsula expressed their opinions as representatives of civil society, thus influencing the future policies of the democratic state.

To summarize, I want to say that Roald Dahl incredibly accurately reflected in his statement the relationship between civil society and the state.

In addition, before reading this article, I further recommend that you familiarize yourself with the video tutorial, which reveals all aspects of the mistakes and difficulties of applicants in the second part of the Unified State Exam.

Sociology Essay

“A citizen who has a share of power should act not for personal gain, but for the common good.” (B.N. Chicherin)
In his statement B.N. Chicherin touches on the problem of the essence of power and the ways of its influence on society. Without a doubt, this issue remains relevant to this day, because since time immemorial there have been relationships between those in power and ordinary people. This problem can be considered from two sides: influencing the authorities for the sake of one’s personal benefit, or for the benefit of many people.

Theoretical argument

The meaning of Chicherin’s words is that people with power should use it to solve the problems of society, and not to achieve some personal needs. Without a doubt, I fully share the author's point of view, since we can find many examples of it, both in the past and at the present time. However, before this we should understand the theoretical component of Chicherin’s words.

What is power? This is the ability of one person or group of people to impose their opinion on others, to force them to obey. Within the state, political power is one of its main elements, capable of imposing certain opinions and laws on citizens through legal and political norms. One of the key features of power is the so-called “legality” - the legality of its existence and the actions it carries out.

What can be the source of power? Firstly, this is authority - recognition by the people of the ruler, and secondly, charisma. Also, power can be based both on the certain knowledge that its representatives have and on their wealth. There are cases when people come to power using brute force. This often happens through the violent overthrow of the current government.

Examples for revealing criterion K3

As a first example illustrating Chicherin’s point of view, we can cite the work of A.S. Pushkin "The Captain's Daughter". In this book we can clearly observe how Emelyan Pugachev, despite his position, does not refuse help to all members of his army. The false Peter III frees all his supporters from serfdom, grants them freedom, thus using his power to support many people.

In order to give the following example, it is enough to turn to the history of Russia in the 18th century. Alexander Menshikov, an associate of Emperor Peter I, used his high position for personal enrichment. He used government money to achieve his personal needs, which had nothing to do with solving the pressing problems of an ordinary resident of Russia at that time.

Thus, this example clearly illustrates the use of power by a person not to help society, but to fulfill his own desires.
To summarize, I want to say that B.N. Chicherin incredibly accurately reflected in his statement two contradictory ways in which a person uses his power, the essence of the latter and its methods of influencing society.

Second work in political science

“Politics is essentially power: the ability to achieve a desired result by any means” (E. Heywood)
In his statement, E. Heywood touches on the problem of the true essence of power within politics. Undoubtedly, the relevance of the author’s words is not lost to this day, because one of the main features of power is its ability to use any means to achieve a goal. This statement can be considered both from the point of view of the cruel methods of carrying out the government’s plans, and from the side of more democratic methods.

Theoretical argument

The meaning of Heywood's words is that political power has an unlimited range of possibilities through which it can impose its opinions on other people. I completely share the author’s point of view, since you can find many different examples that serve as proof of his words. However, first it is worth understanding the theoretical component of Heywood’s statement.
What is power? This is the ability to influence people, to impose your opinion on them. Political power, characteristic exclusively of the institution of the state, is capable of exercising this influence with the help of legal and state methods. The so-called “legality”, i.e. the legitimacy of power is one of its main criteria. There are three types of legitimacy: charismatic (people's trust in a certain person or group of people), traditional (people following the authorities based on traditions and customs) and democratic (based on the compliance of the elected government with the principles and foundations of democracy).
The main sources of power can be: charisma, authority, strength, wealth or knowledge, which is possessed by the ruler or a group of people in power. That is why only the state, due to the concentration of political power, has a monopoly on the use of force. This contributes not only to the fight against lawbreakers, but also as a way of imposing a certain opinion on citizens.

Examples for revealing criterion K3

As the first example illustrating the process of political power achieving its goals within the history of Russia, we can cite the period of the reign of I.V. Stalin. It was at this time that the USSR was characterized by mass repressions, the purpose of which was to strengthen the authority of the authorities and suppress anti-Soviet sentiments in society. In this case, the authorities used the most brutal methods to achieve what they needed. Thus, we see that the authorities did not skimp on methods for achieving their goals.
The next example is a situation that is now widely covered in the world media. During the presidential race in the United States, candidates try to win over voters to their side without using force. They attend numerous television programs, speak in public, and conduct special campaigns. Thus, presidential candidates also use the full power available to them, trying to win the US population to their side.
To summarize, I want to say that E. Heywood’s statement is incredibly accurate and clearly reflects the essence of power as such, revealing all its main aspects.

Essay on political science for maximum score

“Government is like fire—a dangerous servant and a monstrous master.” (D. Washington)
In his statement, George Washington touched upon the issue of the relationship between civil society and the state. Undoubtedly, his words are relevant to this day, because in any state there is a constant dialogue between its “top” and citizens. This issue can be considered both from the point of view of a positive dialogue between the government and the people, and from a negative point of view.

Theoretical argument

The meaning of Washington's words is that the state reacts completely differently to certain social unrest, in some cases trying to resolve them peacefully, and in other cases using force to do this. I completely share the point of view of the first president of the United States, since confirmation of his words can be found both by turning to history and by looking at the current situation in the world. In order to prove the significance of Washington's words, it is first worth considering them from a theoretical point of view.
What is civil society? This is the sphere of the state, not directly under its control and consisting of the inhabitants of the country. Elements of civil society can be found in many areas of society. For example, within the social sphere, such elements will be the family and non-state media. In the political sphere, the main element of civil society is political parties and movements that express the opinion of the people.
If the residents of the state want to influence the government, they try to influence it in one way or another. This process is called political participation. Within its framework, people can express their thoughts directly by contacting special government bodies, or indirectly by participating in rallies or public speeches. And it is precisely such manifestations of civil sentiment that force the state to respond.

Examples for revealing criterion K3

The first example that can clearly illustrate the reluctance of the state to listen to the population of the country is the era of the reign of I.V. Stalin in the Soviet Union. It was at this time that the authorities began to carry out mass repressions designed to almost completely suppress any activity of civil society. Everyone who expressed disagreement with the current course of development of the country, or spoke unflatteringly about its “top”, were repressed. Thus, the state represented by I.V. Stalin ignored the manifestations of the will of the people, establishing his total control over the latter.
The next example is a situation typical of modern political science. We will, of course, talk about the annexation of the Crimea peninsula to the Russian Federation. As you know, during a general referendum - the highest way to express the will of the people in democratic countries - it was decided to return the peninsula to the Russian Federation. Thus, civil society influenced the further policy of the state, which in turn did not turn away from the people, but began to act based on their decision.
Thus, I want to say that the words of D. Washington incredibly accurately and clearly reflect the whole essence of the relationship between the state and the actions of civil society.

Essay on social studies for 5 points: sociology

“To make people good citizens, they must be given the opportunity to exercise their rights as citizens and perform their duties as citizens.” (S. Smaile)
In his statement, S. Smaile touches on the problem of people realizing their rights and responsibilities. Undoubtedly, his words remain relevant to this day, because it is in a modern society, within the framework of a democratic regime, that people can fully realize their rights and responsibilities. This statement can be considered both from the point of view of the level of freedoms of citizens within the framework of a rule of law state, and within a totalitarian state.
The meaning of S. Smaile’s words is that the level of legal consciousness of citizens, just like the level of peace in the country itself, directly depends on what rights and freedoms are granted to the people. I completely share the author’s point of view, since for the successful development of a state it really needs to rely on the support of the population. However, in order to confirm the relevance of Smaile’s statement, it is first worth considering it from a theoretical point of view.

Theoretical argument

So, what is the rule of law? This is a country in which the rights and freedoms of its inhabitants are of the highest value. It is within the framework of such a state that civic consciousness is most developed, and the attitude of citizens towards the authorities is mostly positive. But who are the citizens? These are individuals who are connected to the state through certain mutual rights and obligations that they are both obliged to fulfill to each other. The main duties and rights of citizens that they must observe are written in the Constitution - the highest legal act that sets the foundations for the life of the entire country.
Within a democratic regime, the rights and freedoms of citizens are most highly respected, since they are nothing other than the main source of power in countries with such a regime. This is a unique feature of democratic countries, the analogues of which cannot be found not in totalitarian regimes (where all power strictly controls other spheres of society), not in authoritarian ones (where power is concentrated in the hands of one person or party, despite even a certain presence of civil liberties and rights in people).

Examples for revealing criterion K3

A well-known fact from world political science can serve as a first example that can clearly demonstrate the authorities’ lack of desire to listen to the citizens of the country. Augusto Pinochet, a Chilean politician, came to power as a result of a military coup and established his totalitarian rule in the state. Thus, he did not listen to the opinions of citizens, limiting their rights and freedoms through force. Soon this policy bore fruit, leading the country to a state of crisis. This clearly demonstrates the impact of the lack of political rights and freedoms of people on the effectiveness of their activities.

The next example that will clearly demonstrate the desire of the authorities to make contact with citizens and take into account their rights and responsibilities will be our country. As you know, the Russian Federation is a legal state, which is enshrined in the Constitution of the country. Moreover, it is the Constitution of the Russian Federation that specifies all fundamental human rights and freedoms, which under no circumstances are subject to limitation. Ideological pluralism, coupled with the positioning of human rights and freedoms as the highest values, perfectly illustrates a state that is ready to listen to the opinions of its citizens and treats them with respect.
To summarize, I want to say that S. Smail incredibly clearly reflected in his statement the essence of the relationship between the state and its citizens

That's all. Go to the “All Blog Articles” page to continue preparing with our portal!

Want to understand all the topics in your history course? Sign up to study at Ivan Nekrasov’s school with a legal guarantee of passing the exam with 80+ points!