What's the thesis for my history essay?

anyone?

What are the questions that you are going to answer in your paper? Understanding your questions will stop you from rambling, because you can drift back to them.

You’ve outlined where you’re doing, but you haven’t really given an indication as to why you need to go there.

How did social Darwinism affect the issues created by inequalities in society?
How did society evolve socially?

Society has evolved in areas of acceptance among others, influence among others, and dependence among others. The “among others” could easily lead into dependence. Then to answer how society has evolved socially, I mention how society is today. I may do that in a seperate paragraph cause my original idea was to make this as a timeline. In the paragraph, I’d react to the paragraphs on influence, acceptance, and dependence. OR I could just fit it in those paragraphs. Again, I’m not sure how to organize this.

Inequalities exist in society for what reasons? Does Social Darwinism cause or affect these inequalities? How does society adapt or evolve socially because of social darwinism? What can happen to offset or contradict social darwinism? Is there a domino effect?

But what if the main point of social darwinism is it’s nothing but an explanation? Not much to write about.
My assignment is to pick a movement and then 3 events (body paragraphs). I can’t just answer questions about social Darwinism the whole essay.

1. Because of natural selection
2. Does not affect, just explains
3. People are more accepting of in-acceptance
4. World peace
5. Not that I know of

Does might make right? Do those who have assets and strength deserve to have control? Are only the strong deserving of wealth and survival?

Well that’s basically the controversy behind social Darwinism. I need events to display that.

Darwin’s theory developed because of animal observations, that animals in the wild require the strongest of the gene pool in order to perpetuate the species. Does this hold true in more complex social structures where individuals are capable of higher order thinking? Herbert Spencer had the added position that it was morally correct for the strongest to dominate. But what if the individual has wealth and power that they didn’t earn or was given to them? Under Spencer that would still make them “strong and deserving.” There’s a lot of correlations to social darwinism and the Tea Party.

What happens if only the strong survive? What value do “the weak” add to the evolution of society and to man in general?

My teacher wants this essay to be based on my own opinions. What I’d say about might being right is this: (reaction to TheAmazingAthiest quote)
“We need to have some equal playing field so we can determine who is better than other people. We know damn well some people are better than others”(TheAmazingAthiest). By law, all men and most women across the globe are equal. But that’s only to give everyone an equal playing field to start out on so we can see who is better than others. By natural selection, the people that come out on top probably made better choices than the ones that come out on the bottom. Why do countries like the US thrive while countries like Iraq and Afghanistan plummit? The US has a social standard (values) where everyone is free and accepted; from freedom of religion to free speech. Iraq and Afghanistan are not free countries by any means and have drastically different values. Why are we over there? To help fix that. But we aren’t fixing it, we’re just making it worse. The US comes out on top because we are, well, better than them. We made better decisions… sooner, before everything started to
collapse and countries became reliant on one another.

I wrote that all yesterday while reacting to facts and quotes for my essay.

But I still need 3 events for my body paragraphs. I can use people instead of events (1 person 1 event, I don’t wanna use 3 people)

All men and most women? Interesting

How about something like…
In a democratic society, there is an assumption that “all men are created equal.” However, in a democratic society inequities exist and are accepted as commonplace. The factors that enable some to thrive more than others is rooted in the ability of an open society to allow people to rise to their highest common denominator.

Kinda what I’m saying, but I really don’t know how to fit that point in where my main focus of each paragraph is a certain event or MAYBE a chain of events.

You could then talk about all men are equal, but some are more equal than others. It is the premise of opportunity that allows social darwinism to develop. In a closed society, this doesn’t happen.

I think something like that is your thesis. All men are created equal is necessary for the inequities of social darwinism to develop.

I’m talking worldwide, not just the US so women don’t have legal rights everywhere, not even today.

But I could look at the perspective of extremists saying that extremists were the norm earlier in society. Except of course they weren’t called extremists.

These are 3 events, backed up by smaller movements:
Holocaust (hate groups, acceptance)
Imperialism (influence)
Terrorism (hate groups, acceptance)
And I have no clue how I can fit dependence in there.

ill be afk for a few minutes

There’s a huge problem already with your thesis statement for this question:

It’s an essay on any movement in history and I chose social evolution and I’m basically explaining how social Darwinism did not have a direct affect on issues with inequalities of society. It’s a run-on sentence: It’s… and I’m… and… and… You wrote “affect” and meant “effect”.

Your working thesis is badly worded:
Issues created by the inequalities of society has evolved with influence, acceptance and dependance and the problems created by those inequalities still exist in the world today. Issues… has evolved = subject / verb disagreement. An issue has evolved, or issues have evolved. Aside from that the sentence is meaningless: Issues have evolved with influence, acceptance and dependence [not dependance] and the problems created by those inequalities [what inequalities?] still exist. That means nothing. The “inequalities” are non sequitur to the aforementioned nouns: influence, acceptance and dependence (maybe dependence indicates some inequality; I’ll give you that one). You don’t demonstrate that problems arise from inequalities.

“Well, Social Darwinism… ” leave off the “Well,”. This is a formal essay.
“these inequalities had exists” Come on; be more careful with your writing.
“It’s not like” ... arrrgh. I’d tear it up right there and not read another word. Formal essay.

What exactly do you think “social evolution” is? Start there.

Of course that’s not my actual thesis I can word it better but thats the gist of it.
GIST GIST GIST.
God, you’re a grammar Nazi. Just answer my question…
My essay has not even been written yet. I jotted down notes, not formal sentences. And it’s based around my opinions so it doesn’t need to be too formal. I prefer reading from authors who aren’t 100% formal, but their writing style is interesting.

Social evolution is how ways of society (acceptance, influence, dependence) have evolved over time. (between 2 points of time). It’s hard to explain exacty but I know what it is.

Again thats a gist, not a formal statement.

exactly*

Your thesis would be “social Darwinism did not have a direct affect on issues with inequalities of society.”

So, I rarely come up with my thesis at the beginning of the paper – at least, not an actual sentence for a thesis, more like an idea I keep in mind. I put the thesis on at the end, because then I can make sure it actually fits what I ended up writing about.

@WasCy You might be a bit too harsh for a working thesis – all your grammatical criticisms are good, but vastly more pertinent once the essay is done, and the OP isn’t going to change it anymore. Write, then format.

Ok, so if you don’t know exactly what you mean it’s hard to explain exactly but I know what it is. is not going to fly with any community college teacher. You need to do better than that.

And if you use any misspellings, you will not be taken seriously. I get that you are on Fluther, asking your question, but use us as a sounding board. If you don’t do everything exactly perfect, you will not appear credible.

If you are asking us for help, you need to be specific. You can’t just give us a “gist” and hope that we can help you. You need to be specific.

I think you are wrong when you say that Social Darwinism is just an explanation for how things are. Social Darwinsism is a concept in and of itself. There are situations that occurred in history that created Social Darwinism and then Social Darwinsism, itself, went on to create other historic situations. I think you need to explain and describe these situations. If you don’t believe that, then I think your whole “thesis” will be flawed.

my problem is that all i have is a gist…

I dont have an essay done. All I have is a list of facts about possible topics (Hitler, Holocaust, Osama, imperialism, slavery, racism, etc) and opinions on those topics.
I put this on the social board for a reason.

PLEASE **Do not make any more grammar corrections**. Just answer my question(s).

I think you are struggling because whatever your premise is in your head, it’s not supportable or you are limited by an imprecise vocabulary. Perhaps the problem is that social evolution is not a movement in history. Social Darwinism is a movement in history. Social evolution is the natural outcome of a society.

im relating social evolution to social darwinism. So really my topic is Social Darwinism, but I’m branching it off into social evolution to explain it.

@MyNewtBoobs Thanks for your simple answer. I asked my friend and found out that I was confusing my thesis with my blueprint. And my thesis would be exactly what you said.

@Kardamom I’m a freshman in high school, not community college. And yes I asked my teacher the same question about my thesis and it was a long discussion that confused us both so he told me just to work on the thesis and my essay would unroll right in front of me. And yeah, my problem was that all I had was a gist.

About social Darwinism: I believe Social Darwinism was nothing but an explanation for issues from the past, and indirectly caused issues that happened later. As if all that happened was scientists and politicians felt better about inequality because they had an explanation for it. History repeats itself in different forms.