“We are not created equal in every way” by Joan Rayn

Nature or nurture? This question has baffled scientists and human beings in general for a long time. The logical answer is both. It might seem simple, but looking closer at almost every situation shows that both play a key role in the outcome. Joan Rayn (2000) introduces her article “We are not created equal in every way” with a similar situation. The author logically argues that institutions have the right to have certain admission standards, she also brings up a few concerns regarding the students. Although lacking unity and sufficient evidence, Ryan brings about a logical argument.
In “we are not created equal in every way”, Joan Rayn (2000) upholds the right of institutions in setting admission standards, however she presents a pressing concern for current students. Firstly the author asserts that we are not created equal, therefore institutions need standards of admission to increase their chances of success. Moreover she discusses a major problem that might occur to ‘young adults’. Since certain institutions require a young age to admit students, parents have to decide for their children.
Several parents have the tendency to be living their dreams through their children. It is important for a writer to stick to one subject. If not the reader will be confused, his concentrationtorn to bits, and the author will loose credibility. Those are the effects of Rayn’s lack of unity in her article. She begins with the question in paragraph three with “Does the San Francisco Ballet School have the right to give preference to leaner body types” later she proposes another topic by saying “But for me, the more disturbing issue in this story isn’t about weight but age.”

Furthermore Rayn fails to provide evidence for her claim in paragraph five when she says “But most who practice the art disagree, which is their right”. For these two reasons Rayn does not seem credible or knowledgeable about the subject at hand, Joan Rayn reaches a logical conclusion about institutions having specific criterion to accept students, on the other hand, some of the issues concerning the children seem extraneous. She mentions that “selecting 300 students from this year’s 1400 applicants”. When faced with scarcity the best usually have the pleasure of getting what they want.
That is how it has always been, nature’s way. In contrast Rayn’s concerns about parents having full control over their children’s decision is unsound for two reasons. First, at a young age parents know their children more than they know themselves and should be making their decisions for them. The second point is most people don’t know what they want to do for the rest of their lives. So even if parents decide to live their lives through their children when they are old enough they will choose their own path.