NancyLebovitz comments on [Help] Critique my Admissions Essay on HPMoR

[NancyLebovitz]

I think it’s stronger without the ’that’s, but I don’t know whether my reaction is common.

[shokwave]

Potential ambiguity: do you mean stronger as in better, or stronger as in more forceful? I agree on the second interpretation, and I think for an admissions essay being forceful about transhumanist beliefs might not signal high status.

[ahartell]

I changed it a while back so I’m not sure this still applies. Do you think its current state to too strongly transhumanist?

[NancyLebovitz]

I forgot it was an admission essay, so I was suggesting what I think is better, clearer prose.

I don’t have the foggiest whether blunting the message a little would work better in an admission essay.

I don’t think the strong version is so transhumanist as to put people off—it’s not talking about extending lifespans or modifying people away from the usual. On the other hand, I’ve been reading science fiction and hanging out with weirdos for so long that my judgement might be suspect.

My impression is that what works in admission essays changes from year to year. If word gets out that something works, then it may well go out of fashion just because admissions people don’t want to feel as though they’re being gamed.

[ahartell]

I already blunted the message a bit. What do you think of

That the sad things about being human may not be immutable; that we can challenge the big problems, like disease, aging, and perhaps even death.

Do you still think it would be better without the “that”s?

[NancyLebovitz]

I think the “that”s work (or at least taking them out makes for a much smaller improvement), but what do you think of

That the sad things about being human may not be immutable; that we can challenge the big problems of disease, aging, and perhaps even death.