Over the past decades, materialism has begot a seismic shift in the sense of success. Although some conventional educators advocate fulfilment should be the morally correct factor for this evaluation, it remains obvious that salary is constantly cited as an evidence of being successful. The aim of this essay is to explore the reasons behind this revolution by reviewing both views.
To begin with, there is ample evidence suggested that the size of paycheque often grow with the contribution one caters. In fact, a position ranked with higher salary are likely to belong to the successful people with either extended knowledge or sophistication. For instance, recent empirical research from the Human Resource Committee ascertained that professionals entailing doctors and lawyers have stayed in the leading position of average salary ranking for past 20 years, and are enormously revered for their importance shaping the societal development. Seen in this light, one’s personal income could be a positive corollary of applause gained from the general public, thus it should be deemed a qualification of success.
Meanwhile, fulfilment is unlikely to quantify the level of success, even though it is invariably a source of happiness. This is because the high turnover rate in most industries is mainly attributed to the temptation of salary rather than the failure of acquiring a sense of success in one’s previous profession. In fact, being interviewed by the Workforce Society, 70% respondents admitted that they prioritise the amount of annual income as the major concern in job hunting. Consequently, in this materialistic era, it is widely believed that success should be rewarded by money rather than merely a spiritual sense of fulfilment.
In conclusion, money have a vital significance in modern life, thus such pivotal components constitute a equitable measurement of being successful. It is predicted that personal revenue will outweigh anything else in the evaluation of success in foreseeable future.
Over the past decades, materialism has begot a seismic shift in the sense of
success
. Although
some
conventional educators advocate
fulfilment
should be the
morally
correct factor for this evaluation, it remains obvious that
salary
is
constantly
cited as an evidence of being successful. The aim of this essay is to explore the reasons behind this revolution by reviewing both views.
To
begin
with, there is ample evidence suggested that the size of
paycheque
often
grow with the contribution one caters. In fact, a position ranked with higher
salary
are likely to belong to the successful
people
with either extended knowledge or sophistication.
For instance
, recent empirical research from the Human Resource Committee ascertained that professionals entailing doctors and lawyers have stayed in the leading position of average
salary
ranking for past 20 years, and are
enormously
revered for their importance shaping the societal development.
Seen
in this light, one’s personal income could be a
positive
corollary of applause gained from the
general public
,
thus
it should
be deemed
a qualification of success.
Meanwhile,
fulfilment
is unlikely to quantify the level of
success
,
even though
it is
invariably
a source of happiness. This is
because
the high turnover rate in most industries is
mainly
attributed to the temptation of
salary
rather
than the failure of acquiring a sense of
success
in one’s previous profession. In fact,
being interviewed
by the Workforce Society, 70% respondents admitted that they
prioritise
the amount of annual income as the major concern in job hunting.
Consequently
, in this materialistic era, it is
widely
believed that
success
should
be rewarded
by money
rather
than
merely
a spiritual sense of
fulfilment
.
In conclusion
, money have a vital significance in modern life,
thus
such pivotal components constitute
a
equitable measurement of being successful. It
is predicted
that personal revenue will outweigh anything else in the evaluation of
success
in foreseeable future.