GAMSAT Essay Ideas

September 2026

Youth - takes a long time to become young

Youth is a state of mind characterised by curiosity, adaptability, and openness to change, not simply an age

Older generations may possess the experience of age, but younger generations often possess the adaptability required to navigate a rapidly changing technological world. However, technologicla fluency should not be mistaken for wisdom’ society benefits when youthful curiosity is combined with the experience of older generations

Death - I believe love is stronger than death

Is love stronger than death, is our desire for connection itself a response to our awareness of mortality?

we know we will die, therefore life is finite, therefore relationships become meaningful, love allows us to transcend our individual mortality (love gives meaning to a life that death makes finite)

Terrorism

how a society should respond to threats without compromising the values it is trying to protect

the strength of a society is not demonstrated by its ability to eliminate every threat but by its capacity to confront threats without abandoning the values that define it. Security is necessary for freedom to exist, yet pursuing security without restraint can threaten the freedom that already exist

terrorism doesn’t only threaten physical safety; it tests whether a society will maintain its principles under pressure

Loss - its sad when someone you know becomes someone you knew

if we construct meaning through our relationships, what happens when a relationship that once had our life meaning disappears?

In an uncertain existence humans create meaning through connection, but the impermanence of relationships means that the very people who give our lives meaning can also become sources of profound loss

we need connection = connection gives life meaning - but connection is impermanent = the possibility of loss is inherent in meaningful relationships

Evidence - absence of evidence, speculation thrives, and uncertainty becomes dangerous

scientific progress transformed human health, but without scientific literacy and appropriate oversight, the gap between what science demonstrates and what society believes can create opportunities for misinformation, commercial exploitation and harm

value of evidence based scientific progress shown through antibiotics, vaccines targeted therapies etc. (credibility of science comes not from novelty but from evidence)

E.g., Peptide-based medicines = once discoveries enter the public sphere no longer exist solely within the controlled environment of labs and clinical trials

• contemporary enthusiasm around peptides shows this, something that has legitimate medical applications get commercialised through social media into new weightloss drugs etc.

need scientific literacy = individuals have basic understanding of core science concepts but governments have a duty of care to ensure standards are being implemented into new discoveries when released to the public

Nature and Humanity

How do we decide what is worthy of our attention in the first place?

are we responsible for what we fail to notice, or only for what we knowingly ignore?

Human attention is finite, and what we choose or are encouraged to notice inevitable shapes what we value. While upbringing, culture, and increasingly digital media influence the boundaries of our attention, individuals retain the capacity to deliberately expand those boundaries. To notice something is not merely to perceive it, but to recognise its significance; therefore learning what deserves our attention is the first step toward determining what deserves our protection

1. humans cannot pay attention to everything

2. what captures attention isn’t necessarily what deserves it

3. can we choose what deserves our attention

identity and self

environment shapes what becomes part of our identity, confidence and sense of self - often imagine identity as something that exists within us, but much of who we become is shaped by the environment in which we learn to live

identity not formed solely from our innate characteristics, but through the environments in which those characteristics are developed. The places we grow up teach us what feels familiar, what feels threatening and where we believe we belong. Yet identity remains fluid; encountering unfamiliar environments can challenge assumption we have inherited and reveal that the boundaries we place around ourselves are not always intrinsic

E.g., I am a good swimmer (highly competent in the pool) but feel afraid of the ocean why? I developed a familiarity with the controlled environment of a pool rather than the unpredictability of the ocean

E.g., someone who grew up surrounded by people who love sport, they may come to see themselves as an athlete

Fear and courage

fear is an unavoidable part of human being, but it becomes consequential when it determines what we do or don’t do

Are we defined more by the choices we make, or by the possibilities we allow fear to take away from us?

fear does not always shape our lives through the things we confront, but through the things we quietly avoid. While avoidance can protect us from genuine harm, allowing fear to dictate our choices can gradually narrow our experiences and even shape our understanding of who we are. Courage therefore requires not the absence of fear, but the willingness to distinguish between the risks that deserve avoidance and the discomfort that deserves to be endured

E.g., situations in which I have wanted to approach someone, express how I felt, or make myself vulnerable, but the possibility of rejection made remaining silent feel safer. Nothing was physically preventing me from acting; the barrier existed largely from anticipation of how I might feel if the answer was no. in avoiding rejection also avoided possibility of connection

Failure and resilience

Society often defines success through a predetermined timeline and failure can occur when we measure our lives against milestones that were never truly our own (Abandoned ambitions not necessarily failed ambitions, but dreams we give up because they don’t fit the expectations of the people around us)

Is failure the inability to achieve our goals or can it also mean abandoning our own goals in order to satisfy someone else’s definition of success?

• Society rarely tells young people explicitly that they are failing; instead, expectations are communicated through comparison (E.g., I have increasingly recognised this tension in my own life. While many of my peers are beginning to marry, purchase homes or have children, I am investing years into pursuing a career in medicine.)

• Perhaps the most consequential failures are not those we experience, but those we construct in our imagination and allow to prevent us from trying. (e.g., open water example)

• True resilience is having the courage to define success for yourself rather than constantly measuring yourself against others. Sometimes resilience means accepting that your life doesn’t look like everyone else's

Solitude and belonging

Who are we alone vs who we become around other people

humans seek belonging, but to much belonging can cause us to lose individuality

the greatest danger of social media may not be that it tells us who to be, but that after hearing it often enough, we forget to ask whether we choose that identity ourselves

The solution isnt ot reject the crowd entirely, because belonging is fundamental to human wellbeing. Rather, we need enough distance from the crowd to ensure that belonging does not require us to abandon ourselves.

Memory and the Past

memory isn’t an objective recording of the past, we reconstruct our past through the meaning we give to it

Do our memories tell us what actually happened, or what we have chosen to believe happened?

Memory is essential to identity, but memory is selective and reconstructive; our relationship with the past is fundamentally subjective. Remembering allows us to learn from experience, while forgetting and reinterpretation can allow us to heal. The challenge therefore is not whether we should remember the past, but how we should choose to carry it forward.

memory = interpretation = identity = relationship with the past = future

Liberalism

Comparing Aus and American Soci

A society with maximum freedom and very little government can sound ideal, but we shouldn’t assume that having less government is always better. People often think government only limits freedom through laws and regulations, but governments also protect society by providing safety, rights and support – especially for vulnerable people (children, the elderly, people with disabilities or those experiencing poverty)

• Government regulation is necessary because complete freedom can create harm

  • E.g., Superannuation laws = US: does not have compulsory superannuation system; instead Americans build retirement savings through Social Security, 401(k)s and IRAs & Aus employers must contribute at a statutory rate for eligible workers. Once eligible, you’re covered, and contributions flow automatically 

• Employers may prefer fewer regulations because rules can increase costs and limit flexibility

  • From employers’ point of view, they might argue that government rules about superannuation make it harder for their business to grow. Some small business mighty have to increase revenue through cost-saving measures to manage the impact of the new super laws

• Markets can contribute to innovation and efficiency, but government intervention is necessary in essential areas where unrestricted markets may create inequality or deny basic needs

Freedom

How much freedom is to much freedom when it comes to raising children

freedom is essential to the betterment of societies, but it cannot be absolute when exercised over those who cannot consent. The measure of a free society is not how little the government intervenes, but whether it protects the freedom of the vulnerable while respecting the autonomy of the individuals

• Parents know their children best, government should not dictate moral, educatoin or lifestyle choices (diversity in parenting creates diversity in society)

Antithesis = Parental freedom has limits becuase children are indepedent individuals, not extensions of their parents = they cannot meaningfully consent to their upbringing, excessive parental freedom can deny children education, healthcare or future opportunities (E.g., italian family)

Synthesis = Freedom and regulation are not opposities, responsible boundaries can preserve freedom, parents deserve broad autonomy until a child’s fundamental rights are threatened. Government intervention should be limited but justified when, safety, education, healthcare or future autonomy are seriously compromised

War

war and moral ambiguity; how war transforms morality = war blurs the line between heroism and atrocity, making moral certainty difficult

War exposes how fragile morality becomes under extreme conditions = our commitment to moral principles is tested by war, the principles don’t necessarily change, but the circumstances make them much harder to uphold

War is often portrayed as a contest between good and evil; history reveals that conflict rarely offers such clarity. The extreme conditions of war force individuals and nations alike to make decisions that challenge conventional ethics, demonstrating that the true cost of war is not only measured in lives lost but also in the moral compromises it demands.

1. why war appears morally justified = we celebrate war because we believe some causes are worth fighting for (can be a necessary means of defending justice)

2. Individual morality = ultimately fought by individuals whose moral judgement is continually tested by violence

• e.g., Robert-Smith becomes an illustration that ⇒ War does not simply reveal heroes, it reveals how easily heroism and moral failure can coexist. The case illustrated an uncomfortable truth ⇒ the same conditions that demand extraordinary courage may also create circumstances in which moral boundaries become increasingly difficult to maintain 

3. national morality (hiroshima) Nations often justify extraordinary violence in pursuit of peace, demonstrating that moral ambiguity exists at every level of welfare

synthesis: Extreme circumstances demand impossible choices, yet necessity should never become an excuse to abandon ethical reflection

A just society must recognise the pressures of war while remaining willing to scrutinise its own conduct, because it is our commitment to moral accountability, not merely military victory, that distinguishes justice from violence 

• The existence of the Geneva Conventions reflects humanity's recognition that even in war moral limits must endure. They represent an acknowledgement that while conflict may be inevitable, abandoning ethical principles should never be

Crime and Punishment

idea ⇒ how society defines responsibility ⇒ Can justice exist without accountability, and who should be punished when harm is caused by intelligent systems?

As AI becomes increasingly capable of influencing human lives, traditional concepts of crime and punishment are challenged because responsibility becomes distributed between developers, corporations, users, and machines.

• Punishment exists not only to inflict consequences but to establish accountability and protect society from future harm

• . Emerging technologies such as AI challenge traditional ideas of crime because harm can occur without a clear perpetrator

• rather than abandoning punishment, society must redefine responsibility to ensure technological progress does not become an escape from ethical accountability

E.g., Alleged Grok deepfake case. St. Clair alleges that users generated sexualised deepfake images of her using Grok. She argues that xAI failed to adequately prevent or address the creation of non-consensual explicit material

Technology/ war

just because technology allows us to do something should we?

Technology’s relationship with human responsibility ⇒ E.g., AI weaponry. Should machines ever be allowed to decide who lives and who dies? Where the moral responsibility lies as technology becomes more autonomous

Technology has always increased human power, but AI challenges the foundations of responsibility by allowing humans to delegate decisions that previously required moral judgement 
Throughout history, technological advancement has expanded humanity's ability to solve problems, protect lives, and overcome limitations 

• AI represents a unique transformation because it does not just enhance human capability; it increasingly influences human decision-making 

• Warfare = decisions that carry consequences of life and death; the challenge of AI is not only its destructive potential but the possibility that humans may distance themselves from moral responsibility (who’s really in charge)

Poverty

Poverty is not always caused by individuals' failure; it can emerge when economic systems fail to provide security despite individual participation and effort 

• Middle East conflict example of how global instability can amplify existing vulnerabilities, rather than the sole cause

new form of poverty can emerge when individuals participate in the economy but remain unable to achieve security within it

1. traditional understanding of poverty = individual circumstances

2. modern poverty = the erosion of economic security

3. global instability and economic vulnerability. E.g., Middle East conflict = Disruption to energy markets, uncertainty in global trade, increased transport costs, inflationary pressures. A person's economic security can be threatened by events they do not have influence over. Economic insecurity, relative poverty, and how global events can create vulnerability even in wealthy nations

4. poverty requires structural and individual solutions

wealth

corruption of wealth = how companies are profiting off vulnerable societies (aged care homes) —> getting rich off of the vulnerable

wealth is a measure of power, and the morality of wealth depends on whether that power is used to elevate society or exploit those with less power

• wealth is not inherently immoral; however, when the pursuit of wealth overrides human dignity, it becomes a source of exploitation rather than progress

E.g., Arcare investigation ⇒ explores the tension between wealth creation and moral obligation, particularly when profit is generated from people who are vulnerable and dependent on institutions for care

• positive role of wealth - can improve living standards, fund healthcare, support innovation, create employment and enable philanthropy (wealth itself is not the problem; it is the value guiding its creation and distribution)

• Corruption of wealth = wealth becomes morally problematic when financial incentives conflict with the wellbeing of those who lack power to protect themselves

• ethical wealth creation = solution is not rejecting wealth instead society must redefine welath as something that carriers responsibility. the measure of a wealthy society should not simply be how much wealth it creates, but whether that wealth improves the lives of those who helped create it and protects those who cannot protect themselves

Dignity

technology can facilitate the violation of human dignity, but it is ultimately human beings and societies that decide whether that dignity is protected or denied

• AI created a new way of stripping people of control over their idenitity - AI deepfakes, someones face can be digitally manipulated into an image or video that they never consented to or created

• who owns a persons identity, if technology can reproduce your face and construct a false version of you without your consent, it threatens your autonomy and dignity

Protest

forgiveness allows individuals to release themselves from the resentment created by past experiences, giving them the freedom to define their own future

Thesis = forgiveness liberates us from the control of the past

Antithesis = forgiveness can be difficult and potentially harmful is it is confused with excusing wrongdoing or abandoning accountability

Synthesis = true forgiveness does not erase responsibility; it allows us to acknowledge harm while refusing to remain defined by it

Beauty

When beauty becomes a measure of human worth instead of something used to inspire creativity, it can become a mechanism of insecurity, conformity and exclusion

Beauty is often regarded as an expression of human creativity and individuality, yet its value becomes distorted when society transforms an aesthetic quality into a measure of human worth. The pursuit of beauty can therefore become destructive when individuals are encouraged to value how they appear above who they are

the more society tries to standardise beauty, the less beautiful individuality becomes

• Society/ social media beliefs encourage everyone to have the same filtered appearance, making the pursuit of beauty ultimately destroy the diversity that makes beauty meaningful 

• Beauty drives much of its value from difference, yet society's pursuit of a singular definition of beauty attempts to eliminate difference
  

Youth - impact of social media on childrens minds

Youth is not a fixed stage of life ⇒ shaped by the world in which each generation is born. Today’s youth are the first generation to grow up in a permanent digital environment ⇒ altering how they learn, communicate, form identities, and experience the world compared to previous generations 

• while every generation believes the next has it easier or harder, the defining difference between today’s youth and previous generations is not intelligence or resillience, but the digital environment in which they mature. growing up in an always-connected world has expanded opportunities for learning and connection while simultaneously introducing unprecedented challenges to identity, attention and wellbeing

Suffering

why do humans sometimes respond more strongly to what offends them than to what harms others?

Not all discomfort is suffering, yet modern society increasingly confuses the two

• Offence ⇒ someone hears a swear word, sees an offensive gesture, experiences emotional discomfort 

• Suffering ⇒ famine, war, displacement, poverty and environmental destruction

Modern society has become more sensitive to symbolic discomfort than genuine human suffering 

Potential thesis ⇒ human beings are naturally drawn to immediate and personal discomfort, yet this sensitivity can obscure suffering that is distant, complex or difficult to confront. A society that prioritises avoiding offence while becoming desensitised to genuine suffering risks protecting comfort at the expense of compassion.