Issue 1
As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
ANSWER
With the development of science and technology made through out the human history, especially the past one hundred years or so, people these days are spending more time relying on technology to solve various types of problems. Does the ability of humans to think for themselves really deteriorate as they rely more and more on technology? Admittedly, the improvement of technology and its concomitant contribution to a more convenient daily life does to certain extent obviate the necessity of many traditional tasks, subtly affecting the humans’ ability of thinking. Nevertheless, as a whole effect in general, technology progress improves working efficiency and labor safety, and frees humans from low-level repeated physical work to high-level decision-making intellectual work. In addition, technology proposes brand-new problems as well which challenges the humans’ thinking ability to an even unexpected extent.
It is true that in many situations, the requirement for thinking seems less demanding than before due to the development of technology as the “brains” of computers have replaced humans’ role in many tasks. For instance, students no longer need think hard to solve involving algebraic equations as calculators could do the job for them; engineers do not have to worry about the side effect of modifying their design drawings at one place as in the past due to the modern CAD software’s smart updates for all affected parts; people nowadays could simply forget about their previous pains of finding parking lots when they go shopping at some remote super-markets as the contemporary online shopping systems will deliver the customers anything they need right away with the help of modern logistics, information technology and advanced transportation tools. The development of technology does so much that humans are no longer required to solve many of the traditional tasks and consequently humans’ ability of thinking seems indeed less explored, exercised or even deteriorating. But does the improvement of technology really eliminate the necessity of thinking and deprive humans of their opportunity of solving problems by themselves? With the fading away of stereotyped problems, such as solving algebraic equation on a piece of sketch paper, people are now faced with completely new types of problems, such as how to utilize calculators and computers to solve more complex problems where instead of the regular manipulation innovation and creativity are tested. Technology on the one hand frees humans from the boring and repeated work, yet on the other hand brings in more demanding tasks. In the old says, factory workers have to operate their machines for repeated parts processing which seemed very laborious, however, nowadays they have to program CNC machines for automatic parts manufacturing and tool replacement and they are asked to work on more than one CNC machines as the manager feels the employees are “working less”. Technology does replace humans’ role in many traditional tasks, but technology puts humans in new positions which are more intellectually based. In addition, with the emergence of new technologies, a host of new problems also turn up. The new technology of utilizing nuclear energy for generating electricity brings forward new questions of its ecological impact when the nuclear plant’s cooling water, contaminated with radiation, is discharged into the rivers and ocean. While the development of antibiotics helped cure many patients with infection, it at the same time also produced the question of bacteria’s Developed immunity which makes many previously effective medicines invalid and that whether the development of these antibiotics indirectly facilitates the mutation of bacteria towards a more hazardous and dangerous state. All these new problems never existed before the development of these new technologies and they require far more thinking than the old problems. In conclusion, while technology frees humans from the traditional laborious work, eliminating the necessity of thinking for the stereotyped problems, yet technology meanwhile brings forth new types of problems which are more intellectually intense and even unprecedented. Humans’ mind has been working on all kinds of problems throughout the history to keep up with pace of our world change. With the development of technology, old problems might become obsolete but new problems with more challenges will never stop appearing, ensuring the opportunity for humans’ mind to explore and develop to higher state and securing the brains’ role of thinking from deteriorating.
ISSUE 2 1) To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.
Is it really possible to study main characteristics of a society without study of the cities that are part of that? Sociologist have a wide variety of technics that help them to find main features of a society such as study major cities, study works of literature and study monuments. There can be no doubt that study major cities of a society can make a significant help to understand that society. In my view, study major cities is not necessary for discover important characters of a society. First and foremost reason why study major cites does not make help is that a territories if a society my be spread among many countries and sometimes many continents. For instance, Western society is spread between North America and Europe therefore study a city such as New York City and Paris not help us but also distract sociologist. For example in New York City people always in hurry and usually eat fast foods on the other hand in Paris people pay more attention to their mealtime so eat their food in peace and some times take more than an hour to eat their main course. Thus who only studies these two cities cannot understand whether people in Western society have their meal in a hurry or peace. A second instance in which study a major city is not necessary is that it takes long time for a society to form, so study a city only shows the contemporary situation of that city. For instance, study a current situation of Beijing - capital city of China - does not help us to understand important characteristics of East society. These days modern cities are changing dramatically and it is very hard to find static characters in them. In Eastern society people usually spend their time with their family at home but these days in a city like Beijing new recreation facilities motivate people to spend their times in night clubs rather than stay home with their families.
Last but not least reason why we should study more important factors instead of cities is that these days cities are full of people from different cultures and nationalities so it is very hard to find the similar attributes between them. For instance, It is very hard to find a Western society characteristics in a cosmopolitan like New York city because in that city you can find more than 25 different nationalities live together and each have their own specific culture. In conclusion, it is clear that study major cities in a society does not help us to find important characteristics. These days cities are mixture of people with different thoughts, cultures and ideas and each of them belongs to a specific society. Ultimately, there are better ways rather than cities that help sociologist to discover most important characteristics of a society. 2) To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

The debate of whether the basic characteristics of a society; loyal to its essence can be associated with the major cities of that society or not has caught the attention of many pondering and thinking minds off late. While it may be true that majority would agree with this statement; I personally feel that making a generalization of an entire society based on the sample size of only the major cities of that society is a little overestimating; without considering the percentage of the population and diversity of cultures that resides in these major cities as compared to the overall population and cultural diversity. Without a doubt the world has witnessed and has been abode to many different societies; each rich with its own characteristic flavor; but differing substantially from the other in certain aspects. Now these defining characteristics of a society may not all be evident in only its major cities; and neither can the characteristics that are evident in these major cities define the society entirely. For example in a country like India that is so rich and diverse in its culture and content; major cities contribute to only about 15-25% of the total population. In addition, the ethnic diversity of India; ranging from the seven sisters in the East to the Himalayas of the North; and from the Gujaratis of the West to the Dravidians of the South; cannot be appropriately reflected in only the major cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata, Bangalore, Agra, Kanpur, Chandigarh etc. Further complexity is added by the difference in incomes, taxes and lifestyles of the denizens of non-major cities and major cities. According to a recent survey, only about 31% of the total population of India is living in urban areas. The rest 69% still lies in rural areas where there is a paucity of resources like education facilities, road connectivity; medical facilities etc. But the picture in major cities may lead us to believe quite the contrary, because most of the major cities are mostly urban or on the road to complete urbanization within near future. Similarly the average per capita income of India as a whole and the per capita income of only these major cities is unsurprisingly different. The same can be said of the healthcare & educational facilities. While some may argue that such rich and varied diversity may be found in only a select few societies; the fact remains that no society can be homogenous throughout its composition and existence. In some societies where the major cities account for more than 70 percent of the total population; one may be tempted to generalize it in terms of its major cities. But then again there is a huge question mark as to how many such societies actually subsist in this present world, to which the answer is self explanatory. Even if we find any such odd example; one may ignore it as an anomaly on account of the bigger picture.
Also this world at present has become so old and antediluvian that it is very difficult to come across a society that is absolutely pure and pristine. The advent of European Powers that wreaked and enforced Colonization in the second half of the last 1000 years ensured that most of the societies of the World either got mixed with their own or got completely lost in the transformation. While the principle of sampling may be applicable on a number of scientific models in the field of technology and statistical process or quality control where it can be used to generalize the findings of the sample set to the entire range of populations; similar hypothesis falls short when we talk about societies. The set of rules or characteristics that define the outlook of the major cities of a society may be different from those that define or characterize it as a whole. Hence the characteristics of a society cannot be generalized by looking at only the major cities.
3)To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.

A Society can be determined by its people, their way of life, culture, language, history, politics, and economy and so on as a whole. The more you get to know such basic elements of a society, the better you can understand a society. In fact, an exploration of a society is a time-consuming and life-long learning process for expatriates and visitors. Nowadays, people tend to be busier day by day so that studying its big cities could be a best and efficient way to understand a society, since a metropolis is (i) a place where political, cultural and commercial centres are located; (ii) a place where national identities are placed for tourism; and (iii) a place where representatives from almost every parts of a society are gathered together. The big cities can allow you take an overall glance of must-know items of a society.
First and foremost, a metropolis is a place where political, cultural and commercial centres are located. As we know, the government, parliament, and ministries of any country are normally located in its capital cities. Besides, main concert halls, opera house, theatre, museums and other cultural centres are located in the big cities where they can reach to many people at once. Similarly, there are big shopping centres where items with traditional elements are sold in the populous cities which are a big market for businessmen. In this context, the big cities can allow you to visit all these places and understand a society better. The important thing you should know about a society is its national identities, including national heros, traditional masterpieces, national animals and so on. The capital city is the right a place where you can find about knowledge and information about those things. Generally speaking, the countries tend to build a monuments of its national heros, run a museum holding its masterpieces and unique things, and a zoo showing off its national animals and animals in danger of disappearing. For instance, if you go to France, you must visit a museum of Louvre in Paris to see a Mona Lisa which is an symbol of Paris and the palace of Versailles where you can find out the lifestyles of the kings who ruled France in the past. Last but not least, you can meet different kind of people from all around a country and experience its culture. People and their way of life is an essential part of a society. People are a reflection of their society. You would never have been to out of the capital city of a country, however, you would have seen a person from the countryside which helps you to learn their way of life and language dialect in that part of a society. Some people might argue that there are other important sources to learn about a society, however studying its big cities are the most efficient way as explained above. Visiting its big cities can help you to grab the most important features of a society in a timely and efficiently manner. You can learn its politics taking a tour to its Government building; its culture and history visiting the museums; and its people and language interacting with inhabitants from all around a country.
4) To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position."

Answer:
The speaker asserts that to understand the characteristics of any society, one must study its major cities. However it possible to understand the characteristics of society by studying major cities, but not so much as one can by studying its rural areas in terms of heritage and culture of society. So I beg to differ with speaker. Because all major cities are well equipped with advanced technologies. And also different types of cultures are there. By studying rural area one can know the roots culture due to equal methodology of living. Experience tell us that all major cities of any society are well equipped with advanced technologies. Life becomes easier as comparatively with rural area. For example, in major cities we can easily get pure water at house by advanced pumping stations and RO plants. So we cannot know the original or basic method to get water. But in rural area which are the roots of society, people were used to go far to river or any clear well on their own foot to get water. Other example is transportation. In major cities we are used to buses, own vehicles....etc. where in rural area we can find the bullock cart, camel cart, horse cart..Etc which are heritage for transportation.
Admittedly major cities have different cultures. And due to different cultures obviously there must be different languages, foods and dressing senses. Likewise all this characteristics we can also find others, in short different types of living methodology. For example, in New York we can find people belonging from different societies. We can find Christian, Rome, Hindu, Buddha, Muslim and also others likewise all these. If one need to understand Hinduism then he need to come India. He cannot understand very well from New York. In India, if you go to major cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Hyderabad, Bangalore and so more, you will find out peoples from different society. If we take Mumbai then in Mumbai we can find Guajarati, south-Indian, Bengali peoples. But in countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, we can easily study their society by major cities. For instance in whole Saudi Arabia outside of home women are allowed to wear veil only. So this the one heritage culture of their. In major cities we find it everywhere. Moreover in rural areas you can find only one type of society. So one can understand it very well due to an equality in their foods, language, culture, rules, restrictions, festivals, fairs..etc. for Muslims' we cannot understand their society by major cities like new York and Mumbai. But if we got to the rural area of Saudi countries', then definitely we can. For instance, in south-Indian people are used to eat food in banana leaves instead of plate. But in major cities they became modern and are use plate. There is also disparity in foods' types and language. Finally in sum, one can understand the society by studying major cities, but not as deeply and better by rural and heritage areas. Here speaker's assertion is agreeable in some exceptions, but not in all cases. we can know their living methodology but not their heritage rules, regulations, restrictions. So speaker's statement cannot persuade me to stand with him.

Issue 6: To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities.
Posted on April 8, 2013by rohitkondekar
It is similar to saying, look at the beauty of house, don’t bother about the material it is made from. The argument connoted here by author is not completely right or enlightening in itself. It is rife with loop holes and unmentioned thoughts which have a major impact on how we describe a society. Major cities, mostly talking in terms of developing nations are mostly a feigned/adopted representation of characteristics of the country’s society as a whole. On the same note, there may be or there are situations where large part of nation’s population live in smaller cities and towns, and looking just into the major cities values would be a flaw in itself. But on the other hand, major cities represents a wide variety and interactions between different cultural factions and mentalities, thereby providing a common and facile platform for understanding country’s societal values.
Firstly, major cities, mostly in terms of developing nations, are a mere mirage, in sense that people here, try to adopt societal values similar to those of developed nations. Take for example, topic regarding inter-cast marriages, is quite a predominant issue in India and even in other developing nations of Asia. It is even not tolerated and mostly prohibited by mostly all parts of society of these nations. But in major cities, this may not be an issue, because mostly the people in these cities are quite well educated and have a larger exposure of how world operates. secondly, there may be countries where, the major population representing the country as a whole may be living in small cities and towns, and there cultural rules and values may be quite different than those adopted by major, metropolitan cities. For example, small towns in Africa or China, where people prefer their sons/daughters to grow as a farmer and be an entrepreneur than those of metropolitan cities where people may be preferring their children to be an engineer or doctor. Nevertheless, looking on the positive side of the argument, big cities represent an amalgamation of people from different parts of societies and cultural values. It is in these cities, that people are more concerned about their nations progress and who they elect to lead them. It shows us how different people in terms of cast and creed react to different situations and societal dilemmas. Even due to a larger population base, issues quickly boil up to be widely known and cared for, than those of smaller cities and towns, where they may not even reach neighbor’s ears. So looking at both the aspects of the topic, it could be said that major cities provide a solid base to understand the nation’s cultural values and characteristics of the society, but it may be feigned and artificial. Evaluating and understanding society is not an easy job, different aspects and situations need to be analyzed to frame a conclusion about the nation. Hence, it necessitates us to look at all parts of nations whether it be major or small cities, if we need a complete understanding of the true society.
ISSUE 3
1)Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. Educational institution, most especially the higher educations, have the responsibility of guiding students in making choices about their field of study; however, they do not have the responsibility to dissuade the students from pursuing any field. More than likely in today’s world, students coming into the higher institution are about eighteen years old, therefore they are matured enough to make a decision on what major to pursue or not. At the same time, each student is aware of his intellectual capability as to where they can succeed or not. Moreover, individual’s right to decision making must be respected by the educational institution. Therefore, it is not the responsibility of the educational institution to dissuade students from pursuing any field for any reason. In the United States today, the average age of college freshman is 18 years old and above. At such, at this age, each student is equipped with what it takes to make a sound decision about his choice of career. The best an educational institution can do is to show the student the diverse careers available and leave the decision making process to each of the student. Take for instance, a student that dreams to become a physician, at first, the student might not seem to be prepared enough for the assiduous task of becoming one. However, with rigors of training and teachings, such a student will better value the trainings and might evolve as a better candidate or drop out of the school. The choice is for the student to make. However, if the school decides to talk the student out of the program without the initial trial, the student might not learn the necessary lesson he needed along the way. In some instances, the student might blame the school for not giving him a chance to try at that particular field he was dissuaded from doing. Secondly, every student is well aware of the extent of academic stress he can handle depending on his capacity. This knowledge should guide each student to making the right choice. It is the sole responsibility of the student and perhaps the relatives to dissuade a student from pursuing a field of study. College advisor can do no more than advise. It is still the prerogative of the student to take actions. Finally, each student has the right to pursue what he wishes to and at such, educational institution must respects such a right. Dissuading a student from following his choice will be a way of encroaching his right. Right to freedom is one of the amendments in the US constitution. Talking a student out of his field of study, probably because he is not doing well in it, is not the role of the school. A better way to intervene is to offer ways to do better. The school might support the student in other ways, like scholarships and aids. However, pursuing the field or not absolutely should come from the student’s volition. In view of the aforementioned points, educational institution can at best points out to students the fields available in the institution, give examination and assessment to measure progress. However, the role of dissuading student from pursuing fields of study that they might not succeed at is not the institution’s because the students are matured enough to know their capabilities and they have individual right to their choices. Dissuading a student from pursing his chosen field will not benefit the student or the school on the long run. 2) Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Education is the most important factor behind the success and over all development of a person. Many countries have a high illiteracy rate making them incompetent in full development. Educational institutes are the driving force behind providing quality education and also honing the various skills of an individual. In a country like India where there are a number of educational institutes with a vast variety of professional courses educational industry has become one of the major industries.
I believe that educational institutes have a major responsibility towards the overall success and development of a student in a particular field. They are responsible to provide quality education to nurture the growth of the student and make them an outstanding professional in their field of choice. They have the resources and the knowledge to help the student in the correct path of success and achievement. But i disagree with the argument that educational institutes have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing field of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. No matter how learned or knowledgeable a person is they do not have a right to judge anyone. They may be poor critiques in finding the true potential of an individual. Take the instance of michael jordan. He was kicked out of his high school basketball team because his sports coach thought he is a poor performer but later on he became to be known as the brightest basketball player of the country. It may so happen that a person recognize their potential later in the stage of life and hence if demotivated in the crucial years of college , they may grow to develop low self esteem. The meaning of success is very vast and different from person to person. For some success may mean being rich and monetarily sound, for some it may mean reaching the heights of their creative potential and for some success may mean being socially sound and understanding ones own potential. In India , for example, due to the high poverty rate there are many students who are told from a young age that they are to be the bread earners for the family. This burden to achieve financial stablilty for the family causes many to take up professional courses like engineering and MBBS without much interest so as to be placed good and help to support their family. They may not be brilliant i their field or the brightest mind in their college class but their hunger for money may make them good engineers/ doctors, so to dissuade them from entering a professional life in this field may be a judgmental decision on the part of the educational institute. If a student is dissuaded they may never make an effort to ever try doing something they are not good at and this will lead to deep impact in their all round development. The fear of being discouraged is such that the student may stop even applying their brains to a problem to solve on their own. It is said that a person only learns from their mistakes. No successful human being would have reached to that peak of success without committing a mistake, accepting it, learning from it and making it right the next time. Thus till the time a student is not given an opportunity to explore their potentials they may never be able t achieve success and happiness.
Thus educational institutes should not dissuade a student from continuing in the field in which they are likely to not succeed but provide various opportunities and platform of growth so that they realize their potential themselves and learn to become better individuals and citizens.
Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed.
Educational institutions have humongous responsibility in helping a student develop and understand his passion and potential. Educational institutions and the wisdom of its faculty and staff lay the stepping stone to a synergistic relationship between a student's success and the society's needs. A lot of thinking goes in curriculum development, staffing, course delivery, moral and physical education in these institutions. Certainly, educational institutions must engage in helping a student succeed. However, a student's passion may be influenced by several factors outside of the institutional boundaries. These passions should not be dissuaded. Educational institutions should play a role of mentor and let the students decide the future for themselves. Selection of a field of study has been a challenge for students. If there are two ingredients for success, they are passion and potential. Every student is different. Each student has a different level of passion and potential towards different fields of study. Moreover, these interests and skills are highly temporal . I wanted to become a aircraft pilot when I was in my sixth grade. During my ninth grade, my interests shifted towards computer science. I did not like biology solely for the reason that I hated dissecting frogs and cockroaches. As I grew up into high school, university and beyond, my choices became narrower. Note that the interplay of passion and potential formed the pillar of my selection of specialization. Clearly, the choices exist during the early stages of our schooling. Educational institutions play a big role in developing these passions and potential in us. We spend a major part of our childhood in schools. The educational system and the values that they inculcate in us greatly determine the potential in us. I still remember my mathematics teacher. Her inspirational and enjoyable maths sessions gave a special perspective to this subject. I aced almost all exams in mathematics and it still remains to be a favorite subject. From potential develops passion for many of us. Application of mathematics in empirical modeling, computational finance and probability theory turned out to be my field of study. However, its not just the educational institutions that influence us. One of my friends wanted to became a magician inspired by one of his neighbors and few television shows. While its not hard to find a movie hero's fan or who worships a sport-star, we can safely say that there are many such forces that direct our interests. Given all these, there are limits to what educational institutions can do. While helping to identify the potential and passions, it can only indicate where we are likely to succeed. However, our influences sometimes are too strong to undermine our knowledge and force us to venture into new waters. This need not be bad in all situations. For instance, my friend who was inspired towards magic, is now an established magician. He does not regret dropping out of his university or leaving his comfort area which was then chemistry. Our schooling was demanding. Parents and some friends did not share the passion. Clearly, potential was unproven. Yet, the risk that he took, paid off. There are several such success stories. Bill Gates, the famous Microsoft founder was a college drop out. These people found their passion themselves and had a strong belief on their potential. They were willing to go against the tide. They became successful. However, all those who swim against the current, may not be successful. There is only one Bill Gates and there are probably a million who failed on the same path. There are many who took the advise that their schooling provided and are now successful. Educational institutions have a responsibility to help their students identify true passion and potential. In an age where one can get easily distracted, these institutions must direct the students towards successful future. However, they should not underestimate the other forces acting upon the students. They, most certainly, should not dissuade students from what they believe will not make the student successful.
ISSUE 4
Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Response:
Points:
Disagree
1. Scandals morally degrading
2. Lesson if have to be learnt are already written
3. If scandals useful, society might take a different course

Scandals are always detestable be if of any nature from a mere financial to morally degrading sexual ones. The scandals might have increased in numbers people try their best to go beyond the satisfaction levels. But the pervasive nature of scandal should not dictate the level of morality a civilised society maintains. They might give a deeper insight into the thinking but they never should be origin of any focussed thinking. We form a society and work within the boundaries of moral threads. We are expected not to go beyond those threads. But some people cross limits and get involved into some unlawful activities just either for some extra bucks or some more pleasure. We know they are wrong and prohibited by law. And for thinking in such way, we do not need any scandal reference from past to compare. For example the case of world famous golfer, Tiger Woods, we all know that whatever he did was wrong beforehand. There is no need to bring any extraneous facts to prove what he did was wrong. Such kinds of events take society to a new low level. Moreover what we think after looking at a scandal is already written by some great philosophers or proved wrong by law. For learning a new lesson we do not need a new or new type of scandal. Just we need to look around or think before doing anything and ask ourselves whether we are morally right or not. However if we go by author’s assumption, people would not cease from doing illegal activities if they want or society wants to learn a lesson. As far as focus is concerned, people can focus on their day-to-day life activities and improve the quality of their lives rather than focussing on scandals. The judiciary system is intact to take care of all these. So it is highly hypothetical to say scandals are useful to focus our attention in ways no speaker or reformer has done. The problems and the solutions are same from the time people became civilized. We just have to look out for those either in books or within ourselves.

2)Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
Scandals can attain resurrection in fraction of time, sometime it reveals truth that no body expected and ever anticipated in their lives. People would not notice the person which were reliable and trustworthy there were swindling money behind their back, they would not come to notice untill scandal happened. That time people came to know about bitter truth. So I support this statement and I will justify this statement by taking three examples into consideration which will explicitly claim my reasoning for my propensity towards favor of statement.
Scandals reveal shocking truth that no one ever expected. For instance, take example of IPL in india. IPL is agency which organizes match between cricket teams. Wealthy person can buy or select one team and it plays under their name in IPL. So many actors as well as actress bought different teams and they played for them in IPL. But recent results that broached by CBI(crime branch of india) of india were shocking as well as horrific. They broached that many actresses were involved in scandal because they played batting and fixing on teams, which had a deep impact on afficionado of that particular actress. They were shocked that their favorite actress was involved in Scandals and CBI even proved those claims in court. These Scandals showed a real picture which was murkier before Scandals. It gave clear picture of actresses what they did. Before Scandals, they tried to show that they were against all these Scandals that were ongoing in IPL. But real truth was different. I was fan of one of those actresses because of all paved truths that they said in public but they were nothing more than conceit. What Scandals can do others can not do. For instance, take case of politicians in India. Recently catastrophic that happened in one state of India revealed horrific truth. This state was pilgrim and annually people in thousands come to see these God temples. More than 4000 people died in this catastrophic. Which had a deep effect on public. In aftermath of investigation, police found that this catastrophic happened because of politicians. weather forecaster declared about advent of catastrophic in past then they gave this information to political leaders. And those leaders gave it to higher priority and finally government gave a fund for activities that can stop that catastrophic by building structure which can provide bulwark from glaciers but police told that all money that government funded was digested by people in politics. They did not take it seriously and finally they made a blunder mistake which took lives of people. Police still are finding dead bodies of people and they announced till now 4000 people are dead and they are searching for more. People were shocked when they came to know about that state's chief minister was also involved in that scandal. THESE two examples shows that truth revealed which was horrific as well as shocking. People who never anticipated that celebrities whom they were fan of, was nothing more than conceit . Political leader who gave bombastic speech for favor of public can do gaffe which will take a shape of catastrophic and can take lives of more than 4000 people. These true scandals shows that Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.
It is an indeed dubitable fact that each type of crime is confined to mere time constraint only and when it get caught by crime controlled authorities then turn into scandals; which become the moot-concern of the society to draw mortals’ attention towards the problems more than speakers or reformers in reality. So, I do assert up to some extent with this given statement. On the first facet , It is conceded that scandals reveals the sinful veracity of the people who usually get involve in abject to earn money as well as name and fame. Moreover, all these things help people to know; what is the reality of elites like actors, ministers, preceptors and so forth whereas reformers lagged regard of these level articles. To make it apparent, I would like to cite an example that the last 3G scandal of India’s communication ministry manifests the abominable face; which was being an abstract issue. Till, it had not revealed.
Furthermore, scandals when come under the light then it force government to take some hard and fast steps to make system defiled-free as these abject are confirmed with some firm evidence; which give no chance to culprit to offend him-self. To exemplify, I am going to cite an example which is quite recent as one of the famous impostor preceptor ‘SWAMI NITYANAND’ sins got elucidated his sex-scandal where it was only under the rumors category till, it had not proved. On the whilst, reformers and speakers do have their own inevitability as they are the initiators of any grave issue which is being suffered by people. Owing to whenever ones get witting of it. About the clog of society’s then it get inculcate in dwellers’ mind which further become the solution of the trouble. To illustrate, it can be seen that plethora of nations organize motivational shows to give people spur to individuals so I assent That indeed reformers are the interceptors to bring these troubles to put in the acme of masses’ considerations and to change their opines as well. In crux, I concede that the pace of scandals should be exposed and augmented by media and other resources of communication so that our country could be problem –free. Apart from this, even, motivators need to do their task with vim and zeal.
ISSUE 5
Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive. Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated The speaker asserts that the governments must guarantee the major cities the financial support that they need in order to thrive, as a nation’s cultural traditions are primarily generated and preserved in these major cities. It might be tempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that some major cities are cultural center as well, given that major cities tend to be significant cities with some cultural relics in the history. However, the speaker overlooks that a nation’s cultural traditions are not oversimplified concluded as primarily generated or preserved in cities. Instead, a nation’s cultural relics, including rural areas as well, lie in all over the country.
I concede that providing financial support by the government to make the cultural traditions thrive in the major cities may be beneficial, in terms of building the museums of the relative themes and facilitating the transmission of the conventional culture. Yet, to make a nation’s cultural tradition thrive is far more than providing financial support. It may also involves holding some activities to disseminate traditional festival culture and establishing relevant policies to protect the cultural relics from destruction. In other words, the financial support should be provided when it is necessarily rather than indiscriminately, as these money could be more conducive if applied in helping the impoverished and the construction public infrastructure, and so forth.
As I see it, there are two arguments against the stamen that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated in cities. The first argument is the major cultural traditions are generated by the residents all over the country. Taking China as an example, there are fifty-six ethnic groups while the major cities locate at the eastern coast in China. Given that divergent ethnic groups have various cultural traditions, it is inaccurate to say that a nation’s traditions are primarily generated in cities. The second argument is the cultural traditions are preserved by much more than the big cities. As we all know, the construction of a major city, with the development of the city’s size, many cultural relics have been removed, in order to give way to the building of many commercial mansions which is far more profitable. Furthermore, the increasingly crowded cities become more of a commercial center other than cultural center. With the local residents moving out of the fast-paced cities, the non-material cultural relics would not be able to preserved in the cities, instead, are preserved in these community of their ethnic groups.
In sum, given that the nation’s cultural traditions are not primarily generated and preserved in major cities, the government should try to concentrate on the several most endangered but precious cultural traditions and preserve them with necessarily financial or policies support. Only in this way can the preservation of traditional culture be successful and efficiently, rather than providing financial support indiscriminately .
Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive. Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated
First, the reason provided is doubtful. It is true that, in some cases, the major cities are the places that preserve the traditions and the cultural heritage of a nation. Admittedly, the thriving of these cities can benefit the nation. Take China for example. Its major cities, such as Beijing, Shanghai, Nanjing, etc, are of great history and cultural heritage because they are ancient capitals. Every year, thousands of visitors come to these cities to experience the Chinese culture and bring income to them by tourism.

However, in other cases, major cities can preserve least cultural tradition because these cities are most vulnerable to changes. For example, Taipei, one of the most developed cities in Taiwan, has change considerably these days. A hundred of years ago, there were no skyscraper, no MRT, no such hustle-and-bustle in Taipei, and people maintained their tradition living style and custom. For example, they did farming, they had tradition holidays, and they held ceremony like weddings or funerals in traditional ways. But nowadays, people in Taipei no longer live on land. Instead, they engage in a variety of business. In addition, few of them held ceremony as serious as their ancients did, and most of them skip some trivial details of the ceremony. However, in rural area, it is possible that people still live in the similar way as their ancients did because there are less information comes to these areas.
In addition, even there are major cities that hold the traditions of a nation we still can not assert that the government should ensure their thriving by financial support just because they are of great cultural importance. When it comes to financial support, we should consider whether the government has enough financial resources to subsidize theses cities. If the resources are scares, this action will certainly result in sacrificing other objectives that are essential to the survival of the whole country, such as public health and safety, which is detrimental to a nation. Besides, major cities are not the only places that preserved and generated culture. Rural villages also contribute to the cultural traditions. Today a nation's distinct cultural traditions--its folk art, crafts, traditional songs, customs and ceremonies--burgeon instead in small towns and rural regions. If the government only finances major cities, it is possible that the rural villages may experience exodus of the population because of lack of support, which may cause the declining or even disappearing of the culture of the rural villages.
To sum up, while it may sounds reasonable that government should ensure their thriving by financial support because they are of great cultural importance, a closer examination on this issue reveals that it is actually impracticable and ridiculous.
Claim: Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive.

Reason: It is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.

Response:

A nation’s cultural tradition is deeply rooted in its countryside. Big cities are home to people who are more interested in gaining wealth and hence give very little importance to tradition. Cities already have enough means to thrive and often have a surplus of resources at their disposal. So governments do not need to support big cities to maintain themselves. I also disagree with the reason of the claim as cultures are better preserved in villages and not in big cities.
Big cities have several ways to generate money and they do not need any external help. They have big factories, financial institutions that lend money to the needy, banks, stock exchange and other related offices which are considered the major sources of wealth generation. The economy of any big city is governed by the services sector, a hugely profitable sector. In the US, more than three fourth of the economy depends on the services sector and this sector is thriving in big cities in the form of banking, finance, software etc. When it comes to facilities like healthcare, education, clean drinking water, proper sanity etc. bigger cities have the lion’s share of those.
In contrast, villages have limited sources of wealth generation like agriculture, handicrafts, small factories. They contribute to the majority of the economy of the villages. Sometimes these mechanism are not capable to generate enough jobs to retain people to villages. In developing countries like India, villages almost completely depend on agriculture which in turn depends on rain for most of the country. The failure of rain causes the failure of crops and villages suffer due to lack of money to continue the doing agriculture. At this pernicious time, they need government support to sustain the people of villages and their means of livelihood. Villages do not have ample access to healthcare, education etc. as well.
The reason for the claim falls apart when we look at the history of any place in this world. Any civilization be it Maya, Indus Valley or Chinese, everything started with villages and not cities. Cities came a lot later in the history of civilization. When people started dwelling and living together, they started to build up communities and for livelihood, they started doing diverse works, enjoyed celebrations, mourn burials. This marked the beginning of traditions, customs being made. Some of the age old customs can still be seen in villages like special kind of dance when crops are ready. But ancient traditions are things of yore for big cities as they are only a place to earn money and become wealthy. People do not have time out of their busy lives to make old custom a part of their lives. And gradually they die.
So if the traditions are to be preserved, governments need to support villages that are not self-sufficient. Big cities will take care of themselves.Bottom of Form