Its true that students are life blood of a country’s future. Hence, it is also important for the students to choose their right future. Therefore, a nation must require students to study the same nation curriculum untile they enter college so that the students have vast area to choose their field of interest from.
Once a student enters a school no one has any idea what subject might interest her. The student might love to learn history more than science. However, the student can reach such concusion only when she has gone through both the subjects and can juxtapose and compare them according to her interest. Many contend that in today’s era there are such a wide variety of subjects that students, even older in age, will not come to conclusion about their interest. I admit the fact, but such wide variety of subjects evolve from some of the basic ones. For example, zoology is a branch of biology and on similar ground statistics is a branch of Mathematics. Hence, to allow students a level of introspection and find what area interests them the most, there has to be a common curriculum for all which consists of the aforementioned basic subjects.
Many people contend that studying such raft of subjects might pressurize the students and might encumber them from studying further. However, we overlook the fact that the age students are in is the age to hone the skills and allow the brain think incisively. Unless the students study variety of subjects they will not be able to think incisively. While we grow up, we realize that it is really very important to switch our minds from one problem to other which might be pretty extraneous to the first. This capability of switching can only come if we allo students to study different subjects and solve problems from each one of them.
It is also important to maintain the curriculum common throughout the nation so that progress of all the children can be ascertained on the same scale. This will prohibit a situation in which a student wants to study further a subject in which she is weak. Hence, a statistics can be presented to her exposing the position she is on as compared to other students who are taking up the same subject across the country. Based on that statistics it would be much easier for the student to gauge her position.
It may also be argued that what if we allow students to study only a particular field until they enter college. This may preclude them to ascertain a specific area in which their interest lies. What if a student who has great interest and potential in literature is stuck with science. This may not prove beneficial for her in future. The aforementioned step might also not allow students to develop a mind that quickly switches from one problem scenario to another.
Hence, a nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.
The argument stated by Dr. Karp is wrong for numerous reasons. Primarily, the argument is based on interviews carried out by Dr. Karp and his team of graduate students. The argument fails to provide how many of the interviewed children belonged to Tertia, hence, rendering the conclusion that interview-centered approach is more significant than observation-based approach, invalid.
Dr. Karp states in his article that the interviews that his team took were carried out in islands that include Tertia, whereas, Dr. Field’s observation is based completely on Tertia. Hence, there may be a case that the children who Dr. Karp has interviewed might not have belonged to Tertia. The answers given by children belonging to other islands cannot be generalized for all islands and Tertia in particular.
Apart from giving the aforementioned evidence, Dr. Karp and his team have to also state the exact conversations that happen between children regarding their biological parents. What if, children talk about who their biological parents might be and try to predict them by matching their looks? Hence, amount of time that they take to talk about their biological parents is not enough to rule observation-based analysis out.
It may also be required from Dr. Karp and his team to interview large number of children in Tertia. An interview based on only small number of children may not be fully representative and valid. On contrary, it may also be possible that Dr. Field’s observation might have been based on his 10 years of experience in the island. Hence, to invalidate such an observation it is important to carry out a large scale of interviews.
Hence, aforementioned evidences are needed from the author and his team in order to completely rule out observation-based approach and carry out interview-based approach further to investigate the child rearing traditions.
Teaching has always been a prime tool for shaping people’s future. It is significant to feed the future generation with positive tenats and extol their positive actions. However, it is equally important to convey what is considered as evil and should not be done in future. Hence, negative actions should not be ignored.
Praising positive actions, for sure, instills an idea of how people can lead a life of truth. However, if negative actions are ignored, people would never come to know which actions are condemned. For example, it is important to extol students in a school who help their juniors in their studies, however, it is equally important to convey seniors not to be harsh on their juniors, which can eventually deter juniors from studying further. By this example it becomes quite clear that negative actions should be pointed out and students must be instructed not to perform them.
It is aso better to enumerate the actions that are considered as negative and their consequences. Some actions, even after being listed as negative, are so enticing that people end performing them. For example, many people often steal to statisfy their basic demands. Teaching these people that stealing is one of the negative actions would not preclude them from doing so. It is important to convey the consequences, for example certain months of imprisonment, will eventually preclude them from doing so.
Hence, from aforementioned discussion and examples we can conclude that good actions must be extolled but it is equally important to convey which actions are negative. Moreover, in some cases, it also very important to enumerate the actions considered negative and their corresponding consequences.
The argument is wrong for several reasons. The author makes several assumptions which render the conclusion, i.e. Supercop made correct decision to move its headquarter from Middlesburg to Corporatevile, invalid.
First assumption that the author makes is that surge in the number of homeowners in Corporatevile proves that it is superior to live than Middlesburg. Here, author overlooked a possibility of Middlesburg being already replete with homeowners because of its high quality of living. Corporatevile, being a newer city, might show surge in homeowners due to obvious reasons. The standards of living in Corporatevile can only be ascertained after few months of its establishment. Moreover, the quality of life cannot be based on the surge in the number of houseowners but the total number of people living in that society and their level of satisfaction. Hence, clearly Supercop must carry out a survey in Middlesburg for the same.
Secondly, the author fails to convey how genuine the survey is. For example, survey might have been conducted among the people who had predilection for non-urban areas. In this case, survey cannot be generalized as an overall interest of all employees of Supercop. Unless the survey is fully representative, valid and reliable, we cannot make conclusions.
Third assumption that the author makes is that lower taxes makes a place safer and cheaper one. Lower taxes do not imply tight security or less crime rates in any way. Moreover, what if, the city has recently been built and hence the taxes are low just to attract homeowners and cost of other facilities are higher than other cities? For example, internet companies might be charging more because of the location of the city. Taxes are just one aspect of overall cost of running a company. Taxes being less do not state that other facilities will be cheaper as well.
Hence, from the aforementioned assumptions, it is difficult to assert that the decision made by Supercop is correct. Clearly, Supercop must study more before making such an important decision.
Our advancement in technology is one of the prime parameter on which we have an edge over any other species that exist on our planet. With the advent of 21st century, there has been a catastrophic surge in the innovations we do. Many people contend that these advancements have convoluted our lives. On a quick blush it seems true, however, a close look reveals that it is technology which helps in solving small issues fast so that we can devote most of our time on bigger and more complicated issues.
To corroborate the fact stated above we can take an example of a scientific calculator. Just by pressing appropriate keys, this electronic device helps us perform simple mathematical calculations. This not only saves time for scientists and allow them to solve convoluted problems, but also foster them to plunge themselves into even harder problems with calculators by their side.
Technology has not only helped in saving our time but also it has created new areas of research. With the advent of computers, we have got raft of area to research on. One of the product of such research is Internet. Internet has helped in connecting the world and has allowed us to get any information within seconds which makes our life easier and happier rather than complicated.
Technology has also helped us predict impending doom. Global warming is a prime example of such case. Technology has sensed the quick rate of depletion of ozone layer, which is ultimately responsible for global warming. It has also helped in enumerating the instruments that cause this. This quick move has allowed us to refrain ourselves from using such devices.
By the aforementioned examples, we can conclude that instead of complicating our lives, technology has, in fact, made our lives easier and happier to live.
The argument is wrong for numerous reasons. The argument is based on the assumption that children from Jalikistan are becoming obese because of newly injected hormones in cows to produce more milk and not any other product, rendering its explanation, that the hormore is reponsible for obesity, invalid.
The author is overlooking the fact that there may be several other products responsible for causing obesity. For example, there may be an increase in the consumption of certain tea leaves which might not be healthy. The tea leaves might be affecting children, and not adults, because of their weak immune system.
Although author clearly states that the children who are lactose intolerant do not show the surge in such cases, yet there may be many reasons to explain this as well. First, Lactose intolerant children might not be having tea, or the other product causing the disease, in the quantity other children do because of their weak immune system. Second, the author states that there has not been the same amount of increase in obese case among lactose intolerant group, however, this doesn’t mean that there have been no cases at all. The author needs to present the facts of how many children have shown the signs to be affected in order to correctly rule out the case.
Figure of 200% is also not reliable or representative. What if, the problem of obesity would have always been there in Jalikistan, and is quite prominent now because of the increase in population? Hence, along with the fact that obese children cases have increased by 200% we also need to know the increase in population of Jalikistan.
Hence, from the aforementioned arguments it is invalid to assert that hormone designed to produce more milk is responsible for causing obesity in children. Author should present more evidence to corroborate the fact.
Many people contend that a country’s history should not be judged by studying nation’s prominent leaders, rather, it should the the welfare of entire population through which viewpoint must be made. At first blush it seems logical to infer the aforementioned claim from the reason provided is correct, however, a closer look reveals that it is the nation’s prominent historical leaders who paved a path which the people followed to ultimately experience welfare or decimation. Following examples will support the reason.
Mahatma Gandhi, India’s father of the nation, and many other freedom fighters contributed significantly towards the freedom of the nation. Consequently, the people of India have been living independently since past 60 years. If we begin to study the history of India, with a view to study the welfare of the people, we have to first study people like the aforementioned freedom fighters to gain an insight of what was exactly happening in the nation and what were their exact demands. This small bunch of people inspired people and lead them to create history. Hence, history will be incomplete if we do not the leaders who have helped to create it.
We have discussed about leaders who brought positive change in a nation. Let us now discuss about leaders like Osama Bin Laden, terrorist leader in Afghanistan, who turned nations to belligerants. Similar to the case discussed above, the terrorist leader not only created chaos all over the world, but also lead the population of his own country experience nothing but travail. Hence, the history of Afghanistan is what the leader wanted.
We can also argue that Nations which are deprived of leaders have also not shown much growth and do not have much of historical background. For example, countries like greenland do have population but lacks world known leaders, hence, also lacks rich history as that of America or China.
Leaders tend to inspire people to live life in a certain way. The people follow them and end up making histories. Hence, for studying the society’s viewpoint in distant past we should study the leaders first.