Some people think that robots are very important to human’s future development. Others think that they are dangerous and have negative effects on society. Discuss both opinions and give your personal view.

 

Some people think that robots are very important to human’s future development. Others think that they are dangerous and have negative effects on society. Discuss both opinions and give your personal view.

• ROBOTS ARE BENEFICIAL FOR HUMAN’S FUTURE  DEVELOPMENT 

  • These  machines can guarantee a long term solution for complex becoming work processes that need speed 

  • Can perform repetitive tasks consistent 

  • precision and uniformity: humans will need the work to be more precise since every sphere of human life is likely to become more sophisticated 

  • Safety is what these machines can render to humans since these devices can even work in hazardous and those environment  which are beyond the reach of mankind

  • economical: these machines are capable of working without needing extra overheads 

 

They are dangerous and have negative effects on society. 

• Unemployment. These are likely to cause large joblessness  
• Loss of skills: humans will forget their skills and abilities 
• They depend on an external power source and if that does not become available due to some reasons, humans will become helpless 
• These machines can be easily manipulated and hacked and used against humans 

 

Despite robots  ushering in an era of ease and promises for the furtherance of progress in all spheres of life, there is skepticism about the impact of these machines since certain perceptions enumerate the hazards these could present to society.

There is optimism across several sections: artificial intelligence can afford unprecedented speed and economy, and  the way the things are progressing, it is quite evident that future progress will depend on how quickly jobs in manufacturing environment or in services can be performed  economically. These  devices  are capable of working tirelessly  without needing breaks and also without financial stimulants. This aspect can ensure optimal productivity in all sectors.

Moreover, undeniably, precision is something one cannot discount while using this apparatus. The future will depend on how precisely and meticulously various undertakings can be negotiated. For instance, producing equipment, even household,  for use by humans that is likely to become  more sophisticated, owing to its compact size, will be an onerous task for human workers; however, the automated machines will be able to perform those flawlessly.

Nevertheless, those cynical fear that this will jeopardize human life, and misery will descent in the form of rampant unemployment, especially in the skilled trades, causing widespread poverty and economic pressure of the state, for it will have to support jobless demographics. Additionally, the attenuation of skills – even the basic - is another predicament which is potential outcome, something mankind ill-afford. With these machines dominating every sphere of work, people will find it hard to retain their knowhow.

Overall, although one can hardly deny the impediments these computerized gadgets are going to erect, the fears are inappropriate since progress cannot be halted on such pretext. Nonetheless, prudent steps will need to taken to offset the unfavorable effects of such evolution.

Some people prefer to relax by doing physical activities, while others choose mental activities such as crossword puzzles or chess. Discuss both views and include your own opinion.

Some people prefer to relax by doing physical activities, while others choose mental activities such as crossword puzzles or chess. Discuss both views and include your own opinion.  

     

  

When it comes to rejuvenating oneself, people have disparate choices. Some opt for exercise, or sports, others are inclined to undertaking such endeavors that challenge their intellect. Both the partisan fractions cite plausible reasons in support of their view.

Many are in favor of engaging in something that predisposes them to physical exertion. This view is based on the certain revelations made public by health researchers who profess about the  benefits of engaging in exercise or sport to unwind, that can be derived in the form of metabolizing stress hormones and making an individual feel fresh. Modern lifestyle entails grueling work routines that result in accumulation of stress, which can be disposed only by involving oneself in some kind of exercise. 

Similarly, in contemporary times, people have become enlightened about their wellbeing, and since most of their day, at work or at home, is influenced by sedentary lifestyle and faulty food habits, they attempt participation in physical activities, in any form. This can help them not only burn extra calories they consume by indulging in gluttony but also keep their mental and physical health sound, and evade the diseases and disorders caused by modern lifestyles.  

However, some have a penchant for occupying themselves with intellectual activities, like playing chess or solving crosswords,  during their leisure time. This propensity is commonly observed among those who either have little interest in visiting a gym, or are engaged in work that drains them of energy. Choosing such pastimes helps stimulate their intellect, and also render them relief in  the comfort of their homes.

Overall, I opine both the methods, physical or mental activities,  have their distinct advantages and help individuals fulfill the primary objective of earning a healthy distraction from their stressful engagements in professional, social and personal realms.

Because many children are not able to learn foreign languages, schools should not force them to learn foreign languages. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Because many children are not able to learn foreign languages, schools should not force them to learn foreign languages.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The rationale behind making foreign languages an integral part of academic curriculum is vehemently questioned by many since they feel such learning is challenging for several pupils. This perception and fear can be  allayed easily on various grounds. 

The sceptics to foreign language study at the formal tuition are often found arguing that such an endeavor is not the forte of every young mind since most young learners hail from either extremely conservative social backgrounds, or societies which have little exposure to aliens, which makes it hard for children to apply the linguistic skills garnered at the school in their surroundings, and thus, to retain whatever they have learnt in their language classes. 

Nevertheless, grasping the know-how of an alien tongue is as critical as studying other academic subjects in the highly globalized world of today. The speed with which the political, cultural and ethnic boundaries are blurring in the contemporary era, the time is not far when the citizens of the global village will be found interacting with one another more actively, and linguistic barriers could inhibit social, cultural and professional progress. Therefore, schools should don the mantle of training the future global citizens right from a young age. 

 

Moreover, evading such learning on the pretext of it being an uphill task, is an unconvincing assumption. Every academic realm presents distinct challenges, and young curious minds are able to surmount those eventually. Likewise, language learning can also progress in a similar fashion and all excuses can be overlooked. Various scientific studies have also proven that youngsters can absorb multiple languages effortlessly. 

Overall, despite resentment among several sections, pupils should be  taught additional languages compulsorily since this would benefit youngsters humongously in multiple domains in the long run. 

 

Some people believe that women should be treated as equal to men when applying for a job with the police or the military. Others think women are less suitable for this kind of job. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

 Some people believe that women should be treated as equal to men when applying for a job with the police or the military. Others think women are less suitable for this kind of job.  Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The great public discourse of contemporary times is aligned with the issue whether women should be afforded equal opportunities in armed forces or not. While some render/lend their full-fledged support to this proposal, others think differently.

To start with, a large section of liberal school of thought rallies vehemently behind this idea. Their opinion is founded on the historical facts which clearly highlight the ability of the women to excel in combat roles. In the past too women did not only fight actively but also led the armies to the war. For instance, the Queen of Jhansi and Joan of Arc, this makes it imperative to do justice to this gender in contemporary times too.

Moreover, women can also be seen performing adventure sports and other daring activities that challenge mental and physical endurance. This can corroborate by citing a study that was carried out over a 5 years period and evaluated merely 600 locations across the world to gauge the gender participation in various risky sports. It was found that more than 40 percent participants in such endeavours were females who had no qualms (regret/doubt) about it and were instead inclined to attempt these again. This strongly justifies the reason why women need to be allowed to work in an active role in armed forces and law enforcement.

However, conservatives are up in arms against such a suggestion. They draw their inspiration from a highly biased belief that women lack physical robustness in mental resilience to handle strenuous  jobs, and only men are compatible for such tasks. Nevertheless, this notion can be duly challenged and rejected overrule due to absence of any credible proof.

Overall, I strongly feel that the regressive point of view holds little substance, especially in concurrent times when the society is witnessing an equal participation from both the genders. Females deserve the privilege to serve in occupations of strategic importance because of their ability to handle challenging duties.     

Some people feel that entertainers (e.g. film starts, pop musicians or sports stars) are paid too much money. Do you agree or disagree? Which other types of job should be highly paid?

 Some people feel that entertainers (e.g. film starts, pop musicians or sports stars) are paid too much money. Do you agree or disagree?

Which other types of job should be highly paid?

The great public discourse of the concurrent times is aligned with the issue of compensation of those engaged in various fields that entertain masses such as films, music, and sports. Many feel that such earnings are way too high. This lobby also suggests certain occupations that should be compensated better.  

To start with, a lobby lends it support to astronomical receipts of movie stars, positions and players, to name a few since these individuals are engaged in industries such as films, music, drama, sports and so on, that are known for their volatile nature and continuous success is not guaranteed; people engaged in these occupations are exposed to the risk of going out of demand or out of passion which will make them vulnerable to financial crunch and crisis. Therefore, whatever these people earned is just enough for their survival.

However, critics feel it is rightful to challenge these salaries, for those acting, playing music, or practicing sports are merely educating people, and are hardly doing anything for the betterment of society.  This section elegies that these popular personalities instead tend to inspire young generation to abandon their occupations to pursue their dreams in the entertainment industry, depriving the society of useful skills that could contribute to development. 

This school of thought suggests certain professions that need to be paid highly such as medicines, engineering, teaching, and research, to name a few as people involved in these fields work day and night to drive the development and progress of society. And ensure a better future for the upcoming generation. 

Overall, I strongly feel that compensation of entertainers is not too high or undeserving since they are faced with great uncertainties, but certain other profession must be better compensated.

Creative artists should always be given the freedom to express their own ideas (in words, pictures, music or film) in whichever way they wish. There should be no government restrictions on what they do. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 Creative artists should always be given the freedom to express their own ideas (in words, pictures, music or film) in whichever way they wish. There should be no government restrictions on what they do. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

• 
  
  

  
  

Agree? Why? 

• They represent the culture and tradition and help perpetuate these  further: this has been historically proven 

• Their work reflects the condition of society 

• These people have a pivotal in bringing around revolutions

Disagree? Why? 

• Some people have the habit of abusing their creative freedom and tend to create controversial work which can upset certain sections of society and cause unrest 

• Nowadays, many have started harboring commercial interests and tend to create for character assassination of certain key public figures 

The great public discourse of current times is aligned with the issue of whether people blessed with creativity should be bound by certain restrictions or not. Some are in favor of rendering complete independence, others are up in arms against this motion.

When it comes to discussing affording freedom to those engaged in creative arts,  there is a general perception that it should be accorded unconditionally. However, there are views that stand against this notion.        

There is an overwhelming support for the notion of rendering absolute liberty to the exponents of various art forms. This opinion is founded on the historical facts that reflect that it is these people who have helped perpetuate traditions and culture. The creative expression that evolved in the past and that enjoyed complete freedom has made it possible for the current generations to know about their heritage and also how their ancestors survived and thrived. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the current generation to let people engaged in various manifestations of art, to freely churn out their imaginative masterpieces so that the descendants can also be informed about today.  

However, there is a view that is based on the current socio-political situation across the world where the world is experiencing a volatile environment, and a little instigation can result in social unrest since some work might not go down well with certain communities and they may react violently. Therefore, there is a need to install some limits to ensure that creativity does not evoke controversies and arouse emotions. There have been several incidents in recent years where some societies resorted to violent protests due to some paintings, cartoons and movies, which resulted in loss of man and material.      

Overall, I partially concur with this proposal: even though affording freedom to those working in various realms of artistic domains is justified, there need to be some monitoring and regulation to ensure that their work does not bring the public in harm’s way.   

Computers today can quickly and accurately translate languages, therefore, it is a waste of time to learn a foreign language. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 

Computers today can quickly and accurately translate languages, therefore, it is a waste of time to learn a foreign language.

To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The advent of computer based translators has inspired many to suggest that the days of languages are numbered, having said that, many out rightly dismiss this opinion, and suggest that machines can never supersede humans in this area.  Thus, language courses shall never cease to exist.  

Many, especially the tech savvy  individuals are quite upbeat about the possibilities brought forth by software driven language interpreters: these applications render speed to the language conversion process and can convert any amount of text, even huge volumes of books into any desired language in a matter of a few minutes. In contrast, one has to first study alien tongues and then translate, it will take them at least a few months if not years to gain sufficient capabilities to perform such tasks. 

Moreover, this lobby also cites big money savings one is able to make when they use a computer based translator application instead of joining a foreign language course. The intelligent interpreter facilities offered by software are quite inexpensive and cost barely anything, except nominal subscriptions, when compared to  exorbitant fees and the study material required to undertake and support a foreign language study.

However, others ridicule the former opinion by suggesting that language is the human forte and can never be replaced by the technology. Every tongue and dialect used by humans is driven and influenced by emotions which results in a great variation in the meanings of the same word, phrase and expression: since machines cannot comprehend the same, humans have to rely on their own propensity.

Overall, despite optimism about translation applications, the idea fails to comfort me that humans can forgo alien language studies, machines can sparingly achieve that perfection. Hence, there is hardly anything to agree with in this statement.