Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 24

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. ---------------------------------------------------

It is human nature to look for shortcuts. When we have an easier way of doing something, we do not take the longer path in order to avoid trouble. As the world is advancing, it is making our lives easier. Many problems faced in the olden times which required a lot of physical as well as mental effort are now only a matter of a few clicks. Since technology has entered every home, office and school, there is an increased tendency to depend on it to get our jobs done. I agree with the fact that human dependence on technology has increased. This points at the suggestion made in the statement that the ability of humans to think for themselves will deteriorate in time. However, if this is realized at the correct time, such a situation can be avoided. Moreover, this may not be the case with every individual. The advancement of technology itself is a wonder of the human mind. It is only when great thinkers and learned people think on an individual level that development becomes possible. Due to the advancement of technology we have now forgotten the pains taken to accomplish a task as was done before any development in that particular field was made. It is only when we are faced with problems that we make efforts to find a solution to it. We can find examples of this in history where it was only when people faced the problem of traveling long distances on foot and carrying heavy loads that made them think of a solution. This resulted in the invention of the wheel that made their work easier and less burdening. On the other hand, when there is no problem faced by us, we don't find the need to look for solutions and advancements. The power of a human brain is unfathomable. However, it is important to keep the brain working by performing mental exercises. There were times when people relied on their mental abilities to perform calculations. This kept them mentally active and alert. However, as calculators came into existence, people started performing even simple calculations on the calculator. This is the reason why we are not able to solve a mathematical problem orally while our fathers, who did not use calculators, are still quick to solve the same. This indicates that we started depending upon calculators for every calculation, which made our brains dull and irresponsive to mental calculations. As the computer came into the world, it reduced our mental work even further. If a machine were not used for a long time it would start creaking and eventually stop working. Our brain, like any machinery, needs to be exercised in order to keep it working. Therefore, it is on us to exercise our thinking abilities and keep ourselves active. If we depend too much upon technology and avoid mental exercise, it would definitely deteriorate our thinking abilities. Therefore, along with taking the benefits of technology, we should develop a habit of thinking and solving problems at our own. Students should be encouraged to develop a problem-solving attitude by giving them tasks related to finding solutions. Similarly, we must calculate our monthly budget without any help. Instead of turning to the interiors of our homes and offices in the hot weather, we should think about the possible

solutions to reduce global warming. Likewise, it is only when we give a personal thought on how to save fuel that practical solutions like sharing vehicles to schools and offices can be sought. As I have discussed earlier, technology is a creation of the human mind. This development is possible only because of the advancement of human thinking abilities. However, we must make it a point that we do not become a slave to the advancement of technology and retain our thinking abilities, which would keep the development going.

To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities

Major cities are heart of a country. Traditions and lifestyle of these cities are representative of the nation. They are important centers for entertainment, trade or governance because of this reason focusing of major cities are essential for having a comprehensive picture about a state. To begin with, big cities hold majority of the population and they are representative of their country since they hold many migrants from different part of the state. The people who live in major cities is a mosaic of the society since they continue their traditions and lifestyle when they move to their new dwelling, one can learn almost all aspects of the society by examining the dynamics and lifestyle in these major cities. For example, almost twenty percent of the population of Turkey live stanbul, the most important city in my country. People migrate there from north, east or south of Turkey to find job. In Istanbul there are several regions which are shaped according to the lifestyle of the population who abide in that area. There are centers for people who prefer lifestyle which is similar to the ones in European societies; on the other hand in some parts of the city, people literally forced to live according to the rules of Islam. It resembles Islamic regimes such as Iran or Egypt. This difference in the lifestyles provides a detailed picture of the variety of attitudes and beliefs among the people in my country. Hence, if one wants to have a deep understanding about culture and conflicts among Turkish nation, examining Istanbul is enough for a detailed picture of Turkey. In addition, historical, economical and governance units of a country are collected in major cities; by focusing on these cities, one can full knowledge about all of these aspects. For example, in Turkey Istanbul, Izmir and Ankara are major cities. Istanbul was capital of Ottoman Empire and Byzantine; visiting the historical areas in Istanbul, provide information about the history of Anatolia and the Turks. Izmir is the most important port of Turkey, the agricultural and industrial products of its hinterland are collected and exported to the European countries via that port, and so examining the product portfolio of exported goods gives a comprehensive view about the economic activities that Turkish people engage in. Ankara is the capital of Turkey; hence it is the center where protests and political activities occur. In its main streets or in front of the presidential office there are always people who protests against severe problems of Turkey such as violence against women, economic situation or authoritarian attitude of the government. Finally, some people claim that rural areas are more essential to have deep understanding about a society since the culture and traditions are well preserved in that areas. Although, this statement has some merit, it cannot be accepted as valid. Even though people in major cities follow business rules and

traditions in their jobs, they continue their traditional lifestyle in their homes behind the closed doors. As a result, lifestyle in the major cities is examined, it provides more knowledge than lifestyles in rural areas because lifestyle in major cities include business customs of a country in addition to conventions in the home environment. To sum up, major cities are essential sources of information for a person who want to study and understand the culture of that country. First, they are business centers they attract immigrants from all over the country thus they provide a picture about nation. Second, by focusing on these cities one can gain understanding about the background, economy and problems of that country. Third, these cities are important to understand business traditions of that country as well as customs in the families and neighborhoods. As a result, detailed examination of major cities is enough to gain a perspective about that society.

Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely

to succeed. Proponents of modern education have touted the necessity to help children build their future apart from imparting skill and knowledge. However, a close examination of methods of education in various educational institutes reveal that the latter has been achieved, but the former is yet to be materialized and thus it requires that educational Institutions strive diligently and help students to identify their successful fields.

Todays educational systems have done a commendable job in opening up students to different fields like science, philosophy, literature, arts etc...But mostly, students choose what they perceive better and a field that can assure them a good job with good remuneration. Very few have sought their passion. Let me illustrate this. In todays world of computers and with development of information technology, students pursuing studies in IT field and computers have increased exponentially from those eons ago. These concentrations come up due to their promising factors. But are these fields sought by the students with genuine interest? The consequences being job dissatisfaction, unsuccessful careers, frustration and guilt. Finally are we not compromising on the productivity of the nation?

To avoid the consequences mentioned above, educational institutions have a very important role to play. Academic interests of students of an institution may not be coherent with others. Whilst few have caliber in research , a few might be interested in teaching or engineering. Thus it becomes important to nurture them in the fields those they could excel well. Though it might sound like a colossal venture, these academic shades of differences would be more perspicuous through a small project, a group activity , a simple presentation by students or interacting with the students. Like the classroom session meant to enhance the knowledge of a student, an interactive session could probably dissuade a student from choosing the wrong field.

Besides personal gain, we are obliged to the nation too. The ultimate goal of education is to help students contribute positively to the welfare of people, to the environment and to the world. If educational institutions can help students decide on the fields that they would fare well, imagine the contributions and eventually the success that a nation can achieve in all aspects? For instance the well known and much appreciated scientist Thomas Alva Edison was a school dropout, accused of being addled, he was home schooled. In spite of this he became the great inventor of all times. Similar is the case with Apple CEO, Steve Jobs who was a college dropout. They still came to the horizon with their abilities and persistent hard work. With diligent efforts educational institutions can guide students to the right track - a field that suit the student best, a field that can offer an overall growth. If students are guided properly, an educational institution can mold more scientists, inventors, players, financiers etc...

While now it may be clear that educational institutions have a significant role in dissuading students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. It should also be apparent that the long term benefits would reward the efforts taken. Further, this simple step would help in personal growth of the student and would be beneficent for the nation.

Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could

What catches your attention more - a statistic highlighting the levels of corruption over the past five decades or a sting operation featuring one of the most well-respected ministers of the country taking bribes to direct public funds away from their destined purpose? Scandals - be it political or otherwise, are scandalous -they attract public attention and shed light on problems that the public would otherwise be indifferent to. One could argue that all the scandals that the citizens effectively care about are the juicy tid-bits that one might read on page three. These are primarily concerned with 'private' lives of celebrities and are as germane to the nation's and world's problems as the celebrities themselves. Look at the flip side of the coin - if the intelligent denizens of a city have the predilection to read such pieces of trivia, what would their reaction be if they are presented with scandals which indeed concern the problems of the common man -it would be far from ignorance, I can assure you that. The gossip part of scandals is indeed what appeals to the readers who, then, are inadvertently engrossed and may , in fact, start thinking about its possible implications and repercussions. This interest in scandals is what needs to be capitalized.

To provide some evidence, the Indian subcontinen, known the world over for corruption everbody knew about it for a long but how did it come under the spotlight - 2G spectrum scam, commenwealth games scam - there is an associated scam or scandal with everything the nation organises under the sun. Move to its next-door neighbour, China and the Foxconn scandal - it highlighted the pitiable working conditions that multinational companies like Apple subject its workers to. In fact, the only way disrepute is brought to any major organisation or government , of course, for the better, is through exposing its wrongdoings - which evidently, scandals are more than capable of. Another example could be the demand of Chinese dissendents to move abroad- without the blind activist's Mr. Cheung's fiasco, the world would not have known what goes on within the walls of this forbidden city. To another continent, the mineral-abundant Africa - who would have guessed that the lovely and dazzling tiaras donned by celebrities are infact conflict stones - blood diamonds. Without a scandal involving major diamond companies they plight of civil-war torn African villages would not have seen the light of the day. The media has a very potent role to play in this respect - they bring out the issues plaguing society through these scandals. Only when information about issues are brought to the doorstep of the discerning public, neatly packaged in the from of scandals do they start actually caring about it. Nobody wants to see a four-hour documentary about poaching in the savannahs- actual photographs of Cheetah skins being imported by bigshot companies converting them to fur will prompt the public to address Animal welfare. Scandals are indeed important if we want the uninterested common man to think about the problems of the world.

Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive because it is
primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.

In India, the city of Bangalore - now called Bengaluru - is an apt example to consider in this issue. It has received all the financial support required from the government which has till now conveniently ignored the development of other regions in the state. Within a couple of decades, this city has reached the pinnacle of being the called the Silicon valley of India and is on par in prominence with the metropolitan cities of the country. But it has also reached a point of saturation in terms of the resource consumption - be it land, water or other basic amenities. And the other regions are nowhere up to the standards to share the

burden. This is a classic case of the consequences of concentrating the government aid on a particular city neglecting the progress of other villages, towns or smaller cities. Though the governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support, they must not fail to bring the other cities and towns to the same standards. No doubt the cities are the technological and the financial hubs of the country and their progress is important for the overall growth of the nation as a whole. But one must also ensure the equity in this economic growth. The average income and the standard of living might go up. But, one must make sure that it is not the case of the rich becoming richer and the poor staying the same. Apart for the financial support, what the cities need is a proper enforcement of this aid. In a country like India, close to three-fourths of the regions are still classified under the rural domain. Also the rural areas are the hubs of the diverse set of cultural values that this country is known for. In order to preserve this culture, it is important for these regions to flourish under the country's administration. Not many might know, but many languages in this country have literally gone out of existence because of the large-scale urbanization and because of that many traditional practices have failed to survive. Apart from boosting the economy, it is also important to preserve these traditional values, which this country is actually known for. And also, one must not forget the discontent that might arise within the people if their progress is not kept in mind. People lose faith in the government and this leads to the terrifying consequence of a possible uprising. The Naxalite menace in India is once such revolution that as risen out from the dissatisfaction of the rural people. They are basically tribesmen whose needs have been ignored by the administration in favour of the progress of the major cities and this has forced them to take up the arms against their own government. Such an uprising can be avoided if proper steps are taken at a very early stage to tackle the inequity in resource distribution. To summarize, cities do deserve an adequate attention from their respective governments in terms of monetary grants and the infrastructure required. But not at the cost of the well being of all the people under the governance. Ultimately, it must be the development of the entire nation that must be important and not of a distributed chunk of regions.

A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college.

The children of a nation are its future. Along with becoming independent and successful, they are the ones to carry the responsibility of running the nation as well as developing it in the future. Therefore, it is very important to form a strong base in their formative years so that they are not only successful in the personal front but also turn out to be good citizens. Education plays an important role in forming the basis of a child's future. The curriculum should therefore be carefully chosen to fulfill these requirements. I believe that the curriculum being followed in a nation should be similar but schools should have some freedom to introduce or change it to a certain extent. While the larger part of the curriculum should be decided to remain similar on a national level, it should not be binding schools completely to follow it strictly. Having a uniform curriculum is beneficial in many ways. It determines a standard level which is required by every student to clear before he is able to take another academic step. Each level prepares the student for the next level and this forms a stepwise format of learning. A common curriculum ensures a stable and universal learning pattern. It allows making the curriculum familiar throughout the nation and it becomes easier to refer to it. There are many students who attend more than one school during their education. A common national curriculum is very important for such students who leave one school and join another at a different place. For example, consider the people in a transferable job like the defense. The children of a defense person have to go to different places along with their families. It is evident that they need to change their schools as often as their guardians get transferred to a new place. If there are no guidelines for curriculum given to schools, these children will have to face new and unfamiliar curriculums everywhere they go. This will make it difficult for them to cope up with the requirements of a new curriculum and they will be at a great disadvantage. According to me, a uniform curriculum at all places makes it easier for such people to change schools and adjust in a new environment without hampering their growth. Today is the age of competition. In order to find a place anywhere the students need to compete with each other. Therefore, uniformity is required at some level so that there is fair competition. Generally, students have to face an entrance test at the college level to secure a seat. This entrance test is based on the knowledge acquired by students in their high schools. If there is variation in the curriculum that they have studied, the entrance test will not be made on similar lines for everyone. Hence, it would benefit some students who have studied that curriculum and the other students would be at a loss. There would be no way to judge their capabilities with the same parameters. Hence, it is very important that uniformity be maintained in the curriculum at the school level, and students be able to face fair competition when they leave school. However, I maintain that along with following the national guidelines for curriculum, schools should have certain liberty in choosing the format of courses it offers. Each student is different and so are his abilities. While there are some students who are fast learners, some are average and some are extremely slow. Moreover, the interests of students vary. Keeping in mind the interests of students, the curriculum should be molded so that they retain their interest in studies

altogether. Hence, schools should be allowed a certain amount of discretion in making certain changes according to the needs only for the betterment of all the students. In the end I would I like to conclude that a uniform pattern on the whole is very important at a national level. However, at the same time, schools should not be bound to follow it blindly and should be able to make certain changes that help the students in their stud

Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts.

The term "arts" refers to a broad category of musical, physical, and visual-spatial practices, but in essence it contains the ideas of self-expression, creativity, and freedom. The arts connect cultures when people do not speak the same language, with visual images transcending the boundaries of language. Even within people who speak the language, the arts provide a channel for communicating ideas, emotions, and values in a way that words alone cannot. The arts then, broad as the term is, are an important part of any culture. Therefore some people believe that the government should take an active role in funding the arts so that they can flourish and be available to all people. However, other believe that government funding threaten the very essence of art. My opinion is that though government funding is beneficial rather than harmful to the the field of art. The most beneficial part of government funding would be in art education. Because children contain the future's vision, they need to have an education that develops them not only mentally, but also in their creativity and their ability to connect with others. The arts are the most affordable way to bring children in touch with this ability. The most ideal method would be to provide each child with a wise mentor to help him become enlightened, but as this is not feasible due to the shortage of such ready-to-work mentors and the costs of such a program. The arts, however, allow children to have a medium that helps them develop their skills and learn such things as dedication, practice, craftsmanship, and to experience the pride of presenting their creations. Government funding in this case would help children gain access to art programs. Currently, a rigorous education in the arts is taught only in exclusive private schools, and even public schools have cut the visual arts, physical education, and music from their programs completely due to lack of funding. Government funding of the arts would help bring these programs to a greater number of students instead of to a select few. For people who completely disagree with the notion of government funding, they might argue that art in the past has not been financed by government but by private aristocracy. They might argue that government funding is not necessary - after all, the great pieces of Michaelangelo were by commission and not funded by the government. They might also argue that government funding would limit creativity and self-expression, as the government would have an agenda. However, though many of the famous paintings in history were funded by either individuals or organizations, the act of funding did not limit the quality, creativity, or self-expression of the artists. The Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci did not have any less brilliance or genius due to the fact that it was a commissioned project. Whether this funding is from a private individual or from the government makes little difference. The paintings on the ceilings of the Sistine Chapel were commissioned by the Chuch, which in those times had as much, or even more, authority than our current government. However, though the work was funded, and though there was a very pointed agenda of Christian theology, the work itself is still no less a great artwork than if it were created for the purpose of self-expression. The arts has tied in with its name the ideas of creativity and self-expression, and the notion of government funding, which carries agenda and politics, doesn't tie well with these ideas. However, funding of art works in the past have not diminished their value, and more importantly, government funding is greatly needed in the field of art. The area that needs the most support is art education of students, as this creates the greatest long term benefits for the public.


Other Examples


Arts depict the characteristics of a civilization and society, so, the preservation of all the art forms is of utmost importance. Government can help in preserving the integrity of arts by funding and subsidizing art related works. Arts are mostly non-profitable endeavors. Proper financial support to arts will ensure that, artist are able to develop their artistic skills and they get a proper platform for exhibiting their skills without any hardships. In developing and under-developed countries, the scarcity of financial support hinders the proliferation of arts. The artists are forced to choose alternative career options in which they can afford a standard of living. Such a scenario has a detrimental effect on the arts of a civilization. If the government provides an adequate financial support and encouragement, then the younger generations shall be able to find career options in arts. In most of the countries, museums and art galleries are funded by the government because they are subjects of national importance, likewise a particular skill set which develops an unique art forms such as plays, paintings, or music is of national importance and must be preserved. On the other hand, the government funding of the arts may threaten the integrity of arts, if the funding is prejudiced to some particular fields or subjects of arts. In Soviet Union era, government encouraged only those areas of arts which aligned to their political motives. This biased support led to ignorance of other areas of arts which did not developed in that era. In some countries, a particular forms of drawing or music are banned. So, if the government funding is biased towards different subjects of arts, then the overall development of the arts gets compromised, as the creativity of the artist is limited to produce arts with specific themes. It's the duty of the government to be unbiased towards all forms of arts and contribute to the overall development of arts. Summarizing the topic, government funding of arts is beneficial for the proliferation of arts, as it helps in preserving as well as developing arts. But, it may also affect the development, if government funding is concentrated to particular subjects , rather than overall all development of arts.


Funding for the arts can be a controversial topic when nations now are competing to see which one has the highest math scores, the most technology, and even the best athletes. The arts are an extension of culture however, and should receive the same sort of funding that so many other programs receive. That is not to say that they should be fully funded by the government, but in order to flourish and reach all people, some government support should be available. It is the start up in any business that requires the most capital and the biggest risk. In the same way, new programs require the most at the beginning, but if they are given proper support, they can support themselves with only some contribution needed for maintance. Athletics budgets all over the country vary greatly, but what the best ones (that reach the most people) have in common are not just their ample budgets but their high participation of fans. This participation leads to revenue for the program which it can then turn around and re-invest in itself. In much the same way, the arts need funding to gain exposure so that they have the opportunity to find those same supporters and participants. Even the most talented people need things to accomplish their goals. This can be especially true in the arts. Music requires instruments, art requires supplies, plays require props. While it is possible to do all these things while using borrowed instruments and minimal supplies and props, for a program to truly flourish it needs more than the bare minimum. Through government support these programs are able to provide more for their students and they can reach a wider audience. Once they do that, they are then able to reach out for support on their own and require much less of the program. No program should rely solely on the government. The arts are capable of supporting themselves, but it is much harder than with athletics. While a football team can count on ticket sales throughout their season, most bands hold one to two concerts a year. They may not even charge admission for

these concerts. Government support, once the program is established, can help to supplement what they are not able to make themselves. During high school, our marching band members were required to participate in fundraisers, which were held throughout the year. These fundraisers were used to cover the cost of travel for the band, but were not even enough for that. Without money they recieved from the school system and government programs, they would not have been able to compete, despite being one of the best in the country.

In any fieldbusiness, politics, education, government those in power should step down after five years.

If the surest path to success of any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership, then the regular changing of leaders is essential. The American democracy regularly changes its leaders, limiting by law a president's period in office to a maximum of eight years regardless of personal skill. Some countries, like South Korea, also mandate schools to regularly change their leadership every four to five years, in order to bring new leadership to schools and to prevent them from stagnation. Perhaps taking these sorts of cases into account, the statement above says that not only in the fields of government and education but also in business and politics, leadership should be changed every five years to ensure success. However, this is taking strengths of revitilization through new leadership too far and generalizing the benefits while ignoring the weaknesses of such a system. In some cases, having a mandatory change in leadership every five years can be harmful because revitilization through new leadership is less necessary than having leaders with experience and knowledge of that organization. For example, in the case of the South Korean schools, the government's mandate that no principal or teacher could stay in a school longer than four years has created more instability than good for the teachers and the students. Because the teachers do not spend as much time in one school, they have less of a personal commitment. They have less knowledge and experience of a particular school's students and conditions because they have to constantly move to new schools. Also, in cases where an organization has a strong and capable leader, the organization would suffer by having to replace that leader with another one. For example, Steve Jobs was a capable and innovative CEO of Apple Computers, and did not need or deserve to be replaced by a new CEO in the cause of revitilization for the company. Such a system would have been more harmful than beneficial to his company. However, in other cases, the mandatory change in leadership brings revitilization not only through the introduction of a different style in leadership and new ideas, but also by releasing any stagnation within an organization. In the case of the American government, each president brings a new style of governing the country and dealing with politics, but the continous change in leadership is necessary to prevent the government from falling into self-interested parties. No matter how capable a preceding president is, a new president is necessary to ensure the continuance of a democratic and free system. Though revilization of an organization through leadership is important, especially in the case of government, it would be wrong to mandate it on organizations that do not require it.

Topic: "In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field." Instructions: 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.

When it comes to the issue whether it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being influenced by past achievements, people hold different opinions. Despite the strengtheness of achievement experience, I want to argue that without significant past achievement in one field, people can still achieve splendidly, for the following reasons. First of all, in some fields, creativity occupies more important position than other qualities such as experience. Arts, writing, music composing, all acquire more creativities than experience and mature skills. For example, J.K. Rowling did not achieve anything in writing before she finished her astounding novel, Harry Potter. Vincent Van Gogh could be a worse realistism painter than other painter in his age, however, his creative painting skills in impressionism made him one of the greatest master in fine arts history. Both of them did not achieve anything in their field until their own creativities make them an icon. Furthermore, hiring people from different discipline may bring new thinking and inspire new conception and idea(s?) of a field. Based on this idea, inter-discipline research was popular since last 20 years. In the history of science, many new discoveries were not contributed by the one whos in that field. One case is, once a physicist doing experiment with some cells, he associated what he observe with magnetic field and modify the experiment which improve that one chemical component can kill some cells then discover the first anti-cancer drug. In this case different idea of other field (physics) was imply into cell experiments and finally results in the rug discovery in medicine. Finally, except achievements in the past, potential also play a key role on success. On the other hand, what university teach us should not be knowledge only, but also the way of thinking and learning new skills, as if you consider many people dont make their career as the same as what they major in university after graduation. Therefor it is the ways of speculation, the skills of learning, support university graduated students to achieve in other field. In conclusion, given the discussions about a past achievement within a field may consequently lead to more success, I still believe people who is infamous in one field can achieve high with their creativities, different ways of thinking from other discipline, potential, the skill of learning and thinking, because these factors can also lead to success in one particular field. P.S. On the "Finally" paragrapgh I was planing to give an example about the first female

CEO of ebay, she was a housewife before and after 20 years stay at home she become a CEO (starts as a secretary), however after search information on internet I found my example was wrong, there was no CEO with that housewife experiment....I thought there was one but not the CEO of ebay..so which big IT company hire a female CEO like that? Can anyone tell me whom she was?
Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain

The actions of the humankind during the past few decades, has by far made this time the worst period for our environment. We have polluted the air, the water and the soil, hunted countless animals, destroyed the ecosystem, and made wildlife impossible in many areas of the world. In short, we have ruined the natures hierarchy, and we have done it for one reason: we thought the progress in economy and industry is worth the sacrifice. But there was a point when some people saw that this is a malfunctioning cycle, and needs to be readjusted somewhere - nations should start paying attention to the environment, and since fixing the ruined jungles and forrests and other natural landscapes will probably take hundreds of years, we should take extra care of the remaining parts. Having all this in mind, the statement above is making a good point. Many people, from environmental activists to ordinary people who just care about the nature and wild life, would undoubtedly defend this statement and agree that governments should pass laws to preserve the remaining wilderness by any means possible. They would argue that the earth, the mother nature, has nourished us beyound our expectations, while in return we have torn it apart. Since no other organization would have the power to do so, it would logically be the goverments responsibility to pass laws to preserve the remaining wilderness, before they are occupied and destroyed by factories or incorporations seeking profit. But looking deeper down the statement, there are many things that should be defined before passing such rules. For example, there are for sure countries in africa wich can not provide enough food for their people, and have acres of wilderness areas preserved, b ecause people are unable to use them properly. in this case, there should be groups of experts studying the area, to define the fine line between the areas that should be preserved, and the areas that could be put to use in order to provide peoples basic needs. The other case, are the national

parks, which contrary to public beliefs do have economic gain. So not all economic gains should be considered against preserving the nature. So, although I believe that nature should be preserved from those who plan to destroy it for economic gain, I think there are expectations to add to the above statement. While the nature should be preserved natural, we should understand that the people of today should be respected as much as the people of tomorrow. Environmental mottos and quotes sound very pleasing when they preach about keeping the nature for the future generations, but they largely forget that we are not providing enough food for the present population. Lets preserve the natural wilderness areas, but lets do it correctly.

People's behavior is largely determined by forces not of their own making Behavior is an important characteristic of any human.Behavior of a person determines his value in the society.It derived from various factor like,society,country etc.But all of these factors are only deriving force ,but final decision depends upon us.So i will say that People's behavior is largely determined by their own making. One of the driving force in the determination of people's behavior is country law and regulations.For example,suppose one person who is living in a country where government laws about throwing garbage in public is very strict.So due to strict rule , it might be possible that he will follow the cleaning rule.But suppose he is migrated to some other country where law about cleanliness is not strict.So certainly he will not care about cleanliness in that country because it was not in his nature.He was only doing forcefully.Another example, we can consider the situation of Indian independence fight.We can categories people in two type.One who was with british people and others who were fighting for independence.Both of them were from same Indian culture but their behaviour was different. Second driving force in the determination of people's behavior is society.We can see that every person's behaviour is not same although they are living in the same society.Generally, even in same family every member does not possess same behaviour.For example, suppose in one family parents are doctors and very much interested in social service.Their children will growup in that kind of environment. But we can not say that their children will follow their path.Parents

can only motivate them to do particular thing but it will entirely depend upon their children whether they will follow or not.For example, parents of Mahatma Gandhi forced him to eat vegetarian food.Inspite of this Mahatma Gandhi had tried non vegeterain food but after some time he realized by his own to abstinent from non vegetarian food. To conclude, I would say that People's behavior can be influenced by various other factors but it will solely depends upon him to follow them or not.above examples is clearly showing that how certain situation can influence people's behavior and how they can respond to them.Outside factor only can give particular guidance , decision making power lies in ourself.

Governments should offer a free university education to any student who has been admitted to a university but who cannot afford the tuition.

The recommendation that the government of a country should offer free university education to students who have secured admission but cannot afford the tuition fee, is indeed a noble one. By offering such a waiver, students belonging to all economic strata would be encouraged to pursue their dreams, unfettered by financial constraints. An ideal society is one where equal opportunities are given to all irrespective of gender, race, caste, creed or financial status. The above mentioned policy would play an important role in achieving the same. To state an example, a hardworking and capable student belonging to a economically backward family, will be forced to give up his dreams due to inability to afford the expenses involved. The country, thereby, looses a vauble asset. If the student had been able to pursue his dreams he/she would have served the society as a doctor. Therefore, offering free education to capable students who are not able to afford it, is merely an investment that the government is making to build the society of the future. Also, this burden of affordability would be lifted off the shoulders of youngters previously constrainted by monetary reasons. This would enable them to concentrate on their academics, perform to their potential and follow their dream. Human resources are considered the most valuble resources that any country pocesses and shapes the economy of the country. The

mentioned policy will prove to be an effective tool to extract the talent of the nation and benefit the generations to come. Additionally, offering free education to the deserving but downtrodden students would help them secure jobs that are well paying, thereby increasing the income of their family. A child from a family of daily wage workers, if offered such opportunities might study and become an engineer or lawyer, and earn many times the money that his/her parents ever earned. This could help in gradually bridging the gap between the rich and the poor in the society. In summary, offering free education to the deserving is a policy that will prove to be beneficial to both the students and the society at large. All countries should adopt this policy as a measure towards a brighter future.

Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study.

In 21st century successful person means multitalented, multifunctional person. This means that you should have knowledge of other fields outside your main area. University is the place where we all get knowledge.So,due to demand of multitalented person university should require every student to take variety of courses outside the field of study. Nowadays, engineering is one the demanding field of study and it has many branches example - Civil Engineering, Electrical engineering, Mechanical engineering etc.Suppose a student of electrical engineering who only studied electrical engineering subject in university. But when he will join industry then he has to consider a lot of other factors like optimum cost, environmental impact etc.However he only studied electrical engineering during university time. He will not be able to handle effects of other factors. But if he had studied some financial and environmental courses then he could have done this task effectively. One of the most important benefits of knowledge of other field is multiple options for higher education. Sometime we see that after opting particular field of study student interest got changed and in future he decides to pursue career in different field that time it will be beneficial for him to knowledge of some other subjects. Suppose one person who has done bachelors in

engineering but in future he wants to do MBA.So it will be beneficial for him to have knowledge of financial and management subjects. Besides above benefits we can also get social benefits. I think that attending classes in various subjects, participating in group projects and team work, can help a student to establish relation with people of different backgrounds and interests. These relationships can be helpful in future professional career. To conclude, I would say that due to demand of multitalented person in industry, for better and broad future prospects of student and expansion of social circle. Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study. It will help to increase productivity in industry consequently it will help in the development of society and country.
Educational institutions should actively encourage their students to choose fields of study that will prepare them for lucrative careers

Usually, after school, especially the university, most of the people will step into the society to find a job. Education they have received sometimes can be a decisive factor on whether they can find a lucrative job and promote their status in society or not. For this reason, there is always a debate about whether students should be encouraged to select the study fields which can best serve to their future careers. As far as I am concerned, education, of university or college especially, should be comprehensive. Overly underlining on which side will result to disadvantages. Admittedly, education of university can be a turning point to most of the students. The fair chance that education endows students can help them step out of their limited background and moves toward success on their bare hands. Out of the pragmatic concerns, both educators and students sometimes may prefer the majors which seem to have the most potential career opportunity in the near future. Under the severely financial condition, students nowadays carry much heavier burden then before. It is so imperative that they need a fair job to support their living. However, taking college education based merely on this, whether they will finally realize their initial target is still questionable. The reason is that this is an instant changing society with the

progress of globalization which means students need to be adaptive and well-rounded that will not be easily left behind. As a phase of enlightened and preparatory, the responsibility of university should be capable of providing a wide range of choices that support students personally, academically and also socially instead of focusing on specific career skills training which is the aim of technical school. To educators, they should foresee the interrelationship among study fields and how this works in the future society to encourage their students make smarter choices in a long run instead of short-sighted ones. Like interdiscipline, means courses backing up each other and its wider range knowledge can be advantage to lead to breakthroughs in some vocation. For instance, neuromarketing, a new study field based on psychology and marketing theories, assisting company target its potential customers more accurately, has become a welcome trend for students who tend to be involved in business. Furthermore, talents and interests should be also taken into account when the educators give their suggestions to students on their study planning. Interest is always called "the best guider" which impels students' intrinsic motivation to constant craving for their expecting goals. Meanwhile, students' personal talents can be splendid additive on their study field, as well as their interests. Binding with these two factors, education will work to its extreme extend and students will become the direct beneficiaries. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, although he did not finish his university education, he still exemplified the miracle of the combination of education, talents and interests. He utilizes this strength to start a revolution to transform the conventional mode of communication among people worldwide which also brings to him billions of dollars and fame. It is Zuckerberg's talent and interest decide his career and even create a vocational field, not the career trends confines his destination. Therefore, the educators may suggest students to think over their hidden motivation and help them keep proactive on future planning. To sum up, education is to prepare students in a well-rounded range. Being pragmatic for the future career's concern should not be blamed, however, the educators must clear their mind on what is education and what is the thing that is most essential that students need for a better future.

Some people believe that in order to be effective, political leaders must yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise. Others believe that the most essential quality of an effective leader is the ability to remain consistently committed to particular principles and objectives

Political leaders are those who lead the society. They must have well-defined principles and objectives in order to support their stand. Their objectives must be concerned towards the welfare of the people. If they happen to compromise on their belief based on public opinion, then it will only lead to confusion on the part of their credibility. There are many examples in realtime to illustrate that political leaders who have been stubborn in their opinion are remembered for a long time in the history. First of all, political leaders who adhere to a cause are venerated by the people and they become the cynosure. They are deemed as heroes by the people who in many ways try to emulate their behavior and consider them as their role models. Therefore, stricking to a particular cause often gains acclaim for the political leaders and they become icons in due course of time. For example, Mahatma Gandhi who vouched for independence through nonviolence, amidst lot of protests, is remembered even today by millions of Indians. This is solely because, Mahatma Gandhi has sticked to his belief throughout his lifetime and has achieved success too. Secondly, political leaders who never comprise on the principles are considered to be credible and they can be trusted to eradicate the miseries of the people. Whereas if a political leader happens to heed to the desires of the people, then he will least likely be considered as an exemplary person; his morality will be doubted and ultimately he will turn out to be the most hated person in the society. Hence trust can be established in a leader, only when he moves according to the established principles and rarely does change them. For instance, Abraham Lincoln is considered to be an Africans because he struggled a lot in rescuing the Africans from the clutches of slavery. Had he compromised and discontinued his struggle, neither would Africans have achieved independence nor would Abraham Lincoln have created a mark in the history. Finally, a leader is shaped up by his principles and objectives. At any point of time, if he changes his beliefs, then it will mar his position in the society and create chaos because people will not be able to discern his real character. For instance, Mahatma Gandhi can be rendered as the "Symbol of Peace" - because in no case, did he resort to violence; Hilter who promoted

Nazism and Mussolini who promoted Fascism can be regarded as the great leaders who "achieved success by struggling through violence"; the current President of India Dr.Manmohan Singh can be regarded as the "best economist cum politician" because he is always punctilious in making economic decisions in Political matters. Thus each and every leader is identified uniquely by their opinions and the principles that they adhere to. Consequently, a political leader creates an 'idiosyncracy' for himself and marches towards the path of success. Though consistency in sticking to principles and objectives is required, some may argue that, in exigent cases where no other alternatives exist, we may have to change the principles so as to suit the needs of the current population. It is true to a certain extent that, there is absolutely no use of keeping a principle which no longer does hold valid. As times are changing, the principles need to be changed. But they must not occur at the expense of people's suggestions. An effective leader is one who considers multiple points of view regarding a politcy change, analyses their pros and cons, and finally arrives at a decision on whether to really manipulate the existing laws. For instance, an Indian rule states that "Child labor is defined as employing the children whose age is below 14 years"; But now, the trends have changed and everyone need to have education atleast until 16 to 18 years of age. Hence, the political leader can take steps to accurately set the standards for the new definition of child labor. All in all, an effective leader in any society is identified by his commitments towards principles and objectives; it creates a clear picture of the leader and engenders trust on him in the minds of the people. He who stubbornly adheres to his belief is sure to create indelible impressions in the annals of the nation's history. Though, the leaders can afford to change the principles sometimes, it must never go against his established motives that defines his character. Therefore, great political leaders are always those who have established set of opinions.

Formal education tends to restrain our minds and spirits rather than set them free
The author claims that education tends to restrain our minds. Although academics certainly restrain us in some respects, I would argue that it does not restrain our creativity. Indeed, education creates the foundation for authentic creativity.

For most of who ever received a formal education, there must be at least one class where we sat in the classroom, mind wandering off to a distant universe, before jerked back by the droning of the teacher, or being reminded about algebra, when happily drawing on a scrap piece of paper. These instances could make us feel that education is limiting the imagination. However, this is simply not the case. Without an education, what ideas we have would be prone to wild imaginations, more often impractical and nave than useful. As Confucius once said Learning without think is labor lost, thinking without learning is perilous this is similar to the saying a little knowledge is dangerous. We wouldnt actually listen to a child, or any untrained professional for that matter, giving us new techniques of how to perform brain surgerywe would want top of the line professionals. It is true that the child could come up with brilliant ideas ignored by professionals, but more often than not, it would just be ideas ignored by professionals. A formal education doesnt actually limit our minds and spirits, but rather, provides the fundamental basis for it to be free. Not unlike the string that tethers a kite to the ground, without it, the kite would definitely fall to the ground. True, we hear fantastic stories about many uneducated individuals triumphing in individual fields, unrestrained from traditional views; however, these represent only a small fraction of the uneducated population. In the course of history, most of our revolution-bringing-innovations are still contributed by those with a formal training in their respective fields.

The well-being of a society is enhanced when many of its people question authority."

We all live in a society where the authority to run the society is given to some capable hands. It is impossible for all of us to have the authority that is why some representatives chosen by us are given authority to run the social system for us. These people help us to create a better environment for our living. We as citizens have all the rights to question their authority. If we think that certain things are not happening as they should be happening we can question the authority. Although it is the prime responsibility of the people who are given the responsibility to provide us with all the comforts but if we question their authority then these people become more prompt and it certainly enhances the well-being of the society. If we are denied the right to question then this social system would be like monarchy where nobody can question the authority. Therefore, I believe that if we keep exercising our right of questioning the authority it would make the authorities provide us with better facilities.

If a person is not answerable to anybody then in spite of his sincerity he might be negligent in performing his duties. On the contrary if a person is aware of the fact that he is answerable to the public for what ever he does for the society, he would make sure that everything is done properly. Authority and responsibility are the different sides of the same coin. They appear to be different but they are integral parts of each other. Therefore, a person who is given authority has to take the responsibility. It was in the past when there was authoritarian rule like the one of Adolph Hitler but soon people realized the importance of being free and slowly all such practices came to an end. In the present day scenario people are more educated and thus more aware of their rights and they want to question if they are deprived of their rights. The right to question has brought revolution and people have become stronger. Now nobody can make a fool out of them as they know what their rights are. Although it is the responsibility of the authorities to be answerable to the public but that certainly does not mean that public interferes in all the matters. There are some matters where public interference can not be allowed. There are some decisions that are taken in emergency which are for the betterment of the society and under such circumstances authorities are not answerable to public. If there is too much interference from the society then there can also be delay in important decision making. Such decisions which need immediate attention will take long if there is public intervention. Therefore, public should question the authorities but public should not prove to be a hindrance in decision making by the authorities. Public should participate but not become an obstacle for the government.
Governments should focus on solving the immediate problems of today rather than on trying to solve the anticipated problems of the future

Governments have ineluctable responsibility to solve problems of citizen. It is important for government is to solve current problems but they should also focus on solution of anticipated problems. If we consider current situation of anticipated problems like global warming, pollution, natural disasters ( Earthquake ,Flood, Tsunami etc.) then we can definitely say that government should pay more attention on trying to solve the anticipated problems of future. These are the important issue related to the future existence of world. Nowadays we are not facing that much adverse effects of global warming but meantime we are also aware of the problems of global warming which will be faced by our future generations. Due to global warming earth atmosphere temperature is increasing consequently poles ices are melting and mean sea level is increasing. If mean sea level will constantly increase then time will come in near future that our earth will sink in the oceans. So, it is an anticipated problem but i have explained about the adverse effect of global warming. To avoid this problem government should pay attention to reduce global warming effect by implementing strict laws

about pollution, forest cutting, etc. If now, governments will not focus on these problems then it will get worse and will become intractable. Natural disasters are also an anticipated problems and it can destroy the whole world in very less time. So, government should be always prepared to face natural disasters like, earthquake, tsunami, flood etc. It is also not a current problem but we cannot avoid these anticipated problems. For example we can see that how disasters was 2001 Tsunami in Southeast Asia and 2010 earthquake in Japan. One of the important reasons of focusing on future problem is limited amount of natural resources. We know that natural resources are limited and time will come in the near future that all of our natural resources will become vanished. So, to avoid this situation government should focus on to develop other options so that use of natural resources can be minimized. In sum, I would say that although governments have many current problems but above mentioned future problems are more critical so government should focus on anticipated problems. These problems can affect the existence of human. For future generation, one of our main responsibilities is to give them a better world.

Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places

A society can be most appropriately understood and judged from its law, order, and people. Laws, rituals, customs are a face for the society, which represent it in front of the entire world. They mirror the values and sense of thought, of the people it represents. A welldisciplined society is one where law and Order are strictly observed and obeyed. Laws are made to serve the social responsibilities. They are made by the people, for the people and it is of the people. They are entirely based on the needs and wants of the society. A very important question arises that, with the changing time, circumstances and change of places, does the law system also deserve a change? Let's first talk about some very basic laws we follow in family. When we are kids, we are knowingly kept aloof of the adult talks, but as we grow, even this rule modifies. Parents who use to be very hesitant while sharing some mature topics are now friends and and the conversation between parents and their kids is more congenial and candid. Why? Because, the time and circumstances have

changed. So the law also has to be changed. Few years back, in Indian judiciary system there was no rule for witness protection. Once, during a trial, where the victim was shot dead, the prime witnesses were influenced and threatened by the culprit, who misused his power and money. The witnesses out of fear, changed their statements in court and turned hostile. Because of this, the culprit was announced as innocent and set free. Afterwards, media brought back the attention of entire nation, and the whole judiciary system, that our law needs amendment. This law, which was drafted way back after the independence, is in a serious need of change, because the time has changed, circumstances have change, and more over the society has changes. Finally, the law was amended and the culprit was punished. Had been the law so rigid or fixed, which would have led to a straight disposal of any proposed change, the culprit would never have been behind the bars. Child marriages were a common practice in early Indian society. The girls and boys were married at a very young age. This had very serious implications, as early motherhood for girls, less options for education for girls. As the sun education started rising, the darkness of ignorance started fleeing away. Society was undergoing a change. Change in time, places and more over circumstances. The need for imposing a ban over this wrong practice was felt by all and thus child marriages were banned in free India. This could never have been possible if the judiciary system was not flexible enough to incorporate changes. On the contrary, also the law should not be flexible enough that anyone could tamper, mold and use it according to his/her convenience. Any change in the law proposed, should undergo a strict scrutiny, intelligent evaluation, rigorous testing and perfect formulation. Otherwise, the effectiveness of the law may get hampered, and also the sense of obedience of the citizens towards the law might get diminish. Law are made to restore equity, peace, and sense of freedom amongst the society. With such a dynamically changing world, the laws should also be susceptible to change of circumstances, places and times. A law of today ensuring citizen safety may not be fit for ensuring citizen safety few years from now. At such point of time, it would be wise enough to modify that law. Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and

supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position. Scientific research and development help contribute to nations development and to help man kind. But several researches in the past have proved devastating. I agree with the authors statement that government should place restriction on research and development. Restriction should be laid upon researchs which have deleterious effect on nature and human. In the early 17th and 18th century, several diseases would go undetected and without cure. People during that era thought diseases were a curse or its punishment from god. Black plaque in England during the 16th century exemplifies how disease would result into many people dieing. But nowadays plaques have practically vanished not to say that viral infections like H1N1 still exists. If it wasn't for the research scholar, these plagues would have killed thousand more men. During the 1940, scientists started experimenting on nuclear science which had tremendous power. This nuclear power can be used in generating electricity with really high efficiency but rather it became a power weapon. Hiroshima and Nagasaki attack is an example of the devastating effects of some researchs. The recent chemical posion attack by Syrian government on its own people is yet another example how some scientific research can be harmful. Government, therefore must keep in check the researchs of these kind and put restriction on them. Research and development should be carried out with mankind in mind. Government should restrict researches on mass destruction. Research in medicine, renewable energy sources and like-wise should always be encouraged by government.