THE GOVERNMENT AND SOCIETY

1
Around the world, rural people are moving to cities and urban areas, so populations in the
countryside are decreasing? Is this a positive or negative development?

It is becoming increasingly common for residents to concentrate in urban areas, rather than the
countryside. In my opinion, this is a decidedly negative phenomenon for human society as a whole
despite the economic benefits.

Those who support the current prioritisation of city life point out how it positively impacts the
workforce. When the majority of a population is concentrated, this makes it easier for businesses to
operate. For example, in cities such as Tokyo, there are millions of residents in the city itself and the
outlying districts. The people support restaurants, cinemas, malls, arcades, parks, and various other
recreational areas. These businesses in turn provide jobs for locals and this creates a positive
feedback loop and greatly enriches the quality of life for the average person living in a big city. The
best evidence for this is the number of people willing to move to cities for superior employment
options.

However, the drawbacks associated with city lifestyles are more significant. In past generations,
there was greater diversity in terms of where residents lived that enabled more varied lifestyle
options. People living in the country were more likely to work outdoors and possess skills related to
farming, hunting, and raising livestock. Today, most people live in cities and work corporate jobs
and are experts in terms of marketing, finance, business, and customer service. These industries
have a place in a healthy society but should not predominate over healthier, more active forms of
gainful employment. As the world continues to transition to online-based jobs, the situation will
only worsen.

In conclusion, although there are legitimate economic arguments to be made for urban migration, I
would argue the effects on how humans live are overwhelmingly negative. Governments should
therefore implement policies to encourage more rural infrastructure and economic activity.

2
In recent years, there has been growing interest in the relationship between equality and personal
achievement. Some people believe that individuals can achieve more in egalitarian societies.
Others believe that high levels of personal achievement are possible only if individuals are free to
succeed or fail according to their individual merits. Discuss both sides and give your own
opinion.

In recent decades, there has been considerable debate about whether or not individual achievement
is greater in egalitarian or more hierarchical societies. In my opinion, despite the benefits of
egalitarianism as a political principle, it should not be pursued as a social ideal.

Those who argue egalitarian societies are better for achievement point out the benefits of
opportunity. The most well-known examples of this are in socialist nations in Europe like France
where income disparity is less pronounced than in more capitalist countries. In such liberal
countries, a person can receive a good education, secure stable employment, receive unemployment
benefits in the case of an economic downturn, and support the rest of society by paying high taxes.
Being part of such a community is itself a motivation for individuals to perform well at work and
pursue life goals. This is especially the case as a person will not have to feel anxious about the
possibility of being left behind by society at large.

I would contend that when conditions are generally equal individuals should then be permitted to
compete without considerable governmental regulation. The standout example for this situation
would be in the United States. Although there are more problems related to income inequality, there
is also greater innovation across a variety of sectors. One cause of this is that individuals are
motivated by the desire to excel and earn the financial rewards that accompany success. A person is
therefore encouraged to attain their own definition of success or they might be forced to live on the
fringes of society.

In conclusion, though there is a cruel element to competition, it is the best way to encourage
innovation and growth in an individual and society as a whole. Naturally, such an approach is only
possible when systemic problems related to discrimination have first been eliminated.

3
In many cities, problems related to overpopulation are becoming more common. Some
governments are now encouraging businesses and individuals to move out of cities to rural areas.
Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Certain governments are now incentivizing moving to rural areas due to issues concerning
overpopulation in cities. In my opinion, despite the temporary disadvantages this presents for
standards of living and economics, it is a long-term positive for environmental justifications.

Detractors argue these initiatives can harm businesses and residents. Firstly, this is related to living
standards. Residents of cities typically enjoy better medical care, employment opportunities, and
entertainment options. For instance, a person who moves from New York City to upstate New York
is likely to recognize an immediate decline in their daily quality of life. Secondly, there may be
significant economic issues. Cities tend to be the economic centres of any given state or nation. By
reducing the concentration of industry in urban areas, there is some likelihood that innovation will
be negatively impacted as the pool of potentially competent employees disperses.

Supporters would claim that these drawbacks are justified by benefits for the natural world. The
current threat of cities is that they concentrate populations, increase pollution from private vehicles,
and inevitably create urban sprawl. These issues can be curbed if people live in smaller communities
over a wider area. Residents will then be more likely to care about their immediate surroundings.
Furthermore, over time the reduced density of both employers and employees will allow the
authorities to better treat waste and manage pollution issues. This is evidenced by the better
environmental conditions in countries with fewer large metropolises.

In conclusion, there may be problems related to quality of life and finance but the advantages for the
environment make this an advisable strategy. Governments should continue promoting any such
relevant policies.

4
As the number of cars increases, more money has to be spent on road systems. Some people think
the government should pay for this. Others, however, think that drivers should cover the costs.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some today have argued that the funding for road systems should be the responsibility of
governments instead of individuals. In my opinion, although maintaining roads can be considered a
public service, private motorists should pay in order to more generally benefit society.

Proponents of governments assuming road costs argue this is a basic service tax-payers expect. In
all countries, working adults must pay a certain percentage of their monthly salary to the
government. From these contributions, individuals justly feel entitled to a variety of public services
ranging from police and fire departments to affordable hospitals and safe infrastructure. Roads are a
key component in this contract as most people drive in order to go to work, see friends, and take
holidays. The government will itself benefit not only from fulfilling this mandate but also in terms
of the financial byproduct of consumers being outside actively contributing to a market economy.

However, forcing drivers to pay these costs will greatly discourage private automobile ownership.
This disincentive is crucial today because cities are overcrowded and private vehicles contribute to
rising pollution levels. In large cities such as New York City and Tokyo, it is nearly impossible to
traverse the city by automobile at peak rush hours. If there were fewer cars on the road, then people
could travel more freely on bicycles, on foot, and using public transportation. Additionally, private
vehicles are inefficient. Other forms of travel leave relatively small carbon footprints but cars, often
carrying only one or two passengers, use more petrol than would normally be required to transport
people. Replace cars with more efficient transport options and there would be a marked decrease in
the consumption of fossil fuels.

In conclusion, despite the strong argument that tax-payers deserve public infrastructure such as
roads, it is more important to discourage individuals from purchasing cars. In the long-term, this
will greatly benefit cities and the world as a whole.

5
Some think scientists should be allowed to send messages into space to communicate with other
life forms while others believe this is too dangerous. Discuss both sides and give your own
opinion.

Many are of the belief that contacting possible alien life is a desirable goal, while others are wary of
the potential dangers. In my opinion, though this satisfies basic human curiosity, the risk is too great
relative to the benefits.

The reason to try to communicate with extraterrestrials is to learn more about the universe. Some
might claim alien life could have technology or insight to share, but the chances of this are too small
to justify the effort. Instead, the average person and the scientist alike simply want to learn if there
are other forms of life. Humans have dreamed of aliens in novels and films for decades and some
feel every attempt to realise these dreams is warranted. If alien life is discovered, not only would it
satisfy this desire but it might also help humanity understand their own origins, place in the
universe, and answer fundamental existential questions.

However, curiosity alone is not enough to condone accepting even the smallest chance of the danger
inherent in alien contact. The likelihood of an alien life form turning against humanity like a scene
from a science fiction film are infinitesimally small but the consequences are too great to ignore. In
the event that aliens were found and hostile to humanity it could pose a serious problem and in the
worst case scenario threaten the survival of the human race. This far-fetched but disastrous
downside logically dictates the more sensible approach of continuing to develop human technology
and wait until the distant future to venture to locate alien life.

In conclusion, the self-interested pursuit of other life forms has too much potential for species-
threatening danger to be advisable. Instead, governments should focus on maximising resources for
more advanced technology.

6
Society is based on rules and laws. It could not function if individuals were free to do whatever
they wanted to do. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many believe that the rule of law is the only reason society does not descend into anarchy. I am in
agreement as idealistic, revisionist views of human nature do not take into account the full pre-
history of humanity.

Those who have a more hopeful view of mankind argue the modern progression towards
compassion and tolerance. Humans are not necessarily violent and prone to criminal activity. The
last hundred years has seen tremendous advances in areas ranging from civil rights to voting to more
inclusive social policies. There is therefore a chance that even if society removed or reduced laws
governing behaviour, individuals would continue to behave responsibly out of a renewed
understanding of what it can mean to be human. These claims are bolstered by the existence of
certain small communities in isolation where there is relatively little or no crime.

However, modern values are the product of a refinement of humanity over centuries that still
requires reinforcement. The laws against violent crimes, for example, were enforced with brutal
penalties for thousands of years in countries around the world. Only in the last two hundred years
have most nations reformed punishments to be either imprisonment or fines. The harsher penalties
of the distant past might be outdated, but the current ones still deter potential criminals. The best
evidence of this is that people today still attempt to commit crimes despite advances in forensic
science and nearly ubiquitous surveillance cameras. It takes little imagination to realise many more
would lean towards breaking the rules in the absence of punishments altogether.

In conclusion, laws and regulations are crucial barriers to the excesses of human nature and cannot
be wished away with a good conscience. This does not, however, imply they must be unnecessarily
strict.

7
There is more and more outrage and anger common in society today. Why is this? Is this a
positive or a negative development?

There is a common perception today that people are generally angrier than they were in the past. In
my opinion, this is a fundamentally negative psychological phenomenon exacerbated by modern
technology.

The main reason there are higher levels of anger in society is that individuals are vulnerable to the
pleasure of feeling outrage. Human beings are naturally attracted to activities that produce the
release of certain endorphins. These actions include positive outlets such as exercising and spending
time with others and more harmful ones like eating unhealthy foods and abusing narcotic stimulants.
Outrage also has the added benefit of a self-esteem boost. The narcotic-like effects of outrage over
time become addictive, especially in the current technological age. A person can browse the news
and read stories that provoke anger, scroll through social media, and engage in so-called "hate
watching" of popular pundits on television espousing extreme views. All these addictive pastimes
are available on mobile devices, creating an environment where access to outrage is too readily
accessible to be ignored.

In my opinion, outrage endangers the ability of individuals in a society to understand each other and
work towards shared goals. When individuals pursue outrage as an end in itself, they are no longer
communicating honestly. For example, many online trolls post and engage with other users mainly
to provoke and feel outrage themselves with little concern for truth and honest debate. This creates
an atmosphere wherein people become increasingly distrustful and alienated from one another. In
order for a person to change their views and make actual progress in the world, they must be willing
to listen to and understand the arguments of the other side. When this occurs, both sides feel some
degree of commonality. However, if neither side is engaging in good-faith conversations, then the
unproductive outcome is merely to feel more and more outraged and accomplish less and less.

In conclusion, seeking outrage is fundamentally human, though it leads to a breakdown in social

cohesion. People should cultivate healthier habits and abstain from easy, pleasurable feelings of
outrage.

8
Today, many people do not know their neighbours in large cities.
What problems does this cause?
What can be done about this?

It is increasingly common in large urban areas for neighbours to interact less. In my opinion, this
results in a declining sense of community and the solutions must be individually motivated.

In most cities today, the lack of connection between neighbours has caused less culturally unique
neighbourhoods. An illustrative counterexample to this would be famous neighbourhoods such as
Venice Beach in Los Angeles and Greenwich Village in New York City. In the past, individuals
living in these areas shared similar values and that led to a flourishing of a unique culture. One
result of such a sense of community was the "Beat Poets" of Greenwich. Related to this is the fading
distinctiveness of communities that have value for locals and tourists alike. An individual living in a
district in a major metropolis today feels little sentiment for its streets, buildings and other
inhabitants and therefore derives nearly nothing in the way of a singular shared identity.

Remedies for the problems detailed above involve individual initiative. Governments attempting to
contrive a sense of community will likely only provoke backlash. Instead, individuals could choose
to live in parts of a city with a heritage that suits them and not join mass movements toward
gentrification. A standout example of this would be expatriate enclaves in developing nations. These
communities are able to preserve some of their cultural traditions and are entirely the result of
individuals choosing to live together with those who represent their values and interests. This could
be replicated on a larger scale if city residents choose their homes more thoughtfully and are more
respectful of the traditions of any given community.

In conclusion, the problems stemming from less involvement between neighbours affect the
community at large and should be dealt with by those most impacted by the ramifications. In this
way, some cultural integrity can be preserved in a globalised world.

9
Some think increasing business and cultural contact between nations is positive. Others think it
leads to the disappearance of the national identity. Discuss both views and state your own
opinion.

Many feel that the effects of globalisation on economics and culture are beneficial. In my opinion,
although there is an argument for the financial implications, the risks to the uniqueness of a national
identity make it a negative overall.

Supporters of such close contact point out the meaningful economic ramifications. This is
particularly important for more isolated and undeveloped nations. There are countries where natural
resources are extremely lacking or unbalanced and this has slowed their progress historically. For
instance, many countries in the Middle East lack the arable land to support large population growth.
The discovery of vast reserves of oil in the 20th century allowed them to exploit trade agreements to
improve their economic outlook and basic infrastructure. This same fact applies to varying degrees
to nearly all nations as trade enriches a country without necessarily creating any negative
byproducts.

Nonetheless, the danger for culture is more lasting and therefore more significant. The national
identity of a country is not simply made up of the dominant ethnic group. Every country has
minorities and ethnic populations that are most at risk through this process. For instance, in many
parts of Asia and Africa there are numerous indigenous groups that struggle to flourish in a modern,
global economy. For instance, the Hmong in Vietnam are famed for their craftsmanship and
attention to detail in hand-weaving and dyeing sustainable clothing yet many of them must now
abandon their traditional roots to live in cities and work anonymous jobs for large corporations.
Once such cultures are lost, they will never return and the economic benefits will be little comfort at
that point.

In conclusion, despite the economic advantages of globalisation, the possibility of a country losing
its individual cultural character is too great a risk. Countries must therefore take steps to safeguard
their culture.

10
Museums and art galleries should show local history and culture instead of work from different
countries. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Some feel that museums and art galleries ought to primarily focus on showcasing local, rather than
international, works. In my opinion, despite the importance of domestic pieces for national
cohesion, there is greater value in international items.

Those who advocate for domestic art in national museums and exhibition halls point out the
unifying effect. Students in every country are expected to learn their national history but these
lessons can often feel impersonal and abstract. The chance to visit a museum and see authentic
documents from the past revitalises history and can inspire patriotism. A standout example of this
would be The Smithsonian in the United States, which houses key historic and cultural artefacts.
Visitors from different parts of the country and disparate ethnic groups can potentially find common
ground by reflecting on the struggles and achievements of their forefathers.

Regardless, the citizenry as a whole can learn more from international artworks. Most people have
learned their own nation's history well but possess limited understanding of other cultures. Going to
a museum featuring items from around the world is therefore an enlightening experience. For
example, The British Museum in London famously contains one of the world's largest collections of
culturally significant artefacts from around the world. By seeing and reading the plaques for a
variety of artworks both young students and adults alike have the opportunity to broaden their
understanding of the traditions, cultures, and events that underpin the modern world. Over time, this
can lead to a more inclusive, culturally diversified society.

All in all, the patriotic positives of locally themed collections are outweighed by the educational
benefits of globally sourced institutions. There must be a degree of balance but those in positions of
authority should emphasise cultural diversity.

11
The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each
country. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

There have been suggestions historically for a single government that could control all nations. In
my opinion, there are utopian benefits that would result from this, however, the drawbacks related to
autonomy make it a negative theoretical proposal.

Supporters argue a single government would be more effective and focused. This is best illustrated
through major problems that all nations currently struggle to solve such as climate change and the
recent health crisis facing the world. A single centralised government could better protect the
environment by enacting strict legislation against the burning of fossil fuels and force all citizens to
get vaccinated against Covid-19. In purely hypothetical terms, such unilateral power could achieve
tremendous ends. However, in reality, there is a strong likelihood that a government would either
pursue different, less desirable goals or be unable to enforce their mandates.

Beyond the infeasibility of such a world government, there are more basic reasons to oppose its
existence. Variety in government is valuable in itself. Take for example the different governments
currently in power around the world. Each country has, to varying degrees, chosen a government
that represents their values and enacts laws based on the kind of nation they wish to have. The result
is that some countries, such as those in Western Europe, lean more towards a socialist system that
ensures a minimum standard of living for all citizens, others place greater emphasis on individual
empowerment, others on transparency and still others on security over freedom. This diversity is a
defining feature of human society.

In conclusion, a single government for the entire planet could help resolve global issues but would
ultimately limit the distinctiveness of each individual nation. Therefore, there are other solutions
that should be undertaken to remedy the current crisis of confidence in government.

12
Nowadays people live longer after they retire. How does this affect individuals and society? What
can be done about this?

As average life expectancy rises, people are living longer and longer after retirement, which poses a
number of problems for individuals and society. In my opinion, these tensions can be remedied
through government action.

People retiring older can lead to conflict between individuals and an increased burden on society
generally. For the young, the process of fully integrating older people into society can be
challenging. For example, many older people have quieter lifestyles and disputes may arise with
younger individuals who are in the habit of hosting loud parties or coming home late at night,
particularly in cases where young people are taking care of older relatives. The strain on society can
also be great as older people require more medical support to treat conditions ranging from arthritis
to cancer to heart disease. This translates to a greater proportion of taxes going to the older
generation and can foster societal resentment and ageism.

The best fixes for these problems can be achieved by governments. Firstly, governments can ease
the integration of generations by providing better retirement plans for individuals. For example, in
the United States, social security benefits are rarely enough to cover retirement and so many must
depend on their children. As for society, governments must be more conscientious in planning for
more substantial medical expenses. The government should anticipate this trend only continuing in
the future and set aside funds to research and apply advanced treatments for retired citizens well into
their 80s. These measures combined would alleviate some of the weight of supporting older
populations.

In conclusion, the pressures resulting from growth in the average lifespan can be countered with
forward-thinking governmental policy. This will only become more important in the future as
people live even longer.

13
Nowadays some older people choose to live in retirement communities and centres with other
people, rather than living with their adult children. Is this a positive or negative development?

It is becoming increasingly common for senior citizens to retire to assisted care facilities instead of
remaining at home with their children. In my opinion, though these institutions often have a
reputation for abuse, it is a positive trend as it liberates younger generations.

Detractors of such communities highlight notable instances of abuse. These are detailed in frequent,
highly publicised, exposes from reputable news organisations on a regular basis. Many of these
incidents become criminal or civil cases and the instances of mistreatment are memorably cruel.
Elderly people have been known to be beaten, demeaned and neglected in terms of their basic
sanitary needs. These vulnerable individuals often lack the ability to defend themselves or voice the
abuse to visiting family. However, considering the total number of seniors in assisted care facilities,
abuse is rare and likely to decrease in the future as technology allows for closer monitoring of
employees.

Overall, I believe retirement communities to be positive as they are liberating for families. This
applies to the seniors themselves as, though they may be restricted from leaving the premises, they
can interact with their peers and form meaningful, new bonds. The greatest benefits, however, are
for the family unit as a whole. Families are rarely equipped with the medical training or financial
resources to support ageing individuals. For instance, it is a nearly impossible task for a family
where both mother and father work to look after an ailing parent as well as their own young
children. They are likely to lack some combination of energy, will, means, and time. By placing
their parents in an elderly home, they will have more time to invest in raising their own children and
advancing at work, which will itself increase the standard of living for all family members.

In conclusion, the risk of possible abuse at retirement homes does not overshadow the benefits
generally for families. This is a sensitive topic but each individual must decide what is in their own
best interests.

14
A rise in the standard of living in a country often only seems to benefit cities rather than rural
areas. What problems can this cause? How might these problems be reduced?

When standards of living increase, it is primarily urban residents, not those in the countryside, who
benefit. In my opinion, this can lead to opposite problems related to population density and is best
mitigated by governmental action.

Inequality in terms of standard of living engenders population problems for cities and rural regions.
Cities have become over-populated in the last century as they offer a wider range of educational,
occupational, and recreational options. Elevated population density means that although residents
can enjoy a higher standard of living generally, they must also overcome concomitant effects from
overcrowding such as more traffic, less sanitary conditions, and higher crime rates. The inverse
problem exists outside cities as residents leave and locals struggle to earn a living in sparsely
populated towns and villages.

These related problems can best be countered by the authorities. There are various initiatives that
could be implemented. One real-world example of this would be in Japan where the government in
recent years has addressed dwindling population numbers in the countryside by auctioning off
country homes cheaply. Prospective home-owners are often able to buy houses nearly for free if
they agree to live and work in a town with few residents. Another possible measure would be for
governments to invest more in urban infrastructure. Since migrations to cities are likely inevitable,
this is a more pragmatic tactic.

In conclusion, the inverse issues created for rural and urban areas by rising standards of living can
be effectively controlled if governments intervene. This issue will only become more pressing as the
global middle class continues to grow.

15
It is impossible to help all people around the world in need so governments should focus on
people from their own country. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today have suggested that governments should prioritise supporting their own citizenry over
offering foreign aid. I strongly agree with this statement as international interventions often do more
harm than good and governments have greater control concerning domestic assistance.

Firstly, foreign aid is notoriously difficult to manage. The majority of countries helped by foreign
aid either end up exploiting the charity or become overly dependent. A good example of this would
be the aid sent to many African nations during times of civil turmoil. Certain corrupt governments
would often leverage the aid, whether it be food supplies or financial support, to maintain their
autocratic position. Even in the rare cases where aid reaches its intended targets without interference
from governments or non-governmental organisations, there is a strong likelihood of establishing a
dependence. Individuals generally profit more long-term from developing characteristics related to
self-reliance rather than becoming subservient in a dependent relationship.

Moreover, governments are able to affect greater change over their own populace. There are many
different tactics that governments can choose ranging from funding a comprehensive social welfare
net to allowing individuals to keep more of their tax dollars and contribute to the economy. A
standout example of this would be in China where the government has tremendous sway over both
public and private entities. This ensures that their assistance is not misused and that it supports truly
vulnerable segments of the population. Their oversight and knowledge of their own country
translates to a more efficient allocation of resources and this applies generally to governments
globally.

In conclusion, there is little support for the efficacy of foreign aid and governments can intervene
most effectively in their own nations. Therefore, foreign aid should be limited to times of extreme
crisis.

16
The best way to make the road transport of goods safer is to ask drivers to take a driving test each
year. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some today argue that the transportation of goods would be safer if drivers were required to take
mandatory driving tests each year. In my opinion, this is not a realistic solution despite its potential
benefits.

Those in favour of such a reform point out that truck drivers need these courses more than other
motorists. After driving for many years, it is natural that individuals may forget certain rules and a
course to refresh their knowledge of road safety and etiquette cannot possibly do any harm. Added
to this is the fact that truck drivers transporting goods are on the road far more than your average
commuter. Therefore, it is logical that their ability to drive well will have an outsized impact on
overall road safety statistics. A truck driver who submits to yearly recertification under this proposal
is likely to have at least a superior formal understanding of driving laws.

However, the effects of such learning might be marginal and the program itself would be
prohibitively expensive. Individuals who often drive might not be strictly following the rules they
learned when they first got their licences but they are better informed of the realities and nuances of
actual driving. Years of experience on the road, similar to any job, will likely do more to develop
their ability than standardised testing and certification. Moreover, implementation of annual driving
tests would necessitate immense bureaucratic expenses. Not only would there need to be a large
department in charge but transport drivers themselves would waste time each year getting
recertified. In the aggregate, the effect on road safety would be negligible but the impact on
efficiency would be significant.

In conclusion, although this proposal is well-intentioned, its actual implementation would likely be
inefficient and wasteful. Therefore, more viable options should be explored.

17
Many governments think that economic progress is their most important goal. Some people,
however, think that other types of progress are equally important for a country. Discuss both
these views and give your own opinion.

Many today have made the argument that governments are overly focused on economic
development to the detriment of more valuable areas of progress. In my opinion, though economic
progress is often the catalyst for different forms of growth, the other areas are at least equally as
important.

Supporters of economic progress point out its importance for individuals and societies generally. A
thriving economy allows the average citizen to increase their quality of life in various ways.
Individuals who are provided good jobs and lucrative opportunities are able to afford better
healthcare, own a home potentially, purchase luxuries, and take holidays. In the aggregate, all these
minor additions combine to ground a satisfied and happy life, though they are naturally not absolute
guarantees. The clearest evidence of the value of this approach is that voters in democratic nations
like the United States typically base their decisions primarily on economic factors.

However, economics is the basis for other areas of progress. This relates to education, standards of
living, infrastructure, and, most importantly in the 21st century, the environment. In past centuries,
individuals could be forgiven for considering economics to be the most important duty of
governments. Today, the possibility that the Earth will face cataclysmic changes in the next century
has dramatically shifted that calculus. Most researchers agree that overpopulation and the
manufacturing and consumption of consumer goods is greatly exacerbating climate change and may
lead to seismic disruptions for all life on Earth. Therefore, simply prioritising the economic causes
of a degrading environment would be short-sighted.

In conclusion, though economics is the basic foundation of modern civil societies, governments
today should not neglect equally crucial aspects such as the environment. The economy is means for
enacting other reforms, not an end in itself

18
Some people spend a lot of money celebrating personal family events, such as weddings and
birthdays. How important is it to celebrate such events? Do you think people spend too much
money on these events?

It is common for individuals to invest heavily in celebrating important family events. In my opinion,
such celebrations are vital to healthy family life and the associated costs are reasonable in most
cases.

Events that bring together the whole family encourage stronger internal cohesion. This is best
illustrated through the counterexample of families that rarely meet for large social gatherings. These
families are likely to grow distant and remain family members in name rather than actuality. Family
members that often meet, such as in many Asian nations where familial bonds are prioritised, are
closer to both their immediate and extended family. The result of such closeness is they can ask for
advice, lend a helping hand, and feel the unconditional support and love that is essential for mental
health.

Generally, for these events families spend only as much as they can reasonably afford. There are
rare exceptions, such as when a newly married couple spends excessively on the wedding. However,
most families abide by an internal calculus that keeps their spending under control. A wealthy
family may stage lavish reunions, family dinners, and weddings, but they are able to afford them
and only appear excessive from the perspective of less privileged spectators. A less affluent family,
on the other hand, will tend to hold more modest events and, in the case of weddings, may be able to
recoup a substantial proportion of the costs from gifts. For example, the giving of an envelope
containing money at a wedding is common in Vietnam and helps couples begin their marriage on
solid financial footing.

In conclusion, family gatherings play a key part in strengthening bonds and their cost is justifiable
and moderate. Families should therefore strive to maintain their traditions in an increasingly insular
society.

19
Some people think parents are responsible for transporting their children to school. Others think
it is the government’s responsibility. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many feel that parents should take their children to school, while others feel this is a governmental
responsibility. In my opinion, this is chiefly the duty of governments.

Those who feel parents should be in charge of transportation to school argue this is an important
element of family life. Most people have fond memories of their parents driving, walking, or taking
public transport with them to school and this is a potential time for bonding. Early in the morning on
the way to school children and parents are likely to be at their most energetic. After a long day at
school and work, both parties will probably be tired or busy. This therefore means the morning
commute is an opportunity to catch up, make plans for the day, and enjoy each other’s company.

Nonetheless, most families rely on government support in this area for a number of reasons. Firstly,
many families lack the time to take their children to school in the morning. This is particularly the
case if they have more than one child and they attend different schools. A parent living in a rural
area, for example, might have to be at work early in the morning and simply does not have the
flexible schedule to allow for multiple morning trips. Secondly, most people depend on school
buses and consider this a key part of their tax contributions. This is particularly true for less
privileged families, who might not have private transportation, or in single parent homes where time
is at a premium.

In conclusion, the familial gains of a trip to school in the morning are outweighed by the very
practical concerns of average citizens. Governments should continue to ease the burden on parents
by providing transportation to and from school.

20
Some people feel that equality between the genders has already been achieved while others feel
there is considerable progress to be made. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many are of the belief that problems related to gender equality have generally been rectified. In my
opinion, this is largely true though there are exceptions in certain nations and industries.

Those arguing against this conclusion point to remnants of inequality. This is especially the case in
more traditional or conservative cultures. There are some nations where women still have extremely
limited legal rights and may not be able to vote or join the workforce. There are also less overt
restrictions that persist. Even in developed nations, many women do not earn the same salaries as
their male counterparts and social biases against the competence of women have not entirely faded.
However, a public figure today espousing sexist, regressive views would be widely condemned.

The fact that the world is imperfect should not distract from the legal and cultural strides made for
women. Legally, in the vast majority of the world, women have the same rights as men. More
importantly, there has been a major cultural and social shift in mindset in the last several decades. In
the past, women were considered inferior in many fields and now they are at least the equal of men.
This is best exemplified in the diversity efforts at major international companies that aim to place
women in positions of greater authority. Even in fields such as entertainment and athletics, women
can now expect equal pay, funding, and treatment by their employers, the press and the general
public.

In conclusion, although there are areas where greater gender equality can yet be achieved, I feel that
progress has been legally and culturally accomplished in most countries. This should be seen as one
pinnacle of human civilization

21
Many believe that living in a city offers greater benefits compared to life in the countryside. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

In recent years, rising costs in cities has led to growing interest in the relative value of life in the
countryside. In my opinion, for the majority of individuals, living in a city is a superior choice.

Those who choose to live in more rural areas typically point to the cleaner, more peaceful
environment. This is the natural result of lower population density. Take the typical country village
in India compared to an average city as an example. City populations, such as those in Delhi and
Calcutta, are in the millions and this causes greater traffic, increased noise pollution, and stress on
shared public facilities including public transportation and sanitation. A rural village, in contrast,
has more wide open spaces, fresh air, and untouched nature. This allows residents to enjoy better
peace of mind and feel more relaxed. Lower population totals also mean there is less litter and
industry, resulting in a cleaner overall environment.

On the other hand, city life offers a wider range of economic and social opportunities. A good
example of this would be key economic hubs such as Shanghai, London, and Ho Chi Minh city.
Most city-dwellers are willing to accept a busier lifestyle due to higher salaries and improved social
and cultural activity. For example, the average resident in London can attend a play in the West End
theatre district, visit a popular nightclub, enjoy cuisine from around the world, and interact with
individuals from diverse cultural backgrounds. Added to this are the economic possibilities
concomitant with higher population totals and the fact that many international companies choose to
locate their headquarters in dense metropolises.

In conclusion, despite the potential for peace in the countryside, most individuals benefit more from
living in a city. This is not a strict rule, though, and each person must identify their own priorities
and make an informed choice accordingly.

22
Some people believe that increasing tax on various industries will reduce pollution whereas
others believe that there are better alternative ways. Discuss both the view and give your opinion.

Many today argue that the environment can be best protected by heavily taxing various industries.
In my opinion, though this has worked in certain cases, taxation is not as effective as more positive
reforms.

The case for the taxing industry is that it will discourage the worst practices of companies. This has
been evidenced in the European Union where enterprises are taxed at higher rates, oftentimes
depending on their relative carbon footprints. The result is that businesses are incentivized to adopt
cleaner energy practices. The companies that are greener can therefore enjoy both the benefits of
reduced taxes and the public opinion boost concomitant with eco-friendly initiatives.

The caveat to this approach is that many multinationals are able to simply move their production
facilities and waste to nearby nations. Moreover, there are more positive policies that can
encourage, rather than discourage, the corporate world. Taxation is a fundamentally reactive
measure that supposes companies would not wish to inherently protect the planet. A more proactive
approach would involve funding green industries. For example, companies such as Tesla have
received billions in government subsidies to build stability for a green industry. Over time, more
companies will be able to establish themselves and turn profits and there will be less of a need to
use taxes to discourage industries from polluting. This solution will be longer lasting as it rewards
good behaviour instead of punishing bad behaviour.

In conclusion, despite taxing industries having an immediate effect, a greater impact would result
from subsidies for various companies. Governments should pursue this more positive strategy.

23
Many supermarkets are selling more and more products that are imported from other countries
instead of selling food that is locally sourced. What are the reasons for this? Is this a positive or
negative development?

Some feel that supermarkets today sell too many imported products compared to the number of
locally produced ones. In my opinion, this is a result of changes in consumer tastes and it is a
negative overall.

The main cause behind this phenomenon is an exponential shift among consumers. Over the last
century advances in sea and air transport have allowed supermarkets to import products from all
over the world. As a result, an individual living in New England can try exotic fruits like mangoes
and pomegranates that cannot normally be grown in a four season climate. Once a person tries a
new food and enjoys it, they are more likely to sample other new fruits and vegetables. They then
recommend those foods to others and shifts in taste quickly become mainstream and irreversible.

This change is negative as it hurts local farmers and the environment. Local producers must now
compete with large companies that source products such as bananas at lower prices and undercut
farmers. Consumers naturally buy the cheaper products and the result is that local farmers often
cannot survive without government subsidies or must close their operations. Moreover, this
development leads to greater consumption of fossil fuels. Imported products allow consumers to
shop out of season, for example eating asparagus year round, but this requires shipping products
globally and increasing the burning of fossil fuels involved in transportation.

In conclusion, though supermarkets now enable shoppers to have more varied palates, this poses
tremendous risks for local producers and the environment. Therefore, tariffs on imports should be
high.

24
Some people believe that governments should pay for healthcare for all citizens. To what extent
do you agree or disagree?

Many today are calling for universal healthcare coverage from governments. In my opinion, though
this policy is far from perfect, it would be advisable overall in order to contain surging medical
costs.

Detractors point out that public healthcare would slow innovation. This argument is based on the
premise that advances in most fields are driven by a desire to attain recognition and amass profits. If
all medical care was paid for by governments, this would presumably require a national, federal
health service. The free market incentives for a new procedure or treatment would then be reduced
to simply helping people and lower levels of acclaim. As in other industries, such a state-owned
approach would inevitably stifle growth.

Nonetheless, the above-mentioned challenges can be mitigated with a more moderate approach and
the advantages for the average person are enormous. In countries such as the United States where
healthcare is almost entirely privatised, costs have soared due to more advanced techniques,
pharmaceuticals and medical equipment. If an individual has a serious, chronic condition such as
diabetes or cancer that requires multiple treatments and medications, it is very likely they will spend
their entire life in debt to hospitals. Assisting millions of such individuals would be arguably one of
the greatest achievements for human rights in history.

In conclusion, despite the inherent dangers of government-backed hospitals, they are justified due to
the financial repercussions for the general citizenry. All advanced countries should have some
system in place to ensure the sick can receive proper treatment

25
Around the world more and more people today are living in urban areas. Why is this? What
problems does this cause?

Recent migrations have been defined by expanding metropolitan populations. The reason for this is
simple self-interest and city inhabitants must now reckon with legitimate long-term concerns related
to overcrowding.

The most obvious explanation for surging urban populations is economic opportunity. As society
becomes less agrarian, the demand for an inner-city workforce grows. In cities, there is a nearly
limitless supply of both desirable white-collar jobs as well as more menial labour such as in the
service and construction industries. For the majority of individuals, the allure of cities lies in the
hope of advancing rapidly in terms of socioeconomic status and the esteem from one’s friends and
family concomitant with success.

The main challenge this influx of residents poses relates to the stress it places on a city. Many cities
date back hundreds of years and their infrastructure, ranging from roads to sanitary systems, can
barely sustain populations now in the millions. This typically results in underprivileged residents
living in inhumane conditions, such as the notorious ‘favelas’ of Rio de Janeiro, which over time
can cause rises in crime, exacerbating urban problems. For the average citizen, there are also daily
hindrances stemming from overcrowding such as gridlocked roads and the disappearing feeling of
living in a recognizable community.

In conclusion, people are flocking to cities to realise their dreams and this naturally has resulted in
problems related to overcrowding. Governments ought to therefore incentivise living in the
countryside and invest more in urban infrastructure.

26
Many think that private vehicles, mainly cars, should be banned in city centres in order to
alleviate traffic congestion. Others Think this solution is unrealistic. Discuss both sides and give
your own opinion.

Many today believe that the best solution to traffic problems in cities would be to ban or greatly
reduce private vehicles. In my opinion, though there would be public uproar from certain segments
of the population, this is a sensible reform that should be adopted.

Critics of this change argue that cars offer myriad benefits for individuals and families alike. Most
people buy cars not merely for the social prestige they bestow but also for their convenience and
safety. Cars make it possible to carry a variety of items ranging from groceries and sporting
equipment to work-related items and additional occupants. This makes private vehicles useful in a
number of individual and social situations. Moreover, driving a car is considerably safer than other
modes of transport such as riding a bicycle or motorbike. Safety concerns are especially important
for drivers with families.

Nonetheless, ride-sharing services replicate the above advantages and clearing cars off the road
would unquestionably alleviate traffic congestion. The primary reason for this is largely self-evident
as cars are a poor allocation of space. Take for example the other common modes of transport in
cities: walking, subways, bicycles, buses, and motorbikes. Each of those takes up far less space per
individual, which in the aggregate means more room on roads and reduced traffic. This has been
evidenced repeatedly in cities that have striven to limit or ban private vehicles including Paris and
New York City.

In conclusion, the advantages of private vehicles are reduced in today’s modern gig economy and
therefore a ban is justifiable due to its obvious efficacy. Individuals will also have to accept that
there are superior ways to generate self-esteem in order to make the modern city a better place to
live.

27
Some Believe that nuclear weapons benefit the world at large. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?

Some argue that the development of nuclear weapons has been, on level, a positive for the world.
While I concede that their destructive power is a deterrent to large wars, they are nonetheless a net
negative.

The principle argument in favour of nuclear weapons is their utility as a deterrent to war. This is
often cited as the reason that there have not been any major wars between superpowers since the end
of World War II. The crux of this position is that no country is willing to risk the complete
destruction of a nuclear war. There have also been similar situations in the Middle East involving
Israel and between Pakistan and India in South Asia where the threat of nuclear weapons has
defused potentially violent conflicts.

However, I would contend that the lack of large-scale wars engenders its own problems. The best
known example of this would be the cold war between the United States and the USSR. Since these
two countries were unable to battle each other directly, they fought proxy wars in countries like
Afghanistan and Vietnam. The impact on those smaller countries was massive and the lingering
effects persist to this day. If large nations could settle their conflicts more directly, and there were
no nuclear weapons, then there would be more stable peace in other areas and less powerful nations
would have greater autonomy.

In conclusion, although it can be argued that nuclear weapons have prevented wars, they have
festered minor disputes. This also does not include the deaths caused in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
during World War II and the possibility of future mass catastrophes

28
Older people often choose to spend money on themselves (e.g. on holidays) rather than save
money for their children after retirement. Is this a positive or negative development?

It is common practice for retired individuals to prioritise spending their savings on their own quality
of life. While some would argue this is detrimental to their children and grandchildren, it is fully
justified in my opinion.

Those who view this as a negative development contend that the money’s value is not being
maximised. Elderly individuals tend to spend their money on luxuries such as expensive holidays,
nice foods, and various products that will decline in value. If this same money were redirected to
their children in the form of real estate investments, stocks, or even simply cash gifts, it would have
far greater and longer value. However, a parent’s goal should be to create a positive environment for
their children, not guarantee an effortless lifestyle that may do more harm than good.

Moreover, an individual has the basic right to spend the money that they have earned over the
course of their lifetime. For instance, in past generations most people had to work longer hours at
more demanding jobs, such as in agriculture or mining. Once these individuals reach the age of
retirement and have savings, it is hard to justify asking them to give up their earnings in order to
benefit individuals with easier occupations and many years yet to live. Since many old people will
not live late into their old age, this is even more incentive to not only permit, but even encourage,
them to spend their money freely and without a guilty conscience.

In conclusion, despite the legitimate argument that old people are spending their money somewhat
frivolously, it is in fact a deserved privilege. Regardless, any efforts to convince older people to
spend their money more altruistically would likely be met with significant backlash.

29
Some feel that governments should monitor and regulate scientific research done by companies.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of this?

Many would argue that scientific research requires a degree of oversight from the relevant
governmental authorities. In my opinion, properly handled, this is a sensible and necessary policy.

Opponents of overregulation point out potential impediments in terms of corruption and

inefficiency. Firstly, there is a slight chance that governments may abuse their authority. The rocket
company SpaceX famously refrains from patenting their most revolutionary innovations in fear of
governments learning their secrets. This is a particularly justifiable concern in countries with less
transparent governments. Secondly, companies will have to deal with more burdensome oversight
protocols. A pharmaceutical firm developing new medicines may have to delay their work in order
to satisfy federal mandates.

However, monitoring scientific research greatly benefits society as a whole. When companies are
not supervised, it threatens public safety. The pharmaceutical company mentioned above, given free
rein in their activities, may engage in unethical practices such as conducting risky clinical trials on
human subjects. Moreover, there are certain discoveries which could threaten humanity generally.
This is most possible when there is testing being done related to human pathogens and infectious
diseases. If a disease being experimented on escapes from a lab and is dangerous, then the results
could be catastrophic.

In conclusion, regardless of the risks monitoring company research poses concerning corruption and
inefficiency, it is advisable overall due the potential effect on society overall. Governments should
monitor scientific research in the least invasive ways possible.

30
Some people today have argued that countries should interfere less in the affairs of other
nations. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

In recent years, it has been argued that nations should restrict their interventions with other
countries. In my opinion, though this kind of isolation is theoretically ideal, it would result in too
many problems today to be advisable.

Proponents of this shift contend that it would enable countries to progress independently. History is
full of examples of countries injuring other countries through their actions, most notoriously during
European colonialism. However, there are present problems also being created. The United States
often supports certain governments either overtly or covertly that are amenable to American
interests. The result is that these countries have reduced autonomy to make mistakes, become
independent, and eventually prosper. Though some of these interventions may be helpful, as in the
case of international aid, they all engender a sense of dependency.

Nonetheless, removing all interference in other countries could have dire ramifications. The United
States is again the most relevant instance here as it is most involved in world affairs. If the US
withdrew all international armed forces, then it would create opportunities for other nations to
exploit and powers within certain countries to seize control. In the long-term, this may be beneficial,
especially if the international community were to embrace isolationist policies. In the short-term,
likely to be at least decades, there would be political upheaval that could lead to cratering
economies and potential wars.

In conclusion, countries should ideally not interfere deeply in the affairs of other nations but this
policy is infeasible in the modern interconnected world. Countries should instead seek to slowly
disentangle themselves while fostering independence.

31
Some people feel that cities should allow for spaces for graffiti while others feel it should be
banned. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Some feel that there should be designated places for street art in urban areas, while others feel this
encourages a form of vandalism. Though I concede not all street art should be considered art, I am
strongly in agreement with the former opinion.

Those who oppose a safe space for graffiti argue that it is unlawful behaviour. According to the
strict dictates of the law, all kinds of property damage, including painting on walls and buildings are
illegal. The individuals who engage in street art are not always trying to create meaningful works of
art; many pieces are simply scribbles and lewd pictures designed to undermine the public aesthetic
of a city. In these cases, it is justifiable to argue that the authorities should prohibit and prosecute
offences. An additional argument here is that by encouraging graffiti, it is likely to spread beyond
the designated zones and disturb the peace of a given urban area.

However, there is great value to a vibrant and controlled street art community. The best known
example of this would be in cities such as Los Angeles and Bristol where tourists often come
specifically to view the street art on display. In both cities, there are certain parks and areas where
artists are free to express themselves creatively. The vast majority of art created adds to the aesthetic
appearance of the city. Beyond the simple benefits of having more public art, this policy also fosters
a creative and free environment. The average citizen living in these areas will feel that the city
values their contributions and they are not being constrained unreasonably. This feeling in turn
helps develop a sense of community.

In conclusion, though certain forms of graffiti should be removed and prohibited, every city should
have a safe space for true street artists. The benefits of this policy far outweigh any perceived
drawbacks.

32
Nowadays the differences between countries are becoming less evident because people follow the
same media. Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Many today believe that globalisation has a decidedly negative impact on cultural diversity. I am
largely in agreement with this contention despite limited advantages related to cross-cultural
exchange.

Proponents of globalised societies argue the benefit from sharing a plurality of perspectives. There
are numerous examples of this that extend to various cultural sectors. For instance, in the mid-20th
century, technological advances engendered the spread of a range of musical styles. Not only did
individuals living around the world benefit personally from enjoying the latest rock and roll but this
opening up inspired other nations to innovate. The sharing and collaboration possibly led to the
birth of musical genres such as Reggae, Hip-Hop, and electronic music. This same pattern can be
seen in other art forms and few would claim it is a negative development.

Nonetheless, the positives of globalisation have shifted to become negatives as countries became
less inventive. The creative flourishing early on has now transitioned into a threat against native
cultures. A good example of this would be the similarity in television brought on by the popularity
of Netflix. Before Netflix, each nation had its own unique style of television but now a lot of
programming is repetitive as audiences can be efficiently segmented by non-national interests. In
the past, this same narrow definition of filmmaking led nations to imitate Hollywood blockbusters
and in the future there is a strong likelihood that most cultures will be less original and creative.

In conclusion, the current drawbacks related to distinctive cultures outweigh the past creative
benefits of a globalised world. It is therefore important for nations to take steps to preserve and
safeguard their cultural identity when possible

33
Most societies value being competitive. How does competitiveness affect individuals? Is it a
positive or negative quality?

In most countries, competitiveness is considered a valuable characteristic. I believe that the effect on
individuals is tangible but it depends deeply on a person’s individual psychology whether or not it is
a positive personality trait.

The main consequence of a competitive spirit on individuals is to motivate. This holds true for a
variety of situations across different stages of life. Starting at a young age, there is social
reinforcement to do better than other students in academics and athletics from teachers, parents, and
coaches. This pressure drives many children to excel and, in some cases, can haunt them into
adulthood. There are many adults still striving to live up to the standards of others by overcoming
peers in their career or private life.

The above-mentioned points imply competitiveness is a negative but this is only the case in specific
contexts. Individuals exploiting competition in order to stockpile esteem are fundamentally insecure
and may have trouble reorienting to value their personal opinion of themselves. Conversely, being
competitive is an overwhelming positive for those with a strong sense of self-esteem who are
merely exercising and expressing their capacity. The ideal, healthy competitor is not particularly
concerned with the outward signs of their success but simply enjoys competing and winning as an
end in itself.

In conclusion, most are pushed to compete by social forces but this can be beneficial as long as
individuals are expressing their natural inclinations. It is ultimately the responsibility of each person
to turn competition into a positive.

34
Some people think that famous people can help international aid organisations to draw attention
to important problems. Others believe that the celebrities can make the problems seem less
important. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many charitable aid associations these days employ celebrities to draw greater attention to their
causes. In my opinion, though this can be a moral grey area in some cases, it is a positive on the
whole as it lends legitimacy to an organisation.

The disadvantage of a celebrity endorsement for a charity involves potentially diminishing the
actual cause. These instances are rare but occur when a particularly well-known personality exploits
their charitable activities as a means of self-promotion. With the rise of social media platforms like
Instagram and Facebook, it is possible for celebrities to post and communicate directly with their
fans about a given charity. If the charity is not trustworthy then the proceeds and awareness raised
may not be helpful and it is also possible that the majority of the attention received will boost the
public profile of the celebrity, not the organisation.

However, the above instances are exceptions and most celebrity endorsements highlight important
issues in society. A good example of this would be the social media campaigns that have become
popular in recent years. Several years ago, there was a viral campaign called the ‘ALS Ice Bucket
Challenge’ that raised awareness and donations for a common degenerative disease. It’s popularity
was largely due to the fact that many celebrities took part and posted their videos to Instagram,
Facebook, and TikTok. The effect was twofold as the chief charity being supported raised
substantial funds to fight ALS and the general public became familiar with a pervasive condition
that they might have otherwise ignored.

In conclusion, the risks of abuse inherent in well-known individuals spotlighting charitable causes
do not outweigh the advantages gained from such publicity. The motivations of the celebrities
themselves are beside the point as long as the end result is positive.

35
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL DEVELOPMENT

36
There are different customs in different countries related to how people eat, dress, and so on.
Some think that people visiting a country should behave according to the customs of the country
they visit.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many believe travellers have an obligation to follow local customs. I am in agreement with this
sentiment generally but there are exceptions to this rule where some flexibility is warranted.

Proponents would argue that being culturally sensitive is a sign of respect. The burden of fitting in
falls to the guest because they made the choice to travel to the country in question. For example,
following local traditions is crucial when in certain Middle Eastern countries. Some of the more
religious countries enforce strict restrictions on common western practices like drinking alcohol and
dressing freely. To respect the locals, tourists must modify their behaviour during their stay or risk
offending residents and making a bad impression. If travellers persist in flouting local customs, they
are in the wrong as there are many other more liberal options for international travel.

However, there are meaningful areas where locals must also be receptive to the views of travellers.
This can be broadly grouped into religious and personal beliefs. For example, an individual from a
Muslim country travelling abroad may expect to be allowed to wear a headscarf in public during
their visit. This should be allowed even in situations, such as during the playing of the national
anthem at sporting events in the United States, when people must remove their hats. The same
principle applies to personal dietary restrictions such as those of vegetarians and vegans. If they are
in a country where locals primarily eat meat, they ought to be able to make substitutions and
amendments to the menu if possible.

In conclusion, it is typically important to follow the customs of a country when travelling to show
deference but this can be outweighed at times by personal and religious convictions. Individuals
should also be mindful of potential conflicts when choosing a travel destination from the onset.

37
In many countries, people increasingly talk about money such as how much they earn or how
much they pay for things in their daily conversations. Why? Is this a positive or negative trend?

It has become increasingly pervasive in recent years for individuals to discuss money matters on a
daily basis. In my opinion, this is due to changes in what individuals consider polite and is a
decidedly negative trend on the whole.

The reason people now talk about money is that it is socially acceptable. In past generations,
discussing money was considered “in poor taste” and most people were reserved in order to not
appear arrogant or desperate. Today, many social norms from the past have disappeared and this
includes ones related to the discussion of one’s finances. This enables the average person to discuss
money with friends and family as a way of coping with anxieties about the future or insecurities
about their own status in society. For instance, it is common for some wealthy individuals to show
off by talking about their investments, property, and so on to impress friends and elevate their own
self-esteem.

Discussing money is overall a negative trend as it exacerbates an unhealthy mindset. There are
situations where it can be positive, such as when discussing potential investments and helping
friends. These contexts are the exceptions, however, as most people simply talk about money to
relieve their own nervousness or as a form of bragging. Once a person becomes addicted to the
minor dopamine bursts that accompany seeking self-pity or self-aggrandisement, they will have a
difficult time transitioning to more productive and fun topics of conversation. Over time, a person
may ironically increase their anxieties and insecurities by seeking to cope with them.

In conclusion, people talk about their finances as it is no longer considered rude and it is an
unhealthy habit. It is better to talk about more important topics.

38
Some people believe that the government should spend more money putting in more works of art
like paintings and statues in cities to make them better places to live in. To what extent do you
agree or disagree?

Some feel governments should invest more in public art in cities to boost the quality of life.
Personally, I am in disagreement with this idea because it has little actual importance for the
average citizen.

On the one hand, public art beautifies a city. A city stripped of all art gives off the dreary
appearance of being purely for utilitarian value and the daily rigour of work. In contrast, cities that
have invested heavily in public art, such as New York City, offer their residents a beautiful and
inspiring home. A child who sees sculptures and murals walking home will feel the city is a nicer
place to live and workers passing by works of art will have some emotional relief from the demands
of the day. This not only builds up the character of urban areas for local inhabitants and instils a
sense of pride, but also attracts tourists and professional artists to the city, both of which contribute
to a vibrant city.

Nonetheless, public art has little quantifiable positive value. Most city-dwellers are too engrossed in
their hectic schedules to notice public art. This art, therefore, means nothing to most locals, while
also diverting an outsized share of a city's budget. There are other more vital areas requiring
development such as high-end infrastructure, well-rounded healthcare systems, and modern
recreational facilities. Moreover, the public space used to house these works of art cannot be used
for practical purposes including critical public facilities like restrooms, bus stops or parks. Those
who rely on these other facilities will have more trouble finding them and their quality of life may
be somewhat impacted by a preference for art.

Despite the aesthetic value of public art, government bodies should focus more on urban issues that
truly matter to their constituents. There must be a degree of balance but it should always tip more
towards pragmatic concerns.

39
Some argue that patriotism is the primary cause of wars globally. Others feel that it serves to
prevent less ethical politicians from running a country and starting wars. Discuss both views and
give your opinion.

Many feel that patriotic feelings do more to foment, rather than prevent, conflicts and potential
wars. In my opinion, though patriotism can be a positive force in a nation, it is more likely to serve
as the justification for armed conflict.

Those who value the benefits of patriotism argue that it is a tool to oppose international
interventions. This is most often the case in countries where it is possible for citizens to voice their
opinions publicly. A standout example of this would be in the United States as the government is
often engaged in unpopular conflicts abroad such as the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Many critics make the argument that the US was originally isolationist and should not now interfere
in the affairs of other countries. This appeal to the patriotic roots of the country is persuasive.

However, it is more common for politicians to encourage nationalistic feelings to justify foreign
wars. There are examples of this from both the modern era and past historical epochs. For instance,
in Medieval Europe there were frequent wars of aggression between France, England, and Spain.
The rulers of these countries used both religious and ethnic or nationalistic justifications for either
expansion or defensive measures. Over time, patriotism came to be considered a method to distract
residents from the domestic situation and motivate them towards a common goal.

In conclusion, despite the legitimate potential advantages of patriotism within a country, I feel that it
is more likely to serve as a catalyst for international conflict. In fact, individuals have very little
overall impact on whether or not their country enters a war.

40
Many think that religion should be taught in schools while others think it should be avoided.
Discuss both sides and give your opinion.

Some feel that religion should not be taught in schools, while others are of the opinion that it is a
crucial element of any curriculum. In my opinion, religion is an important subject to learn about
though teachers should strive to be open-minded about different beliefs.

Detractors of religious instruction fear that it interferes with the rights of parents to raise their
children as they wish. In most cultures, there are a wide variety of religious values that parents
ought to be permitted to instil in their children. For instance, parents might want to raise their
children as Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Jewish, Hin-du, or another religion. If schools focus on
one particular religious sect, such as Christianity in a predominantly Christian country like Spain,
then parental rights are being threatened by the state to some extent.

However, as long as the lessons are not overly opinionated, it is valuable to learn about religion.
When students learn about religion, they firstly learn about its cultural and historical significance.
Human history and culture can be defined for the first several thousand years of recorded history as
the documentation of religions. Even today, religion may be less important in an increasingly
secular world in terms of politics but it still plays a crucial personal role for the average person. By
learning about various religions and how their values conflict and agree, students will be able to
make more informed choices about how they want to live their lives.

In conclusion, although there are legitimate reasons to worry that learning about religion can
become irresponsibly persuasive, it should be taught due to its importance from both a historic and
personal perspective. Schools should seek a balanced and reasonably objective approach to religious
education.

41
Always telling the truth is the most important consideration in any relationship between people.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some have argued that there is no single more important factor in a relationship than honesty. In my
opinion, this is untrue though there are situations where telling the truth is a pragmatic choice.

Those who argue in favour of unconditional honesty point out how it can create trust. When a
person tells the truth, then any problems in a relationship become open and can be potentially fixed.
For instance, if a person is annoyed by their partner’s inconsiderate behaviour when they are in
public settings, by lying about it the situation will only become worse. If they are honest then it will
be possible to address the underlying issues and do better in the future. This is the starting point for
healthy communication and the quality missing in most toxic relationships.

However, emotional intelligence necessitates a more nuanced understanding of a healthy

relationship. In some cases, a friendship or romantic relationship may require dishonesty. For
instance, if one person is lacking in confidence and needs reassurance about a recent work project or
argument they were in, then their partner or friend might need to consider how to first bolster their
self-esteem. After slowly increasing a person’s confidence they may then later be more receptive to
constructive feedback. By sacrificing the elation and pride that comes from being a so-called truth-
teller, a person can be doing a great service to the relationship in the long-term.

In conclusion, although truth can serve as the basis of a healthy relationship, it is not the most
important consideration as there are key contextual factors. Individuals must therefore judge each
situation on its own and act accordingly.

42
Whether or not a person achieves their aims in life is mostly related to luck. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?

Some are of the belief that luck is the determining factor when accomplishing a given goal. In my
opinion, luck is pivotal in individual situations but its importance decreases over larger sample
sizes.

The main argument for the primacy of luck is highly visible, singular examples. This translates to
extremely successful individuals. For instance, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were exceptionally
intelligent and hard-working but they would never have become leading figures in history if they
had not grown up in California in the 1970s during the computer boom. It is likely they would still
be successful regardless of their era and place of birth but the extent of influence would be more
limited. This same principle applies for the average individual as there are moments in one’s life
that are best credited to good luck or an advantageous situation.

However, the significance of luck decreases over time. Take, for example, an average person. They
may be born into a wealthy family and have a good start in life; they are lucky from the onset.
Nonetheless, if they are not hard-working, there is a strong chance they will not be able to
accomplish their goals in life. The reverse is true of someone born into a bad situation. There are
exceptions, where the situation is dire or the period in history precludes success, but most people
who apply themselves over a long period of time will ‘make their own luck’. This is because as
sample sizes become larger, the influence of variance naturally decreases. It still requires some
extraordinary luck to attain huge aims but more modest ones result from repeated action rather than
fortune.

In conclusion, luck is decisive in particular instances but not more generally. It is therefore more
important to place greater value on working hard in the long-term than on the off-chance of being
lucky.

43
Some people today prefer to get advice for medical problems and do not want to visit a doctor.
Why is this? Is this a positive or a negative development?

Many individuals today would rather seek out medical advice themselves instead of seeing a
licensed professional. In my opinion, this is a result of online convenience and it is a positive
development on the whole.

The main cause of this transition is the proliferation of information available on the internet. In the
past, an ailing individual had little recourse other than to visit a doctor for tests. Now, there are a
variety of question and answer websites as well as diagnosis ones that are free of cost and faster
than a trip to a hospital. The slight conveniences of saving some money, time, and effort may not
seem decisive, but mass behaviour is often driven by marginal advantages. For instance, posting a
question to a forum such as Reddit.com where qualified professions may provide free advice is a
powerful incentive to avoid a costly and time-consuming consultation with an experienced doctor.

Though there are risks associated with misdiagnosis, seeking advice online is generally more
reliable. Doctors vary in their quality and numerous studies in recent years support the counter-
intuitive conclusion that websites actually provide more trustworthy advice. This is a result of the
accumulation of many years' worth of data and the standardisation of detection, prognosis, and
treatment. For example, the website WebMD.com allows users to search for their symptoms online,
discover a range of possible causes and then decide themselves on the best path forward. This may
include a visit to a hospital if further tests are required that can only be conducted in person, but at
least the patient has saved time and money at the initial stage of diagnosis.

In conclusion, fewer people today visit doctors because there are cheap, convenient alternatives
online and this is largely positive. There are risks that must be guarded against but this change
cannot be reversed.

44
There is too much noise in many public places in cities.
What are the causes of this problem?
What can be done to solve the problem?

Public areas in cities today are becoming increasingly noisy. In my opinion, this change is caused
by surging urban populations and shifting attitudes to personal space. The best solutions involve
innovative urban design.

The underlying reasons for higher noise levels in public spaces are growing residential figures and
changes in social behaviour. Firstly, the migration of individuals from the countryside to cities has
been well documented over the last century. This trend shows no sign of abating and it is self-
evident that more residents talking, operating vehicles, and interacting in public areas will create
more noise. Moreover, people are now less self-conscious. This is a uniquely modern trend and is
most apparent on social media. Most people are now comfortable making videos in public, taking
photos, and talking loudly on their phones. This psychological shift has its benefits but one
drawback is the contribution to noise levels.

The most realistic solutions are adaptations by the authorities. I strongly believe that the trends
themselves cannot be countered since they follow the dictates of human nature. Attempting to ban
phone class in public or restrict residency numbers in certain cities would in fact engender greater
problems. Instead, governments can make myriad minor adjustments. Public spaces could include
more structures, such as trees and statues, in order to absorb sound. On public transport, there could
be softer padding so that sound does not bounce and travel as far. There may also be steps that could
be taken in terms of traffic and residential areas that would encourage more spread out cities with
lower density. These are minor solutions to a large problem, however, their impact in the aggregate
would be meaningful.

In conclusion, although cities are becoming noisier as they become more populous and people are
more open today, this can be remedied if authorities devise novel counters. In the future, this issue
will only become more pressing.

45
Some people say patriotism causes problems and is negative overall. Others feel that it is
beneficial for society at large. Do the advantages of patriotism outweigh its disadvantages?

Many feel that patriotism has a beneficial impact overall. In my opinion, although there are
legitimate reasons to be proud of one's country, patriotic feelings do generally produce more
negatives than positives.

Proponents of patriotism argue it is a natural impulse with tangible benefits. Firstly, a strong sense
of patriotism can be motivating. Individuals who have pride in their country are more likely to work
hard for the common good. This applies to a variety of positions in society and may include soldiers
serving in the military, healthcare workers during times of national emergencies, and even common
workers contributing to a flourishing national economy. Secondly, individuals can use investment in
their country's successes to support their own self-esteem. Most people support their country similar
to how sports fans root for a team. Success elevates their mood and connects them to a wider
community.

However, patriotism is often taken to extremes. This occurs most frequently with vulnerable
segments of society. For instance, it is common for military recruiters to target less affluent
individuals. If they serve in a war abroad, then there is a strong likelihood they will later suffer from
a mental or physical handicap. More generally, most people employ patriotism as a proxy for their
own personal achievements. This can be evidenced during the furor surrounding the Olympics every
four years. This quintessentially patriotic event costs taxpayers tremendously, inflames tensions
between rival countries, and distracts from investing time in personal development. At best,
patriotism is a marginal net negative and at worst it can foster an unhealthy dependency.

In conclusion, though patriotism is beneficial economically and in terms of one's self-esteem at

times, the drawbacks related to disassociation are more significant. Mental health should not be
dependent on the fortunes of one's compatriots.

46
Some people say that to prevent illness and disease, governments should focus more on reducing
environmental pollution and housing problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Certain concerned parties today contend that the optimal means of improving public health is to
confront pressing environmental and housing problems. In my opinion, though these solutions
would be helpful, it is more important to prioritise proper nutrition.

On the one hand, there are current issues concerning housing and the environment that impact
health. Many illnesses and conditions are either directly or indirectly related to one's environment.
For instance, a person who lives in an overcrowded metropolis such as Hanoi or Beijing must deal
on a daily basis with the immediate dangers of air pollution, potential drinking water contamination,
car accidents, and elevated crime rates. If there were fewer individuals in these cities and the air was
cleaner because there were more open, green areas, then it is probable that hospitals would be able
to focus more on a reduced number of patients.

On the other hand, there are various causes for diseases and the primary one is poor nutrition. In the
last several decades, lifespans globally have increased exponentially, largely as a result of advances
in medical science and greater understanding of the human body. A standout example of this would
be the plant-based diets that are widely recommended by most nutritionists. A person who
consumes little meat, reduces their carbohydrate intake, and mostly does not eat sugar will
drastically lower the risk of conditions ranging from diabetes and heart disease to Alzheimer's and
cancer. National health authorities can widely and effectively address these health problems by
legislating the levels of unhealthy ingredients in food products.

In conclusion, those in favour of combatting housing and environmental problems make legitimate
arguments though improving the average citizen's diet is in fact the best guarantee of good health.
Naturally, governments should pursue a balanced policy

47
In many countries, fast food is becoming cheaper and more widely available. Do the
disadvantages of this outweigh the advantages?

Many today are of the belief that the ubiquity of fast food provides enough enjoyment and economic
positives to outweigh its impact on public health. In my opinion, the disadvantages related to health
make this a negative development.

Those supporting the fast food industry typically point to the pleasure consumers derive and the
employment it provides. There is little to argue about in terms of enjoyment. Fast food is affordable
and tastes good. That explains its popularity and makes it accessible for people from even the lowest
socioeconomic backgrounds. Moreover, there are obvious economic benefits. Companies like
McDonald’s, Burger King, Baskin Robbins, and Domino’s Pizza are some of the largest employers
globally. Their economic contributions extend beyond providing poorly paid jobs as they are taxed
and thereby strengthen the federal budgets of both developing and developed nations.

Nonetheless, fast food has a huge impact in the health sector. Most tangibly, this concerns obesity.
Studies have shown that obesity rates soar in countries where fast food has become entrenched in
the local market. The best known example of this is in the United States, where obesity is reaching
epidemic proportions. Related and often symptomatic drawbacks include cardiovascular disease,
diabetes, and high blood pressure. Foods high in fat, sugar, and overprocessed ingredients have been
proven to exacerbate these conditions, with heart disease now the single greatest cause of death
around the world. This cannot be blamed entirely on fast food but there are very few healthy options
on most fast food menus and the majority of companies specialise in quintessentially unhealthy
foods like deep fried chicken, cheeseburgers, pizzas, and tacos.

In conclusion, despite the boons for enjoyment and the economy, fast food is a negative taken as a
whole given its impact on well-being. It is therefore important to regulate fast food companies to
curb their influence.

48
Fast food has become more common in recent years. Some people think that it has a negative
effect on lifestyles and diets. Do you agree or disagree?

Many individuals feel that the widespread proliferation of fast food negatively impacts both
lifestyles and eating habits. I am in complete agreement.

Firstly, as a result of fast food consumption, lifestyles are more passive. Before such restaurants, it
was more common for consumers to buy raw ingredients and prepare nutritious meals at home. This
occurs less often now as fast food offers a cheap, quick alternative. Over time, this can lead to
worsening cooking skills and a generally more lethargic lifestyle predicated around ordering meals
and watching TV shows and movies. Moreover, the ingredients in fast food are often empty calories
that do not provide the vitamins and minerals necessary to support an active lifestyle. A person who
eats McDonald's and KFC most days is more likely to lack energy and be unproductive.

Secondly, fast food is one of the least healthy possible additions to an individual's diet. Healthy
foods tend to be fresh fruits and vegetables and fast food consists largely of preservatives, chemicals
and addictive fats, sugars and carbohydrates. Even eating a single fast food meal a day has been
shown in numerous independent research studies to increase the risk of diseases ranging from
diabetes and cardiovascular disease to cancer and obesity. Fast food companies have recognized this
themselves and now offer healthy alternatives such as mini-salads to appeal to an increasingly
health conscious public.

In conclusion, the evidence for the negative impact of fast foods is nearly irrefutable as it
encourages a more sedentary lifestyle and is high in harmful fats and sugars. Whenever possible,
individuals should resist the immediate gratification of fast food.

49
In many countries, people now wear western clothes such as suits and jeans rather than
traditional clothing. Why is this the case? Is this a positive or negative development?

As the fashion industry has become increasingly closer, it is now more common for individuals to
wear western-style attire instead of their own traditional clothing. In my opinion, this is a natural
result of globalisation and is a negative on the whole given its lack of diversity.

Many countries now adopt western fashion trends due to the effects of globalisation. In past
centuries, consumers were limited to the clothes that they either made themselves or could procure
from their local area. Today, it is possible to efficiently transport vast quantities of goods by air,
land, and sea. These fashion products are often made by famous brands such as Nike and Calvin
Klein and can undercut local manufacturers' prices. The global nature of media, particularly with the
rise of the internet and social media, has also accelerated this process. Most people watch and listen
to western movies and music and are subconsciously influenced by western fashion.

In my opinion, the pervasiveness of western fashion is decidedly detrimental as it concentrates

wealth in unimaginative corporations. There are thousands of traditional styles of fashion around the
world that have now been subsumed into a limited range of western aesthetic preferences. For
instance, the Hmong communities in the North of Vietnam are famous for their vibrant design and
the use of sustainable, textured fabrics such as hemp. If their cultural contributions were to be lost, it
would necessarily mean a blander fashion world. The companies that now have the most power in
terms of fashion tend to be concerned with profit over creative expression, and therefore create
clothing without artistic merit.

In conclusion, wearing similar, typically western, clothing is a result of the spread of consumerism
and impairs cultural diversity. Consumers should strive to embrace more traditional and
environmentally-friendly fashion trends.

50
Despite the benefits for health, fewer people today than ever before exercise by walking. Why is
this? What can be done to encourage more walking?

Fewer individuals these days spend time walking despite the well-supported health benefits. In my
opinion, this is part of a larger societal shift towards more sedentary lifestyles and can only be
countered through innovative solutions.

The main reason individuals today walk less relates to technology. In the past, the average
individual might commute to work, spend their day sitting at a desk and walking little, but then meet
up with friends outside in an active setting. Now, a sizable percentage, if not the majority of
citizens, are more likely to spend time at home on their computers and smartphones watching
videos, sending emails, or simply disappear online for a few hours. Coupled with an increase in
remote working and migration away from the countryside into urban areas, it is no exaggeration to
claim that people today enjoy the most passive, sedentary lives in human history, for both better and
worse.

The remedies for less walking do not lie in a return to past ways of living but in ideas that take into
account modern lifestyle changes. Companies and governments must be flexible or risk being
ignored by increasingly savvy and discerning consumers. The best example of a solution comes
from technology like the FitBit smartwatch. FitBit tracks your daily steps and collates it with a
variety of health statistics to give users understanding of their activity level. This is one of the few
positive contributions that more advanced technology has made to exercise routines and companies
and governments that seek to develop similar devices will be able to keep pace with the inevitability
of more generally passive lifestyles.

In conclusion, the cause of less walking among the general populace relates to the conveniences of
modern technology and only novel countermeasures will be effective. However, individuals
themselves must naturally strive to walk more.

51
Everyone should become vegetarian because they do not need to eat meat to have a healthy diet.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today argue that since meat is not strictly a necessity, everyone should opt to become a
vegetarian. In my opinion, though there is an ethical argument for abstaining, it is also a
fundamental human desire.

Proponents of vegetarianism make a moral case. The crux of this position is that humans and
animals both inhabit the planet and one should not have priority over the other. Since humans can
live, arguably much healthier lives, by simply eating fruits and vegetables, it is a needless cruelty to
raise animals
in deplorable conditions and slaughter them by the millions. This argument is further supported by
advances in science which now allow for natural, plant-based fake meat products such as The
Impossible Burger, further calling into question animal cruelty.

However, the majority of all action is motivated by desire, not necessity. Individuals spend most of
their lives developing habits in order to enjoy their lives, rather than to fulfil necessary goals such as
sustenance. These activities range from the creation of art and consumption of entertainment to
playing
sports and enjoying time with friends and family. Eating animals is no different as it is a natural
human desire that produces pleasure. The moral component is a more recent development and
animals themselves would never consider such ethics if they had the ability to dominate mankind so
thoroughly.

In conclusion, despite the moral considerations, eating meat is an activity that individuals should be
able to choose themselves. Those who decide not to eat meat should be inclusive and recognize the
potential for differing perspectives.

52
Many People today do not feel safe either at home or when they are out. What are the causes?
What are the solutions?

Many individuals today no longer feel safe in their everyday lives. In my opinion, this is a result of
media coverage and the solutions all involve a continuation or slight modification of current
policies.

The main causes of this fear relate to the media. Nowadays, there are 24-hour news networks and
articles constantly being shared on social media. The stories that generate the most revenue are
invariably negative and morbid and this has led to excessive coverage of crime. In the aggregate,
this misleads the public into believing that the world is less safe today. Besides the volume, there is
also the method of coverage exacerbating this issue. News is more visual than even before and
individuals are more likely to be psychologically impacted by vivid imagery.

Residents will feel safer if crime continues to decline and there is more coverage of the progress
being made. The advent of surveillance technology and rising incomes globally has led to this
reduction in crime statistics in nearly every nation on Earth. Governments should continue the
initiatives focused on these two areas. However, it is also important for these facts to receive greater
publicity. Since the news media will always be motivated to cover more negative events,
governments must make their own efforts to show the progress of public safety.

This could be done through public service announcements and official reports. In conclusion, people
today worry about safety due to the volume and way in which crime is covered in the media and this
can be ameliorated if governments continue to make positive reforms and publicise the results.
Crime is, in fact, at its lowest level in human history.

53
Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others,
however, think that change is always good. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

Many people feel that change should be embraced without qualification while others believe it is
better to avoid new situations. In my opinion, though change can be positive in certain contexts, it
should not be pursued as valuable in itself.

Those in favour of change argue it is nearly always positive. Examples of good changes might
include moving to a new city, starting a new job, finding a new life companion, or even something
as simple as getting a pet. Each of these decisions is a means of addressing a desire or feeling of
dissatisfaction. One change that has become prevalent in recent decades relates to nutrition and
exercise. Such lifestyle changes are based on research that has definitively shown the importance of
a healthy diet and identified foods low in certain kinds of fats and carbohydrates. Combined with
weekly exercise, the results are superior fitness and improved longevity.

However, change is, more often than not, a means of disregarding one's responsibilities. Many
individuals change jobs or leave relationships simply because they feel they have lost their passion.
This effort to re-energize is typically unsuccessful because outward changes do little to alleviate
internal problems. Therefore, in the majority of cases, change is either an excuse to justify selfish
behaviour or a temporary and superficial solution. The best-known example of this would be the
classic 'mid-life crisis' that particularly affects men as they age and decide their life is not fulfilling
their most basic desires. Ultimately, most people would be better served by focusing on improving
their current situation rather than seeking transitory and exaggerated new experiences.

In conclusion, change should not be sought as a means of escaping one's primary duties. Change
should be an organic process and it is therefore advisable individuals do not pursue it as a goal
generally.

54
People living in the 21st century have a better life quality than people who lived in previous times.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some have argued that individuals living in today’s era enjoy the highest quality of life yet attained
in human history. I am largely in agreement with this contention despite the drawbacks associated
with technology.

Critics of this statement point out the psychological burden of modern technologies. This is most
apparently the case for the internet and social media. In past generations, individuals possessed
greater peace of mind and were more active, and less self-conscious, in their daily lives. Today,
nearly everyone is online for a large proportion of the day and they are typically scrolling
thoughtlessly through social media. Over time, the effects of using social media include addiction,
low self-esteem, lack of productivity, and a more sedentary overall lifestyle.

However, the downsides detailed above can be countered by individuals and are overshadowed by a
range of benefits. Individuals today live in an increasingly inclusive society. Examples of this
include the right to vote for women, equal political rights under the law, and greater diversity in the
workplace. Depending on how far one looks back in history, there is a strong likelihood that a
person would have a gruelling work schedule, die young from a disease or armed conflict, be
subjected to political and social
oppression, or simply not possess today’s modern conveniences. Few can argue against the marvels
of contemporary medicine, transportation, entertainment, and infrastructure.

In conclusion, though technology exacts a heavy mental toll, the overwhelming advantages of this
modern day make it the height of human civilization. This does not imply that there is not still
tremendous progress that must be made in the coming decades.

55
Many believe that the goal of one’s career should be to pursue a passion while others feel it is
merely a way to earn a livelihood. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Many today consider passion about one’s chosen career path more important than its utility. In my
opinion, this argument is idealistic and an unattainable approach for the majority of individuals.

Those who argue in favour of pursuing a passion point out it is a better guarantee of happiness.
Individuals who work in a field where they feel joy and satisfaction often profess to not be actually
working at all. This is the case for many high-achieving professionals such as athletes, successful
artists, and so on. By choosing a career that suits their interests, they are able to sustain consistent
motivation and therefore achieve more personally and for those who support them. However, these
are extremely rare exceptions and there is even a strong likelihood that people who excel in a
seemingly fun field may not enjoy the high expectations placed on them.

Moreover, the pathway to pursue a passion as a career is extremely challenging. Most people who
attempt to work in an area of passion will naturally struggle to earn a living. A person who decides
to become a stand-up comedian after university should expect many years of difficulty and the very
real possibility that they will eventually have to settle for a more commonplace career path. Even if
a person begins to find success in a given field, they may then find that their passion starts to lose
some of its intrinsic interest and ability to engage them. For that reason, many people wisely choose
to work at a decent job and satisfy their passions through their hobbies or family life.

In conclusion, though some may be able to achieve perfect satisfaction from a particular occupation,
the majority should opt for a career that sustains a decent standard of living. This was true in the
past and will remain the case in the foreseeable future.

56
Some think that politicians should always be honest while others feel that there are times when
they must lie. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion

Some believe that lying is an essential aspect of politics, while others think that leaders should be
honest at all times. In my opinion, though this can be taken to extremes, fabricating the truth is at
the heart of politics.

Those in favour of complete transparency argue this would lead to improved policy decisions. A
counter-example illustrating this would be leaders who infamously lied to the public such as
Lyndon Johnson during the Vietnam War. If he had been more candid, then public opinion might
have shaped policy decisions for the better. This can be generalised more widely today as there is
great agreement on issues ranging from environmentalism and LGBTQ rights to healthcare and
education. More openness in these sectors would allow the public to understand these issues better
and elect leaders who will enact their wishes.

However, lying enables politicians to accomplish their goals. There is often a sizable difference
between the ideal demanded of politicians and the actual expectations of their positions. For
example, influential leaders such as the President of the United States, are often brought up with
complex scenarios where they must choose between two morally compromised actions. In a
Hollywood movie there is always the possibility for the hero to remain self-righteous and achieve
their aims but in real life, this may not always be realistic. Therefore if a leader reveals the complete
truth, they may lose popular support, regardless of how justified the actions are because of the
unrealistic desires of the general populace.

In conclusion, despite the importance of transparency in influencing policy, it is essential for

politicians to be able to lie in order to perform their jobs effectively. Naturally, they should lie only
when absolutely necessary and strive for a more open,
forthright approach if possible

57
Many think intelligence is an innate quality. Others feel that intelligence can be improved
through learning. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some would claim that intelligence is largely determined by genetics while others feel it can be
learned and improved through determination. In my opinion, while there are hereditary factors, most
intelligence is developed.

The argument that intelligence is innate rests on genetic research. There has always been debate
about the relative weight of nature and nurture but no one disputes that genetics play at least a
substantial role. In studies that attempt to isolate the effects of upbringing, it has been demonstrated
that certain qualities such as spatial reasoning and linguistic prowess can be inherited. A good
example of this would be families that produce multiple members who excel in specific subject
areas such as mathematics and science. These conclusions can always be equivocated by the
surrounding environment, however, there exists a possibility that intelligence is primarily a result of
one’s genes.

However, other research has shown the primary role that practise plays in neurodevelopment. There
have been studies done demonstrating how the brain can physically alter even during adulthood.
One famous study looked at brain scans for taxi drivers applying for licences in London. It was
found that portions of their brains grew as neural connections strengthened and weakened in
preparation for a notoriously difficult exam. This same outcome has been replicated in numerous
papers and serves as the foundation for theories of ‘growth mindset’ and ‘grit’ which hold that an
individual has tremendous power in determining their own capacity and therefore intelligence.

In conclusion, the foundations of intelligence are overshadowed by the concerted study efforts of
individuals. This is uplifting news though the methods of study and importance of teachers also play
a key role.

58
Some people think it is better to have many short holidays during the year. Others believe it
would be beneficial to have fewer, longer vacations. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many people today argue that frequent, short holidays are preferable to long, infrequent breaks from
work and school. In my opinion, although short holidays are beneficial for mental health, longer
ones are superior as they concentrate travel-related inconveniences.

Those supporting shorter breaks contend they are crucial moments to recharge. The average worker
spends at least 40 hours a week at the office and holidays are an opportunity to forget their duties
and look after their emotional well-being. By having more frequent holidays, a person will be able
to look forward to them and manage their psychological mindset better throughout the year. This is
comparable to how many people achieve greater productivity at the office by working in short
bursts and taking frequent breaks.

However, travel becomes more efficient when vacations are longer. Most holidays require travellers
to book flights, hotels, and arrange travel plans with others. When actually taking the holiday, a
person invariably spends time at the airport, taking taxis, packing, and then later unpacking. Doing
this multiple times throughout the year wastes not only time but also energy. Therefore, by
combining holidays a person can save time which can then be better used enjoying one’s time while
on vacation. Over the course of an entire year, this can accumulate and make a significant difference
for an overburdened worker.

In conclusion, longer holidays are more convenient and therefore better than shorter ones, though
they admittedly are positive for one’s emotional health. Individuals and their employers may still
need to negotiate issues like this on a case-by-case basis.

59
Research shows that some activities are good for health and others are bad. Despite knowing
that, millions of people engage in unhealthy activities. What is the cause of this? What can be
done?

Despite the wealth of information available on nutrition and fitness today, many people are still
unhealthy. In my opinion, this relates to the challenges of maintaining a healthy lifestyle and can
best be countered by a variety of governmental regulations.

The primary cause for persistent poor health among the general populace is the difficulty of
establishing healthy habits. Most individuals are aware of the value of exercise and a nutritionally-
balanced diet consisting of mainly fruits and vegetables. However, people also naturally gravitate
towards addictive fast food products and junk food. This tendency is exacerbated by pressures in
life concerning work and family. Exercise is also a notoriously difficult habit to maintain. Most
people are too busy from work or study to exercise every day and would rather enjoy their leisure
time passively watching movies or scrolling through social media.

These proclivities to unhealthy lifestyle choices can be mitigated through government action.
Governments have the ability to regulate various industries and encourage healthier behaviour. For
instance, in many European countries the state plays a strong role in public health by controlling the
content of fat and sugar in certain products, limiting advertising of unhealthy foods to children, and
providing nutritious school meals. The combined signal from these various steps is to aid
individuals in their struggles to lead long-term healthy lives.

In conclusion, though many individuals struggle to consistently follow healthy lifestyles, they can
be supported by a variety of federal initiatives. Naturally, individuals must themselves assume some
degree of responsibility.

60
Childhood obesity has become a serious problem in recent years. What are the primary causes of
this? What measures should be taken to reduce childhood obesity?

Many interested parties are concerned about rising levels of obesity amongst children. In my
opinion, the cause of this phenomenon relates to modern lifestyles and can best be solved through
the combined efforts of parents and teachers.

More children suffer from obesity today because of less active lifestyles. Before the advent of the
internet and its ubiquitous accessibility on mobile devices, most children would engage in more
active diversions like riding their bike, hanging out with friends, playing a sport, and learning
various outdoor skills like how to fish and build a fire. These pastimes still exist but they have been
pushed to the periphery of modern life and parents must make a concerted effort to force children to
resist their screens. This is compounded by dietary changes. Although people today are more
knowledgeable than ever about nutrition, there is also a greater prevalence than ever before of
unhealthy junk foods high in salt, fat and carbohydrates.

This novel health crisis can be countered if parents and teachers work in tandem to instil life-
affirming habits. A good illustration of this would be in countries such as Japan and Finland where
parents typically discourage children from owning a smartphone until the beginning of university.
This prevents bad habits from developing and encourages healthier modes of living. Schools and
teachers can further fortify healthier habits by implementing and enforcing strict guidelines
concerning technology and nutrition. For example, teachers could ban smart devices from the
classroom and not allow young children to eat junk food in school.

In conclusion, overweight children are on the rise due to alterations in how they live today and both
parents and teachers are responsible for reversing this trend. If feasible, assistance from
governments would also be beneficial.

61
It is a waste of time to spend money buying luxury goods such as expensive bags and watches. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

As consumers become increasingly interested in luxury goods, some have argued that they are
essentially a waste of money. I am in agreement with this statement despite the qualification that
these purchases do not actively harm the world.

Those who are in favour of luxury goods point out that individual shoppers should be allowed to
spend their money freely. There are other purchases, such as buying inefficient cars, firearms, and
meat products, that are decidedly harmful to either individuals in certain cases or the environment
generally. Buying a Gucci or Hermes bag, in contrast, is a simple fashion choice that contributes to
companies that employ thousands while at the same time satisfying a customer’s desire for a
noteworthy status symbol. If there were laws banning such free decisions, then it could lead to a
range of other overly-strict regulations.

However, luxury goods are evidence of a less refined sense of taste. A good example of this would
be the clothing and bags made by high-end French and Italian brands. Although the design and
materials used for their products are good, they are not especially unique or special in any way. The
typical buyer of these products is willing to pay many times their actual value in order to be able to
display their wealth to others. This kind of showiness itself demonstrates that a person may have
abiding insecurities that force them to overcompensate with exorbitantly priced items. A more
discerning shopper might shop at less well-known establishments and focus on cultivating better
aesthetic taste.

In conclusion, regardless of the lack of real injury being caused, buying luxury goods is not a good
use of one’s money. Individuals should instead develop healthier buying and lifestyle habits.

62
Some feel that individuals should try to assimilate completely to the country where they live while
others feel it is more important to preserve their native culture. Discuss both sides and give your
opinion.

Many people these days argue that assimilation is an overly aggressive process. In my opinion,
though assimilation to a certain degree can threaten one’s cultural heritage, it is nonetheless crucial
for personal reasons to assimilate into mainstream society.

The main reason certain parties are against assimilation is that it has the potential to nearly erase
one’s origins. This is commonplace in rapidly urbanising areas where the economy is progressing
quickly. For instance, many Native Americans in the United States choose to move off of
reservations and settle in nearby cities for improved education, healthcare, and career options. Over
time, these individuals may stop celebrating traditional festivals and speaking their native language,
eventually fully assimilating with a foreign culture. However, instances of complete assimilation are
rare and many people seek to preserve their traditions to greater or lesser extents.

Furthermore, assimilating is a necessary stage if a person wishes to flourish in a multicultural

society. In the United States, there is a diverse range of demographics, often termed “the melting
pot.” Early in its history, many immigrants in the US had to learn English in order to acclimate to
society. Even today, individuals from other countries are expected to speak the national language at
most workplaces and a failure to learn English can drastically limit one’s career options. Over
generations, embracing English leads many families to lose their roots to some degree but it is
justified given its impact on their daily life and expected standards of living.

In conclusion, when there is clear conflict between assimilating and preserving one’s culture,
individuals should prioritise the latter. There are naturally many situations where communities can
achieve the ideal of accomplishing both goals simultaneously.

63
It has been argued that people today seek attention more than past generations. Why is this? Is
this a positive or a negative development?

Many feel that individuals today are more addicted to receiving attention relative to past
generations. In my opinion, this is a result of technological shifts and is decidedly negative in terms
of mental health.

The primary cause of greater levels of attention-seeking in society today is the availability of
technology to post media online. The capacity for a person to seek attention in the past was limited
by the reactions of others and fewer opportunities in real life. Today, people can post on websites
such as Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok about themselves, a habit particularly pervasive
among media-savvy young people. As individuals receive attention through these social media
platforms, they are likely to become addicted to the concomitant small and consistent dopamine
bursts. Since no one is there in person to stop this behaviour, it persists and becomes difficult to
abandon.

I would argue that this focus on attention leads to a reliance on the esteem of others. A person who
has become addicted to the attention received online might be engaging in fairly unhealthy
behaviours such as posting superficial selfies or extreme political viewpoints. These posts might
then form the basis of their self-esteem. Instead of building confidence through healthy habits such
as exercising, making art, and socialising, they may come to direct their energies mainly towards the
fulfilment of what receives the most engagement from their followers online. This elevation of the
values of others can ultimately lead to long-term mental health concerns.

In conclusion, people today prioritise the opinions of others and have less confidence because of
how technology and social media have transformed the world. It is therefore crucial for individuals
to identify and implement more positive lifestyle choices.

64
Serious health problems associated with obesity are increasing. What is the cause of increased
obesity? How can this problem be fixed?

Many policymakers and health experts are concerned about the current health epidemic related to
soaring obesity rates globally. In my opinion, the underlying causes of this trend are changing
lifestyles and the best solution would involve government action.

Obesity is a direct result of alterations to the way individuals live these days. Research has
definitively shown that past generations were more likely to engage in active, outdoor activities.
People today, however, spend more time at home, addicted to consumer electronics and their many
uses. Smartphones have quickly become the chief source of entertainment for most consumers as
they are used to send and receive messages, watch videos, read news articles, listen to music, and
play games. This combination of convenient entertainment is the irresistible lure that has created
humanity’s most passive generation.

The countermeasures for such a large-scale societal dilemma can only come from governments.
Individuals are too susceptible to instant gratification to make wholesale lifestyle changes against
their own interests and corporations are more concerned with exploitation than altruistic reform.
Governments must therefore reverse this trend. One method would involve instituting bans for
smart devices in schools in hopes of instilling positive habits into the next generation. Another
related measure would be to tax companies producing these devices and content at higher rates in
order to incentivise alternative revenue streams.

In conclusion, as consumer electronics and social media now define modern lifestyles, there has
been a concomitant rise in poor health that can only be tackled effectively by federal governments.
It is therefore imperative that steps are taken in the near future.

65
It is important for people to take risks, in both their professional lives and personal lives. Do the
advantages of taking these risks outweigh the disadvantages?

Some would argue that taking risks, both in terms of one's private life and one's working career, is
advantageous overall. I am generally in agreement with this contention due to the potential for
advancement and growth.

Firstly, risk-taking can expedite one's career goals. Many workers decide early on that they are
content with their position in society and therefore often fail to actualize their potential. Others,
however, attempt various business enterprises and transition from field to field in order to find a
good match. Although this may lead to short-term setbacks, in the long-term such ambitious
individuals are far more likely to become very successful in life. Assuming that these risks are taken
early in one's career, there is a strong likelihood that they will eventually profit the risktaker in
question.

Moreover, an individual who takes risks will also develop more mature personal relationships. In
more conservative countries, many young people do not begin to have serious romantic
relationships until after university. The result of this is that they are often immature and it can lead
to poor and naive choices in terms of marriage and parenting. In contrast, a person who takes risks
in their personal life and enters into various relationships throughout high school and university will
become a better judge of character. Their allegedly risky behaviour can then serve as the foundation
for personal growth and increased maturity.

In conclusion, taking risks can be a catalyst for tremendous growth and is therefore advisable. The
disadvantages of risk-taking can also be mitigated in most contexts by not being inordinately
reckless.

66
Nowadays, an increasing number of people with health problems are using alternative medicines
and treatments instead of visiting their normal doctor. Do you think this is a positive or negative
development?

In recent years, a growing number of unwell individuals have begun to adopt the use of alternative
medicines and treatments. In my opinion, though these can sometimes be effective, this trend is
negative overall due to the superiority of modern medicine.

Those who support alternative remedies argue there is historical evidence in favour of their
effectiveness. A pertinent example of this would be the popularity of traditional Chinese medicine
in Asia. Many of their medicines and treatments date back hundreds or even thousands of years.
Over that time, they have been tested and their effect verified in some cases. Contemporary health
researchers are often able to later identify the scientific rationale but it is possible there are remedies
in use today that we still do not understand. This ignorance should not serve as a justification to
question their overall importance.

However, the vast majority of viable medical treatment is modern. Scientists now understand more
rigorously the underlying structures of cells, viruses, bacteria, cancers, and various other maladies.
This has allowed for the creation of undeniably effective procedures such as surgery and the
discovery of crucial medicines like penicillin. There is no doubt as to why these medicines work and
therefore in the future they will only become more refined and safe. In contrast, traditional medicine
may be effective for unknown reasons but its applicability is limited and it will not advance
overtime.

In conclusion, with few exceptions, traditional medicine is a better alternative to less verifiable
treatments and pharmaceuticals. Individuals can attempt to use them but should rely on their usual
doctors

67
In some countries, more and more people are becoming interested in finding out about the
history of the house or building they live in. What are the reasons for this? How can people
research this?

There is a growing trend whereby residents are researching the history of their homes. In my
opinion, this is due to a natural curiosity and practical concerns and should be done through official
channels.

Many are interested in the past of their home because they desire to link with history and are
worried about potential structural faults. The first reason is analogous to exhaustively studying
family genealogy. By researching one's ancestors or place of residence, it is possible to understand
and establish a connection with the past. Moreover, there is a pragmatic reason related to historic
construction methods. Older homes in particular may have employed unsafe techniques or materials
that will degrade, creating the risk of structural damage and, in the worst cases, collapses. By
learning about the house and period when it was built, residents can take the necessary steps to
ensure the house is structurally sound.

The method for carrying out such specialised research involves requesting local records. It is
possible to do initial research through "word of mouth" and collecting relevant stories in a
community. However, this information may be unreliable, and therefore an individual should
endeavour to contact their local building authorities. In most countries, it is possible to register a
freedom of information request and receive the required documents from municipal offices.
Governments have little incentive to protect such information and are likely to be receptive and
helpful in offering assistance. Residents can then be assured they have the most trustworthy
information possible in order to better understand the history of their home and any possible defects
in its construction.

To conclude, some today gather information concerning the history of their home to understand the
past and guarantee their safety. This development is advisable and the authorities should comply
and encourage such fact-finding.

68
Some claim that men are naturally more competitive than women. To what extent do you agree
or disagree?

Men are stereotypically considered to be more competitive than women. In my opinion, though this
is ostensibly true, in fact, competitiveness just finds different expressions in females.

The traditional argument in favour of this claim is that men are predisposed genetically to
aggressive traits. Men have elevated levels of the hormone testosterone. This is supposedly an
evolved adaptation as males in human prehistory had to battle one another for dominance and
required a surplus of strength to hunt and provide for the whole family. In the modern world, this
translates to a heightened aggressiveness often reflected in the number of ambitious men, driven to
excel in their chosen field. Numerous studies and tests have confirmed the surface-level validity of
this argument.

However, this ignores the fact that women simply have different outlets for their competitive
qualities. In the past, societal prejudices often discouraged women from expressing an interest in
competitive sports and ambitious career paths. It is now more common for females to embrace their
competitive drive and strive for goals similar to men. However, this is merely a redirection of innate
desires that were already present. Instead of competing in traditionally competitive fields, women in
past generations focused their energies towards more domestic matters. These might not have been
as seemingly competitive but women nonetheless had to compete against each other to gain the
highest possible position in society available to them at the time.

In conclusion, despite the evolutionary evidence to support the natural competitiveness of males, I
feel that the sexes are generally equal in this area though women express this desire more subtly.
Such narrow stereotyping of both genders is often overly simplistic.

69
Cooking at home is a waste of time because there are so many convenient fast food options that
make life less stressful. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people today feel that cooking food at home has become inessential due to the ubiquity of fast
food restaurants. In my opinion, the understandable appeal of fast food does little to undermine the
health benefits of preparing your own meals.

Fast food is convenient. This is evidenced through its popularity and is based on how quickly it can
be purchased, its price, the fact you do not have to prepare it yourself and how easy it is to clean up
afterwards. These incentives combine to entice the average worker, coming home tired after a long
day, that some burgers from McDonald’s or a pizza from Domino’s will not only make their lives
easier and reduce their stress levels but also help them cope with any personal problems. Given all
these motivating factors, it is no surprise that many today have convinced themselves that cooking
at home is a waste of time.

Regardless, the above listed reasons do not outweigh the health risks of fast food or the health
benefits of home-cooked meals. Fast food has been shown, in numerous replicated studies over
decades of research, to be one of the leading contributors to the risk factors for heart disease,
diabetes, and cancer. The alternative to fast food is cooking at home. This is not always healthy; it is
perfectly possible to prepare an unhealthy meal by oneself. However, home cooks have complete
control over the ingredients and are not adding the preservatives or chemicals that are typically
found in fast food. They are instead more likely to serve fresh fruits and vegetables and be generally
conscious of what goes into their body, thereby improving short and long-term health.

In conclusion, fast food is a naturally attractive time and stress saver that does not imply people
should stop cooking at home. The health benefits of home-cooking are crucial and this is unlikely to
change in the near future.

70
People are more similar than they are different. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some believe that there are more similarities between individuals than differences. In my opinion,
natural inequality is a fact of life but what people have in common is greater.

The main argument in favour of great difference comes from natural predisposition strengthened
through social conditions. People are not born equal. Some are naturally gifted from a young age
while others struggle to discover any talents in themselves throughout life. Added to these genetic
factors are social ones. An individual growing up in a wealthy family, with access to a quality
education and supportive parents will have a much better chance in life. The separation from
someone with a less privileged background will only widen over the ensuing years, giving the
impression of great difference between individuals.

Nonetheless, there are striking psychological similarities between all humans. Everyone has similar
desires and fears, though their expression varies. Evidence of this can be found in the exploitation of
human nature by advertising companies. These companies realised early in the 20th century that the
wants of consumers were nearly identical. They tapped into a deep, common psychological profile
and began advertising aspirations over products. Foods that have very little to do with intimacy are
stylised with sexual imagery and cars are presented as signifiers of identity. The basic human desire
to be part of a ‘tribe’ that defines them is present in the lifestyle cults built around the savvy
marketing of companies like Apple and Tesla. It follows that all individuals are shaped by and
motivated towards the same inner drives.

In conclusion, though there are clear social and natural differences between individuals, our shared
humanity ellides those dissimilarities. It is important to recognise the value of both difference and
commonality.

71
It is sometimes suggested that primary school children should learn how to grow vegetables and
keep animals. Do you think that the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Some feel farming vegetables and taking care of animals should be added to the primary school
curriculum. In my opinion, though there are drawbacks related to its feasibility, it would be a
positive overall.

The disadvantages involve the struggles to implement this practice. Firstly, inner city schools do not
have easy access to farms. A school in New York City already faced with rising student numbers
and a lack of resources cannot be expected to bus thousands of students to nearby farmland on a
regular basis. That would unequivocally be a poor allocation of limited resources. Secondly, even
schools located in the countryside would have trouble enacting such an ambitious policy. They
would need to connect with possibly reluctant local farms, convince teachers, parents, and students
of the benefits, and divert funding towards a program with dubious 21st century value as society
becomes increasingly urban and less agrarian.

Nonetheless, the skills learned would be transferable and beneficial in themselves. Children learning
to grow vegetables will be able to do that their entire lives and much more inclined to later tend a
private garden. This can save money, encourage productivity, and improve health. Taking care of
animals will also help them if they choose to keep livestock or pets. The greater benefit, however,
will come from cultivation of personal qualities. Children will gain a greater sense of responsibility
and internalise the real world effects of their negligence or dedication. Later in life regardless of
their occupation and where they live, they will have increased self-reliance and a stronger
recognition of how they can shape the world around them.

In conclusion, the personal benefits to raising animals and growing vegetables outweigh any
perceived drawbacks concerning resources. Where possible, schools ought to enact these changes.

72
Many young people today spend too much time following the latest fashion trends in areas such
as clothing and technology. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today feel that young people are overly focused on the latest fashion trends which encompass
areas like clothing and technology. In my opinion, this can be taken to extremes but in general an
emphasis on beauty is positive.

The main argument against the growing primacy of fashion is that it is distracting. When individuals
are spending time and money picking out the latest smartphone or brand name clothes, they are
necessarily not able to allocate those same resources to other areas of life. They might neglect
personal growth if they are too wrapped up in their appearance, and have less time and energy for
social or political causes such as protecting the environment or protesting police brutality. This
worldly obliviousness is certainly present in individuals but it would be a mistake to generalise it to
everyone interested in fashion.

The majority of those concerned with fashion are simply prioritising aesthetics. In the past,
functionality was a point of emphasis. For example, computers made by IBM and Dell worked well
but had uninspiring design. The design culture changed completely when Apple was founded and
built beautiful machines that also performed to a high level. This now mainstream movement means
that consumers today are no longer content with functionality, whether in phones, clothes or other
personal accessories. They instead require sleek, intuitive design and this compels companies to
meet expectations, with the end result being nicer-looking products and, by extension, a more
beautiful world.

In conclusion, though obsession with fashion is potentially distracting, its overall impact is to
elevate. Nonetheless, it is still important for individuals to balance their desire to look good with
deeper virtues.

73
One of the most important issues facing the world today is a shortage of food and some think
genetically modified foods are a possible solution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Surging global populations have led some to suggest genetically modified foods as one potential
avenue of meeting demand. In my opinion, though this new food technology has its risks, it is a
viable solution.

Detractors point to the unknown effects of GM foods on the human body. It is common sense that
many of the methods in practice today, such as injecting livestock with growth hormone are not
only unethical but also could have unintended adverse effects. This situation mirrors that of artificial
preservatives, which some researchers believe are one of the catalysts behind rising cancer rates.
The longitudinal studies currently being done on GM food consumption are inconclusive and the
industry is evolving so quickly that they may be irrelevant by the time they have clear results.

Nonetheless, the dangers detailed above will decrease with more research and it is a burgeoning
science with unlimited potential. The research into GM foods so far has helped to create insect
resistant crops, which decreases the need for pesticides that have their own risks for health.
Scientists claim that as they learn more about genetics, they will be able to create foods with greater
nutritional content. Moreover, there are new crops, such as strains of corn and okra, that can be
grown with less water than normal. This is particularly important in regions susceptible to famine
like sub-Saharan Africa.

In conclusion, the possible health risks of GM foods do not outweigh the logic of taking full
advantage of emerging innovations. There should be controls and regulations but this research
should be ongoing.

74
CRIME AND PUNISHMENT

75
The news should not report detailed information about crimes because it can have negative
consequences. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There are many today who feel that the news media over-reports details of crimes. I agree this is a
negative overall given its impact on ongoing cases, though I would concede there are also legitimate
public safety concerns at stake.

The justification that news media outlets fall back on is that they perform a public service. This
applies mainly for situations where the criminal is still at large or has just been released from prison.
For example, several years ago there was a sniper terrorising districts around Washington D.C. The
media revealed the suspected vehicle so people could avoid or report it. This same rule holds true
when a convict is released from jail. It is common for the media to report on inmate releases,
especially when it comes to sexually motivated crimes, so that residents are aware of potential
dangers in their neighbourhood.

However, the media often becomes an obstacle for law enforcement by reporting sensitive
information. Typically, the police will attempt to withhold details that may aid criminals attempting
to evade capture. If the public are aware of the type of vehicle or have a physical description of their
features, then the criminal also has this information. Moreover, investigators of cold cases try to
keep secret certain pieces of information that only the guilty party would know in order to avoid
false confessions. In these instances, news reports that reveal key information are doing more harm
than good in the pursuit of good ratings.

In conclusion, reporting on crimes can help keep viewers safe but giving out too much detail will
surely hinder the efforts of law enforcement. Media outlets ought to therefore disclose only enough
information as is required for public safety and otherwise exercise restraint.

76
Although it is generally illegal, physical punishment continues in many countries. Some argue
that parents should have the right to punish their children in this way. Do you agree or disagree?

Some traditional parents argue that they should be allowed to punish their children physically. I am
in strong disagreement with this contention despite the legitimacy of parental rights.

Those in favour of parents being permitted to punish their children physically point out this is an
historically ingrained privilege. For thousands of years, parents have had the ability to raise their
children according to their own beliefs and values. This includes choices related to culture, religion,
diet, and lifestyle. Physical punishment can be theoretically added to this list as it has a massive
impact on a child's psychology and future identity. The support for this practice is that many
successful individuals have anecdotally expressed gratitude to parents who hit them when they were
younger, believing that it instilled a sense of discipline in them.

However, research has shown that the positive impact in select cases of corporal punishment is
greatly outweighed by emotional and psychological abuse. The vast majority of children who were
physically abused develop either temporary or lasting side-effects. The most common one is that
children are not as confident and willing to express themselves because they consistently fear
punishment from a loved one. As they get older, this can become a barrier both for interpersonal
relationships and their public persona. Many children who have only learned discipline through
physical punishment end up hitting their own children and this can create an ongoing cycle of abuse.

In conclusion, although parents should have the right to raise their children as they see fit, this
prerogative must be limited in the case of physical abuse. In most nations, there are already laws
banning corporal punishment.

77
Prison is the common way most countries try to solve the problem of crime. However, a more
effective solution is to provide the public a better education. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?

Some would argue that although punishment is the most pervasive means of combating crime
globally, education would in fact be far more efficacious. In my opinion, there are strong grounds
for this opinion but ultimately deterrence remains the central core of all legal systems.

Those who favour education are trying to resolve systemic issues. There can be little debate over the
fact that crime is overwhelmingly driven by necessity. Individuals who have few other options in
life are more likely to see criminal activity as a viable alternative. By educating a population well
and providing at minimum a high school diploma for every citizen, governments can effectively
eliminate this motive. For instance, countries with quality education systems are much less likely to
have high crime rates.

However, the solution detailed above is difficult to implement and the simplest method to
discourage crime is to punish criminal acts. There are many justifications cited for punishment but
the most basic is the need to deter future crimes. A criminal being put in prison does not reverse
their past action but it does deter the same action being committed by other individuals in the future.
If there were no punishments or extremely lenient sentences, it is a near inevitability that individuals
would commit crimes, for a range of motives, more frequently.

In conclusion, education addresses the root causes of crime yet punishment is still a more effective
preventative countermeasure. A combination of both is naturally ideal.

78
Some people believe more actions can be taken to prevent crime, while others think that little can
be done. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Many concerned parties today feel that crime has already been reduced as much as is realistically
possible. While I agree this may be true in nations where security is prioritised over privacy rights,
there is still tremendous progress that can be made globally.

Those who argue crime no longer needs addressing point to technological innovations. This
situation is most apparent in authoritarian nations. Security surveillance can include the use of street
cameras, digital tracking, and eavesdropping on private communications. For instance, in South
Korea the crime rate in most urban areas is negligible and the average person reports little anxiety
about possible criminality, in contrast to periods in the past when there were more instances of
robbery, assault, theft, pickpocketing, and so on. These technological shifts have greatly aided law
enforcement in prosecuting criminals thereby also increasing the deterrence of potential offences.

However, crime still exists and can be countered by addressing the deeper, societal roots. The main
cause of all crime is poverty. When individuals earn a wage sufficient to maintain a decent standard
of living, the entire motive for most crimes disappears. The evidence for this is that in wealthy
countries where there is a relatively even distribution of wealth, the crime rates are low and the
police do not require draconian punishment or surveillance techniques. Beyond income, it is also
possible to invest in improving mental health. Many people today spend too much time online and
are vulnerable to extremist views. A still significant proportion of crimes could be eliminated by
encouraging people to spend more time outdoors in their community.

In conclusion, though technology has reduced certain kinds of criminality greatly, it is still possible
to lower crime rates by embracing a holistic, societal approach. The complete eradication of crime is
likely impossible and therefore there will always be a need to make progress.

79
Crime rates will fall as advances in technology make it easier to detect and prevent crimes. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people believe that as technology advances, it will ease the challenges of law enforcement. I
am generally in agreement though these innovations will not completely eliminate criminality as it
is inherent to human nature.

Critics would argue that crime is a natural human instinct. Crime has existed in all human society
for thousands of years and improvements in law enforcement can only hope to limit, not extinguish,
a basic element of human nature. The reason for this is the natural conflict between the desires of
individuals and the expectations of society. In most cases, an individual inhibits his or her impulses,
but some lack this restraint and violate the dictates of society. Many of these individuals, for reasons
related to nature or upbringing, would struggle to control themselves even if there was near-
certainty they would be apprehended.

Nonetheless, crime can be effectively countered by more invasive surveillance. Governments now
have the capacity to install cameras in the physical world and watch individuals carefully online as
well. The best known examples of this would be in countries where cameras are common. In these,
often authoritarian nations, governments are able to record footage of nearly every street. As
criminals are aware there is a near 100% chance they will be filmed and arrested, crime statistics in
those areas are negligible. This reduction in crime due to an awareness of ubiquitous surveillance
can also be extended to the online sphere, where law enforcement can monitor VPNs, IP addresses
to detect and trace illegal activity.

In conclusion, despite the likelihood that crime will never be completely eliminated, the advent of
increased surveillance in particular will lead to drastic reductions in offences in the coming decades.
Governments will then, as always, have to balance the priorities of safety against claims to freedom
and privacy.

80
Some believe that more action should be taken to prevent crime, while others feel that crime is
being tackled effectively now. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Though crime rates have fallen to historic lows in most nations, there are many who feel further
action is still required. In my opinion, there should always be criminal prevention efforts, however,
on level, crime is being opposed adequately.

Those who believe crime requires greater prioritisation identify its effects, particularly in
underserved segments of a population. Crime is still pervasive in areas rife with poverty, such as in
neglected neighbourhoods in inner cities. An illustrative example of this would be the infamous
favelas of Brazil. Residents in these communities must remain constantly vigilant for muggings and
robberies and there is a high likelihood that in their lifetime they will come into contact with
criminal elements. The causes of such crime-ridden slums are complex but the results for millions of
individuals in cities around the world deserve meaningful countermeasures.

Nonetheless, criminal activity already receives sufficient funding as evidenced by its decline. Crime
is best tackled through a combination of economic, educational, and criminal justice reform and as
developing countries become wealthier, there is a concomitant effect on crime. Criminality is
therefore being addressed and it would be unrealistic to expect a world without crime given the
realities of human nature. Instead of diverting more money towards an area on the mend already,
governments can continue to also fund schools, hospitals, state universities, defence, infrastructure
and a host of other areas that may themselves indirectly contribute to eradicating crime.

In conclusion, though crime impacts the daily lives of many citizens, it is already being successfully
curbed and there are other key areas deserving of budgetary consideration. Governments must
nonetheless balance these concerns and remain vigilant towards changes in this promising pattern.

81
Young people who commit crimes should be treated the same as adults by the authorities. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many would argue that minors and adults should be treated equally by the law. In my opinion,
despite the potential positive effects of this sentiment, it ignores key contextual factors.

Defenders of this proposal contend it would deter more possible criminals. The primary reason that
all individuals are punished by the law is to prevent them and others from committing similar
crimes in the future. If young people are given more lenient sentences this would not encourage
them to commit crimes but it would also not serve as effective discouragement. This applies for all
age demographics more or less equally. For instance, in nations where laws are strict, there tends to
be less crime as individuals greatly fear the consequences of their actions.

However, equal punishment for all ages lacks basic human compassion. Most adults have achieved
the cognitive development necessary to fully understand the difference between right and wrong and
how their actions impact others. Minors, the younger ones especially, are inherently less mature. For
example, many teenagers can be influenced by their peers and the media and have not established
independent thinking based on high self-esteem and confidence. Therefore, they are more easily
convinced to participate in reckless and, in extreme cases, criminal behaviour. Only as adults are
they able to reevaluate their actions as minors and understand better the flaws in their previous
thinking.

In conclusion, though greater equality would strengthen the principle of deterrence, minors should
be given different treatment due to their lower levels of maturity. This also naturally can vary from
situation to situation

82
Some feel that punishment should focus more on rehabilitation instead of long prison terms.
Others feel prison terms are important for social stability. Discuss both sides and give your
opinion.

Some today have argued that the primary goal of the criminal justice system should be to
rehabilitate rather than simply punish offenders. In my opinion, though there are exceptions, reforms
prioritising rehabilitation should be embraced.

In particular instances, it is crucial to place the welfare of the majority above the interests of
criminals. This most commonly occurs in cases involving violent criminals and repeat offenders.
There are individuals who have been identified as sociopaths by trained clinicians and represent a
threat to society. Punishing them through lengthy incarcerations serves a dual purpose, at once
deterring other criminals and also preventing them from harming innocent citizens. The attempt to
rehabilitate such individuals is admirable but likely to fail and the risks of releasing a person early
who has made a bad-faith effort at improving themselves can pose a serious risk to public safety.

However, rehabilitation is a more sustainable solution to criminality in general. Today, the study of
psychology has advanced to a point that allows modern facilities to focus more on rehabilitating
criminals. A person who commits a crime is likely to suffer from specific psychological problems
either based on inherited traits or their upbringing. In the former case, there are pharmaceuticals
now that can treat and rehabilitate individuals suffering from mental illness. For the latter situations,
it is possible to offer therapy, combined with medication, to address and help criminals overcome
the sources of their behaviour. For instance, this is already typically done with minors as they are
impressionable and there is a strong chance they will be able to reform and commit themselves to
law-abiding behaviour.

In conclusion, in extreme cases there is little chance of rehabilitation and the community at large is
the priority. However, a more progressive system involves the compassionate rehabbing and
reintegration into society of criminals.

83
Shops should not be allowed to sell any food or drinks that have been scientifically proven to be
bad for people’s health. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There have been strong calls in recent years for shops to be banned from selling any unhealthy
foods. In my opinion, though this policy would greatly benefit public health, it is too great a
restriction on freedom.

Proponents of this reform argue that poor health is a global epidemic. This crisis has emerged due to
the proliferation of fast food and other highly processed food products combined with the
prevalence of more passive lifestyles. As a result, rates of obesity and various related conditions
have surged. Since individuals themselves have proven themselves largely incapable of regulating
their own behaviour, governments would be justified in taking drastic measures to protect people
from their own worst impulses. However, despite this alleged epidemic, life expectancy has reached
its highest point in human history.

Moreover, governments should aim to preserve, rather than limit, freedom. The principal
responsibilities of governments are to guarantee freedom and safety, two tenets that are often in
conflict. When it comes to matters of individual choice and lifestyle, such as what foods to eat, most
citizens in a modern society expect a wide degree of liberty. For instance, an average office worker
wants to be able to choose foods that taste good as an indulgence after work even if they are not
healthy. This person might lead an overall healthy lifestyle but still enjoy occasional unhealthy
snacks.

In conclusion, even though banning unhealthy foods at their source would greatly improve health
for the average person, it would also constrain a person’s ability to live life as they choose.
Therefore, more moderate policies should be pursued.

84
Some believe that new science related to criminal forensics should be used to look at old cases.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It has recently been argued that modern forensic science developments should be used to review
older cases. In my opinion, this is a logical development that should be pursued when reasonably
possible.

Those who argue against this reform point out the potential expense. The methods used today,
primarily related to various kinds of blood and DNA tests, are very expensive. Countries must
weigh these costs against other areas of criminal justice such as law enforcement, prisons, courts,
new cases, and so on. If a country were to decide to test a wide range of physical evidence from the
past, it would likely require the majority of a criminal system’s budget and necessitate cuts in other
areas. It is therefore infeasible to perform these tests for all currently convicted criminals.

However, modern forensic techniques are considerably more reliable than they were in past
decades. Most convictions before the 1990s were based on circumstantial evidence or less
trustworthy forms of forensics. Today, DNA testing allows for far greater accuracy and could be
applied to thousands of cases in order to either exonerate or confirm guilt. A good example of this
would be in the United States where there are criminals who have appealed past verdicts and been
found innocent of their crimes in many cases. This allows the police to re-open these cases and
attempt to apprehend the true perpetrators.

In conclusion, although reviewing old cases may not always be necessary, it should be done
generally in order to better guarantee just results. It is also important to recognize that modern
methods may be fallible at times.

85
Some countries have legal ages at which people can drink. Other countries believe not having
strict laws is a better policy. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

In many countries, there are stringent laws regulating alcohol consumption while in other nations,
the rules are less strict. In my opinion, though these laws often serve a useful function, it is better to
allow for freedom in communities.

Those who argue in favour of laws concerning drinking age point to the potential for abuse. Medical
professionals have been aware for decades of the health drawbacks of drinking alcohol related to
brain functioning, liver disease, heart disease, obesity, and more. Even in small amounts, alcohol
can be harmful. Young people, by nature, are less mature and less likely to understand the
consequences of dangerous behaviour. A good example of this would be in the United States where
there are high incidences of alcoholism and alcohol poisoning among younger people. By restricting
drinking until the age of 21, the government is able to at least limit the negative effects of reckless
drinking.

Moreover, allowing communities to address drinking as a social matter will have greater overall
impact. The best argument for this is in countries such as France and Italy where there is no legal
age for drinking. In these countries, responsible drinking is a crucial part of the culture and children
learn about it from a young age. As they get older, they are then less likely to drink excessively
having developed a more mature attitude to alcohol. The added benefit to this approach is that the
community can act as a force for good in an individual’s life. This stands in stark contrast to
countries with strict legal drinking ages where individuals often feel constrained and in opposition
to the state.

In conclusion, though there are legitimate concerns relating to the legal drinking age, it is a more
mature solution to allow communities to educate young people about responsible consumption.
Naturally, this is a long-term solution that cannot be implemented in all countries immediately.

86
Some people believe that there should be a fixed punishment for each type of crime. Others,
however, argue that the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing
it, should always be taken into account when deciding on the punishment. Discuss both sides and
give your own opinion.

For centuries, countries have attempted to strike the right balance between fixed sentences for
crimes and taking heed of mitigating circumstances. Personally, I believe that the former approach
is more advisable due to its deterring effect.

Proponents of individualised sentences often point out the unique context of every crime.
Circumstances always play a role in shaping a person’s life to the point at which crime becomes a
viable option. The best evidence of this comes from the simple fact that economic status is the
number one determiner of criminal activity. Take for example shoplifting; the majority of
shoplifters are poor and their reasons are diverse. One person might steal to feed their family, while
another does it from wanton desire or for the rush from taking a risk. Though the crime is the same,
the circumstances seemingly dictate separate sentences.

However, such a personalised approach to sentencing risks undermining law and order. If people
know that they can make excuses to get away with a crime, however legitimate these reasons might
be, they are more likely to commit the crime. Conversely, if every case of shoplifting is punished
the same with little or no consideration of the motives, fewer people will shoplift. This applies to all
crimes and is the central motivating principle of deterrence, which is the foundation of law and all
stable societies. Some individuals will be treated unjustly but the public will benefit on the whole.

In conclusion, though fixed sentences may appear unfair at first glance, they have an inimitable
effect on society. Courts will always strive to be just but the more straightforward and predictable
law is, the more effectively it will deter potential criminals.

87
Studies show that crime rates are lower among those with educational degrees. Therefore, the
best way to reduce the crime rate is to educate criminals while they are still in prison. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?

Research has shown that educational level is a key determiner of potential criminal behaviour,
leading many to suggest reorienting prisons to focus on helping inmates earn degrees. In my
opinion, this approach would be ineffective relative to other measures.

Reformers point to the bulk of studies supporting this practice. The last 50 years have witnessed a
growth in prison programs funded by federal governments and private activists aiding prisoners
earning either a high school or university degree. Tracking those who are released with a degree
compared to those without has shown a marked decrease in reoffenders among the former group.
The reasons for this are self-evidently related to the better jobs available for individuals with
diplomas. This tangible effect is heartening as prisons should ideally serve to rehabilitate convicts
for civilian life and not simply punish them for past transgressions while limiting their future career
options to more criminal activity.

However, the efficacy of prison education is limited compared to improved education for
underprivileged segments of society. The research on education while incarcerated is dwarfed by
studies on the primacy of education before the onset of criminal activity. A good example of this
would be the persistently high crime rates among inner city youth who do not have access to good
public schools. Those who fail to graduate from high school have drastically higher rates of later
criminality ranging from burglary to robbery to violent crimes. If a student is supported in their
studies, they have no need to turn to crime later in life to make ends meet. Once a convicted felon,
even for the rare individuals who earn a degree, it is difficult to find good work later.

In conclusion, the unequivocal benefits of prison education reform do not justify its priority over
more impactful educational measures. There should be a degree of balance but the most efficient
solution should invariably receive the most resources.

88
EDUCATION

89
Many educational institutions give greater importance to subjects related to science and ignore
subjects such as drama and literature. Why is this? Is this a positive or negative development?

It is becoming increasingly common for schools around the world to emphasise STEM (science,
technology, engineering, and maths) to the detriment of the humanities. This is a logically motivated
decision and is negative overall.

The main reason for this shift is a realisation of the value of jobs in scientific fields. New inventions
and medicines push forward human progress and generate billions of dollars in revenue across a
wide spectrum of industries. It therefore follows that there are high-paying jobs available in private
and public sectors for engineers, researchers, scientists, and mathematicians. At the very least,
someone who majors in a STEM related subject will be able to find a quality teaching position. This
guarantees a minimum level of success and the possibility of a much greater career motivates
parents, institutions and students themselves to prioritise and pursue scientific careers.

This over-emphasis on science will translate to less art in the world. It is true that from a strictly
utilitarian point of view, resources ought to be allocated to fields with the most economic value. Life
is, however, more than the sum of everyone’s earning potential. If the proportion of humanities
majors falls, there will be fewer painters, sculptors, filmmakers, writers, and musicians. Science
may create modern conveniences but the arts are more important for a fulfilling and enjoyable life.
The results of this decline might not become apparent for generations, but if funding is slashed for
arts programs, the world will become culturally poorer and the art that has enriched and elevated
humanity will give way to a tranquil, technocratic future.

In conclusion, the jobs available to science majors explain their dominance but taken as a whole this
trend will result in a world bereft of great artists. It is therefore important to balance funding to a
defensible degree.

90
It has been suggested that primary children should learn how to grow vegetables and keep
animals. Do the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

Some today have argued that it would be a sensible policy to teach children how to farm and raise
animals at school. In my opinion, though this would require enormous resources, it would be
beneficial in terms of both physical and intellectual development.

Those arguing against this proposal point out the resources needed. In order to implement such an
ambitious program, schools would firstly need land nearby where animals and crops could be
raised. This might be possible within a school's pre-existing grounds, but there would still need to
be significant investment in infrastructure. Schools would therefore have to reallocate a significant
portion of their budget, potentially reducing the money for crucial facilities, staff, and teaching
resources.

However, the advantages for the holistic development of children is overwhelming. Students today
spend more time than ever before passively using technological devices. By spending more time
outdoors learning about animals and crops, students will better understand their position within the
natural food chain. Over time, this may lead them to adopt environmentally friendlier,
compassionate lifestyle choices such as becoming vegetarians or shopping locally rather than
buying from large chains. Moreover, the work outdoors would necessarily involve physical
exercise. Since obesity is a growing concern in most countries, this time outside could help to
improve standards of physical fitness and establish healthy lifelong habits.

In conclusion, despite the money this reform would require, schools should adopt it when possible
so as to achieve a more complete education for students. Governments should consider the long-
term effects when deciding on such policies.

91
Some believe that students should begin learning a language very early in school while others
think these subjects should be taught later. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Many have argued that the earlier students begin learning a language in school the better. Although
this can pose challenges for schools, I am in complete agreement with this opinion.

Those against early foreign language courses contend it is not always practical. In many school
systems, the cost of such courses can be prohibitive. More specifically, in more remote areas,
teachers will often not have the ability to teach another language and it may be difficult to recruit
foreign native language speakers. If the schools teach a foreign language anyway, then they will
have to rely largely on textbooks and the classes are not likely to be as productive. This reality can
create a situation where wealthier school districts receive a disproportionately superior education.

However, even when the conditions are not ideal, there is tremendous value in learning a language
early relative to learning it later in life. Studies have shown that languages can be acquired far more
easily early in one’s education. As a person gets older, the muscles in the mouth become more fixed
making it more difficult to pronounce sounds from another language similar to a native speaker.
Their brains are also less flexible and this is clearly evidenced in the considerably slower progress
for adults when learning a new language. Attempting to acquire another language younger therefore
has greater overall value for any given individual.

In conclusion, the effectiveness of early language acquisition justifies its inclusion in curricula at all
schools. This educational reform should be a priority.

92
Nowadays, distance-learning programs have gained in popularity, but some people argue that
online courses can never be as good as those taken at a college or university in person. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?

The rise in popularity of online-learning software and applications has led many to argue they can
be as effective as real-life lessons taken at university. In my opinion, though these lessons are more
efficient in particular university situations, their overall efficacy is far lower than learning in person.

Proponents of online study point out how increased flexibility leads to greater efficiency. When
students study in person, they must expend time travelling to and from class and waiting before and
after the lesson. In the aggregate, this constitutes significant time lost. This time could be redirected
into more studying or other tasks. For instance, a student studying online could finish assignments
up until the minute class begins and quickly begin their homework after the lesson. However, the
efficiency gained is largely hypothetical as most students are likely to become distracted during
online lessons and waste much of the time saved online.

Moreover, in-person lessons are far more engaging than online ones. This was clearly evidenced
during the recent Covid-19 pandemic when many schools, including universities, transitioned to
online learning for a period of time. The results were that students were generally less engaged in
lessons and their overall productivity and learning suffered. This counterintuitive loss of
productivity can be explained not only by the potential distractions students are vulnerable to online
but also by the lack of connection between learners and teachers. In a classroom setting, students
personally interact with their professors and other students, guaranteeing a high level of engagement
and memorability.

In conclusion, though there are reasons to argue for the potential time saved through online lessons,
they are simply far less effective than real world classes. Online lessons should remain a niche
element of a university education.

93
Some people believe that children of all ages should have extra responsibilities (for example,
helping at home or at work). Others believe that, outside of school, children should be free to enjoy
their lives. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many today have argued for the importance of children having greater responsibility in the home. I
am generally in agreement with this position, though it should naturally not be taken to extremes.

Critics of such an approach maintain that it can overburden young children. In many societies
around the world today, children are under immense pressure at school to perform well
academically. In many Asian countries, for example, young children must study at school until the
late afternoon, have dinner, and then take additional classes before doing their homework each
night. If these students were also tasked with cleaning the house or washing their own clothes, they
simply would not have enough time to complete all their responsibilities and rest for the next day.

However, increased responsibility encourages greater maturity and self-reliance. A child who must
ensure their room is clean and takes part in either cooking or cleaning up afterwards better
understands the importance of time management and how to run a household. In contrast, some
parents are overly protective of their children and do not instil traits related to independence. If a
child grows up and attends university without a variety of life skills or the maturity that comes from
looking after themselves, then they will likely struggle to adjust and may be viewed as childish by
their peers.

In conclusion, though there must be logical limits to the amount of work that children should do in
the home, it is an advisable approach overall to increase a child's sense of responsibility. The
benefits later in life justify any potential fatigue.

94
Nowadays, not enough students choose science subjects at university in many countries. Why is
this? What effects does this have on society?

It has become increasingly less common in recent years for individuals to major in STEM-related
subjects. In my opinion, this is the result of the growth of more business-oriented fields of study
though the actual effects on society are marginal.

Greater numbers of young people now opt to major in subjects related to economics and finance
rather than science. Over the past century, economies globally have grown and can now support
white-collar professions such as those in marketing, banking, investment, and finance. These
occupations allow an individual to engage directly in earning a high salary without requiring the
hard work or talent that is needed for intensive scientific jobs. It is therefore only natural that
individuals will increasingly gravitate towards work that guarantees them the greatest possible
rewards with the least possible effort.

However, this shift to more lucrative fields only moderately impacts the field of science. The reason
for that is that there is still substantial demand for innovation in scientific fields being driven by
both private and public interests. A strong example of this situation would be the worldwide
response to the Covid-19 pandemic and the rapid development of viable vaccines. The main areas
where science is hurt by interest in other majors is at the fringes where the average worker is more
likely to pursue a job at a bank or marketing firm rather than an engineering or manufacturing
company. Although this has led to a decrease among certain segments of the population in their
passion for scientific endeavours, there is still great work being done by professionals in a variety of
fields.

In conclusion, it is a logical consequence of more developed economies that many students are now
less likely to major in the sciences. However, the impact on society is largely imperceptible and
compensated for in various ways.

95
Some claim that studying abroad has great benefits for a student's home country. To what extent
do you agree or disagree?

Many believe that studying in another country is largely beneficial for the home country of the
students in question. In my opinion, the losses entailed by these students potentially emigrating is
outweighed by the expertise they often bring back.

Critics of this contention argue that many of the best and brightest students never return to their
country of origin. This is especially the case as it regards developing countries, including both
ordinary and famous examples. The average student from a developing nation that studies abroad in
the United States or Europe, will likely have the opportunity to pursue a career there. Once hired by
a company, there is a clear pathway to residency and even citizenship in the future. Since these
students must meet higher admission requirements, it logically follows that a significant percentage
will never return and share their newly acquired expertise with their fellow citizens.

Nonetheless, the instances above are rare and there are tangible effects from knowledgeable
graduates returning to their home. Such students are capable of contributing novel outlooks and
perspectives in society, generally the workplace more specifically. One illustrative example of this
in Vietnam is Ngo Bao Chau who studied mathematics at Oxford. After his studies abroad, he was
awarded the most prestigious mathematics award, the Fields Medal, in 2007. Upon his return to
Vietnam, he established a mathematics academy in Hanoi that distinguishes itself from other
institutions with an innovative approach borrowed from Western schools. None of this would likely
have come to pass if he had simply remained in Vietnam to study like most other students.

In conclusion, despite the risks that talented individuals may choose to reside permanently in a new
country, there are more concrete benefits for the home country. Governments should therefore
encourage such students with state scholarships.

96
Some feel that students should not have to take standardised tests in school. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?

Many today have made the legitimate argument that students should no longer be subjected to
testing in schools. In my opinion, this view is correct though testing can sometimes serve as a crude
motivational tool.

Those in favour of preserving traditional testing argue that it is needed to push stu- dents to excel
academically. The most traditional model for education involves teachers teaching material that
students will then later be tested on. The grades that students receive are reported at some point to
their parents. If students want to receive praise and avoid punishment from both parents and
teachers, then they must perform well. An additional incentive that tests create is to outperform
other students. A student who routinely does poorly on tests and quizzes is likely to be looked down
upon by their classmates.

However, there are healthier methods to motivate students. Instead of prioritising the opinions of
others, educators could shift towards more personal evaluation standards. This is common for young
children when learning through the Montessori methodology. This form of teaching encourages
children to pursue what naturally brings them pleasure and to view learning as a form of play rather
than work. This same principle could be modified and applied at later grades if students were
allowed to choose their subjects and focus on areas they think will have greater future value for
them. Though this may change over time, it would foster a healthier learning environment where
students can develop confidence and strong self-esteem.

In conclusion, testing is an outdated means of motivating students and should be replaced with
methods that place greater value on mental health. Naturally, these approaches will require greater
investment in terms of time, money, and effort.

97
Some people think that it is a waste of time for high school students to study literature, such as
novels and poems. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today claim that learning about literature should no longer be a key component of the high
school curriculum. In my opinion, there are practical reasons for this sentiment but literature still
serves a purpose.

Proponents of this reform argue other subjects deserve prioritisation. There is little doubt that in the
21st century, the most important subjects for students’ future careers relate to the sciences, such as
engineering and computer science, or the practical humanities, like business. The earlier that
students begin specialising, the more likely they are to have a head start on the competition and
secure a well-paying job immediately after graduating high school or university. In contrast, the
novels and poems that students read in high school are usually completely forgotten within a few
years and do not teach any tangible skills that will help them advance in the real world.

Nonetheless, literature contains many of the most important and fundamental truths about the
human condition. Life is about more than a career and great authors tackle the most fundamental
philosophical and psychological questions. For example, the masters of 19th century Russian
literature, including Tolstoy and Dostoevsky, are primarily concerned with human psychology and
how this fits into a larger context of man’s search for meaning. Their exploration of these issues is
relevant to everyone and cannot be replaced with a steady career. Moreover, the way in which great
writers develop their themes, the aesthetic quality of their writing itself, imparts to careful readers
the importance of artistic expression and may help them see outside the narrow modern confines of
accumulating the most material wealth.

In conclusion, the utilitarian benefits of studying practical subjects do not outweigh the deeper
values of literature. It is therefore advisable that literature be emphasised in high school classrooms.

98
Some believe that spoken communication is always more powerful than written communication.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some think speaking, rather than writing, is an intrinsically more moving medium for
communicating your points. In my opinion, spoken communication is more powerful in a political
context but pales in comparison to the impact of literary works.

Speaking is at its strongest in politics. This is because people rarely read political proclamations or
commentary but speeches invariably signal pivotal moments in history. One of the best examples of
this is Martin Luther King Jr.’s ‘I have a dream speech’ which was recorded and delivered to a
crowd of thousands and has been replayed millions of times since then. Dr. King was a persuasive
speaker, holding forth as the civil rights movement of the 1960s was reaching a head. Hearing his
words, his cadence, elocution, and emotion, bring home the pressing realities of a prejudiced
moment in a way that a typed speech never could.

Speaking is unassailably more important in politics but timeless works of literature show the
potential for writing to communicate universal human truths. A great example of this would be the
works of Leo Tolstoy. His best known novels, Anna Karenina and War and Peace, were written
more than a hundred years ago but still resonate with readers today. In fact, there is very little in
speeches that can compare with his novels’ psychological insights and metaphysical probings. The
enduring legacy of his, and many other writers’, work is testament to the capacity of writing to
communicate on a deeper, longer-lasting basis than speaking.

In conclusion, although speaking can be more powerful in politics, the written word has displayed
greater strength over centuries of great literature. In today’s media saturated world, people ought to
seek to balance written and spoken influences.

99
Some people think that because children find subjects such as mathematics and philosophy
difficult, they ought to be optional instead of compulsory. To what extent do you agree?

Many feel that overly rigorous subjects such as mathematics and philosophy should not be
mandatory for children. In my opinion, though there is a risk students will struggle to cope, teachers
should be able to adapt the subject matter.

One reason these subjects should not be mandatory is they are often too abstract for young children.
Numbers themselves are abstract. This is why many children are unable to tell time as it is
essentially a metaphorical division of a circle into a clock. Teachers who place too much emphasis
on abstract numbers and ideas in their lessons will find that students may become bored because
they are unable to grasp the concepts. Philosophy could also become tedious and inefficient if the
students lack the cognitive ability to apply general rules and ethical considerations to everyday life.
This capacity to recognize and apply abstractions typically develops later in adolescence.

However, these subjects can be made accessible for children. The key is the approach of teachers
and choice of materials. Maths, for example, does not need to begin with complex, abstract
equations but could instead involve real world scenarios and simple logic. Numbers could be
introduced later as children tend to be confused by less grounded concepts. Similarly, philosophy
can be approached from a number of mediums, including through stories. Many children's stories
and fables feature curious protagonists and interesting morals. Instead of explicitly instructing
children through academic jargon, they can engage with the same questions about life and its origins
more directly through the journey of characters in a story.

In conclusion, despite the risks of theory-heavy subjects for young learners, schools should embrace
the challenge and seek less explicit teaching methodologies. This will help form the basis of a well-
rounded education.

100
Some believe that money for education should mainly be spent on better computers while others
believe it would be better spent on teachers. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many feel that funding allocated for education should be primarily spent on computers rather than
paying the teaching staff higher salaries. In my opinion, though technology is important today,
teachers are still considerably more valuable and deserving of prioritisation.

Proponents argue increased funding for computer technology reflects shifts in modern society.
Expertise with computers is becoming essential not only for one's daily life but also for most
careers. At the moment, schools focus on a wide range of subjects that may not have any direct
applicability later in a student's life such as history, biology, physics, literature, art, and so on. It is
logical that focusing more on a useful area such as new computers will maximise funding for
schools. However, this thinking neglects the key finding in numerous studies that a wide base of
knowledge is more important than early specialisation.

Moreover, teachers can potentially be a crucial influence on their pupils. Most adults are grateful to
at least one teacher who serves as a lifelong role model. This is because students can connect with a
teacher emotionally and intellectually. For example, a teacher may introduce and elucidate a number
of great thinkers and writers that later shape a student's political or moral philosophy. By providing
greater funding for teachers, this simply ensures that more qualified teachers will apply for jobs.
Additionally, teachers who are passionate about their work and are underpaid at the moment, are
likely to feel more motivated and appreciated with higher salaries.

In conclusion, those who argue in favour of computers are short-sighted as teachers have greater
overall impact. Naturally, it is more difficult to measure and study the value of quality teachers and
provide definitive evidence for this viewpoint.

101
Many students find it difficult to pay attention at school. What are the reasons for this? What
could be done to solve this problem?

Many students these days find it increasingly difficult to pay attention during lessons. In my
opinion, this is partly a natural reaction that has been exacerbated by technology and the solutions
lie in school reform.

Students struggle to stay engaged both due to a natural predisposition and the pervasive impact of
screen time. Students throughout history have always wanted to escape their school lessons. This is
because learning is difficult and provides little pleasure itself relative to both passive and active
pastimes like hanging out with friends, watching TV, listening to music, or playing sports.
Moreover, the advent of the ubiquitous internet era and portable devices such as smartphones has
had an exponential effect on attention spans and diversionary priorities. Most students today are
addicted to short videos and posts on social media networks and therefore struggle to follow the
intricate arguments of lengthy lectures and extended readings.

On a small scale, individuals can remedy these problems through sheer willpower but for broader
change schools must play an active role. The most immediate fix would be to ban phones. This is
difficult since phones serve practical purposes such as allowing students to call their parents or book
a ride home, but they could be taken at the beginning of the day and returned when school finishes.
Another step schools could take would be to modernise the curriculum and account for reduced
attention spans. Lessons could be shorter and could include more interactivity in order to stimulate
learning, rather than the passive learning environment that has led to daydreaming students for
generations.

In conclusion, although this trend is likely an irreversible part of human nature and progress,
schools can implement changes to curb its effects. It is important for parents and governments to be
supportive of such reforms as well.

102
The best curriculum is not one based on a static body of knowledge but one which teaches
students to cope with change. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many would argue that schools today should focus more on adaptability rather than traditional,
discrete subjects. In my opinion, although there is a strong argument for this contention given the
disruptive nature of modern industries, it is nonetheless important to preserve the traditional role of
subjects in a curriculum.

Those who support this reform contend that the skills needed for modern workforces are changing
rapidly. Past generations could rely on subjects learned in high school and university, such as those
related to accounting, finance, and so on, providing lasting job security. This guarantee is less stable
now due to advances in automation specifically and technology generally. At many companies,
human workers are being phased out of specific roles and entire jobs and replaced by cheap
software. Therefore, schools should teach adaptable methods for handling change that will help
them cope with an uncertain future job market.

However, traditional subjects provide an invaluable base of knowledge for the average student. By
learning about core subjects a person becomes more well-rounded intellectually. In high school and
university this likely includes maths, literature, the sciences, history, physical education, economics,
philosophy, art, and so on. Naturally, most of these subjects will not yield practical skills that are
used on a daily basis throughout life and that is the source of many later complaints about school
curricula. However, it is impossible to know the final utility of a given skill or piece of information.
A good example of this would be the classes that Steve Jobs took about calligraphy in university
which later informed the lasting design of computer interfaces and word processors.

In conclusion, despite pragmatic employment concerns, it is essential for students to possess

foundational knowledge about multiple disciplines. Moreover, a binary distinction between subject
knowledge and flexible skills is not always necessary

103
Some people believe that the experiences children have before they go to school will have the
greatest effect on their future life. Others argue that experiences gained when they are teenagers
have a bigger influence. Discuss both views and give your own opinions.

Many would argue that experiences with the greatest impact occur before one becomes a teenager.
In my opinion, the most pivotal stages of development in fact take place during one's teenage years.

The argument for the primacy of childhood experiences is supported by years of psychological
research. In the early 20th century, researchers such as Jean Piaget began to analyse and perform
experiments on young children in order to verify theories about how the human mind develops.
Over the last century, these studies have evolved and it is now commonly accepted in the field of
psychology that very early experiences definitively shape one's later personality and identity. This is
particularly the case when a child undergoes trauma such as abuse or neglect at home. These
children are then more likely to have mental health disorders later in life and suffer generally from
low self-esteem.

However, decisions made as a teenager are more directly impactful on the future. The arguments
made above are compelling but also difficult to verify beyond the purely theoretical. The choices a
teenager makes have tangible effects. Most teenagers begin to settle into distinct social groups that
will help inform their future identity, take up potentially lasting hobbies, choose the sports they will
play later in life, and may even decide on a future career. The experiences a teenager gains through
these activities will in turn allow them to shift their focus in life, such as by pursuing a scientific
rather than artistic field in higher education.

In conclusion, despite the research showing the impact of childhood development, there are more
important practical life choices made as a late adolescent. Therefore, it is key that teenagers are
supported fully by both parents and teachers.

104
Some people think that the best way to be successful in life is to get a university education. Others
disagree and say this is no longer true. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Some contend that a university education is declining in relevance in modern society. In my

opinion, though there are other methods to gain success, a university education remains the most
likely pathway.

Those who argue against the primacy of higher education point out the evolution of contemporary
job markets. In past decades, graduating from a university, prestigious or less well-known, would
virtually ensure a salaried position with potential for growth. Today, many employers are more
interested in discrete skills and no longer assume degrees imply expertise. For instance, many
technology companies prefer to rigorously test potential candidates and hire based on their
performance and aptitude rather than simply their credentials. This applies to a variety of fields and
will only become more extreme in the future.

However, a university degree better ensures a minimum level of success and increases the
likelihood of even greater achievement in life. An individual with a degree will, at the very least, not
have to work a minimum wage job. This guarantees that they will be more successful than a large
proportion of the working class population. Moreover, a degree is still required by most companies
as evidence of competence. An individual who applies to a renowned law firm or engineering
company will not only have a greater chance of securing a role with a degree, but will also be able
to advance more quickly into better paid positions within the company.

In conclusion, though university education is no longer as essential as it was in the past, it is still a
better predictor of success than any other tactic. Therefore, individuals and governments should
prioritise the pursuit of higher education.

105
Some people believe the purpose of education should be helping the individual to become useful
for society, while others believe it should help individuals to achieve their ambitions. Discuss both
sides and give your opinion.

There are differing viewpoints as to the primary role of education. While I concede there is a valid
argument being made by those who claim school should serve a social end, I believe learning should
chiefly help an individual accomplish personal life goals.

Those who believe education should benefit society at large make a purely utilitarian argument.
School is the best opportunity for governments to instil values and educate youngsters about issues
ranging from poverty to systemic racism to environmental awareness. If school curriculums
included foundational background information about these issues, there is a strong chance students
would play an active role in improving society later in life. For example, Japanese citizens are
famously diligent when it comes to recycling and this habit is established in schools from a young
age.

Nonetheless, the above reforms often lead to unintended backlash and there is greater value in
preparing students for individual success. If students feel they are constantly being indoctrinated by
schools, many will rebel instinctively. However, if they are given the opportunity to pursue their
passion and learn the traits that will lead to future success, they are infinitely more likely to become
well-adjusted, contributing members of society. This is clearly evidenced in the fact that people with
a quality career contribute more to the functioning of society than activists who are often just
propping up their own self-esteem.

In conclusion, despite the relative importance of schools in shaping lifelong values, each person and
society will gain more from a happy, productive citizenry. Governments must therefore bear this in
mind when reforming education.

106
libraries should focus resources on upgrading technological resources rather than preserving
their physical collections. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today feel that libraries are wasting valuable resources by maintaining rarely-used physical
collections. In my opinion, despite the clear advantages to technology, there is still a place for
libraries in the modern world.

Those who support investiture in more technology for libraries point to the tangible benefits. This is
because the books in libraries have become increasingly less important in recent years as copies are
available online and there are other resources for the same information. This is not true for
technology. The computers used in libraries are tremendously useful for tourists, students, and less
affluent segments of society. Libraries can therefore remain relevant by upgrading their computers
and staying current with technological advances such as 3D printing.

Nonetheless, there is greater value in preserving books conducive to healthier all-around habits. It is
true that the majority will not take advantage of the books stored in libraries. However, those who
do, regardless of age or class, will receive outsized benefits. Reading a real book, and abstaining
from an electronic device, encourages more active and creative mental engagement. Diligent readers
can understand whatever topic they are reading about more fully and this will distinguish them from
a society that is reliant on less reliable online information. There may even come a time when many
individuals decide that reading and staying away from the instant gratification of technology is
better for mental health and a well-stocked library would then be invaluable.

In conclusion, despite the utilitarian gains of technology, it is worthwhile to preserve the more
lasting potential benefits of actual books. Governments must continue to fund libraries as a
countermeasure to the pervasiveness of technology.

107
Some people think that schools should not test and grade students. Others think that grades are
important. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Many believe that schools should test and grade students, while others feel these stressful
evaluations can be counter-productive. In my opinion, although testing can be useful, schools could
be improved if there were no grades and students could learn with less pressure.

On the one hand, standardised testing allows students to measure their progress. Students and
teachers are both able to utilise grades to understand if a student is excelling or struggling in any
given subject. For example, in most high schools, students take a test before being placed into a
mathematics course. If they excel at maths, they will be placed in an advanced class and if their
maths skills are weaker, they will receive the support they need at a lower level. Over time and
through repeated testing, students can move up or down levels and receive relevant practice and
individualised learning. This is the basis of most educational systems and facilitates the practical
organisation of levels.

On the other hand, schools with reduced focus on grades encourage healthier growth. This approach
is common in certain progressive European nations like Finland and Norway, which are famous for
their de-emphasis on grades. Schools in Finland attempt to foster a positive learning environment
where students feel free to make mistakes, play, and develop a lifelong passion for learning. With
less anxiety and less of a burden to excel, students can focus on what they care about most and not
become overly obsessed with gaining the esteem of their teachers and parents. The result is that
Finland has consistently ranked as one of the strongest school systems internationally.

In conclusion, although grades are important for categorization, their elimination would allow
students to learn better and flourish. Where possible, schools should seek to focus more on learning
and less on testing.

108
Learning at university would be more effective if men and women were educated separately. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?

There has been recent debate concerning whether or not men and women should be educated
together at university. In my opinion, though such a reform would allow students to focus better on
their studies, it is not advisable overall given that diversity of gender is crucial for creating an open-
minded learning environment.

Those who argue in favour of the separation of the sexes maintain it engenders greater focus. One
potential distraction that inevitably emerges during university is physical attraction. If students are
too concerned with impressing the opposite sex and dating, then they necessarily have less time for
their academic work. In extreme cases, relationships may become overwhelming and cause
emotional mood swings that can also impact one’s work. Recent research has shown that there are
definite advantages in terms of single-minded focus that comes from the segregation of genders,
though this is more apparent at younger ages.

Moreover, there is a subtle benefit that comes from a diversity of perspectives. Men and women are
not only naturally disposed to seeing the world in different ways but have also been influenced in
different ways by society. For instance, if a group of literature students are reading a novel, women
can interpret it in ways that may never occur to a man. Similarly, men will be able to share their
own viewpoints. The ideal school will embrace both viewpoints and help students to widen their
perspectives on a wide variety of topics. This also applies to social life as a lot of learning in
university takes place outside the classroom.

In conclusion, though there might be minor benefits concerning concentration at single-sex schools,
men and women should be educated together in order to engender a more open and creative
atmosphere. Single-gender schools should therefore not be encouraged.

109
Educating young people is naturally important. However, some think governments ought to
invest more in education for adults in need. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people today have called for a reorientation to focus more on education for vulnerable
segments of the adult population. In my opinion, youth education should remain the priority.

Those who argue in support of increased education for adults point out the moral obligation. In
many contexts, adults are not to blame for their lack of education. Some countries may have been
facing severe economic downturns, limited infrastructure, and even wartime. Any young person
growing up during these periods has a greater chance of having gaps in their education, such as
limited literacy skills, that will impair them long-term. A society that cares compassionately for all
citizens should consider these factors and decide that the ethical imperative to educate adults is a
basic human right.

Nonetheless, society will benefit the most from educating young people well. A young person who
has a solid education can enjoy a long and productive career lasting for decades. This is not possible
for adults simply because of their age. Countries that prioritise youth education will also encounter
fewer problems with these individuals later in life related to unemployment, drug abuse, and
criminality. A standout example of this would be how previously developing nations like South
Korea and Vietnam prioritised primary, secondary, and tertiary education to form the basis of their
recent economic flourishing.

In conclusion, adult education is often neglected, however, there are legitimate justifications for this
related to the effect of educating the young. The current policies should remain in place in most
nations.

110
Many university students want to learn about different subjects in addition to their main subjects.
Others feel it is more important to give all their time and attention to studying for their
qualification. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many university students are now inclined to divide their time between studying for their major and
pursuing interests in unrelated subjects. In my opinion, it is crucial for undergraduates to learn about
a wide range of disciplines in order to best prepare themselves for the future.

Those who support prioritising one's major argue the importance of specialisation. At university,
there are a range of potential distractions related to social life and living on one's own. If a graduate
wants to be successful in a future career, the most logical pathway is to prepare diligently in one
specialisation. For instance, an undergraduate learning about chemical engineering will be a better
potential candidate for well-paid positions if they have acquired a solid theoretical foundation and
accumulated whatever practical experience is available in their courses. Any diversions that detract
from this focus could hinder their early career progression.

However, it is in fact more valuable long-term to view learning as an interdisciplinary experience.

Many graduates will change or at least alter their professions as they begin working. Even those
who remain in the same industry will benefit greatly from studying a variety of subjects. The above-
mentioned engineer might be able to study about figure drawing outside their main courses and
come up with more creative ideas that combine multiple subjects in their main work. Even if the
other subjects are not directly applicable to work, at the minimum they are likely to feel they have
become a more diverse and well-rounded individual on a personal level.

In conclusion, though time spent on one's university major can lead to an improved discrete skillset,
there is far greater value in possessing a breadth of knowledge. This range of information will serve
as the foundation for a potentially more creative and fulfilling career and personal life.

111
TECHNOLOGY AND THE MEDIA

112
In their advertising, businesses nowadays usually emphasise that their products are new in some
way. Why is this? Do you think it is a positive or negative development?

It is becoming increasingly common for companies to place focus on the novelty of their products.
In my opinion, this has its basis in the psychology of consumer behaviour and is generally a
negative development.

The reason many marketing departments present products as new is they are hoping to incentivize
increased consumer demand. One of the chief principles of business is that products must meet a
real consumer need and, ideally, be unique in some way. For example, advertising for the electronic
vehicles made by Tesla highlights that they are different from traditional automobiles and this offers
novel benefits for the environment and the individual motorist. This strategy created a niche in the
automotive industry that they eventually expanded to become one of the largest companies in the
world. It follows that every business attempts to present their products as new to inspire interest and
compel demand.

There are exceptions, as in the case of Tesla mentioned above, however, this trend generally leads to
disingenuous ads and consumer fatigue. Most companies framing their products as new in some
aspect are actually attempting to mislead the public. This is often the case with soft drink companies
like Coca Cola and Pepsi that regularly rebrand their bottles and cans to give the appearance of
novelty. These tactics are recognizably dishonest and audiences are rarely convinced. In fact, the net
effect is that consumers become tired of watching ads for familiar products pretending to be
innovative. For many customers this leads to a growing feeling of apathy and disinterest towards the
exploitive methods of advertisers.

In conclusion, the reason businesses often present their products as new lies in the importance of
consumer psychology and the cynical impact this has in the aggregate is negative. More savvy
companies often eschew this trend and produce honest advertisements.

113
Some think newspapers are the best method for reading the news while others think other media
is better. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

In recent years, many have argued that the best way to read the news is no longer in newspapers. In
my opinion, though there are sentimental reasons to prefer newspapers, newer forms of media are
far superior.

Those who continue to value newspapers tend to be older individuals. They have typically
maintained this habit for years or even decades. Over such a long period reading newspapers, it is
logical that they will have developed an emotional attachment to the act of buying and reading a
physical copy of the news. For example, The New York Times continues to publish and sell
physical copies of their paper in select markets. The people buying these papers could save time and
money by reading the same articles online, but might be attracted to the feel and memories
surrounding physical newspapers.

However, new forms of media allow audiences a wide range of choices that enhance the overall
experience. A user accessing a media website can not only read an article from the convenience of
their phone or laptop, but also take advantage of features like automatically generated text-to-
speech, videos, links to related content, the ability to share an article, and more. All these features
are also complemented by the ability to select a diversity of news sources. Instead of reading a
single news outlet that might have a liberal or conservative bias, a discerning reader can seek out
multiple viewpoints and find the news that is most trustworthy over time.

In conclusion, despite the respect due to the history of journalism, there are now a wide array of
better options online. Individuals should nonetheless be wary of less trustworthy sources.

114
Today, many people use the internet and smartphones to transfer money to friends, family, and
businesses. Is this a positive or negative development?

An increasing number of individuals today take advantage of online applications to transfer money
to friends, family, and various businesses. In my opinion, this is a largely positive development
though there is greater potential for fraud, particularly among less internet-savvy segments of the
population.

Those who oppose sending money online point out the potential dangers. When transferring money
online, there is a chance that one's password could be exposed to hackers, the transaction may be
fraudulent, or the senders themselves might make a mistake in how much money is transferred.
Most younger people are able to avoid these complications but older users are particularly
vulnerable to fraud. For instance, every year thousands of retired citizens fall victim to identity theft
after opening phishing emails and naively clicking on the links inside. Many of these individuals are
unable to recover their money afterwards as cybercrime is a complex, international problem.

However, online transfers are tremendously convenient for the vast majority. In the past, a person
who wanted to make a transfer to a family member, friend, or business would have to make a trip to
the bank, wait in line, and fill in various forms. Not only do online transfers save time but they also
allow for greater flexibility. Users can transfer sums to multiple parties, monitor their transactions,
cancel them or ask for refunds, and keep their own records with ease. All these features would
previously require additional trips and phone calls with a physical bank. In the aggregate, the time
saved is a significant factor for individuals and businesses and the main reason online banking has
become the de facto norm in recent years.

In conclusion, individuals must be mindful of potential fraud; however, transferring money online is
a clearly beneficial technological advancement. There is little doubt that it will only become more
pervasive in the future.

115
Some people think that social networking sites have a huge negative impact on both individuals
and society. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today argue that social media has an overall negative impact on both the average person and
society more generally. I am in complete agreement with this opinion as individuals are likely to
suffer from an unhealthy addiction and social media can cause fractures in society.

The most obvious effect of social media is on the mental health of individual users. Most people on
social media have become to varying degrees addicted to the small dopamine bursts that come from
scrolling through their feed, feeling outraged at posts, receiving likes, and making positive or
negative comments. Each person is likely to gain satisfaction through a different route but all these
self-esteem boosts are unhealthy relative to achieving something in the real world. In some cases,
individuals retreat from the real world in favour of a virtual one where the stakes are considerably
lower and interactions are safely one-sided.

Additionally, the drawbacks of social media are evident throughout society. There are numerous
small groups and communities on Facebook that encourage anti-social impulses. For instance, many
people post and read about conspiracy theories online on a daily basis. Over time, these individuals
begin to feel isolated from mainstream society and the effects of this can appear during real-world
events such as the January 6 insurrection and the Occupy Wall Street movement. Although these
actions can be interpreted as protests, the viewpoints being expressed are often too extreme to lead
to defensible and pragmatic reform.

In conclusion, social media is an overwhelming negative for both normal citizens and the entirety of
society. Since governments are averse to regulation, it is important for individuals to abandon these
platforms.

116
Some old people today struggle with the use of modern technologies such as smartphones and
computers. What is the cause of this? What are some possible solutions?

Many older people today have difficulty acclimating to new technology. The main cause of this is
the novel nature of the computer revolution and the best solutions involve education.

The elderly have trouble catching up with new developments in technology because computers and
the internet are fundamentally novel. Computers require a skill set that is completely foreign to
individuals who did not grow up in the last 30 years. To use a computer, one must be able to type,
set up online accounts, remember passwords, troubleshoot IT problems and navigate both the
internet and various internet-based apps. For those born into the internet era, this is all second nature
but for others the learning curve is often too steep. The simple process of turning on a computer and
locating programs using an unfamiliar interface can be overwhelming and serves as the principle,
initial barrier.

The best solutions for this relate to education. Older people who are still working require special
training programs and patience from their employers and themselves. Competence is likely given
detailed instructions and enough time to practise. Moreover, many retired older people want to
spend more time with their children, grandchildren and old friends but it can be difficult to travel,
particularly if they live far apart. Old people would be extremely motivated to make video calls and
stay in touch with loved ones with applications like Skype, Facetime and Facebook Messenger.
Through simple instructions from family members, it is possible video-conferencing could become
a routine task.

In conclusion, old people today often cannot understand technology because it is a seismic shift in
perspective and the solutions involve patient training at work and home. In this way, the benefits of
technology can be extended to a generation that missed out on them in their youth.

117
Today different types of robots are being developed which can serve as companions and workers
to help at work and at home. Is this a positive or negative development?

Nowadays, the robotics industry is beginning to penetrate both home and work environments. In my
opinion, advances in robotics generally and artificial intelligence more specifically have their merits
but are isolating.

Proponents of these innovations point to the eradication of inefficiencies. This applies to both
workplaces and homes. At work, there are a range of responsibilities being carried out by humans
that could be done by robots ranging from the transportation of goods and photocopying to slightly
more robust tasks such as data input and security. As artificial intelligence becomes more self-
sufficient it is likely that companies will be able to increase efficiency and humans can prioritise the
areas where they most excel. In homes, the situation is similar as robots may be able to take over
chores such as washing the dishes and cleaning, freeing up individuals to focus on more pleasurable
pastimes.

Nonetheless, the growth of a robotics industry exacerbates a modern trend towards isolation. People
today are seemingly more connected than ever before thanks to the internet and social media,
however, real world connection is on the decline. The workplace and home are two of the last
remaining spaces to build meaningful, interpersonal relationships. A rise in the number of robots, as
is the case in Japan where it is now possible to purchase a robot companion, will lead to a
concomitant decrease in human relations. It seems unlikely that people would completely stop
talking to each other but the pervasiveness of online life can serve as a warning that humanity is
only too willing to subsist on one-way, inauthentic relationships.

In conclusion, despite the benefits robots bring for productivity, their isolating effect will make
them a negative on level. Individuals must therefore strive to maintain strong human relationships.

118
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?

As translation technologies become more advanced, many people have started to question the
importance of language learning in general. In my opinion, the point at which technology will
render such study redundant has not yet arrived.

Supporters of this argue the existing benefits of translation technology. The best example of this is
the widespread use of Google Translate. Tourists can use the service to not only translate basic
phrases but even have an actual conversation. Google Translate can listen to a native speaker,
translate their words and the user can then say their response and it will be translated and read
aloud. This is a limited but effective tool for travellers and is just the beginning of the expanding
capabilities of translation-based applications.

Nonetheless, learning a useful foreign language is a key determiner of future success. The majority
of the world population can widen their career prospects by learning an important international
language such as English or Chinese. Take for example, the average student living in Vietnam.
They are already fluent in Vietnamese and if they learn English, at a minimum they can secure
quality work as a translator or teacher. Assuming they are hard-working, there will also be lucrative
opportunities involving international business or studying a major of their choice abroad. On level,
this makes learning an international language one of the most basic guarantees of success.

In conclusion, technology has replaced some of the importance of language learning but not its
overall relevance. This is the reason many parents rightly prioritise language lessons.

119
Some people believe that international news is more important than local news. Discuss both
views and give your opinion.

Many think that following global news is more important than the news in one’s own country. In
my opinion, a general awareness of international events helps individuals make better choices but
knowing about your own community is more important.

By following news from around the world, one can make informed decisions about global issues. A
good example of this would be current movements towards environmentalism. Every year,
researchers publish alarming studies about the potential effects of climate change and many of these
predictions are already becoming a reality. There is a good chance that climate change has little
effect on one’s neighbourhood so it is important to follow the spreading consequences around the
world. This news can sway individuals and may result in them reducing their carbon footprint by
using fewer single-use plastics and buying more eco-friendly products.

However, most local news will be more impactful. Global news tends to centre around figures and
issues that people cannot influence and that barely touch them. Local news, whether it be related to
the nation at large, one’s city, or one’s community, is likely to be more relevant. For example, the
recent Cannabis reforms in certain localities in the United States show that will and consensus
among citizens can actually result in new laws. The legalisation movement accelerated in the last
decade as people signed petitions aimed at their local representatives, businesses helped raise
awareness of the health facts, and state governments began to take notice. This is a clear instance of
citizens staying informed of a meaningful issue and pushing forward real change.

In conclusion, some pieces of international news are important but more change is possible when
keeping abreast of local news. Individuals ought to find ways to balance both but not lose sight of
the stories that impact them directly.

120
New technologies have changed the way children spend their free time. Do you think the
advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

There is little doubt that technological advances have greatly altered the free time activities of
children around the world. In my opinion, this is a decidedly negative phenomenon since the far-
reaching effects of technology on the human psyche are still largely unknown.

Proponents of children using technology contend that it can be used for a variety of purposes. This
applies not only to traditional usages such as sending emails, doing research online, and watching
educational videos but also burgeoning innovations like artificial intelligence. The recent emergence
of applications like ChatGPT now enable all individuals, children included, the opportunity to make
their lives more efficient, productive, and enjoyable. If children are taught responsible usage habits,
then they can take advantage of the many benefits and become more well-rounded learners and
future members of society.

However, the psychological ramifications of habits centred around technology are potentially
severe. Humans have not evolved the ability to properly interact with a digital world and children
are especially vulnerable. A child who becomes addicted to a social media application such as
TikTok might be less physically active and start to see the world through a virtual perspective. This
can lead to the development of mild mental conditions related to anxiety and self-esteem, or more
extreme ones related to dissociation and depression. The evidence for this is clearly expressed in the
often-cited statistics on the rising number of suicide attempts among teenagers and children since
the introduction of social media platforms.

In conclusion, regardless of how technology can be used as a tool, its drawbacks in terms of general
mental health make it a negative overall. Parents must therefore carefully manage their children's
screen time.

121
Although more and more people read news on the Internet, newspapers will remain the most
important source of news for the majority of people. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some believe that despite the rise in consumption of online news, newspapers will always be the
primary news source for most. In my opinion, though newspapers may remain more trustworthy,
online news will surely only become more popular in the future.

Those who argue for the primacy of newspapers point out their reputations. Before publication,
newspaper articles are researched thoroughly, often for several months, by accomplished and
professional writers who then pass their articles on to editors who verify the information and
approve inclusion in the next edition. Most individuals are dimly aware of this process and therefore
more likely to carefully read and trust reputable papers like The New York Times and Washington
Post. This stands in marked contrast to online news which is written hastily and published instantly,
often with the intended purpose of generating clicks and advertising revenue rather than accurately
informing their audience.

Nonetheless, the majority of people already receive most news from sources other than newspapers.
This includes television and podcasts, but websites and social media now dominate the media
landscape. Most individuals find articles through websites like Facebook and Twitter that allow for
the direct posting of links, which can then redirect users to a primary news source. Other more
popular social media, including YouTube, Instagram, and TikTok, are more likely to aggregate and
summarise or respond to recent news stories. Their potential audience is far wider than the
dwindling circulations of physical newspapers.

In conclusion, despite the reliability of newspapers, there is little that can curb the growing ubiquity
of online news. Individuals must therefore be more discerning as to which influencers they trust.

122
The personal information of many individuals is held by large internet companies and
organisations. Do you think the advantages of this outweigh the disadvantages?

There are growing concerns today about the storage of private data by major internet companies like
Facebook and Google. In my opinion, the disadvantages of this trend outweigh its conveniences.

These companies themselves would argue their intentions are primarily to provide better services.
This relates first of all to advertising. Facebook, for example, tracks user behaviour and then allows
advertisers to target audience segments in order to show them relevant advertising. An individual
might therefore see ads related to the kinds of restaurants and music they enjoy most. Secondly, the
information is used to create helpful services for consumers. Google maps is a good example of an
entirely free platform used by millions that follows individuals, sells information to businesses, and
makes life more convenient without any obvious drawbacks or pernicious intent.

However, the misuse of big data has begun already and will only become worse in the future. The
advertisements targeted at individuals are not always harmless. During the last presidential election
in the United States, foreign governments sought out vulnerable groups and fed them false
information to influence voting behaviour. Unethical companies use the advanced targeting tools in
the same way, often locating vulnerable individuals and encouraging their worst impulses by
indulging coping mechanisms ranging from fast food to barely legal pharmaceuticals. This is only
the beginning as this information becomes more comprehensive there are legitimate concerns that
authoritarian regimes working in tandem with companies will be able to create all-knowing police
states and human rights abuses will become the norm.

In conclusion, the marginal benefits of access to personal information by private companies do not
outweigh both current and future negatives. It is therefore important that governments regulate
companies and individuals attempt to take back a degree of control.

123
Machines are taking over more and more jobs previously done by humans. Discuss the
advantages and disadvantages and give your own opinion.

There has been growing concern in recent years related to the number of positions robots now
occupy in the workforce. In my opinion, though this has clear disadvantages for the average worker,
it is a positive overall.

Those who decry this trend towards automation point out its impact on unskilled labourers. The
most affected live in poorer, predominantly rural areas rather than cities where there are more white
collar workers. For example, in the United States in the primarily agrarian economies of the
Midwest, the number of jobs for farmers and factory workers has been in steep decline. The result is
either that many families now struggle to make ends meet and are embittered towards the current
economic model or they leave their homes to earn subsistence wages in the city. This migration
brings its own negatives as cities become overcrowded and the consumer class in the countryside
dwindles.

Nonetheless, the forward progress of technology is a positive sign for the future. There is little
doubt that the transitional period will be rife with unrest among working class people; however, this
will be more than compensated for by future generations. In the future, workers will be free to
pursue their passions rather than having to toil in manual jobs better done by robots. This could lead
to a concomitant rise in the number of scientists, artists, researchers, artisans, and other skilled
positions. There is even consideration these days of a universal basic wage that would sever
individuals from the necessity of work and open up a range of leisure options for the average
citizen.

In conclusion, though the dominance of robotic technologies has short-term downsides, it will
ultimately lead to a flourishing of human creativity and innovation. It is therefore important for
governments to capably manage this transition.

124
Many people put their personal information online (address, telephone number, and so on) for
purposes such as signing up for social networks or online banking. Is this a positive or negative
development?

The advent of a digital society has led to greater vulnerability in terms of the personal information
stored online. In my opinion, these associated dangers are significant but do not outweigh the
benefits of a more convenient user experience.

Concerned policymakers often argue that sensitive information registered online fosters widespread
fraud. The majority of individuals store some degree of information online whether it is as simple as
their address and phone number or more important data such as social security numbers or banking
details. Naturally, this information can be stolen. The variety of methods used to steal information,
including phishing emails and actual hacking of websites, pose challenges for law enforcement and
can lead to crimes such as identity theft. These novel vulnerabilities that all consumers must become
aware of are likely to remain a permanent fixture of online life.

Nonetheless, the above instances are rare and storing information online allows for greater ease of
access. The best evidence for this is that the vast majority of individuals have decided to store
personal information online despite growing cognizance of the risks. For example, it is an
afterthought to log in to a website, accept the cookies and store a username, and password. The next
time the user logs in, the process only takes seconds and this small savings in terms of effort and
time is justifiably meaningful in the aggregate. Moreover, in the case of online market trading
platforms and banking websites, consumers are willing to divulge more confidential information to
enjoy the conveniences of conducting transactions faster.

In conclusion, the tradeoffs associated with storing important data online do not make it a negative
on the whole. Consumers, corporations, and governments must take steps to ensure safety, while
being mindful that saving time and effort are two of the more fundamental human priorities.

125
Information technology is changing many aspects of our lives and now dominates our home,
leisure and work activities. To what extent do the benefits of information technology outweigh
the disadvantages?

Some today would argue that the revolution in information technology has a pernicious impact
generally. In my opinion, the drawbacks related to social interaction do not outweigh the positive
possibilities now available to the average person.

The legitimately worrying disadvantages to information technology concern interpersonal

relationships. In the past, social interactions in person were more common. Today, a majority of
conversations take place through messaging apps and on social media. The short-term result is that
communication skills are in decline. The longer-term implications will create wider social trends.
As people interact and form groups online they are more prone to groupthink and radicalization.
What would normally be mitigated by one's circle of friends and families, can now grow unabated
in the virtual sphere with possible negative results for all of society.

The main advantages of the current age are increases in what is possible. These possibilities are
most basically conveniences. Users can save time by taking advantage of their phones to send
emails, make calls, organise their day and undertake a variety of other tasks. As technology evolves,
it has even become more common for employees to work remotely and therefore conserve time and
energy commuting to and from the office. Beyond these simple comforts, people are able to
accomplish more with digital devices. This includes the ability to write with word processors, edit
video on various applications, and then post and interact with a global audience through the internet
and sites such as YouTube.

In conclusion, despite the threat of a less socially active world, there are justifying benefits
concerning human potentiality. Both the positives and negatives must be weighed and managed
carefully.

126
More and more people no longer read newspapers or watch TV programmes to get their news
and instead read online. Is this a positive or negative development?

Increasingly large segments of the population now receive their news online, rather than from the
physical editions of newspapers. In my opinion, though the conveniences of technology are self-
evident, this trend is a negative on the whole.

Proponents of modern habits of reading news argue it is more convenient. Examples of this abound.
Consumers can search Google or Apple News and locate articles from thousands of online papers
and websites, enabling them to access the news that matters the most to them more efficiently.
Furthermore, they can do this while they are commuting to work or during various periods of
inactivity throughout the day. It is even possible on most websites to listen to an audio version of
the news, a tremendous advance for the visually impaired. All these modern features of online news
only hint at the innovations to come and validate the decline of the publishing industry.

Nonetheless, the quality of online news is considerably lower on most websites. There are
exceptions, such as websites that specialise in a given subject-area and employ intelligent
contributors, however, the vast majority of the online news industry cynically pursues advertising
revenue at any cost. Most stories are written hastily, the headlines are misleading, and the news
articles themselves may be rife with unchecked facts and unprofessional prose. Retractions to
reporting errors go unnoticed. The situation developing from this is that most individuals now read
the news either to confirm their biases and gain a momentary burst of endorphins or out of outrage,
so-called ‘hate-reading’, for the very same reason. It is therefore justified to claim that the
relationship between publisher and audience is exploitive, not educational.

In conclusion, easier access to news does not outweigh the bad habits instilled by online news.
Governments will likely never regulate this industry properly so it falls to individuals to make more
informed choices when consuming media.

127
If a product is good and meets customer needs, then people will buy it and advertising is
unnecessary. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some are of the belief that advertising is largely superfluous as most consumers are aware of their
own needs. In my opinion, this is true despite the fact that advertising can occasionally serve
informative purposes.

The stated aim of the majority of advertisements is to raise awareness among a potential audience.
This applies to commercials, billboards, and online advertising. A good example would be the short
commercials that play before videos on YouTube. These ads are designed to showcase an item or
service that, based on advanced audience targeting, would appeal to a particular consumer or
demographic. Since an individual has been targeted, it is likely that the advertisement will be
relevant and, if the ad is well-designed, informative. For instance, this might be an advertisement for
a smartphone targeted at a photography enthusiast that includes details about hardware
specifications and picture quality.

However, the internet now allows individuals to research products more objectively on a case by
case basis. When a particular person is interested in purchasing a new phone, because they lost an
old one or they desire a more modern one, then they can compare prices online, read customer
reviews, and consult a variety of blogs and sites like Consumer Report, which is well known for its
unbiased appraisals. There are, admittedly, situations when individuals will uncover new products
they might not have been aware of before through ads. However, this is more likely to occur
organically in daily life if a person sees someone else, for example, with a useful smart watch. The
advent of social media and sharing of personal information online also means that individuals have
another media outlet aside from advertising that promotes new products and services.

In conclusion, advertising is no longer needed in modern society as there are other ways to research
and discover products. This does not imply that advertising is ineffective, merely that in a perfect
world it could be eliminated.

128
These days consumers are faced with an increasing amount of advertising from various
companies. To what extent do you think consumers are influenced by advertising? What
measures should be taken to protect them?

Advertising has become an increasingly pervasive and, arguably, compelling presence in the
modern world. In my opinion, marketing greatly influences the average consumer and there should
be strict regulations in place to ensure it does not become overly invasive and manipulative.

Shoppers are persuaded by advertising because it exploits vulnerabilities in human psychology. For
decades, advertising agencies have been researching and refining their approaches. Over this time,
key tenets have been established that maximise the money spent on marketing. These principles
include the so-called "fear of missing out," social proofing, and various ways of raising brand
awareness. For instance, many companies will offer limited-time deals such as the famous "Black
Friday" sales in the United States. The best evidence of the effectiveness of these techniques is that
corporations continue to employ them and advertising is the single wealthiest industry in the world.

In order to guarantee advertising does not pose a threat to society at large, it should be strictly
regulated by the state. A standout example of this relates to health. Companies that manufacture
products that are naturally addictive to humans, such as junk foods high in sugar, fat, and
carbohydrates, often aim their advertisements at the most vulnerable segments of society including
children and obese individuals. Governments can play a key role at this stage by legislating that
certain audience segments cannot be targeted. This would likely include preventing companies from
accessing private information about online users and from directing their marketing budget towards
locations near schools and playgrounds.

In conclusion, advertising is an effective practice and must be stringently regulated by the federal
government. These laws will only become more essential in the future as marketing becomes more
sophisticated

129
Some people believe that violent media directly results in violent behaviour. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?

Some argue that violent media serves as a direct catalyst for violent actions in society. In my
opinion, although there are examples to support this viewpoint, it is largely untrue due to other
contextual factors.

Those who decry the level of violence in entertainment and media generally often cite relevant past
examples. One such example would be the school shooters from the Columbine High School
shooting in the United States. As was widely reported in the media subsequently, the perpetrators
enjoyed playing violent shooting games. The argument here is not that every person who plays a
violent game or watches a violent movie will commit similar crimes, that is patently false, but
simply that those already predisposed to violence gain encouragement, and even training, from
violent media. This applies not simply to the above-mentioned instance but also to other atrocities
around the world.

The claim above might be somewhat true, however, it is misleading as violence tends to be more
highly correlated with other causes. In the case of crimes with a clear motive, such as robbery,
which may result in violence, poverty is the clearest catalyst. For rarer crimes such as school
shootings there are a mix of social and psychological factors. Most school shooters are either
neglected or abused by their family and feel alienated from society at large. They have often been
bullied at school and are not performing well academically. They might find solace in the fantasies
of violent games and movies but their troubles originate at a deeper source.

In conclusion, it is reductive to claim that violent media creates violent behaviour as there are more
direct and varied causes. The solutions must therefore address these true roots.

130
Computers are becoming increasingly pervasive in modern life. Some view this as a positive while
others feel it is negative overall. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

As computers continue to become a ubiquitous fixture of society, some question their overall
impact. In my opinion, despite the unquestionable advantages of computers, they are also clearly a
negative on the whole.

Proponents of computer technology argue they expand what is humanly possible. The first personal
computer created by Apple featured a word processor that allowed millions to write and distribute
their work more widely than ever before. In recent decades, the advent of internet technology has
enabled computers to communicate globally, retrieve nearly infinite amounts of information, and
perform a range of functions. For instance, the creative expression in computer animated films is
only possible because of computers. This same increase in opportunities is present in many other
fields.

Nonetheless, the advantages detailed above are hypothetical for most people as computers more
often lead to distraction. The vast majority of computers are used for passive, rather than active,
purposes. People use computers to watch movies, read the news, and scroll thoughtlessly through
social media. Since the human brain is evolved to receive pleasure in low doses through
achievement, the sudden shock of instant and effortless gratification is debilitating. This explains
the current addiction to computers. The result of this addiction is a severe decline in mental and
physical health and the rise of dissociative anxiety disorders, obesity, and cardiovascular disease.

In conclusion, the potentiality of computers does not overshadow how they are in fact used by most
people. It is therefore crucial for individuals to manage their time in front of various screens.

131
The internet means people do not need to travel to foreign countries to understand how others
live. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The growth of information available on the internet in recent decades has prompted some to
question the value of international travel. In my opinion, travelling to other countries is a rewarding
experience, but I am largely in agreement with this position.

Those who still advocate travelling abroad highlight how important the experience can be. This
argument centres around both its value in itself as well as its utility. Most travellers can justify the
time and money by the enjoyable experience and discovery of another country, including their
people and traditions. These experiences are also formative. For example, someone who grows up in
a wealthy European nation might not have seen how people live in developing or more ethnically
diverse countries. They will therefore have a fuller understanding of the rest of the world if they
travel a lot and this could impact both their political views and their actions later in life.

Nonetheless, travel is no longer as important as it used to be because it is now possible to learn

about countries online. The experience is still valuable but online information is actually likely to be
more accurate and comprehensive. An individual who wants to research life in Vietnam, for
instance, can scroll through lifestyle blogs, read the local online versions of magazines, watch
videos of both foreigners and residents from all over the country, follow individuals from a wide
segment of society on Instagram, and generally get a good sense for the country without ever setting
foot there. In the past, limited access to technology in those developing countries might have made
it impossible to understand how locals live, but that is no longer a problem.

In conclusion, the information that can be found on the internet has greatly diminished the
importance of the experience of travelling to other countries. Each individual must nonetheless
decide for themselves whether it is still a worthwhile expense.

132
Many think that the news should be as objective as possible. Do you think all news is true? What
is the main function of a newspaper?

Many people believe that the news ought to strive to remove as much subjectivity as possible. In my
opinion, news is always false to varying degrees and the main function of a paper is to keep society
at large honest.

There are two main impediments to truth in the news. The first one is vested interests. These are
primarily governmental interference, which is strongest in authoritarian regimes such as in North
Korea, and corporate control. Companies are naturally averse to publishing stories that will hurt
their standing with the government or bring them unwanted attention. Added to this is the fact that
both reporters and their sources have personal biases, limited vantage points and, oftentimes,
incentives to distort the truth. This all makes it nearly impossible to form an objective picture of an
event.

The chief function of newspapers is to perform a public service. This typically entails uncovering
threats to public safety and abuses of power. A good example of this would be the investigative
reporting in the early 2000s by The Boston Globe to reveal child abuse scandals and the subsequent
cover-up by the Catholic church. Their year-long investigation and multiple articles on this topic
played a pivotal role in not only removing the figures responsible for hiding the abuses but also
pushing the church at large to undertake steps towards greater transparency and reform.

In conclusion, though truth is an ideal that can never be reached, the news’ importance as a check
against public endangerment cannot be downplayed. It is therefore essential for democracy to have a
free press.

133
Some believe that advances in technology are increasing the gap between rich and poor while
others think the opposite is happening. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Many are of the belief that the progress of technology has widened income inequality between
social classes. I agree with this view as, although technology ensures equal levels of accessibility, it
also concentrates capital in the hands of a few.

Detractors often argue that technology has allowed the underprivileged greater access to
information. This relates chiefly to information technology and the growth of the internet and
devices that support connectivity. In the past, only those educated in universities could read certain
academic articles and important research. The internet now makes it possible for the majority of the
world’s population to locate a wide variety of information on every topic imaginable. The effect is a
more equal playing field when it comes to education that then has a domino effect on later standards
of living.

Nonetheless, advances in technology are paving the way for an increased accumulation of capital by
select individuals and corporations. In the past, an employee working a good job could generate
most of their money from salary. Today, most income comes from reinvested capital. This has
widened the gap between socioeconomic classes and technology only exacerbates this by replacing
human jobs annually and hastening the growth of conglomerates like Google and Amazon. These
companies, and their shareholders, are able to profit off existing capital while the average worker
struggles to make ends meet or faces the prospect of unemployment due to technological
innovation.

In summary, technology cuts down on some societal impediments to success but erects other,
stronger economic barriers. This also partially explains the recent calls for a universal basic income
to combat growing inequality.

134
News stories on TV and in newspapers are very often accompanied by pictures. Some people say
that these pictures are more effective than words. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Modern media often prioritises images over language in order to create more striking and engaging
content. Although some might argue that words communicate more information, I believe that
images are more effective overall.

Proponents would argue that words can convey nuanced information. This is because of the amount
of detail and complexity of information that can be contained in language. For instance, an article
about recent climate change accords can include background, statistical information, direct quotes
from key figures, in-depth analysis, and multiple perspectives. This kind of persuasion tends to
appeal more to those who are swayed by logical argumentation. In contrast, an image is limited in
its scope to the subject portrayed and much more open to interpretation without an accompanying
article.

Nonetheless, visual information is more memorable and moving. The most famous images in
history have persisted long after what was said or written about them has been forgotten. A pertinent
recent example of this would be during the Syrian refugee crisis in 2019, few people were
convinced by numerous think pieces and articles. The photos of refugees, in particular a viral image
of a boy who had died and washed up on a beach in Europe, was the catalyst for public outcry that
later influenced policy changes. Some of the explanation for this might come from research that has
shown that the human brain has evolved for language relatively recently while image recognition
has a lengthy pre-history.

In conclusion, words can impart greater complexity but images will always appeal more to human
nature intrinsically. Media entities should balance both but opt for maximum impact.

135
Online currencies have become more common in recent years. Why is this? Is this a positive or
negative development?

In recent years, cryptocurrencies have become increasingly common. In my opinion, this is a result
of technological advances and excess capital and is decidedly negative on the whole given the
likelihood these coins will never become actual currencies.

The main reasons that online currencies are now gaining in popularity is they are now feasible. In
the past, technologies to create currencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum did not exist. Today,
blockchain technology allows private individuals to create cryptocurrencies and seek investment
from online communities on websites such as Reddit and Twitter. Added to this fact is an increase
in disposable income from a burgeoning middle class. The last several decades have witnessed
unprecedented economic growth, profiting all segments of society. Most investment in
cryptocurrencies has come from either small, individual investors or large firms and hedge funds.
The best evidence for this is that the recent economic downturn and lack of credit and capital
available globally has led to the collapse of most online currencies.

In my opinion, cryptocurrencies hinder global economics. Even the most popular cryptocurrencies,
including Bitcoin, are at best only likely to serve a very niche purpose. That means these coins are
only sustained by further investment, creating an artificial value bubble. The individuals who invest
in these coins are likely to lose their investments at some point. Even those who profit are learning
the lesson that it is justifiable to invest in a service that provides nothing for the world at large.
These factors do not even account for the potential environmental and economic downsides of
ultimately valueless cryptocurrencies.

In conclusion, the rise of online currencies is a natural culmination of technological innovation and
available capital that negatively impacts the world. It is better for individuals to focus on earning a
good salary rather than contributing to risky investments

136
Many people feel that media coverage has become increasingly biassed today. Why is this? What
can be done to fix this problem?

Some would argue that media platforms globally are becoming more prejudicial towards a given
side of the political spectrum. I believe that this is a natural reaction to societal changes and can be
mitigated only by media consumers themselves.

Individuals today feel increasingly drawn to the comfort of polarising content. The explanations for
this appeal are fundamentally psychological. All humans naturally strive to become part of a
movement confirming their opinions and elevating their self-esteem. A recent well-known example
of this would be some of the emerging right and left wing pundits that have become popular such as
Glenn Beck and Rachel Maddow. A large portion of their allure is that they state extreme
viewpoints with complete certainty and therefore admit their followers into a self-righteous
ideology.

In order to become more moderate, individuals must monitor their own behaviour critically. For
example, a person who is addicted to coverage that either provokes outrage or confirms their pre-
existing opinions could consider a more active hobby such as reading a book or playing a sport.
When consuming media, one can seek the most balanced commentators and networks. This will
have an impact in the aggregate if individuals globally tune out the most extreme channels
generally. Media platforms will in turn tailor their coverage to more moderate voices to recapture
their audiences.

In conclusion, the media’s focus on extreme positions mirrors a desire among the general populace
to be part of a group of like-minded believers and only individuals themselves have the authority to
counter this shift. Governments have little role to play in regulating a free press.

137
In the 20th century, contact between many different parts of the world has developed rapidly
through air travel and telecommunications. Do the advantages of this outweigh the
disadvantages?

The spread of globalisation and technologies related to international communication have brought
people closer than ever before. In my opinion, though there are environmental disadvantages to this
trend, it is positive overall for the relationships and economic development it fosters.

The relevant disadvantages here are chiefly environmental. Firstly, air travel is one of the key
contributors to climate change. This is because planes require the burning of massive quantities of
fossil fuels. In the aggregate, people taking trips all over the world greatly increases greenhouse
emissions being produced globally. Moreover, telecommunications are also a net negative for the
environment. These technologies necessitate massive servers that use incredible amounts of
electricity to power the conveniences most consumers now take for granted.

However, there has been tremendous social and economic progress due to the advent of flight and
telecommunications. Flight not only provides thousands of jobs but also serves as the basis for the
transportation of most goods. This stimulates the consumer economy in a variety of ways and
allows for companies to ship products globally. More importantly, communication technology and
flight both bring together disparate cultures. In the past, individuals from Asia might never have had
the opportunity to talk to foreigners or travel for short or long trips abroad. Now, they can meet
others, widen their perspectives on life, and enjoy experiences unknown to past generations.

In conclusion, countries must naturally be wary of the impact of technology on the environment but
that does not overshadow the advances created by air travel and telecommunications. Progress
cannot be halted.

138
Some feel that movies and tv shows are a good way to study history despite their lack of historical
accuracy at times. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today have argued that watching movies and television shows about history are legitimate
methods to learn about the past. I am generally in disagreement with this sentiment as these shows
typically prioritise entertainment over historical accuracy.

The argument in favour of learning from period pieces is that they are sometimes well-researched.
Most scripted dramas are based on historical sources and there is often at least one historian serving
as an advisor on set or during pre-production. A standout example of this would be ‘Ekaterina,’ a
Russian drama based on the life of Catherine the Great. In contrast to the American show ‘The
Great,’ based on the same historical figures, this series is more closely related to actual historic
accounts and the deviations from history and dramatisations should be self-evident to most viewers.
There are many similar shows produced globally with the same commitment to an honest retelling
of history.

However, movies and TV shows will naturally skew towards entertainment. Even the most well-
intentioned productions must take liberties not only in terms of the private conversations they depict
but also for the portrayals and characterizations of major figures. When it comes to figures from
recent history, such as movies featuring President John F. Kennedy, actors can rely on archival
footage to be more accurate in their performances. When it comes to older figures who predate
video, then writers and actors will necessarily have to impose their individual interpretations on
history. This is unavoidable and viewers who are not sceptical are likely learning
misrepresentations.

In conclusion, although entertainment is undeniably an effective way to learn, it is likely to be

largely filled with dramatic liberties. Therefore, these shows should be enjoyed but not taken too
seriously.

139
These days children spend a lot of time on devices playing games and watching shows. Some
believe this is harmful for mental health. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is becoming increasingly common to see children using devices such as smartphones and tablets
to watch videos and play games. In my opinion, this development is decidedly harmful for mental
health despite marginal educational benefits.

Those parties who support this trend believe there is value in what children can learn from games
and videos. There are numerous examples of applications which children can download and
channels on YouTube that provide content either to enhance creativity or inform about the world.
For example, one of the most popular games of the last decade, Minecraft, is typically played on
phones or tablets and involves imaginative tasks such as building structures and managing a finite
supply of resources. For this reason, the platform is used in educational contexts frequently.
Moreover, many channels on YouTube are dedicated to educational programming such as TedEd,
ASAP Science, and Discovery Kids.

Nonetheless, the exceptions above do not justify the injurious impact of games and videos on the
developing mind. Recent research has shown that interaction with both mediums simulates drug
usage, evoking pleasurable and addictive impulses in the brain. Over time, children become
increasingly hooked on electronics and struggle to achieve the same sense of satisfaction from real
world interactions. That can lead later in life to increased risk of anxiety disorders and depression.
Combined with the inherent attraction of passive entertainment, the end result is that children today
are less physically active, which itself has an enormous impact on mental health.

In conclusion, aside from the educational import of certain games and channels, spending too much
time on screens is overwhelmingly negative. Parents must ensure that screen time is limited to
guarantee healthy cognitive development.

140
Many people think technological devices such as smartphones, tablets and mobile phones bring
more disadvantages than advantages. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The availability of new technologies to the average citizen in the form of consumer electronics
brings with it both advantages and disadvantages. In my opinion, though these devices are
convenient, their use is a negative overall given the impact on mental health.

Proponents of phones and tablets can point to the all but limitless functionality they provide. It is
possible, just by owning a small, affordable device that fits in your pocket, to instantly capture
video, take photos, send emails, check social media, make phone calls, watch movies, listen to
music, play games and use a wide variety of productivity applications. There is no arguing with the
near miraculous achievements found in smartphones and tablets. Used properly, these save time and
widen the possible outlets for self-expression and creativity. An amateur filmmaker, for example,
can shoot and edit digital video directly on their phone, add in sound effects and post it easily to a
website like YouTube.

Nonetheless, the potential of phones is hindered by their corrosive effect. It is almost impossible to
use a phone as a tool to enhance creativity and productivity because it is also home to applications
designed to prey on the weaknesses of the human psyche. Companies like Facebook tap into a
natural human desire for affirmation and trigger addictive dopamine bursts as rewards for posting
selfies. Those not addicted to social media, may find themselves wasting hours playing video
games, receiving roughly the same chemical incentive. Over time, users become dependent on
unhealthy habits that humans have not had time to evolve counters for and the ostensible
convenience of these handheld devices becomes an excuse, rather than a reason, to own one.

In conclusion, phones and tablets open up new possibilities but their abuse has led to a generation of
dependent users. It is up to individuals, not organisation and governments, to limit their screen time
to preserve their mental well-being

141
Some children spend hours every day on smartphones. Why is this the case? Do you think this is
a positive or negative development?

These days, children are spending more and more hours each day using smartphones. In my
opinion, this is a natural consequence of the ubiquity of phones and is a decidedly negative
phenomenon.

The main cause of this trend is access to portable devices. Since the introduction of the original
iPhone, countless phone manufacturers have imitated Apple's innovation and virtually every family
possesses multiple devices. The owners of these phones are typically overworked and stressed
parents who are often willing to allow their children to use their smartphones to listen to music,
watch movies, and keep themselves entertained. In many parts of the world, parents even purchase
phones specifically for their children to use. The increased hours children spend on phones is
therefore a combination of tremendous access coupled with a natural desire to use them.

The main repercussions from increased smartphone usage among children are negative. Firstly,
smartphones have replaced healthier habits. Children who were raised before the advent of the
portable smartphone were more likely to read books, socialise with friends, and take part in outdoor
activities. These practices are all far healthier physically, intellectually, and emotionally. Moreover,
the usage of phones itself is actively detrimental to normal cognitive development. Many
researchers have theorised that the 21st century spike in cases of dissociative anxiety disorders can
be directly correlated with the technological age in general and smartphones more specifically.

In conclusion, children use smartphones for hours every day because of their availability and the
result of this is a steep decline in healthy lifestyles. As governments cannot restrict such usage, it is
the responsibility of parents to effectively regulate screen time for their children

142
In the future all cars, buses and trucks will be driverless. The only people travelling inside these
vehicles will be passengers. Do you think the advantages of driverless vehicles outweigh the
disadvantages?

A future filled with driverless vehicles is an inevitability. In my opinion, though there are
concomitant moral risks, the practical import for health of such a seismic shift will be positive on
the whole.

Critics of this trend suggest that machines should not be responsible for the potential loss of human
life. This argument rests on the fact that when there is an accident involving humans, it is possible
to either assess blame and assign punishment or accept that human error played a role. In contrast,
an individual severely injured as the result of a collision caused by a machine may justly feel that all
human autonomy and free will is absent from their fate. This is analogous to a natural disaster with
the crucial distinction being that humanity has engineered the situation. It is human nature to prefer
to control a situation rather than surrender the outcome to an autonomous machine.

Proponents of automated vehicles, on the other hand, argue the tangible ramifications concerning
public safety. The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that driverless vehicles cause fewer accidents
than humans. The reason for this is that humans are prone to errors related to fatigue, distractions
such as smartphones, and, in some cases, altered states. Machines might experience the occasional
technical error, however, they are far more consistent by comparison. In fact, the few accidents that
have occurred with automated vehicles were the fault of human drivers. If all cars were driverless,
this would enable a greater level of sophistication that could, theoretically, all but eliminate
automobile accidents.

In conclusion, though many accidents will occur without human agency playing a role, safer roads
fully justify this innovation. Companies and consumers must be wary of the influence of automation
while also embracing its most transparent benefits.

143
WORK

144
Some people believe that professionals, such as doctors and engineers, should be required to
work in the country where they did their training. Others believe they should be free to work in
another country if they wish. Discuss views and give your own opinion.

Certain groups today have argued that skilled professionals should be obliged to work where they
did their initial training, while others feel they are owed the right to work anywhere. In my opinion,
assuming that the qualifications translate, all individuals ought to have the freedom to choose their
country of occupation.

Those who oppose this practice contend that professionals owe a debt of gratitude to the location of
their training. Qualified professionals ranging from medical practitioners and engineers to scientists
and teachers at some point likely relied deeply on governmental and educational resources in their
local area. It is therefore logical that these individuals should remain at least in the same country and
contribute their skills to bettering society as a whole. For instance, a doctor who has benefited from
quality schools and government aid in the United States can justifiably be asked to help their fellow
citizens and train future doctors.

However, the right to choose freely where one works and lives is paramount. Since many
professionals will likely end up remaining where they did their training, this is rarely a pressing
problem in most nations. Given that reality, workers should not be restricted in their movement and
choice of living environment. When moving to another locale, they will likely have to ensure their
standardisation and certification is valid and learn the intricacies of working in another nation.
However, these are simply individual impediments and should not be used as definitive counter-
arguments. Preventing individuals from working in other countries would also considerably impair
the sharing of expertise and culture across international borders.

In conclusion, though there are certain standards that must be reached, all working professionals
should be free to work abroad. This policy is largely already in place for most occupations.

145
Some people say that individuals should change jobs during their working life often while others
believe that doing the same job has advantages to individuals, companies, and society. Discuss
both views and give your opinion.

Many are of the opinion that it is preferable for individuals, corporations and society more generally
for workers to remain in the same position long-term. Although such a contention has transparent
benefits, I am largely in disagreement.

Those who argue against employment mobility point out how it can facilitate consistent progress for
all parties involved. Firstly, companies are the most likely to profit since they will not have to hire
and train new employees and will be able to cultivate a positive company ethos. As companies
flourish, it necessarily follows that individuals will be able to gain promotions and raises. This will
enable a higher standard of living. Finally, society itself will benefit as the private and public world
can achieve a balanced system of mutual benefits. There is then less likelihood of unemployment
and civil unrest.

However, I would argue the opportunities that individuals may miss by not changing jobs are more
significant. A worker who is unhappy in their job has the power to improve the situation. For
instance, if a person is under-utilised and underpaid in their current position, they could apply for a
new job or move to a new sector. If the move is successful, they will not regret their decision and if
not they can always apply for another job. In the aggregate, citizens finding more satisfying jobs and
taking full advantage of their latent abilities will lead to a happier society. This will in turn grow the
economy and corporations are likely to be more productive with an engaged workforce.

In conclusion, the tangible impact of remaining in a single job does not outweigh the potential gain
for individuals, and society by extension, when seeking a varied career path. There are exceptions to
this but most workers should be willing to switch jobs when possible.

146
Some countries have introduced laws to limit the working hours that an employer can ask from
an employee. Why are these laws introduced? Is this a positive or negative trend?

In many countries, it is common for the state to constrain the number of hours a person can work
within any given day. In my opinion, this law is designed to discourage exploitation and is
decidedly positive overall.

The main reason the average workday is limited by law is that otherwise companies could take
advantage of their employees. The evidence for this comes from past centuries before such laws
were passed. Around the beginning of the industrial revolution, it was a common practice in
European countries for individuals to work 12 to 16 hours a day. If an employee protested then they
might be fired or even physically harmed. Today, there are very few countries where corporations
have the ability to make inhumane physical and mental demands on employees.

Limiting a person’s working laws is beneficial to society as it ensures workers have time for
themselves. In countries where these laws do not exist or are poorly defined, there may still be
instances of child labour or long working days. For example, in several East Asian countries,
factory workers must live and work at their jobs with little opportunity for an outside life. In
contrast, in countries with strict labour laws, a person possesses more time for family, hobbies, and
friends. Free time is one way of guaranteeing better quality of life and overall satisfaction, benefits
which can have ramifications for society as a whole.

In conclusion, laws related to working conditions protect workers and for that reason are positive. It
is also essential that countries enforce the laws they have passed.

147
Some feel that individuals should have the right to strike in all jobs while others feel there are
exceptions. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Some interested parties today argue that strikes should be an inalienable right for all workers. I am
in disagreement with this contention as there are certain jobs where strikes could be potentially
disastrous for a country at large.

The right to protest labour conditions is the basis of a fair labour market. When workers are not
allowed to strike, it is possible for employers and powerful industries to intentionally suppress
wages and collude to create poor working environments. This was the case in past centuries before
the labour movement. In the United States and Great Britain during the industrial revolution there
were infamously dangerous factories where workers were at risk of injury, illness, and potentially
even death. Combined with those dangers, most employees received low wages because they did
not have the right to organise and protest for better treatment.

Strikes should still be allowed for jobs where the impact would be inconvenient such as for public
transportation workers or teachers. However, in certain cases, striking could have potentially more
damaging effects. These occupations range from police and firefighters to doctors and government
officials. If the police in a given city or country decided through their union to not come to work,
then the public would be vulnerable to an increase in crime. This applies to all jobs that relate
directly to the public good. For this reason, most countries have laws stipulating which unions are
allowed to organise strikes and which ones must use other methods to achieve progress.

In conclusion, in an ideal world all people would have the freedom to protest their working
conditions but there are safety concerns that are sometimes a greater priority. Luckily, many of the
occupations that should not be allowed to strike already receive fair remuneration.

148
In the past, most people worked for small businesses, while more people now work for large
businesses. What are the advantages and disadvantages of working for large businesses?

The rise of large corporations has led to a fundamental shift in the workforce towards large
businesses. The chief advantages of this relate to opportunity and the downsides are larger, societal
dilemmas.

Proponents of big business can point to career advancement and the variety of roles within a large
company. Small businesses, by their nature, draw on a limited possible source of revenue that
naturally caps promotions. Large companies have nearly unlimited profit potential and can thus
employ a large number of managers, executives and other high-salaried positions. Moreover, a small
business is more likely to be limited in the number of roles, while larger companies will have
departments ranging from legal to marketing to research and development to human resources, all of
which are potential destinations for motivated employees.

The disadvantages of these large companies relate less directly to individuals and more to society at
large. Firstly, although there are more quality jobs available in big companies, the disappearance of
small, local entrepreneurs means that capital becomes concentrated in the company’s chief
shareholders, who are often living in other countries and already extremely rich. Over time this has
led to the division of wealth that defines the 21st century. Secondly, as executive decisions become
further removed from local communities it is harder to regulate large companies. A good example of
this would be the environmental cost of drilling for oil and extracting natural gas, which hurts local
residents but continues unabated because those in authority are unaffected.

In conclusion, the opportunities provided by big business do not outweigh the negative potential for
all of society when power becomes concentrated and distant. It is therefore important to check the
reach of corporations and empower individuals.

149
When a person spends most of his or her time working a job with no job satisfaction, their life
loses meaning. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Throughout history, individuals have struggled to balance the demands of work with a personal
search for meaning. In my opinion, though individuals can derive some purpose from their private
life, a satisfying job is an essential component of a meaningful existence.

Those who argue that meaning can be found outside work typically couch their argument in family-
life. The average office worker does not feel a stirring passion for their job or industry but simply
shows up for work, does a competent job, looks forward to the weekend and the end of month when
they receive salary. Their focus instead lies in family and personal life. They may spend time
playing and teaching their children or show more interest in their hobby than their career.

Nonetheless, the personal is only half of a full life. In order to have meaning, one must also exist in
the public sphere through work. It is common for individuals at the end of their life to regret not
spending more time with family, but many also feel that they failed to leave an impression in the
realm of public affairs. The larger-than-life figures that all individuals look up to, ranging from
political leaders to athletes to artists and entertainers, lead more meaningful lives because they
impact people outside their immediate circle. These are extreme examples but the average
individual gives their life greater depth of meaning when they feel valued by both family and the
world at large to some degree.

In conclusion, though a rich private life is important, life is meaningless without an accompanying
role in public. It is paramount for individuals to keep this in mind when prioritising their time.

150
Getting promotions is one of the biggest motivators for hard work in the modern workplace. Why
are people so driven to receive promotions? What other factors motivate people to work hard?

It is commonly thought that people primarily work hard in order to move up to better positions in
their company. Individuals naturally strive after promotions but there are also other motivators that
can encourage hard work.

The desire for promotions is driven by an inborn human inclination towards growth. All people seek
to improve their standing in the world and promotions are one basic method of doing this. This
intention can be masked with a number of justifications ranging from providing for one’s family to
wanting to earn a higher salary to hopes of making a difference in the world. At bottom, these are
the results, rather than the origins, of seeking promotions. This is evidenced in some ambitious
individuals who will do anything to climb the corporate ladder, seemingly without concrete
motivations and more satisfied with the process of movement than its tangible rewards.

Outside of promotions, individuals work hard for intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Promotions are one
example of an extrinsic motivator but there are others related to societal pressures. Many workers
are driven by the social norm of providing well for one’s family and ensuring their future. Some
people feel the implicit or explicit expectation to excel professionally and draw personal self-esteem
from the esteem of others. There are also potential intrinsic motivations such as passion, a rationale
that typically motivates individuals working in the arts or hard sciences.

In conclusion, seeking promotions is a natural consequence of wanting to rise in the world and there
are related intrinsic and extrinsic motivations that also push people to work hard. By understanding
these motivations deeply it is possible to align career goals with one’s innermost desires.

151
There are different methods businesses use to increase their sales. What are the different ways
companies use to increase sales? Which one is the most effective?

There are a variety of methods employed by businesses to grow their sales revenue. In my opinion,
these typically relate to marketing and innovation, with the latter being the most effective.

Most companies choose to target increased sales through advertising campaigns and new products.
Marketing and advertising are self-evidently important. Nearly every major company reserves a
substantial portion of the budget for television advertisements, online marketing, billboards, and so
on. Companies that excel with viral marketing, such as Starbucks, are able to dominate the
competition through brand awareness and grow sales consistently. Furthermore, the introduction of
new products is also a key catalyst. This can include new menu items, such as the recent popularity
of Popeye's new chicken sandwich or technological advances like the electric vehicles produced by
Tesla.

Though advertising can be extremely persuasive, there is no substitute for a truly revolutionary and
unique product. The best example of this would be the most successful consumer electronics
product in history, the iPhone. When it launched there was no comparable product, with Blackberry
phones being the closest analogue. The iPhone allowed users to make phone calls, send messages,
take photos, check email, and use the internet. These are routine features now but at the time these
innovations drove rapid revenue growth and countless other companies raced to replicate their
success. This model applies to a range of industries as a novel product can drive demand while a
company needs only focus on maintaining their supply chain.

In conclusion, sales figures rise as a result of marketing strategies and successful innovation, with
the latter the single greatest method for generating more revenue. Companies must balance both
techniques yet prioritise new ideas whenever possible.

152
In an era of globalisation, some people think that studying abroad is the best way to attain a well-
paid job while others believe other options are better. Discuss both views and give your own
opinion.

Some today would argue that the rise of globalisation necessitates studying abroad if an individual
desires a stable career path. In my opinion, though this is an ideal route to success, there are superior
methods.

Those who argue in favour of studying abroad make the contention that it allows a person to
network and understand the world better. The majority of students who study in other countries are
leaving less developed nations to study in more affluent countries. When studying abroad, not only
will they be exposed to other cultures and ways of living, but they are also likely to make key
connections that can help them in the future. After graduation, they can rely on their network when
applying for jobs, starting businesses, or simply seeking advice. Without these advantages, a person
will have a more difficult time attaining a well-paying job.

However, the surest pathway to success is to gain experience in any given profession, regardless of
the location. A person who is studying and working abroad faces roughly the same obstacles when
applying for jobs. If they remain in their country of origin, they will not only understand the local
market better but also possess inherent advantages in terms of language, culture, and family support.
Many of the most successful entrepreneurs in the world and highly-regarded executives studied and
work in their native country. For instance, in Vietnam there are numerous start-up businesses that
identify local needs and work to meet demand, oftentimes without the benefit of an education
abroad or even an advanced university degree.

In conclusion, most individuals studying abroad are more likely to succeed because of other factors
and therefore most individuals should pursue different means of securing stable employment in
today's volatile employment market. Governments should naturally support individuals in these
matters.

153
Employers sometimes ask people applying for jobs for personal information, such as their
hobbies and interests, and whether they are married or single. Some people say that this
information may be relevant and useful. Others disagree. Discuss both these views and give your
own opinion.

Many are of the opinion that there is little value to the sensitive personal information that employers
may inquire about during job interviews. In my opinion, though there are certain logical limits, I
believe these questions are generally useful as it helps employers understand candidates better.

On the one hand, applicants may rightly feel these questions can be uncomfortable. An employer
who asks questions about family background, sexual orientation, and medical history is certainly
violating all ethical bounds. If the candidate feels triggered or uncomfortable, there is the chance an
interview could become the catalyst for a mental health setback or result in the candidate deciding
not to apply for the position. A hypothetical example of this that shows the potential harm is that if
an LGBTQ candidate must continually disclose their orientation, and the environment is very
traditional or homophobic, they may find themselves frustrated and feel unfairly discriminated
against.

Nonetheless, as long as inquiries are within acceptable limits, these questions aid potential
employers in constructing an accurate picture of a potential employee. Naturally, an employee can
lie about personal questions if they have a particularly disturbing private life, however, that might
itself be of some value. Interviewers likely have experience and can detect the presence of lies and
make judgments accordingly. For candidates who answer honestly, the interviewer will be able to
compare their responses with past employee performance. For example, there is a strong likelihood
that socially competent individuals with lots of friends and active hobbies will be outgoing and
morale-boosting additions to a staff.

In conclusion, despite the risks of causing offence, these questions have value in forming a general
opinion of a candidate for any given position. Employers should therefore continue asking such
questions

154
Large companies should pay higher salaries to CEOs and executives compared to other workers.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many believe that executives at major companies are overpaid. In my opinion, this disconcerting
wage gap is justified as there are few individuals capable of fulfilling the role responsibilities.

Critics of higher salaries for executives point out the unwarranted gap between them and other
employees. For example, the average office worker or a cleaner works a similar amount of hours
and, in some cases, the demanding nature of their job is arguably more strenuous. Nonetheless,
CEOs and other executives get paid in the tens of millions of dollars annually, and this occurs even
if the company reports disappointing results or in periods of economic downturn, such as the recent
global recession. Their salaries are so many times higher it is impossible to rationalise the disparity
by emphasising the hours worked alone. Therefore it is logical to decry the salaries of executives
and identify corruption as a culprit.

However, in my opinion, the outsized salaries for executives are justified by supply and demand. It
is an uncomfortable fact but true regardless that there is a large pool of potential applicants who
would make serviceable replacements for the lowly paid positions. This is not true for executives
generally and CEOs more specifically. A CEO must have a strong theoretical background (often
based on attending an Ivy League institution), years of proven experience, tireless work ethic,
uncommon leadership qualities, and exemplary understanding and insight into global economics.
These abilities and characteristics are rare and , therefore, companies must compete to hire them by
offering the greatest remuneration packages.

In conclusion, though the salaries for executives appear extravagant, they are the result of a logical
calculation of supply and demand. There are more important reforms needed within the free market
capitalist model.

155
The leaders of most organisations tend to be older people. However, some argue that younger
people make better bosses. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is commonplace at most companies for bosses and managers to be older individuals. In my

opinion, though young individuals may be better at embracing new ideas, the best employees will
always have more experience and be generally older.

Those who argue in favour of younger bosses contend that they are more open to implementing
modern developments in any given field. Older bosses are more likely to stubbornly follow the
principles that brought them success originally, even if their industry is evolving rapidly. For
example, in the sporting world, many older executives follow dogmatic principles that have become
outdated due to greater understanding of the scientific and mathematical underpinnings of sports.
Younger bosses therefore tend to have greater success at a variety of managerial positions in sports
ranging from coaching and managing to ownership and executive roles.

However, in the majority of fields, the most capable bosses will typically be both experienced and
flexible. Older bosses who are unwilling to evolve will likely deliver poor results and be removed
from positions of power. The more competent ones, who can blend their life experience with novel
insights and developments, will eventually distinguish themselves. A clear illustration of this would
be that the CEOs of Fortune 500 companies are almost invariably either middle-aged or older
employees who have proven track records of achievement yet also the humility to accept advice and
understand that innovation is the key to continued success.

In conclusion, while younger bosses are likely to be more receptive to modern outlooks, older
managers can be both open-minded and experienced. There will naturally be exceptions but
companies should aim to promote their most experienced and competent employees.

156
Some people believe that jobs provide both income and for a social life, while others think that
friends should be made outside of work. Discuss both views and give your opinion.

The line between work and social life is becoming increasingly blurred as people spend more time
at their jobs. In my opinion, though having work friends has tangible benefits for career
advancement, it is more important to have a life outside the office.

Those in favour of a closed circle of work friends can argue the career benefits. Befriending co-
workers and those higher up in a company can naturally translate to future promotions and other
opportunities. For example, if a person starts out working for a law firm in a relatively low position
as a clerk or even in the mail room, their best chance of being noticed by the upper echelons of
management is through social connections. Supplemented with a solid work ethic, this increases an
individual’s chances of standing out from other candidates and fast-tracking their career goals.

Nonetheless, having friends outside work exposes one to a greater diversity of perspectives. When
talking with work friends, the topics invariably focus on office politics, gossip, and industry-related
discussions. Over time this can unwittingly have the effect of limiting one’s viewpoints. In contrast,
if a person’s friends are employed in a variety of fields they will learn about other industries and be
able to share their own expertise. This exchange of perspectives is the basis of creative thinking and
goes a long way towards enlarging an individual’s knowledge of the world at large.

In conclusion, the gains from having a diverse set of friends outweigh the career oriented benefits of
work friends. Individuals must of course themselves decide what will contribute most to a more
satisfying all-around life.

157
FAMILY

158
Nowadays, families are not as close as in the past and a lot of people have become used to this.
Why is this happening? Do the advantages of this trend outweigh the drawbacks?

The family unit in today’s world is becoming increasingly less secure. In my opinion, this reflects a
wider societal shift away from various traditions and it is positive in the majority of cases where it
occurs.

The main cause of this phenomenon relates to a breakdown of historically sacred values. This has
been hastened by the development of technology and globalisation but predates it. Individuals for
the last century have been questioning the role of institutions, religions, and patriarchal structures.
This leads to many doubting the value of a tightly connected family if the individual members of the
family are not benefiting each other. A clear illustration of this would be the number of children
who become estranged from their parents in order to safeguard their own mental health and escape
an abusive environment.

I feel this is a positive change as it is only likely to take place in families that are dysfunctional.
Families from countries where the family unit is still a healthy part of tradition, such as in many
Asian and South American nations, are less likely to experience this gradual disintegration. The
instances in which families are no longer connected tend to be for good reason. For example, in
many western nations, individuals are free from a variety of social stigmas and this allows them to
see clearly if their family is healthy. In those instances where there is abuse or unhealthy
dependency, family members are not bound by oppressive laws or an intolerant society into
ignoring these problems.

In conclusion, although family cohesiveness is in decline due to progressive trends in society, this
should be viewed as a positive as it liberates individuals. This shift away from family-life will only
become more pervasive in the future.

159
Weddings are getting bigger and more expensive.
What is the reason for this?
Is it a positive or negative development?

Weddings around the world have become more expensive and larger in recent decades. In my
opinion, this is a natural progression and is positive in the vast majority of contexts.

One explanation for more lavish weddings is increasingly higher expectations coupled with a
burgeoning global middle class. It is a natural desire for humans to strive to surpass previous
standards. Any person who has attended weddings in the past will naturally attempt to exceed what
they have experienced both in terms of size and expense. This propensity to exceed past
achievements is combined with increased disposable income. Economies around the world,
particularly in developing nations, have risen dramatically recently, enabling individuals to spend on
a variety of luxuries including memorable wedding parties.

I believe this development is positive overall due to the impact it has on the average person.
Admittedly, excessive spending in any area can be a negative if it greatly exceeds one's earnings.
Assuming a person is planning a wedding that will not hinder them financially in the future, then it
is a massive positive for the bride, groom, and all attendees. Most people, even beyond those getting
married and their family, consider weddings to be meaningful and enduring memories. The small
and large bursts of happiness produced by such an event in the aggregate are worth more than a
wide range of other expenses that individuals often prioritise.

In conclusion, weddings are larger and costlier today because of raised expectations and this is
largely positive given the impact on individuals. It is nonetheless essential that weddings are not
taken to extreme excesses beyond one's means.

160
Although families have influence on a child's development, factors outside the home play a
bigger part in their lives nowadays. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today feel that the home no longer plays the largest role in child development. In my opinion,
though outside factors have become increasingly invasive, family life is still more influential.

Those who believe children these days are largely shaped by the outside world often focus on the
expanding importance of technology. Decades ago, it was more common for families to engage in
conversation throughout the day, at dinner, and during holidays. Today, each family member might
be more engaged with their smartphone, tablet, or laptop. For example, children now have constant
access to streaming video sites like YouTube. Instead of watching cartoons for an hour a day on
television, they can watch shows all day long, both in and outside the home. The result is that kids
often find niche channels and parents have a difficult time monitoring and keeping up with the
appropriacy of their interests and influences.

Nonetheless, family life remains the heart of early psychological development. Children are unlikely
to have much access to new technology in their early years when researchers say the majority of
personality formation occurs. If parents are strict, unforgiving and withhold their love then children
begin to either turn inwards feeling rejected or strive compulsively for their parent’s esteem. These
early, learned behaviours will manifest themselves in progressively more unhealthy behaviours and
evolve as the child matures. Conversely, a child who is loved unconditionally but given honest
feedback from their parents has a much greater chance of becoming a well-adjusted adult with
strong role models to imitate.

In conclusion, despite the ubiquity of technology today, family is the key catalyst in early
development. Regardless of changes in society, parents will continue to be the main influence for
their children in the foreseeable future.

161
Parents should take courses in parenting in order to improve the lives of their children. To what
extent do you agree?

Some today believe that there is a crisis in childcare that necessitates training courses for new
parents. In my opinion, this would have a range of real benefits but is not advisable overall due to its
infeasibility.

Proponents of this initiative often highlight the tangible impact. There is little doubt that 21st
century parenting presents unique challenges including the pervasiveness of social media, changing
attitudes to recreational drug use, and the normal issues relating to child development and identity.
Courses could help align child-rearing practices and lessen the pernicious effect of social media in
particular. For example, parents would not have bought their children smartphones from a young
age for fear of them becoming socially ostracised if all agreed on the same age to first introduce
these devices.

This ideal solution is, however, impractical. The first hurdle is financing and enforcing these
classes. Parents are busy and few would volunteer for such courses. If they were compulsory, there
would be human rights concerns and there is no current precedent for such extreme autocratic
measures. More-
over, it would be nearly impossible to craft a course that caters to the wide variety of viewpoints in
today’s pluralistic society. There are religious beliefs, such as those of Muslims, Hindus and
Christians, that might clash with a state-mandated curriculum.

In conclusion, though society would benefit from such a course there is no realistic way to create it.
Instead, less direct steps must be taken by governments and individuals.

162
In marriages today, some argue that it is the responsibility of both spouses to earn a living for the
family. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many these days contend that both spouses should work and provide for the entire family. In my
opinion, though advisable in certain circumstances, it is preferable to subdivide roles within a
family.

Those who support this argument focus on the righteousness of empowering women in marriages.
Historically, women did not have the freedom in most cultures to work. In recent decades, as
women have gained more rights both formally and informally in society, this has allowed them to
extend themselves through their careers. Connected to this empowerment is also a sense of duty.
Not only do women now have the opportunity to work and develop their full potential, they also
have the privilege of taking on greater responsibility. The end result is they can both help alleviate
financial burdens at home and gain improved self-esteem.

However, a clear division of responsibilities in a family is the best way to nurture one's child. If
both parents work, as has become increasingly common in Western nations, there is a strong
likelihood the children will be neglected. Though affluent families can mitigate this drawback with
a nanny to look after the children and a cleaner, this is a poor substitute for the love of one's actual
parents. Moreover, most working-class families must simply work harder at their jobs and at home.
This can produce significant fatigue over the long term and cause parents to feel powerless,
overextended, and even lead to anxiety conditions and depression.

In conclusion, ideally both parents would have jobs but in reality this does not allow for proper
balance in a family. This does not imply that only males should have jobs as either the husband or
wife can become the primary earner.

163
Some believe that younger family members should be legally responsible for supporting older
family members when they become physically, mentally and financially unable to look after
themselves. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There have been recent proposals for laws that would require younger generations to look after
older family members when they are no longer capable of doing so themselves. In my opinion, these
laws are ethically responsible yet should not be enacted considering the many circumstances they
fail to take into account.

Supporters argue elderly care is a basic responsibility. As parents age, there is a near absolute
chance they will have some combination of physical, mental, or financial difficulties. Since most
older people are unable to work full-time jobs, the duty of care naturally falls to either the state or
their families. The government has other concerns and their care is impersonal, as in the case of a
state-funded nursing home. Children, who have an obligation to their original care-givers, are in
much better positions to provide loving support. This could include living with them, supplying
money, or helping them with medical bills.

However, this discounts the many contexts in which this care may not be appropriate. Many parents
do not want to be a burden to their children and would rather look after themselves later in life.
Others may not have been there for their children, or even been abusive. Moreover, the help that
children offer will likely hinder their own progress in life. If they are wealthy, this is not a major
concern as they can hire someone to look after their parents and the financial support will not be a
burden. However, most working class families will struggle to advance socially when slowed by a
duty of care for elderly parents, especially if this includes expensive medical bills.

In conclusion, despite the moral justifications, there are simply too many situations where these
laws would result in injustices and inconveniences. Individuals should be given the opportunity to
look after themselves.

164
More and more people today are moving away from where their friends and family live. Do the
advantages of this trend outweigh the disadvantages?

Some feel the growing tendency for individuals to move away from where their friends and family
live is a decidedly negative phenomenon. In my opinion, the perceived downsides related to social
disintegration are overstated and do not supersede the benefits for individuals.

On the one hand, living apart from friends and family weakens social bonds. An individual living
together with their family or a close group of friends will naturally spend time with them talking,
preparing meals, doing housework, and generally being together. Strong bonds develop and the
inverse is true as time apart typically leads to more tenuous emotional connections. For instance, a
person who moves to a new country after university is likely to make new friends and may stay in
touch with former connections as a formality. Over time, this person might feel lonely and struggle
to maintain long-term relationships.

On the other hand, moving is often a catalyst for individual growth. Someone who moves to a new
country for work or study is likely to encounter people from different backgrounds with a greater
number of viewpoints and experiences than their former friends and family. Interacting with new
people can lead to a broader range of interests and a keener understanding of other cultures.
Moreover, many individuals leave their hometowns in order to escape toxic situations. Families can
be controlling and limiting, either intentionally or unintentionally, and moving to a new location
allows a person to choose their friends, break old patterns of behaviour, and achieve better mental
health.

In conclusion, despite the threat of weakened familial and friendship bonds, there are significant
benefits for the individual that make this trend positive. A balance is needed but this change is not
inherently objectionable.

165
Many people nowadays tend to marry and have children in their thirties rather than at a younger
age. Is this a positive or negative development?

These days, it is becoming increasingly common for couples to marry and start a family later in life.
Although there are risks associated with this trend, it is overwhelmingly positive as it allows
individuals to lead fuller lives.

Those who decry these changes can justifiably point out the maturing effects of marriage and
children. Just like going to school or getting a job, getting married and having children are
milestones in life that both signal and push forward character development. A child is an especially
important opportunity for growth as parents must subordinate their own needs to a greater good. If
this occurs later, then a person may remain immature well into their 30s. It stands to reason that this
lack of character development will permeate throughout one’s life and relationships and possibly
become more fixed.

Nonetheless, the statements above cannot be generalised to all people and are greatly outweighed by
the freedom gained. When a couple gets married and has children from a young age, they are
sacrificing a great deal of freedom and opportunity. Assuming they were not born wealthy, it will be
impossible to focus on a successful career and also be an attentive parent. The result is likely that
they will either neglect their children, marriage, or career, all of which can instil resentment and
foment future problems. On the other hand, those who delay marriage are naturally more
experienced and ready for a long-term relationship with parental duties as well as likely more settled
in a stable career that can relieve the financial strain most young parents must withstand.

In conclusion, though raising children later can lead to a protracted period of immaturity, the
advantages related to lifestyle are undisputed. It is therefore important that companies and
governments are receptive to this new reality

166
Some think that fathers should have time off from work after the birth of a child. To what extent
do you agree or disagree?

Many now suggest that both mothers and fathers deserve leave from work after the birth of a child.
In my opinion, though time off work for fathers is not as justified as it is for mothers, this policy is
forward-thinking and advisable.

Critics of such a policy claim that there is little physical justification for paternity leave. Few would
argue that women should have time off in order to both establish an emotional connection with their
child and to recover their physical strength for work. Men, however, do not suffer physical side-
effects and therefore do not need time to recuperate before returning to work. They may require a
period of time for emotional recovery but this claim is tenuous and difficult to support with clear
evidence. Therefore, the norm in most countries is to prioritise workplace productivity and provide
little or no contractually obligated paternity leave.

However, fathers need time with their children and spouse to form strong emotional bonds for the
good of all family members. In past generations, taking care of children and the home was the
domain of mothers and men were defined primarily as earners. The recent shift in society that sees
more women entering the workforce also recognizes the emotional needs of men and its importance
for the entire family unit. Research has shown that the single most important element of healthy
childhood development is a loving and supportive home environment. The consequence is that
fathers are now expected to be more involved in the child-rearing process. By staying home for
several weeks or months after birth, they can become more active, helpful participants.

In conclusion, despite the lack of physical justification, paternal leave is crucial for emotional
reasons. When possible, governments and employers should advocate and extend this privilege to
both parents equally.

167
THE ENVIRONMENT

168
The amount of drinkable water for people is decreasing. Why is this? What can be done?

The world is currently facing increasing shortages of water, especially in developing countries. The
main cause of this is overpopulation and the best solution is governmental regulation.

Water scarcity is increasing because global populations are rising. In the last 100 years, the
populations have more than tripled, leading to a strain on natural resources. For example, there are
more than a billion people now living in China and India. The amount of water is finite and
developed countries not only use their own water resources but also import water. In the United
States, the average citizen requires 105 gallons of water a day compared to those in developing
countries who use around a single gallon a day. This disparity combined with increases in
population are the source of water scarcity.

The most viable solutions involve government intervention. Individuals themselves have marginal
impact and companies are motivated to sell more, not less, water. Governments, however, can
introduce laws to curb water usage. This is already common in many parts of the United States
during droughts.
Residents are often not permitted to water their lawn at certain points during the day and encouraged
to take shorter showers. Governments can also impose taxes and pass tax breaks to incentivise more
efficient industrial water usage.

In conclusion, the cause of water scarcity is unsustainable rises in population and the solutions all
relate to governments enacting restrictions. A concerted effort will make it possible for all people to
have enough water.

169
In many countries, plastic containers have become more common than ever and are used by
many food and drink companies. Do you think the advantages outweigh the disadvantages?

Using plastic containers for various food products has become ubiquitous in recent decades. Though
this has potential drawbacks for the environment, I believe it does not outweigh the benefits to
businesses and individuals.

The environmental cost of disposable plastic containers is massive. Before plastics, foods and drinks
were typically put into biodegradable, eco-friendly paper or cardboard. The arrival of plastics has
impacted the environment on two major fronts. Firstly, plastic itself is a fossil fuel byproduct that
requires crude oil for its production and later transportation. The emissions from fossil fuels are
often cited as the chief contributor to the hastening of climate change. Moreover, the containers
themselves either find their ways to landfills, polluting previously pristine land, or end up in the
ocean, forming ‘land masses’ that are injurious to marine life.

Nonetheless, the concomitant problems of plastic containers listed above do not override their
usefulness. For companies, using plastic containers is cheap and allows for uniform consistency.
This is the reason why they have been adopted by companies ranging from fast food giants like
McDonald’s to local grocery chains. This savings is then passed on to the consumer who enjoys
cheaper prices and the many conveniences of plastic containers. They are less likely to rip open and
spill compared with paper and most families make use of them afterwards for leftover food. If
plastic containers for food items were banned not only would people lose these conveniences but
many companies would have to radically alter their packaging, and potentially, products themselves.

In conclusion, the environmental impact of plastic containers does little to undermine their value for
both corporations and the average customer. It is instead important to explore innovations to make
plastics more environmentally friendly.

170
Some people say that supermarkets and manufacturers have a responsibility to reduce the
amount of packaging on products they sell. Others believe that it is the consumer’s responsibility
to avoid buying products which have a lot of packaging. Discuss both views and give your
opinions.

It is often argued that curtailing the over-packaging of products is the onus of supermarkets and
manufacturers rather than consumers. From my point of view, I am largely in agreement with the
latter viewpoint.

On the one hand, supermarkets and manufacturers are responsible for using less packaging because
they are the ones who have instituted unnecessary packaging on a large scale. There is no
discernible reason, in light of its dire environmental impact, that toothpaste manufacturers have
historically chosen to pack tubes in extra boxes or supermarkets have opted to wrap bananas and
apples in Styrofoam trays, covered with plastic. These redundant practices contribute greatly to both
the initial production of plastic and its subsequent disposal in landfills. Since supermarkets and
manufacturers are the ones with the power to reform their own policies, it is only logical that they
should be responsible.

On the other hand, only consumers can force the hands of large corporations by boycotting their
products. This is best evidenced in cities where it used to be common to package fruits and
vegetables in plastic, such as Chiang Mai in Thailand. Consumer awareness movements among
locals have had a discernible impact on companies. It is now much more common to find bananas
bare or simply wrapped in natural leaves and vegetables tied together with a single piece of string to
lessen their environmental footprint. This same practice employed in cities around the world will
have the largest possible impact on the environment.

In conclusion, the only pragmatic way to persuade shareholder-controlled corporations to reform

packaging policies is by putting consumer pressure on their bottom lines. If customers make more
of an effort to steer clear of heavily packaged products in favour of more environmentally conscious
ones, this will lead to a shift in thinking when it comes to the environmental toll of plastics.

171
It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the
South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?

The ability to travel to remote destinations such as the arctic and various islands contains
advantages related to travel and research as well as disadvantages regarding environmental
preservation. In my opinion, the pros decisively outweigh the cons.

On the one hand, the tradeoffs of being able to travel to remote areas are environmental. Most
remote locations are untouched by the rapid industrialization of the last two centuries and despite
the best efforts of local governments there is likely to be some contamination from tourism. A good
example of this would be various South Pacific islands. The Philippine archipelago in particular is a
popular tourist destination and this has resulted in increased litter and development of the natural
environment for tourist friendly infrastructure such as hotels and restaurants. Similarly, the cultural
environment for locals is at risk. Numerous indigenous cultures struggle to maintain their unique
heritage as foreigners and modern products pour into previously isolated regions.

On the other hand, the main positives relate to travel for pleasure and research. Locations that are
not currently occupied by traditional societies were effectively without purpose. Many of them,
ranging from remote islands to terrain with inhospitable weather such as Mt. Everest, now offer
attractive experiences for the intrepid traveller. For researchers, the benefits are even more tangible.
The best known example of this was the Galapagos islands where Darwin sailed more than a
hundred years ago and conducted foundational research for his theory of evolution. Since then, the
ability to explore new areas has resulted in thousands of discoveries and advances related to
archaeology, medicine, marine life, and the environment.

In conclusion, despite the injurious impacts of tourism, it is my strong belief that the opening up of
unexplored regions is a net positive. However, governments must still regulate such travel to
mitigate the inherent dangers.

172
Fossil fuels are the main source of energy around the world today. In some countries, the use of
alternative sources of energy is replacing fossil fuels. Is this a positive or negative development?

Many nations are now supporting the adoption of various energy alternatives in order to reduce
fossil fuel consumption. In my opinion, though there may be short-term economic downsides, this is
a decidedly positive development due to the implications on the environment generally.

Those who feel the sudden adoption of alternative energies is a negative point out the financial
repercussions. There are economies around the world that are currently dependent on exporting
fossil fuels, in particular in The Middle East, South America, and Eastern Europe. Many of these
countries are still developing and have few other natural resources or industries that could replace a
decline in the energy sector. The economic effects will extend far beyond exporters though. Both
developed and developing nations ranging from The United States and Vietnam to China and Russia
exploit oil for private vehicles and various industries. Substituting cheap oil for a more expensive
alternative might result in economic catastrophe with wide-ranging repercussions.

However, the environmental effect is overwhelmingly more important for the long-term health of
the planet. The economic results of less dependence on fossil fuels will cause short-term problems
but the issues caused by climate change are also becoming a present reality. For instance, there has
been a rise in the number of cataclysmic natural disasters related to rising ocean temperatures and
deforestation. Even more troubling are the less noticed problems such as habitats being destroyed in
remote areas like Antarctica and the Amazon Rainforest. Beyond the animals becoming endangered
and extinct, it is only a number of years before human life is affected. This existential threat is the
reason alternative energies are a pressing need.

In conclusion, despite the economic drawbacks of a sudden shift to alternative power sources, this
reorientation will have a markedly positive long-term impact on the environment. Governments
should therefore implement and bolster alternative energy initiatives.

173
It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaurs, dodos, etc.). There is
no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening. Do you agree or disagree?

Some today argue that humanity should not interfere with the extinction of other species. In my
opinion, this was a more legitimate argument in the past, when mankind was not the primary driving
force behind this phenomenon.

Throughout history, extinction has been part of natural selection and evolution. Creatures such as
the dinosaurs disappeared due to a likely cataclysmic event, but in more recent history, less
adaptable species have also gone extinct. Humanity, in these cases, played either no role or one
commensurate with the rest of nature. This can be seen as necessary to the work of nature. Certain
species develop and prosper, while other ones do not and perish. A modern, compassionate public
might view this as inhumane, but the indifferent cruelty in nature has served the historic purpose of
maintaining a healthy, thriving, and diverse ecosystem.

However, contemporary human dominance must be accompanied by a larger share of responsibility.

Mankind is no longer one animal among many, but the dominant species whose actions affect the
majority of other animals. The most pertinent examples of this relate to deforestation and climate
change. In order to sustain booming populations, production has stripped bare sections of the earth,
decimating natural habitats and plunging thousands of species to the brink of extinction. The causal
role of human industry necessitates taking responsibility. Moreover, there are simple steps that
could be taken to preserve species and curb the effects of human progress. If countries collectively
committed to moderate conservation efforts, then the earth could be restored to a more natural
equilibrium.

In conclusion, though humanity was not at fault for past extinctions, the current influence of
industry means that we should now take responsibility for biological diversity. Once a species
disappears, it will never return.

174
Some think that climate change reforms will negatively affect business. Others feel they are an
opportunity for businesses. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

Some are of the belief that any prospective reforms to combat climate change will necessarily be
injurious to businesses. In my opinion, despite the marginal market for eco-friendly companies, this
is largely true.

Environmentalists often argue that green businesses can be profitable. There are numerous examples
from all over the world of corporations excelling in fields such as eco-friendly foods, cars, energy
and fashion. For instance, Tesla has become one of the largest automobile manufacturers over the
last decade with a unique focus on stylish electronic cars. Their success is by far the greatest so far
in the emerging sector of green energy consumer products and will doubtlessly inspire a generation
of entrepreneurs to view protecting the environment as a potential catalyst for growth rather than a
deterrent to profits.

However, the examples above are still dwarfed by most industries and governmental regulation will
surely hurt large and small businesses. In the past, well-intentioned environmental policy has failed
to take into account the far-reaching impact of even the simplest stipulations. For example, when
nations band together to sign treaties such as the recent Paris Accords, nearly all countries
eventually fail to live up to the standards laid out because of the economic downsides and how that
could affect their popularity domestically. As soon as one nation begins to fall short of their
commitment, other countries have no choice but to also prioritise corporations over the environment
for fear of losing power in later elections.

In conclusion, though there is some potential in green business models, they will always have dire
economic repercussions. This does not make them less justified but it is an important consideration
to temper expectations of progress.

175
The manufacturing and use of cars damages the environment but their popularity is increasing.
Why is this? How could this be controlled?

Even though both production and car use increase pollution, the auto industry continues to expand.
This is because developing nations now have greater disposable income and governments can limit
the resultant environmental damage through regulation.

The main cause underlying an increasing number of cars is growth in developing countries.
Ownership in developed countries peaked decades ago and many European nations in particular are
now adopting greener modes of transport. However, in developing nations, cars are seen as a status
symbol that boost self-esteem and serve a practical travel purpose. Coupled with increased per
capita GDP, the boom in car ownership is unsurprising. For example, a growing middle class in
Vietnam has driven up purchases of foreign automobiles dramatically over the last decade. The
demand is so great that last year a Vietnamese company introduced the first domestically produced
car. This same trend is replicated around the world in developing countries.

The most impactful response is from the government. Consumers will continue to buy cars but the
government has control over a range of possible environmental protective measures. For example,
there could be stricter laws related to emission standards. This would cut down on the average
amount of pollution from individual cars and collectively make a huge difference. Another measure
would be to discourage car ownership by taxing cars heavily and improving the quality of public
transportation. A good example of this would also be in Vietnam where there is a 200% tax on cars
and the government is building the world’s most expensive subway system in Ho Chi Minh City.
Individuals are unlikely to change their behaviour en masse so it falls to policymakers to dissuade
citizens through proactive reforms and policies.

In conclusion, more cars can be explained by rising incomes globally and pragmatic solutions come
from government regulation. If taken seriously, the heavy environmental toll of cars can be curbed

176
Nowadays many countries are facing problems related to waste disposal. Why is this the case?
How can this issue be tackled?

Many countries today are dealing with serious problems related to waste disposal. In my opinion,
the phenomenon can be largely explained by population growth and the most promising solutions
involve tackling the problem at its source.

Excessive waste results from rising population figures. In the last century, the Earth has seen
unprecedented growth in the number of inhabitants in both developing and developed nations. This
is combined with advances in industrialization and production methods which has precipitated
today’s modern consumerist culture. Therefore, the greater number of individuals all around the
world buying food products, consumer electronics, automobiles, and appliances has created mass
waste. Countries, most notably China, have instituted laws to limit population growth partly in order
to combat surging quantities of waste.

This dilemma can be countered through government initiatives aimed at reducing the amount of
rubbish produced per person. Individuals on their own are only likely to have a marginal impact,
while national governments can institute laws that will encompass millions and truly make a
difference. For example, in many European countries, shops are no longer allowed to give out
plastic bags for free to customers. Consumers must bring their own bag or pay a fee to receive one.
The impact of a simple regulation such as this is that nearly instantly there has been a dramatic drop
in the number of plastic bags produced and thrown away.

In conclusion, as increasing numbers of individuals produce waste there is a concomitant problem

related to its disposal that can best be remedied by changing consumer habits through restrictive
laws. Governments must take the initiative on these solutions with support from concerned
individuals

177
HOUSING AND ARCHITECTURE

178
Some believe it is important for cities and towns to invest heavily in building large outdoor public
spaces. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today claim that cities and towns have a responsibility to erect communal, outdoor spaces for
residents. I am in agreement with this viewpoint, though I concede there are other important areas
requiring attention.

Detractors to significant funding for public spaces argue there are more pressing budgetary
concerns. All governments must balance allocations between key areas ranging from healthcare and
education to housing and economic growth. One common policy proposal is that the majority of
problems could be dealt with through more robust governmental economic intervention. The
standout examples underpinning such a contention are developed countries in North America, the
United States and East Asia. Once the economies of those nations started to grow rapidly, citizens
were able to provide for themselves and their families, lessening the burden on governments to fight
crime, fund education, extend healthcare benefits, and so on.

Nonetheless, public spaces meet a wide variety of needs for the average city or town resident.
Sufficient public space is typically considered one with high quality of life. Take New York City for
example. Before Central Park was constructed, the island was mainly a place of business and people
lived outside the city. Central Park’s development now allows residents to go for runs in the park,
attend cultural events such as outdoor plays, hang out with friends in nature, and play various sports.
These activities are some of the chief reasons to live in a densely populated city and they bring a
vitality to the city that, more than any other single factor other than perhaps employment
opportunities, justifies urban life.

In conclusion, despite legitimate doubts, it is my belief that heavy investment into public spaces is
warranted due to the diverse range of ramifications for a citizenry. Governments should endeavour
to prioritise such investment.

179
Many cities are now turning parks and farmland into new housing developments. Is this a
positive or negative development?

Some are of the belief that current initiatives to transform public parks and farms into residential
areas are misguided. I am in general agreement with this contention despite its ostensible
advantages in dense urban areas.

Those who argue this policy is positive point out its effects on overcrowding in cities. In the last
century, mass migrations to cities have created increasingly dense urban areas. One of the best
solutions for this is to expand the size of cities by subsuming nearby farmland into urban districts.
For instance, large metropolitan areas such as Tokyo and Mexico City are only able to house their
surging populations by spreading to neighbouring lands. The result is that more individuals are able
to live in cities and enjoy higher standards of living, better healthcare, improved economic
opportunity, and various entertainment options. For the average resident, such a development is
incontestably positive.

However, new housing developments neglect the primacy of the natural world. Firstly, building
homes on nearby farmland not only clears away pristine natural land but also necessitates the
transportation of agricultural products from greater distances. This will in turn exacerbate
environmental issues and potentially lead to inflated food costs for the average person. More
importantly, cities that lack parks are not providing an optimistic living environment for residents.
For wealthy individuals, this is less pressing since they may be able to make frequent trips to
outlying areas. However, for the least privileged classes, parks may be their only opportunities to
experience nature and a life deprived of all contact with the natural world is undeniably bleak.

In conclusion, despite the positives related to population density in cities, it is an overall negative
due to its effect on the natural environment and quality of life in cities. Such proposals should
therefore be pursued in moderation.

180
Some people think the newly built houses should be the same as the old housing styles in local
areas. Others argue that local authorities should allow people to build houses in their own style.
Discuss both views and give your opinion.

Many feel it is crucial that homeowners possess the freedom to design their own property, while
others feel there should be restrictions. In my opinion, the value of preserving the identity of a
neighbourhood outweighs the rights of property owners.

Those in favour of unfettered choice argue this can inspire and motivate. When an owner has the
ability to express an individual vision, they are naturally more invested in developing their property.
Examples of this abound in newer cities such as Shenzhen in mainland China. There is little history
to disturb and therefore architects are encouraged to pursue a vision in concert with owners that is
aesthetically pleasing and novel. The result is modern homes and offices that push the boundaries of
design and in the aggregate contribute an energy and vitality that can enliven, or even revitalise in
some cases, an urban area.

However, in the majority of communities it is more important to prioritise cultural preservation.

This is because the unique character of many cities and neighbourhoods is today under threat from
the irreversible effects of globalisation. A standout instance of this would be the old quarter in
Hanoi in Vietnam. The government has imposed strict regulations in recent years as a growing
middle class has attempted to modernise their living conditions. To preserve the historic character of
the city, many new homes must meet certain guidelines, including having classic wooden shutters,
employing older building materials and not demolishing noteworthy homes. These efforts in Hanoi
and similar cities conserve essential and unique aspects of history and culture.

In conclusion, despite endeavours to allow for freedom of expression in design, I believe that it is
generally more valuable to preserve historically relevant design principles. Governments must
naturally balance this with a desire to modernise.

181
The shortage of housing in big cities can cause severe consequences. Only government action
can solve this problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some today argue that only governments are capable of countering problems in cities resulting from
housing shortages. In my opinion, although governments should be the primary actors, individuals
can also offer aid.

On the one hand, only governments have the authority to enact truly large-scale change.
Governments by design make decisions for the benefit of the entire citizenry. An example of how
this could relate to housing issues would be the urban planning in New York City over the last
century. The authorities there had to contend with an unprecedented population surge in a limited
urban area. They responded by building skyscrapers that could house many residents, expanding
public transport, and constructing various highways to allow commuters to live nearby the city.
These solutions could only have been successfully undertaken at the behest of the government.

However, though the role of individuals is less prominent, it still exists. In the previous example,
voters in New York City were able to make their voices heard by voting for mayors and governors
that best served them. In the event that the government is not addressing housing problems
sufficiently, then citizens can write to their representatives, organise protests, or take more drastic
action such as relocating to a new city. In the era of social media, it is now more possible than ever
before for the average person to openly discuss these issues. Individuals will always find methods to
pressure governments, including in areas related to housing.

In conclusion, I disagree with those who contend only government action can improve housing
issues in major metropolitan areas as individuals can collectively always engender some degree of
reform. Governments will ideally enact laws based on the needs of the general populace.

182
Some feel that cities should be designed to be beautiful while others feel their functionality is
more important. Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

There is debate in certain corners as to whether or not cities should be primarily aesthetically
pleasing or practical. In my opinion, the beauty of a city supersedes its function.

Those who argue in favour of functionality point out that residents make pragmatic use of cities.
There is little argument that city residents are greatly impacted on a daily basis by decisions related
to transportation, sanitation, roads, and public facilities. A noteworthy example of this would be
cities that were built a long time ago such as Boston that have struggled in recent decades to support
surging urban populations. Residents of Boston are often hindered throughout their day by
deteriorating infrastructure, traffic congestion, and limited public transport.

Nonetheless, beauty is a timeless quality that often cannot be replicated later on in the same way as
practical improvements. Cities that have been built more recently, such as Shenzhen in China, are
definitely more convenient but most individuals would prefer to live in a city famed for its beauty
such as Venice or Rome. The value of living in a city that energises and awes is tremendous and the
modern problems present in older cities are not always intractable. A person who can easily walk to
view the colosseum or ride a gondola through the canals of Venice, would rarely trade those
privileges to save a few minutes on their commute to work.

In conclusion, although livable cities are important, there is greater value in the outward appearance
of an urban area. There should naturally also be a certain degree of balance.

183
SPORTS AND LEISURE

184
Many people today would argue that cinemas are becoming irrelevant due to new streaming
services. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some today contend that various streaming platforms have supplanted the role of cinemas in
society. In my opinion, though home entertainment options are more convenient, there will always
be a place in the world for the complete cinematic experience.

Those who maintain cinemas are irrelevant greatly value the comforts of home entertainment.
Thanks to websites such as Netflix and Disney, it is now possible to watch films and television
shows at home on a variety of devices while enjoying your favourite refreshments. An individual
using a streaming service can also select movies from a greater variety of genres and eras, pause a
film at any point, rewind it easily, and change the audio and subtitling options to suit their personal
preferences. Since these services are relatively inexpensive, a person can also enjoy these perks at a
fraction of the cost of a trip to the cinema, which is particularly costly for large families.

Nonetheless, only at a theatre can a person enjoy a truly cinematic experience. In the early 20th
century, there was a sense of awe and wonder that cinema-goers experienced when they first
witnessed moving images. Over the years, cinema has evolved and most adults today have indelible
memories of classic films like The Godfather, Jaws, and more recent masterpieces such as Phantom
Thread and Avatar. The feeling of watching a movie with a large group in a darkened room and the
ideal sound and picture settings for a movie cannot be replicated at home on a much smaller screen.
Indeed, at home an individual is likely to disturb the experience in the name of comfort and spend
considerable time pausing, looking at their phone, and having conversations.

In conclusion, despite the inarguable conveniences that online streaming sites afford the average
viewer, the cinema itself is crucial to modern culture. Therefore, cinemas should be supported and
maintained by both governments and individuals.

185
Today, many young people spend too much of their free time at shopping malls. This can be
considered negative for young people and society generally. To what extent do you agree or
disagree with this statement?

In certain countries, it has become increasingly common for young people to spend their free time at
malls and this is often viewed as a negative. In my opinion, though there are more productive
activities, it should be considered a positive overall given the most likely alternatives.

Proponents of this statement point out that malls are typically not a productive use of one's time. A
person who goes to a mall is likely shopping, watching a movie, hanging out idly with friends,
eating from a fast food establishment, or engaging in another similarly passive activity. A better use
of time could involve playing sports, reading a book, creating art, or working. The rise of malls
globally beginning in the 1980s signalled a period when younger individuals strayed from healthy
activities and took part in more socially and personally subversive pastimes.

However, the fears detailed above are overblown compared to other free time activities. These days,
most young people who are free spend an outsized proportion of their time doing truly unhealthy,
passive activities. These largely centre around technology and include wasting time on social media,
taking pictures, playing online games, chatting online, streaming movies and videos, and using the
internet. The mall is now actually a better use of one's time since it likely will involve in-person
socialising, precisely the domain that is most at risk for younger generations today.

In conclusion, though time spent at malls is not the ideal activity for a younger person, it is
preferable to a more passive lifestyle and should therefore not be condemned. It is likely, however,
that malls will continue to decline in popularity in the future so this concern will become less
relevant.

186
Some people believe that engaging in an active pastime does more to develop children's life skills
than time spent reading. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many today would argue that the best way to aid in a child's life skills development is to take part in
active pursuits, rather than more passive ones such as reading. I am generally in agreement though
reading has become increasingly important in contemporary society.

Those who argue against this contention point to the primacy of reading. In the past, large
proportions of the world's population were illiterate. Today, children must be able to read in order to
interact with the world online. It could be argued that reading, and writing by extension, are the two
most important life skills children can learn. Without them, children will feel alienated from
mainstream culture and not be able to stay in touch with friends and family, apply online for jobs,
and do research on the internet.

However, reading skills develop organically for children and there are more critical skills that are
often neglected in a technological society. Most people would relate to the experience of watching
their grandparents display a wide range of life skills including automotive maintenance, cooking,
and sewing. These life skills have diverse applicability. A person who is adept with their hands will
be able to handle a variety of household tasks, repairs, and renovations. Moreover, there are less
concrete benefits. These activities are likely to make an individual more creative, and physically and
mentally healthier. Research has shown that more time spent being active, and less time on devices,
improves mood, develops lateral thinking ability, and lessens the risk of chronic anxiety disorders.

In conclusion, despite the centrality of reading due to advances in technology, truly valuable life
skills require more active participation. Unfortunately, shifts in society related to technology are
likely irreversible.

187
It is better to learn the way people lived in the past through films and video records than written
documents. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some believe that learning about the past is best done through written documents, while others feel
video is a more accurate medium. In my opinion, recent films in particular can be useful but most
information about the past is contained in documents.

Those who argue in favour of video recordings can point to their accuracy. Images transform every
observation into a firsthand account. For example, there are documentaries and home videos starting
in the 1960s that show how people lived. By watching these films, a social anthropologist can spot
more than the surface content. They can see how people talked to each other in real life, what
products they used, get a sense for the fashion and the way people spoke. In order to better
understand their subject, historians would give anything for an opportunity to have similar films of
the Ancient Greeks or Romans.

However, video is limited, especially in terms of its access to important persons and events of the
past. It might reveal how everyday people behaved but the facts of what was going on behind the
scenes is contained in firsthand notes, memos, letters, and official documents. A good example of
this would be the exhaustive four volume biography of Lyndon Johnson written by Robert Caro. A
famously meticulous writer, he has poured over thousands of documents ranging from private
diaries and correspondences to the laws and orders issued at the time. Slowly, a good observer of
the past is able to piece together disparate pieces of information into a narrative that approaches
truth. There simply does not exist the same repository of video evidence from any period to yet
allow for such a complete understanding of individuals or historic periods.

In conclusion, the value of film may increase in the future but documents still offer the greatest
insights into the past. It is important to be mindful that all history is speculation but the best history
sticks closely to the facts.

188
Some people think that one should plan in detail activities for their leisure time, while others
disagree with this view. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

Many feel that it is important to plan out their free time activities, while others opt to live more
spontaneously. In my opinion, planning can be useful but over time it will devalue the activities
themselves.

Arranging one’s leisure activities ahead of time is a natural impulse to ease tension and ensure their
usefulness. Some psychologists have termed humans the ‘planning animal’ because of an inborn
tendency arising from a calming need for security. To the person doing the planning, this serves the
secondary purpose of ensuring they are not wasting their time. For example, if a motivated
individual plans their day they might set out to do some exercise, read a book, finish some work at
home, and cook a meal. These are productive tasks that will lead to a feeling of fulfilment at the end
of the day.

However, this drive causes undue pressure and hinders enjoyment of a given activity. The human
propensity to plan is also an underlying cause of stress and keeps individuals from being fully
present in the moment. This can result in a situation where pre-planned activities become joyless.
For instance, the person described above who maps out their day might feel they are simply ticking
items off a to-do list and not enjoy the activity in itself. Contrast this with a more spontaneous
lifestyle that still entails productivity but does not set a purposeful goal for every action. This person
will accomplish just as much but enjoy it much more since they can be fully invested in the moment
and act.

In conclusion, the useful aspects of planning do not outweigh the worth derived from spontaneous
action. Individuals must naturally strike a balance but be mindful they are not subordinating an
activity to its utilitarian value.

189
Some people think that the most important function of music is to help people relax. To what
extent do you agree or disagree?

Many believe that music serves primarily as a means of relaxation while others think it is more than
that. I am in agreement with the former as there are other purposes for music but they can all be
roughly defined as ways of relaxing.

Those who feel music is more than just relaxation point out its other stated uses. For example, many
people listen to music in more active settings, such as in night clubs, and dance along. In difficult
emotional periods, including after a bad breakup or the loss of a loved one, some individuals turn to
music to cope or lift up their spirits. There are also those who view music as an art form no different
from literature, painting, and poetry. For them, music serves the myriad purposes of artistic
appreciation that include offering insights into life and the artistic expression of others.

Nonetheless, the reasons detailed above can all be generally categorised as forms of relaxation and
the most common purpose of music is unadorned enjoyment. People relax in different ways and that
can include dancing, connecting with music emotionally or enjoying art. The majority of people,
however, simply listen to music throughout the day as a way of escaping from the pressures and
demands of work and family. Studies have shown that listening to music regularly can reduce blood
pressure and ease the burdens that modern life places on mental health. This is the reason why
workers, students, and parents gravitate towards music, in addition to other kinds of light
entertainment, at the end of a long day and explains the enduring success of the industry.

In conclusion, music is mainly for relaxation, though this takes on different variations depending on
the person in question. This desire to relax is part of a shared humanity that unites all peoples.

190
Some think that it is more important for children to engage in outdoor activities instead of
playing video games. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many believe that children today play too many video games and should instead spend more time
outdoors. In my opinion, though the former diversion is more educational than in years past, the full
scope of the latter makes it preferable.

Advocates of gaming point out their recent evolution. This goes beyond more realistic graphics and
includes the topics and types of games now available. Many games today are essentially a cinematic
experience, with fully realised characters and themes that rival other great works of art. In this way,
games are as educational as more respected art forms such as novels and films. Moreover, not all
games are passive. There are more and more games every year that require creative and logical
thinking, such as puzzles and text based mysteries. The developers of the newest apps available for
phones now take advantage of improving hardware to push forward the medium and engage the
mind.

Nonetheless, the games mentioned above are the exceptions and the benefits of outdoor play are
greater in general. The most obvious advantage is the effect on health. The world is facing an
obesity epidemic that is at least partly driven by more sedentary lifestyles centred around consumer
electronics and gaming. Going outside is a natural antidote and can instil in children good habits
that will promote a healthy life later. Additionally, outdoor activities offer the opportunity for
children to engage in a social activity. Most games are, to varying degrees, an individual experience
but playing with others outside will foster teamwork and improved interpersonal skills.

In conclusion, games can be worthwhile but they rarely have more value than going outside. It is
therefore important that parents strive to limit children’s screen time.

191
Some believe that the Olympic games help bring people from different nations together, while
others claim that holding the Olympics wastes money which could be used for important issues.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

There are many who claim hosting the Olympics unproductively diverts money from more essential
areas. In my opinion, despite these valid objections, there is still great value in the unifying impact
of the Olympics.

Critics argue there are urgent needs that should be prioritised over a sporting event. This applies to
every nation but particularly developing ones. For example, the Olympics in Brazil in 2016 led to
mass unrest and protests as locals felt too much money was being spent on the event and not enough
on helping to alleviate worsening conditions among underprivileged segments of society. The
government could have instead improved the infrastructure used by millions daily, invested more in
education, or built more hospitals. These allocations of the federal budget would not only serve an
immediate purpose but also have a longer lasting effect than the Olympics.

Nonetheless, most Olympic games are sponsored by developed nations and they occur very rarely
which justifies their efforts to unify. The countries competing in the Olympics often have fraught
international relationships and competition can counter-intuitively decrease tensions. Supporters
may root against other countries at specific instances, such as when watching a football match, but
they are united in their love of sports and the shared viewing experience. This has the subtle but
powerful unconscious result of fostering greater empathy between diverse ethnic and national
groups. When an individual roots for their country and their athletes, and sees other individuals
partaking in the same ritual, they will realise that association within a larger tribe is an essential,
common human trait.

In conclusion, despite the seemingly inefficient allocation of funds, the Olympics are a mass,
cooperative effort that has tremendous value. Therefore, countries should consider hosting the
games a great honour.

192
Companies should provide sports facilities for local communities. To what extent do you agree?

There have been recent calls for businesses to contribute more to the local community in the form of
investing in public sports facilities. In my opinion, despite the good this would do for public health,
it should be primarily a governmental responsibility.

The argument in favour of this policy involves the benefits it would have for public fitness levels.
Companies naturally gain from the communities where they operate in terms of sales supporting
their products and services. If they were to contribute to the building of sports facilities, it would
have a major impact on the health of their customers, particularly in areas where it is difficult to be
active such as inner cities. For instance, in certain cities in the United States it is rare for less
affluent urban residents to have the opportunity to exercise and therefore chronic health conditions
such as obesity are on the rise.

However, there should be no obligation for businesses to address this particular pressing social
issue. Corporations should be focused on being profitable and delivering results for shareholders.
Governments, in contrast, are tasked by definition with safeguarding public interests. Citizens pay
taxes and that money should deservedly return in various forms, one of which includes public
health. Governments have not only the funding but also the ability to undertake large scale projects.
They will be able to more efficiently identify potential locations and circumvent bureaucratic
obstacles.

In conclusion, though companies could help their communities by building these facilities, the duty
of public health falls mainly to the relevant governmental authorities. Companies should only
pursue such investments out of their own initiative.

193
Many think playing sports is meant to teach children teamwork, while others feel it is important
for them to learn to be competitive. Discuss both sides.

Some believe that the main reason children should participate in sports is to learn about teamwork,
while others feel developing a competitive edge is more important. In my opinion, being
competitive can be valuable but learning to be part of a team is invariably crucial in life.

Those who lean towards the competitive benefits of sports argue that all of life is competition. In
school, students compete against one another to get the best marks, to excel at extracurricular
activities, and date the most beautiful people. This same struggle only intensifies in university and
throughout adulthood. Sports are one of the safest environments for children to learn the necessary
perseverance and discipline and also receive feedback on their performance. The results in sports
will not greatly impact their life but the skills they learn can be transferred to the real world.

Nonetheless, being part of a team is a more valuable skill. Competitiveness is a natural human drive
that requires refinement and teamwork is one way to do this. Later in life, if an individual is overly
competitive, they are likely to alienate friends, family, co-workers, and, potentially, themselves.
Someone who can work well in a team, for example in a corporate environment, is not only likely to
achieve material success but also be liked and feel greater job satisfaction. Sports are instructive
opportunities where parents and coaches can teach children lessons about both the benefits of
working together towards a shared goal and the intrinsic enjoyment this brings.

In conclusion, becoming a more conscientious team member is more important than a grandiose,
romanticised view of the ultimate competitor. Children will be better served learning the former
skill well.

194
Many adults nowadays prefer spending their free time playing computer games.
Why do they do this?
Is this a positive or negative development?

A large proportion of adults now enjoy playing computer games during their free time. In my
opinion, this is a result of developments in mobile technology and is decidedly negative since
computer games encourage passivity.

The primary cause of increased interest in games is their availability. In the past, computer games
could only be played on desktop computers at home. Now, it is possible to play the same essential
games on laptops, tablets, and smartphones. This means that individuals are more likely to become
addicted over time as research has shown the strength of intermittent rewards in forming addictive
habits. For example, the average worker can play games on their phone while on the commute to
work, during work on a desktop or laptop, and throughout the day whenever they have a break. This
creates a powerful feedback loop in the same way as other drugs.

In my opinion, the entertainment value of such games pales in comparison to their impact on
sedentary lifestyles. Before computer games became pervasive habits, individuals were more likely
to spend time talking with friends, reading books, participating in physical activities, and being
generally more productive. All these habits were better for mental and physical health. Computer
games, on the other hand, require a minimal level of mental activity and feed users small bursts of
dopamine that keep them occupied and entertained for hours. The cumulative effect, particularly
when coupled with other passive activities such as using social media and watching streaming sites,
is a generation of less active and creative individuals.

In conclusion, adults play computer games more often these days because of the availability of
mobile technology and this is harmful as it fosters passivity. It is therefore important for adults to
set limits for themselves.

195
Many people living in cities these days do not get enough physical exercise.
What are the causes of this?
What are some possible solutions?

It is becoming increasingly difficult for the average citizen living in an urban area to set aside
enough time for exercise. This is largely because of the rise of sedentary lifestyles and the best
solutions involve moderate, individual changes.

The main causes of reduced physical activity by city residents is more modern ways of living. This
relates first of all to technology. In the past, people were more likely to go out to meet with friends
or take a trip to the cinema and now it is more common to chat with friends online and watch TV
shows on Netflix at home. Combined with this is the widespread use of other technologies that
reduce activity such as washing machines, apps for ordering food, and self cleaning robots. All
these factors together constitute a trend towards more passive lifestyles dependent on the modern
comforts of 21st century technology.

Solutions for these problems ought to all involve individual initiative. Most people today are at least
dimly aware of the dangers of addiction to and reliance on technology. Some possible remedies
include allocating time every day to doing exercise or joining a sports team or socially reinforcing
group activity such as yoga. There are also potential counters related to new technologies. Many
companies are meeting consumer demand with wearable technologies, like the Fitbit or Apple
Watch, that track advanced biometric data ranging from heartbeat to quality of sleep. These devices
implicitly encourage a more active lifestyle.

In conclusion, technology is at the root of less exercise among city residents and this can be fixed by
individuals taking up the burden of improving their own lives. These solutions are advisable since
individual responsibility is a habit with myriad benefits

196
Some people say that bicycles are a good, modern means of transportation. Others say riding a
bicycle has clear disadvantages. Discuss both view points and give your own opinion.

Many people today are taking advantage of the environmental and health benefits of using bicycles
as a primary means of transportation. I am largely in agreement with this practice, despite potential
safety concerns.

Critics often point out that cycling can be dangerous. This conclusion is based on numerous studies
showing the fatality and serious injury rates for accidents involving bicycles are considerably higher
than for most other vehicles. Even if a cyclist is wearing a helmet, the rest of their body is
completely unprotected and bikes themselves do not stand up well to collisions. Added to this are
the driving conditions in most major cities, where there might not be bike lanes or cars and
motorbikes may not respect cyclists’ right of way. The cyclists themselves contribute to the danger
if they are overconfident and try to keep up with or pass motorised vehicles.

Nonetheless, the marginally increased risks involved in cycling do not outweigh its environmental
and health benefits. Bikes are a modern, clean form of transportation because they do not burn any
fossil fuels or require intensive industrial production methods for their manufacturing. This is the
main reason many forward-looking, environmentally-conscious cities now encourage biking to
work with bike lanes and bike-sharing schemes. The second advantage is health. Cycling is great
cardiovascular exercise at a time when lifestyles are becoming increasingly sedentary due to
advances in consumer technology. Riding a bicycle allows the average person to get in their daily
exercise efficiently on their way to work.

In conclusion, bikes may increase the odds of serious injury, but these exceptions are dwarfed by
health and environmental prerogatives. Cities should therefore enact laws to help cycling flourish.

197
Nowadays many people travel to foreign countries for pleasure. Some believe this travel has a
negative impact on the countries travelled to. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The fact that international travel for pleasure has become so pervasive in recent decades has led
many to argue this trend is negative. In my opinion, despite the potential risks to local culture, it is
an overwhelming economic positive.

Detractors justifiably question whether international travel is eroding traditional cultures. As the
influx of those travelling for a holiday rises, this not only increases exposure to foreign cultures but
also requires adaptation on the part of the locals, particularly ethnic minorities. For example, in
many parts of Northern Vietnam and Southern China, local tribes can make more money from
tourist-related trades than their traditional occupations. This encourages them to learn English and
focus on tourist-friendly exploits, such as opening homestays, to the detriment of past ways of living
that were primarily agricultural.

Nonetheless, progress is inevitable and locals themselves would prefer a higher, more modern
standard of living. Those who decry these changes are typically disinterested intellectuals living
abroad. The actual individuals affected understand that the past methods of earning a livelihood are
under threat and
they must adapt. This is not necessarily a negative in terms of its cultural or economic impact. Many
local people are able to sell traditional handicrafts or offer guided tours that allow them to preserve
the integrity of their ancestral roots while simultaneously enjoying the benefits of a more modern
lifestyle.

In conclusion, the dangers that tourism poses to vulnerable, local cultures are greatly outweighed by
the benefits to living standards. There must be a balance but the locals themselves should be the
chief arbiters.

198
Some people think that governments should spend more money on sports facilities for top
athletes. Others argue that this money should be spent on sports facilities for ordinary people.
Discuss both sides and give your own opinion.

The amount of money governments invest in specialised sports facilities for competitive athletes has
led many to question whether this money would not be better spent on the average person. In my
opinion, there is value to funding national athletics programs but investment encouraging public
health is more important.

Those in favour of facilities for top athletes argue that they contribute to national cohesiveness. This
sentiment is best exemplified by Olympic national teams. Countries around the world invest heavily
in training and facilities for athletes across a wide range of sports, with the expected result being a
communal experience of national pride. During the Olympics, individuals and groups transcend
national divisions for a brief time and commit to rooting for the same athletes under the same flag,
thereby justifying significant budgetary expenditure.

However, a brief shared experience does not outweigh the health benefits that public facilities
provide the general public. The facilities built by governments for citizens can include public parks,
gyms, courts, and swimming pools. These investments in infrastructure reap tangible rewards over
time that, in the aggregate, benefit millions and implicitly encourage greater physical fitness.
Improved fitness in turn leads to improved quality of life for the individual and decreases the
financial burden of medical care for governments as well. Compared to the transitory and
questionable effects of facilities for professional athletes, these policies reflect a more inclusive and
modern concern for the well-being of a populace.

In conclusion, though there is limited value in building facilities on the Olympic model, there is far
greater import derived from providing means of exercise for the average person. Governments
should balance these competing concerns but prioritise impact on the greatest number of people.

199
Some countries invest in specialised sports facilities for top athletes but not for the average
people. Is this a positive or negative development?

Heavy investment in sports facilities aimed at professional athletes is common in countries that want
to compete in international events. This is a positive development for national pride but negative on
the whole as it takes funding away from the average citizen.

Proponents of this practice would argue that it brings the nation together. The best examples of this
relate to international competitions like the summer and winter Olympics. China and the United
States have famously invested millions in building sports facilities for prospective Olympians and
the results in terms of medals justify the expenditure. The wider implications for national unity
come from an entire country watching the telecasts and rooting together. Divisive domestic disputes
are temporarily forgotten as everyone focuses on the progress of their country. Much of this would
be impossible without specialised sports facilities for the best competitors.

However, these facilities benefit a select few over the majority. Funding for such facilities is a
limited part of a federal budget that must cover essential areas like health, education, and the
military. Any money diverted towards preparing world-class athletes for international competitions
is to some extent a waste as it cuts into the budget for facilities for average people. For example,
many inner city youths in poorer neighbourhoods lack access to parks and such facilities and this
has been identified as one of the factors that allows for poverty to be inherited over generations.
Direct the funding away from these expensive gyms for top athletes and it would be possible to
build many more facilities that serve a much wider and underserved segment of the population.

In conclusion, despite the less tangible benefits to national cohesiveness, this is a negative on level
as it favours a talented minority. More resources should be allocated towards facilities for those in
greater need.

200
Many believe that reading books is a waste of time and children would be better served doing
something more useful. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

There are those who doubt the practical value of reading and believe children should prioritise more
useful pastimes. In my opinion, though reading is fundamentally passive, it still has tremendous
practical value.

Those who question the importance of reading argue that there are more active uses for free time.
Reading is receptive and passive as readers must simply understand and interpret an author’s words.
This is active compared to watching television or playing a game on a smartphone but not relative to
more creative tasks. It therefore follows that children could make more efficient use of their time
playing a sport, learning to write themselves, making art, doing additional homework or any of a
wide variety of activities that require creation and full mental engagement.

Nonetheless, reading is an opportunity to learn and develop critical thinking skills. This is true with
both young children and older ones. For example, many toddlers read books by Dr. Seuss which not
only help them learn English vocabulary but also encourage creative thinking. Once children get
older and can read longer texts, they also transition into more complex themes and styles of writing.
Even in young adult novels, the writer will typically employ meaningful diction to illustrate
nuanced emotions and storylines. As students become conscious of the craft of writing, they will
learn how to read texts closely and understand more about the world. All this learning will profit
them greatly throughout life and cannot be considered a waste of time.

In conclusion, despite the advantages of more active hobbies, reading remains a key learning
opportunity. Parents should therefore strive to instil a lifelong passion for reading in their children

201