Câu hỏi:
07/01/2025 142
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?
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?
Câu hỏi trong đề: 2000 câu trắc nghiệm tổng hợp Tiếng Anh 2025 có đáp án !!
Quảng cáo
Trả lời:
Giải bởi Vietjack
Sample 1:
Expeditions to distant isolated destinations have been on the rise recently. While this can potentially benefit wildlife conservation programmes, I firmly contend that the development is disadvantageous overall considering the risks to the environment.
On the one hand, both scientific and touristic expeditions can help develop conservation programmes. Indeed, on-site scientific research conducted at Antarctica has successfully illuminated the mating habits of many nearly extinct animal species such as the emperor penguins thanks to close observation of these species, driving initiatives to boost their fertility rate two-fold. Meanwhile, tourists who visit remote destinations might learn about the damages of climate change, thus becoming intrinsically motivated to protect Earth’s fragile ecosystems from further degradation. For example, a campaign to preserve Himalayan bald eagles was initiated by two Swedish explorers on an expedition after they eye-witnessed eagle chicks dying of starvation on a far-flung mountain peak.
On the other hand, I believe the threat of pollution these activities pose must be highlighted. One obvious danger is oil spills from the cruise ships and other forms of transportation traveling to the remote observation sites. In 2007, a cruise boat heading to the South Pole struck an iceberg and sank to the ocean floor, causing a diesel fuel spill that covered 25 square kilometers. Despite enormous efforts from the international community, the disaster claimed the lives of thousands of sea creatures including many rare marine birds in less than two weeks. It also resulted in permanent damage to the Antarctic fauna, algae and plankton, which are the foundation of the local food chain, disturbing the ecological balance across the entire continent and nearby waters.
In summary, although scientific research and intrepid tourism in remote areas might partly contribute to conservation breeding efforts, I am of the opinion that they pose more pressing existential threats to the environment and natural habitats. Therefore, a complete travel ban should be imposed by the United Nations to preserve the ecological and biodiversity of these unique environments.
Sample 2:
As the result of increasingly sophisticated transportation, many scientists and tourists can traverse across the world to exotic distant lands. This essay would attempt to make the case that while this enablement presents some merits, they are ultimately overshadowed by the demerits.
Visits to isolated regions such as polar areas can facilitate the knowledge expansion regarding the Earth’s ecological system. In these visits, scientists and nature lovers can explore firsthand the secluded landscape and wildlife, which likely helps deepen their understanding of and instill a sense of appreciation for the diversity of our home planet. Scientists go about this by setting up research stations in the area, which allows research work to take place, and consequently leading to a more environmentally informed public. For instance, research expeditions made to the South Pole in the last several decades have given some insight into the exotic wildlife residing in the area. Another benefit is that travelling to previously inaccessible destinations can offer more diversity for tourists, especially thrill seekers or adventure lovers. These travelers can enjoy a relatively exclusive and likely once-in-a-lifetime experience, which not many can claim to have since such traveling is still not for the masses.
The above-mentioned benefits, however, are likely dwarfed by the drawbacks from my perspective. Due to the long-distance nature of the trips to remote areas, the amount of carbon emission released to the environment is inevitably enormous. What’s more, as the means of transportation for long-distance travel is often ships, oil spillage could occur, and in fact they have on many occasions in the South Pole. These accidents may take many years, or even decades, to be reversed. The appearance of tourists can also disturb the wildlife in these once human-free areas, especially with the lack of oversight in these sparsely populated areas. The safety of tourists themselves also poses valid concerns. If accidents do happen along the excursion, it would take lots of time for rescue teams to reach the victims, which puts travelers’ lives at stake.
In conclusion, although the possibility to travel to remote destinations can broaden our knowledge and provide thrilling experiences, these benefits are by no means a worthy trade-off for the negative impacts on the environment and travelers safety risks.
Sample 3:
With the aid of transportation technologies, it is now possible to reach even the most distant regions in the world. However, I would contend that the merits of this development are outweighed by its drawbacks.
On the one hand, the ability to travel anywhere in the world offers considerable benefits. First of all, the discovery of new areas allows everyone to gain a better understanding of the earth and new species. This newfound knowledge can act as a precursor to / clinical breakthroughs or provide scientists with valuable insights to more effectively combat environmental issues such as climate change. Access to previously unreachable scenic beauty also suggests tourism opportunities, as travel enthusiasts are always on the lookout for new exotic getaways.
However, I believe the positive aspects of this trend are eclipsed by more immediate threats to life in this remote natural world. More often than not, as major corporations set foot on and exploit tourism in these areas, the construction of tourism facilities drives out the indigenous people living there. Hotels and recreational facilities emerged at the expense of the locals' accommodation. These people are coerced into / assimilation, which, as history has indicated, results in loss of civilizations and cultures. The presence of foreign visitors in these places also poses certain threats to the natural environment, namely water contamination, land degradation and natural resource depletion.
In conclusion, as exciting as the thought of traveling to remote natural areas may sound, I believe they are better off left untouched.
Sample 4:
As technology has developed, people can now travel to remote natural areas. While this trend is beneficial to some extent, I would argue that its disadvantages are more significant.
On the one hand, visiting isolated natural places has some benefits. Firstly, this is a newer and more interesting type of travelling. Since going to other cities or countries has been too common for most people, it might be more exciting for them to explore new places such as the South Pole or the Amazon rainforest. This gives them valuable experiences and unforgettable memories. Secondly, when visiting remote areas, people, especially scientists, might acquire more knowledge about the natural habitat. For example, when coming to the North Pole, scientists can learn about the life of polar bears which live far away from humans.
On the other hand, I believe this development has far more drawbacks. The first one is that travelling to remote natural areas can be risky if the travellers are not sufficiently prepared. For instance, the temperature at the South Pole is usually very low, which adversely affects people’s health. Travelling to forests can also be dangerous as people have to face the risk of being attacked by animals. Also, since visiting isolated places often requires a large amount of investment in researching and ensuring the safety of travellers, the costs of travelling tend to be high. Therefore, it seems like only scientists and rich people can afford this activity, so this development is likely to benefit only a small group of individuals.
In conclusion, I believe the disadvantages of people being able to travel to remote areas outweigh its advantages.
Sample 5:
It is true that humans can now set foot in wild regions far away from civilisation. While I accept that this development can have certain benefits for the human race, I believe that it is likely to have a harmful impact on nature.
On the one hand, undertaking expeditions to the wilderness can be valuable in terms of both science and recreation. There are a considerable number of undiscovered secrets that can be tremendously useful for researchers to conduct their studies. For instance, environmental scientists can analyse the data about the thickness of ice layers over millions of years in both hemispheres to predict the possible changes in global temperatures. Such findings are crucial for the governments to develop appropriate plans to alleviate global warming. Furthermore, the untouched beauty of these areas is usually appealing to travellers, providing people with an attractive option of holiday destination or excursion.
However, I would argue that these positive aspects are outweighed by the drawbacks. When people are given full and easy access to the distant and unpopulated areas, there are likely to be more moving there to reside or start their business. It has been shown that substantial damage has been done to nature such as massive deforestation or water contamination due to humans’ lack of environmental awareness. If there is inadequate protection of the environment from this type of action, wild regions in the world will no longer exist, unspeakably affecting not only the overall ecology but also the lives of other people.
In conclusion, it seems to me that the potential dangers of travelling to wild environments are more significant than the possible benefits for the mentioned reasons.
Sample 6:
Thanks to recent technological advances, travel to remote destinations such as the South Pole is now feasible. Personally, I think this trend is advantageous and disadvantageous in equal measure.
The growth of tourism in distant areas is beneficial in several aspects. One of the most significant benefits is that visitors are able to explore the pristine conditions of these regions, which is virtually impossible to find elsewhere. In these deserted areas almost untouched by humans, nature thrives. In Antarctica, for instance, tourists will be able to enjoy the sights of towering glaciers and crystal clear waters, as well as observing penguin colonies and schools of whales in their natural habitats. Another group to benefit from travels to the Antarctic is scientists. By studying the changes made to the environment and species there, they might be able to observe the impacts of global warming and thus devise ways to conserve the continent.
On the other hand, these trips can cause damage to these environments as well. The first drawback to mention is the risk of pollution. If any accidents occur to the ships touring the Antarctic, it might result in oil spills and debris that could threaten the delicate ecosystems. There is also the risk of invasive life forms. Visitors could unknowingly carry vegetation or even insects from outside into the area, causing disruption to the ecological balance there. Additionally, the growth of tourism could disturb wildlife. They may leave their habitats to avoid tourists, which would in turn affect their breeding and the balance of the ecosystems.
All things considered, trips to distant destinations could bring about both positive and negative impacts to the regions. However, I believe that in view of preserving the natural conditions there, such trips should be limited to a small number of individuals.
Sample 7:
Travelling to remote locations of Earth has evolved as a major topic of concern in recent decades. With advanced technology, missions to these places are no longer impossible for both scientists and tourists. While promoting exploration to such areas has its advantages, I believe the disadvantages are far more significant.
One the one hand, the idea of bringing more people to remote locations is well received by many advocates for a number of reasons. First, some people may regard expedition voyages to untouched areas as exquisite adventures. As the tourism industry expands to these potential destinations, new jobs can be created, and economic benefits can be derived. Furthermore, with the aid of modern means of transport, geologists may now approach the previously inaccessible sites, some of which can be fossil fuel deposits. This is increasingly significant to humankind, as the majority of the current fossil fuel sources have been overexploited and there can be a global energy scarcity in the near future.
On the other hand, substantial disadvantages are apparent because the burgeoning of tourism and geological research may heavily disturb the flora and fauna of the remotely located places. This is due to the unlikeliness that tourist ships bring waste back to the departure point, and that there is no waste treatment plant in untouched places, such as the South Pole. In addition, the work of geologists involves drilling into ice sheets hundreds of metres thick to search for oil and gas. These activities, along with the cumulative tourist waste, may consequently have a disastrous effect on the natural habitats, threatening the lives of millions of animal and plant species.
In conclusion, the drawbacks of the practice of travelling to secluded places such as the disturbance to the local flora and fauna are insurmountable, far outweighing the aforementioned benefits.
Sample 8:
Nowadays, owing to the development of technology, a number of humans are reaching remote places, including the South pole, which our ancestors had yearned to reach. Although some people believe this brings disadvantages, I believe this development entails more merits than drawbacks.
On the one hand, the first drawback is that travelling to distant natural environments destroys the previous biodiversity. With the advance in tourism, incoming visitors can alter the existing nature of animals and plants. Furthermore, travel plans always have a considerable possibility of encountering disasters. Destinations are the places that have not been investigated enough due to severe natural conditions, which may result in large-scale incidents. For example, at the South pole, a great number of explorers disappeared because of unexpected weather or terrain.
On the other hand, I argue that there are more advantages than drawbacks. First of all, expeditions can broaden the potential for future research since there is no data on such places for the investigations of new findings on biodiversity and historical routes. For instance, the investigations on the volume of ice at the South Pole revealed that the pace of ice decline was a serious issue. The research result became a wake-up call to the international community. In addition, commercialising travel increases business opportunities. This inspires the local economy and gives financial security for preservation.
In conclusion, in my opinion, though travels to unreclaimed lands have hazardous effects on the environment and safety, this situation gives positive consequences through the progress in research and enlarging business opportunities.
Sample 9:
The ability to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole, presents both advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand, it allows scientists and tourists to gain first-hand experience of some of the most fascinating and untouched natural landscapes on the planet. On the other hand, such travel can have negative impacts on the environment and the delicate ecosystems that exist in these areas.
One advantage of travelling to remote natural environments is the opportunity it provides for scientific research. Scientists can study flora and fauna of these regions, conduct experiments, and make observations that would not be possible in other settings. This can lead to important discoveries and a better understanding of the natural world. Furthermore, tourism can generate revenue for the local communities and promote conservation efforts in these regions.
However, there are also several disadvantages to this development. One of the biggest concerns is the potential damage to the environment caused by increased human activity. Human waste, pollution, and disturbances can all have negative impacts on the delicate ecosystems that exist in these areas. Additionally, the travel itself can contribute to climate change through the release of carbon emissions, further exacerbating the negative effects on the environment.
Moreover, tourism can also disrupt the lives of the indigenous people who live in these regions. Tourists may unwittingly disrespect the cultural traditions of these communities or bring new diseases that could be harmful to the local population. This can lead to social and cultural conflicts that may have long-lasting effects on the local communities.
In conclusion, while the ability to travel to remote natural environments can provide benefits in terms of scientific research and tourism revenue, it also has negative impacts on the environment and the local communities. The advantages and disadvantages of this development should be carefully weighed, and measures should be taken to mitigate the negative effects of increased human activity in these areas.
Sample 10:
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 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.
Sample 11:
Earth has been acknowledged to possess a wealth of natural riches, scenic beauty, polar ice caps, mountain ranges, hidden terrains, and so on, since time immemorial. Scientists and curious sightseers alike frequently embark on journeys throughout the globe in search of undiscovered natural wonders. This essay will discuss the pros and cons of these investigations and conclude with a reasonable conclusion.
Studying the local population, flora, and fauna, and the impact of climate changes over time is one of the benefits of exploring distant natural ecosystems by researchers and visitors. Scientists are free to conduct studies that may one day shed light on the origins of life, the functioning of the planet's climate, and other fundamental questions. Travelers to the area will be able to soak up the natural magnificence of the area, soothe their minds and bodies, and generally have a great time on vacation. Many tourists, for instance, seek out remote and isolated locations for their vacations so that they can reconnect with nature and their own inner peace.
However, these types of expeditions can cost a lot of money. Travelers in really far locales may put their lives in jeopardy owing to a lack of essential amenities including food, water, medical care, and other necessities. In addition, the impacts of environmental and climatic changes on their lives remain largely unknown. There is a concern that more visitors will visit as a result of these explorations, ruining the area's natural attractiveness and threatening the native species’ habitats.
Summing up, there are good reasons to support any point of view, as we have shown. Despite this, I believe the benefits of exploration outweigh the drawbacks, as it not only leads to significant discoveries but also helps to tame the innate human thirst for excitement and adventure.
Sample 12:
These formerly inaccessible regions of nature are now open to tourists because of technological advancements. I think the drawbacks of this tendency outweigh the benefits to a far greater degree.
There are positive aspects to exploring wild, uninhabited areas. To begin, this is a novel and intriguing kind of transportation. Traveling to new urban centers or countries has become routine for many, therefore it may be more exhilarating for them to discover the South Pole or the Amazon rainforest. They get knowledge and memories that will last a lifetime. Second, it's possible that scientists, in particular, can learn more about the natural environment if they travel to more isolated regions. Scientists, for instance, can study polar bears, which live in isolation from people, by traveling to the North Pole.
Nevertheless, I think there are many more negative repercussions of this trend. The first is that if one is adequately trained, traveling to natural locations far from civilization can be safe. The South Pole, for example, has extremely low average temperatures, which can have catastrophic effects on human health. Forest travel is risky because of the possibility of being attacked by wild creatures. Moreover, travel costs tend to be expensive because exploring remote areas typically necessitates a substantial financial commitment to research and assuring the safety of tourists. So only scientists and the affluent can afford this activity, so only a selected few will benefit from this innovation.
In conclusion, it is certain that the downsides of individuals being able to visit far-flung locations outweigh the rewards.
Sample 13:
Modern times have opened up previously inaccessible natural areas to tourists and environmental scientists. In this essay, I'll make the case that the advantages of this strategy much outweigh any potential downsides. The essay will begin by showing that the main benefits are a reduction in stress and an improvement in the local economy, and it will then go on to show that the primary disadvantage is not the creation of pollution but rather the perception of that as a problem.
The primary motivation for visiting undeveloped wilderness places is the pursuit of serenity. People today are under a lot of stress from their jobs, and as a result, some of them are looking to escape to a peaceful natural environment to refocus and recharge. Moreover, this can aid scientists in locating uncommon plant species that can be used for the study of the prosperity of the community. For instance, according to research published in The Times of India, many conventional medicines are derived from natural herbs that were discovered by scientists in faraway lands decades ago.
Some people think that opening up natural areas to tourists and researchers will ruin them for everyone. The reason for this is that a growing number of visitors would visit these areas in the years to come, posing a threat to the ecological system. Many backpackers to these locations are conscious of the likelihood of environmental damage, so they take measures to minimize their impact. In addition, governments implement rigorous standards to preserve the tranquillity of these areas.
The idea that exploring natural areas will lead to pollution is erroneous, but the reality that doing so helps to achieve peace and development of that area more than makes up for it.
Sample 14:
In recent years, it has been possible for tourists to visit distant regions that were accessible only to scientists and explorers. In fact, the industry is booming with visitor figures rising year after year. While there are certain risks involved, I believe these are outweighed by the benefits.
Travel to remote areas is usually associated with risks regarding environment and tourist safety. Firstly, tourism activities might disturb the fragile environments in these areas. For example, there are incidents in Antarctica when vessels carrying tourists collide with submerged ice, spilling a huge amount of oil into the sea. This can severely interfere with marine life. Land animals are also affected. A recent accident involved a polar bear being shot dead to save a tourist who got too close to the animal. Secondly, keeping tourists safe is another concern because remote areas often have harsh and unpredictable weather conditions. For example, if accidents occur in the Arctic, tourists can be left in sub-zero temperature for hours before rescue arrives.
Nevertheless, the above-mentioned risks are relatively low and thus can be managed; the benefits, on the other hand, are much greater. First, when seaside or mountainous holidays have become too familiar, distant regions offer fresh travel experiences. For example, tourists who travel to the Arctic can see stunning icy landscapes with northern lights and impressive wildlife such as polar bears and penguins. Second, remote-area tourism helps raise environmental awareness. While global warming is not news, the average person seems to be not too concerned with it. Their daily activities are generally not affected, and the impacts of global warming seem non-existent. This attitude might be changed with a trip to the Pole, where they can first-hand observe ice glaciers melt and see wildlife struggle to cope with the changing environment.
In conclusion, it is my view that tourism in distant regions is advantageous, provided that environmental protection and tourist safety are guaranteed.
Sample 15:
Scientific expedition and tourism growth to remote natural habitats has resulted in significant public discussion in recent years. While there are some specific benefits, I would argue that this trend does more harm than good.
On the one hand, increased accessibility to remote wilderness could be advantageous to scientific studies and environmental preservation. Firstly, scientific research in remote areas, including Antarctica, relatively remaining untouched, might enrich human understanding of global environmental issues, including climate change, ozone depletion, and sea-level rise. Ever-accelerating impacts by human activities since the industrial revolution could be better understood by researching ice glaciers in polar areas, containing a unique record of the world’s past climate which later helps scientists to offer more accurate predictions about the Earth’s future environment. Secondly, ecotourism in remote communities might benefit the environment and the local economy because numerous locals and their communities have been relying on ecotourism as their sustainable source of income and conservation funding.
On the other hand, I would argue that there are more drawbacks to this trend. Firstly, increased contact between humans and wildlife animals could strain the already fragile natural environment. There are some reported cases that humans encountering polar bears have caused unnecessary conflicts of killing these wild animals for the sake of protecting humans. Also, scientists and tourists could cause the danger of introducing non-endemic species ultimately devastating native wilderness. Secondly, large ships carrying visitors and scientific professionals could cause great concern as various incidents of oil or fuel spills over these pristine environments could pose a severe challenge for rescue and evacuation and incident resolution due to its isolated locations from inhabited areas. The unavailability of emergency facilities and a dearth of preparation and readiness among tourists could be easily met with unpredictable dangers on these unfamiliar fronts.
In conclusion, while there are some merits of tourists and scientists exploring remote destinations, I believe that the demerits of this trend eventually outweigh its benefits.
Sample 16:
Travelling to isolated places is becoming easier for scientists and tourists. Although this trend is beneficial to some extent, I believe its drawbacks are more significant.
Going on a visit to remote destinations can be advantageous for two reasons. For scientists, field research in remote settings can provide an insight into scientific problems and encourage new ways to investigate the solutions that otherwise would be problematic to achieve in conventional environments. For example, field research in Antarctica would allow scientists to look closely at rising sea levels and therefore find ways to mitigate the detrimental effects of climate change. Regarding tourists, this kind of travelling helps them to have a change of scenery, which can be especially beneficial for adventurous travellers who look for something out of the ordinary. That is, getting off the track can provide trav ellers with a great escape from the hustle and bustle of everyday life while having incredible views and exploring wildlife in unspoiled destinations.
However, the disadvantages of this trend outweigh the advantages. Conducting fieldresearch in remote places is challenging as there are many issues associated with travel hurdles, dangerous weather or animals or even local politics that may not offer conveniences or comfort for scientists. If researchers do not possess good problem-solving skills, their life might be at risk. Besides, tourism is likely to pose threats to these unspoilt places in environmental terms. The presence of so many visitors tends to create an enormous amount of waste or disturb the habitat of native plants and animals. For instance, the highest mountain in the world. Everest, is now strewn with litter that is left by hordes of mountain climbers
In conclusion, although the advantages of contribution to science fields and opportunities to get extraordinary travelling experiences that can be offered by visiting remote places, I strongly believe that the disadvantages of being involved in dangerous situations and disturbing the native environment are greater.
Sample 17:
Remote environments with hostile natural conditions, like the South Pole, used to be out of bounds for the general public. However, this is no longer the case in the present day when scientists and tourists can make a casual visit to such places. From my point of view, the benefits that this trend offers can hardly justify the potential catastrophic drawbacks that it poses.
On the one hand, travelling to remote natural environments brings certain advantages. As regards tourism, these natural areas make for exotic traveling destinations that can create great revenues for the industry. As the uncharted elements of these areas whet the curious travellers’ appetite for adventure, they would not mind paying a handsome fee to get this unique experience. This money, in turn, can go into the preservation of the natural features there. In terms of scientific research, expeditions made into isolated areas may yield some useful discoveries about the origins of various creatures, including homo sapiens. These findings can be added to the existing theories of evolution and offer people a new insight into the history of the world.
On the other hand, I am of the conviction that the potential drawbacks are more disastrous when it comes to visiting remote areas. Insufficient preparation and equipment on the part of travelers can expose them to the hazards of extreme weather. For example, the South Pole and North Pole are infamous for their unyielding cold, to which a long exposure can adversely impact the physics of dwellers on these lands and might even result in death in severe cases. On top of that, a flux of travelers to these lands can alter the already existing course of nature. Specifically, the presence of humans, especially in numbers, can often drive native animals off their natural habitats, which can force them into danger from other predators or hostile environments. Consequently, the ecosystem there may suffer greatly.
In conclusion, I believe that the feasibility of travelling to remote areas can bring more harm than good. It is both the travelers and the natural habitats and wildlife that will bear the consequences.
Sample 18:
Explorers, along with scientists, have long traveled to previously inaccessible locations in the interests of exploration and understanding our world better. Now tourists are also going on excursions there for purely personal reasons with potentially serious effects such as bringing in pollutants and disturbing local wildlife. The benefits of such activities are therefore highly contentious.
For thousands of years, mankind has sought to reach every part of this world in the interest of discovering it all and learning as much as possible. This has opened up these remote areas to human encroachment at a level never experienced before; for example, after the Southern Pacific Ocean was mapped, whalers and seal hunters were sent there in droves to bring back whale oil seal skins for burgeoning European markets. This brought riches to many merchants and an expansion of trade networks which definitely increased the world economy. However, there were no controls on the killing, so some species were hunted to near or complete extinction, affecting the natural ecosystem greatly.
As the world economy has grown, more people have taken to traveling to remote places, even back in the early 1980’s tourists could take a commercial flight over Antarctica from New Zealand, until a plane crashed into a mountain in bad polar weather. While this is a disaster for the people killed, their families and the tourism industry, it also severely impacted a pristine environment, with debris scattered over a large area. This is not an isolated incident either as thousands of tourist boats go to unexplored areas such as Northern Alaska every year, all impacting fragile environments, including wildlife such as Polar Bears.
Overall, the only advantage I can see is scientific research, which can bring incalculable benefits whereas the negatives are manifold, from pollution, including from accidents, to deliberate hunting of endangered species. Personally, I believe these areas should only be open to carefully vetted scientific research to ensure future generations still have this as part of their world.
Sample 19:
Recent advancements in technology have enabled humans to travel to distant places in nature. This is scientifically beneficial to all societies, yet concurrent tourism activities can contaminate the pristine conditions of these places and negate the scientific benefits.
Being able to travel to these places is an unprecedented opportunity for scientific development and application, especially in the field of climatology. Scientists can now travel to pristine locations to collect live specimens, fossils and observe the local natural phenomena that may not have been documented before. For example, studying the layers of the ice cores from the North and South Poles has helped scientists to reconstruct the climatic trends and patterns which date back to millions of years. These findings can add valuable insights and revolutionise the way humans understand our environment in the past and the present. Recently, such findings have been extremely useful in the ongoing discussions on how to solve global issues such as global warming.
Despite unique opportunities it offers to the scientific community, traveling to unspoiled natural destinations could inflict irreparable damage on them when tourism is involved, thereby doing more harm than good. Littering and vandalism are two of some of the most pressing problems caused by tourism. For example, numerous mountain peaks which previously could only be reached by serious mountaineers have reportedly been polluted and defaced after the installation of aerial tramways which grant unrestricted access to all visitors. The aforementioned remote environments could suffer the same fate when waves of tourists frequently land there. Furthermore, the contamination brought to these locations by touristic activities could also interfere with the quality and accuracy of the scientific research carried out there.
In conclusion, exploiting remote natural locations for tourism could nullify the scientific values they offer and even cause permanent damage to these places. Only selected organizations and individuals who follow strict rules and regulations to preserve these places should be allowed to access.
Sample 20:
Since ancient times, planet earth has been known to host a multitude of natural resources, scenic beauty, polar ice caps, mountain ranges, hidden terrains and so on. Often Scientists and tourists travel all over the earth to explore hidden natural place, admire their beauty or conduct scientific research over its ecosystem. This essay will analyse the merits and demerits associated with these explorations before drawing a logical conclusion.
One of the benefits of exploring distant natural ecosystems by scientists and sightseers is to study the local inhabitants, flora and fauna and impact of climatic changes in that region over time. Scientists can perform their research work which can potentially lead to some important discoveries about the evolution of life on earth, climatic behaviour and so on. Analysis of snow caps in Polar Regions, rivers in Arizona, lakes in Himalaya's and soil in remote forests can help to answer unsolved mysteries. Tourists can enjoy the untouched beauty of that region, relax their souls and enjoy their vacations. For instance, many holidaymakers prefer to choose sites that are not crowded and far away from known places, so that they can enjoy the nature to its full extent and revive their souls.
On the contrary, these explorations often incur huge expenses. People visiting remote places can risk their lives in danger due to unavailability of basic necessities of life like food, water, medicines and so on. Moreover, unknown environmental and climatic changes can have adverse effects on their lives. These explorations might attract more tourists which will destroy its beauty and ecosystem of local in-habitats.
To recapitulate, the aforementioned provides several plausible arguments in favour of both views. However, in my opinion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages as the exploration not only result in important discoveries, but it also helps kerb the human desire for adventure and thrill.
Hot: 500+ Đề thi thử tốt nghiệp THPT các môn, ĐGNL các trường ĐH... file word có đáp án (2025). Tải ngay
Sách thầy cô Vietjack biên soạn:
- Sổ tay Giáo dục Kinh tế & Pháp luật 12 (chương trình mới) ( 18.000₫ )
- Sổ tay Lịch Sử 12 (chương trình mới) ( 18.000₫ )
- Sổ tay lớp 12 các môn Toán, Lí, Hóa, Văn, Sử, Địa, KTPL (chương trình mới) ( 36.000₫ )
- Bộ đề thi tốt nghiệp 2025 các môn Toán, Lí, Hóa, Văn, Anh, Sinh, Sử, Địa, KTPL (có đáp án chi tiết) ( 36.000₫ )
CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Some people take the view that criminal behavior is a product of an individual's inherent nature, while others argue that it is the outcome of poverty and societal factors. Although there are cogent arguments for the former view, I still lean towards the social issues and poverty theory.
Those who argue that crime is rooted in an individual's personality traits and moral compass suggest that some individuals are simply predisposed to engage in criminal behavior due to factors such as personality. They argue that some people either have a natural inclination towards aggression, violence, and rule-breaking. These individuals are believed to engage in criminal activities by choice despite having access to legal means of earning a living. In fact, some serial killers are known for their violent and sadistic crimes, which were often carried out with a sense of pleasure or enjoyment.
In my view, crime is primarily a result of social problems and poverty. This is because individuals may turn to criminal behavior when they are faced with limited opportunities, financial insecurity, and social inequality. These conditions can lead to frustration, hopelessness, and despair, which can ultimately push individuals towards criminal behavior as a means of survival or escape. For example, a young person who grows up in a community with few employment possibilities may feel that their only option for financial survival is to engage in drug dealing.
In conclusion, while there are certainly some individuals who exhibit consistent patterns of aggressive or antisocial behavior, these traits alone are not sufficient to explain why people commit crimes. Therefore, I believe that the majority of crime is driven by socioeconomic factors.
Sample 2:
Opinions differ as to whether crime is caused by social issues and poverty or by people’s evil nature. Personally, I agree with the former view.
It is understandable why some people claim that our nature is the root of crime. Perhaps they have witnessed some children commit wrongdoing at some point in their lives. For example, many physically strong children tend to bully others at school, while others may perform mischievous acts like lying to adults or stealing money from their parents. These experiences lead people to believe that humans are purely good or bad by nature, and those who engage in misconduct at a young age will likely become criminals.
However, the point mentioned above is deeply flawed. Everyone possesses their own good and bad nature, and it is the environment that triggers people’s evil side and causes them to commit crime. One major cause of crime in many countries is inadequate education. Poorly educated youngsters may struggle to discern between right and wrong; therefore, they are more likely to commit crimes without even knowing. Poverty is another root cause of crime because those living in impoverished conditions may turn to stealing or robbing as the final solution to make ends meet. A corrupt political system can also be a breeding ground for crime because the politicians there have to comply with the corruption, regardless of their personal intentions.
In conclusion, though some might think that crime results from a person’s bad nature, I believe it is more likely caused by social problems, such as poor education, corrupt political systems, and poverty. People are both good and bad by nature, and the environment in which they live determines whether they become criminals.
Sample 3:
When it comes to crime rates, some individuals claim that criminal activity is solely the result of innate characteristics, while others argue that it is the outcome of societal issues and impoverishment. In my opinion, socioeconomic challenges and inequality are more likely to prompt people to engage in illegal behaviours.
On the one hand, criminality could represent the result of an inherent personality. In some cases, crime is merely the result of a person’s impulsive actions and lack of moral compass. Various factors such as upbringing, personal beliefs, and psychological disorders may all play a role when it comes to criminal activity. Some people, for example, may have grown up in environments in which illegal conduct is normalised, causing them to assume that such behaviour is acceptable. Similarly, those with mental health disorders like sociopathy or psychopathy may be inclined to committing crimes due to their inability to empathise with victims.
On the other hand, societal problems and economic hardship may contribute to criminal conduct. Poverty with limited access to food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, and schooling can push people to the brink of desperation, prompting them to resort to criminal behaviour as a means of survival. People who are financially strapped in various urban areas, for instance, may turn to illegal activities like drug trafficking or burglary in order to make ends meet. Once poverty and crime are intertwined, it may ultimately develop into a vicious cycle that is challenging to escape. Furthermore, socioeconomic issues such as discrimination, inequality, and corruption may promote crime through fostering an environment of dissatisfaction and rage. Those who experience discrimination or who believe the system is stacked against them are more inclined to turn to illegal behaviour as a form of protest or vengeance.
To summarise, aside from personal psychological factors, I believe that social difficulties and poverty can have a greater impact on crime rates.
Sample 4:
Crime has been studied by many scientific disciplines, with some people ascribing it to social problems and poverty, and others thinking that it is caused by the criminal’s nature. In this, I believe that unlawful behavior is more likely the result of defective personal qualities.
Several explanations can support crime being a function of inferior socioeconomic factors. Firstly, poverty reduces access to education and employment, causing hopelessness and desperation as a result. Having been deprived of opportunities, people may turn to crime to get by. Furthermore, people whose environment is rife with social problems may be accustomed to illegal behavior, making it easier for themselves to engage in criminal activities later on. A child who grows up in a neighborhood with drug problems could turn into a drug dealer himself, since he has witnessed drug abuse and addiction as a norm. It could, therefore, be argued that social issues and poverty create criminals.
However, the view that crime is a result of the perpetrator’s nature is no less convincing. Proponents of this belief claim that certain traits, such as impulsivity, aggression, and callousness, predispose individuals to immoral or unethical behavior. People with these traits become less considerate when they perceive any threat to their self-interest, making them likely to ignore the consequences of their actions. Others, meanwhile, carry undiagnosed psychological disorders, and their condition makes them more prone to committing crimes. A large share of the prison population, especially repeat offenders, are affected by sociopathy, a disorder usually characterized by inhibited compassion towards others. It is not well-understood otherwise, and education has only been partially effective in mitigating sociopathy’s effects. For these reasons, criminals’ nature is definitely worth looking at as a cause of their offenses.
In conclusion, while both views can be supported by evidence, I believe one’s personality is a more indicative factor of whether they are likely to commit crimes. Hence, it is crucial that parents and guardians pay attention to how they shape their children’s nature.
Sample 5:
For millennia, philosophers and scientists have held countless debates on personality. Some believe in the inherent crooked nature of humanity while others argue that they are the product of their environment. This essay wishes to explore both sides of the argument.
Nativists believe that personalities and manners are inherent and genetic, so crime is innate. Credible evidence of this would be the correlation between lead exposure and crime rate. In the 1940s, the USA was the prime consumer of lead-based products, such as paint and gasoline, so babies conceived, born, and raised during this period were lead-poisoned. They later suffered from poorer impulse control and higher aggressivity. As adults, they contributed to the surplus in levels of violent crime. However, it should be noted that genes do not cause behavior but influence it through their effects on the body's response to the environment.
Supporters of Environmentalism concede that criminal behaviors are determined by family and other people, education opportunities, as well as physical circumstances. This school of thought is supported by several studies. some of them focused on the negative link between vegetation and crime. It was shown that in neighborhoods with more greenery, fewer crimes were reported. One explanation for this was that the environment gave its residents a sense of safety and security.
It should be noted that the nature-nurture debate has not been taken as seriously as it used to be. Essentially, every facet of personality development results from interaction between genes and environment. If the authorities aim at reducing the rate of crime and violence, they should take action in improving residential areas as well as enhancing healthcare.
Sample 6:
Many people consider that innate characteristics are responsible for the fact that some people choose to turn to a career of crime. While I accept that crime may result from individual characteristics of violence or greed, I would argue that it is largely a consequence of social issues and poverty.
There is a belief that a person’s nature determines whether or not they become a criminal. Firstly, some argue that an individual who is cruel turns to crime more easily than a kind person. For instance, a child bullying other boys or girls at school may turn into a violent criminal in the future. Secondly, bad characteristics such as laziness or selfishness could also breed future offenders, who seek to acquire easy money without working for it. A number of youngsters choose to steal from others, instead of working hard to make an honest living. These are strong reasons for thinking that those who have an inborn bad nature are more likely to break the law.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that social issues and poverty are the main causes behind crime. There are many problems in society which might lead to an increase in the crime rate. For example, unemployment pushes people into resorting to crime because they simply cannot find a job. As a consequence, the number of offenders has climbed in many countries over recent decades. Another reason is that, more broadly, poverty in general leads to a rise in crime. If people do not have enough money to make ends meet, they will be tempted to pursue illegal activities just to support themselves and their families.
In conclusion, although both views certainly have some validity, it seems to me that the principal causes of crime are a result of social conditions and problems.
Sample 7:
The causes of crime have long been a topic of debate. While some argue that crime stems from a person's inherent nature, I do believe it is the result of social problems and poverty
On the one hand, advocates of the view that crime results from a person's nature suggest that individuals with cruel tendencies are more likely to engage in criminal activities. This is because cruelty often correlates with a lack of empathy, disregard for others' well-being, and aggressive behavior, all of which can lead to crime. For example, a child who bullies others at school may grow up to become a violent criminal. Additionally, bad characteristics such as laziness or selfishness can breed future offenders who seek easy money without working for it. Many young people, lured by the prospect of quick and easy money, turn to cybercrime, engaging in online scams, hacking, and identity theft.
On the other hand, some, myself included, argue that crime is primarily a result of social problems and poverty, a perspective I support. Social issues, such as unemployment, can push people towards crime as they struggle to find legitimate employment. The widening gap between the rich and the poor exacerbates this issue, as seen in places like Rio De Janeiro, where high crime rates are prevalent in impoverished areas. Poverty is another significant factor; individuals struggling to make ends meet may resort to illegal activities to support themselves and their families. This explains why people in dire need often turn to theft or other crimes for survival.
In conclusion, while inherent personal traits can contribute to criminal behavior, social problems and poverty play a more significant role in driving people towards crime. Addressing these underlying issues is crucial for reducing crime rates.
Sample 8:
Crime is a complex issue that elicits varied perspectives regarding its origins. While some argue that crime is primarily a consequence of social problems and poverty, others contend that it stems from an individual’s inherent nature. I contend that the interplay between societal factors and individual predispositions contributes significantly to criminal behavior.
I concur with the notion that crime often finds its roots in social problems and poverty, where the impact of socioeconomic conditions significantly steers an individual’s choices. For example, in underprivileged areas, the absence of adequate educational facilities, job prospects, and robust social support structures may force individuals into a corner, compelling them to turn to illicit means for survival. Moreover, when societal disparities are rife and systemic issues remain unaddressed, it can exacerbate the situation, causing individuals to resort to criminal activities as a perceived solution to their economic struggles or as a means to voice their grievances about prevalent social injustices.
However, I am also of the opinion that the origins of crime are not solely tethered to external factors; rather, an individual’s innate disposition can also play a crucial role. Some individuals might exhibit inherent psychological disorders that predispose them to engage in unlawful activities, regardless of their social background. Furthermore, the absence of strong moral values or ethical guidance in an individual’s upbringing can be a contributing factor, irrespective of their socioeconomic circumstances. Instances abound where individuals from affluent backgrounds have succumbed to criminal behavior due to the lack of a strong moral compass in their formative years, indicating that individual nature can play a pivotal role in shaping criminal inclinations.
In conclusion, I believe crime’s origin is not solely attributed to either social problems or an individual’s nature; rather, it is a complex interplay between societal factors and personal inclinations.
Sample 9:
There are divergent opinions regarding the root causes of criminal behavior. Some people argue that external factors such as poverty or other social issues are to blame for most crimes, while others contend that people who engage in criminal activity are intrinsically bad in nature. In this essay, I will discuss both perspectives and provide my own opinion.
On the one hand, those who believe that social problems are the primary cause of criminal behavior argue that people are driven to commit crimes due to their difficult and disadvantaged circumstances. For example, individuals facing extreme poverty or unemployment may resort to stealing or other illicit activities as a means of survival. Proponents of this view also point out that issues such as substance abuse or mental illness can exacerbate criminal tendencies, emphasizing the importance of addressing underlying social difficulties to reduce crime rates.
On the other hand, there is a counterargument that criminal behavior arises from individual traits such as impulsivity, selfishness, or a lack of empathy. This perspective suggests that some people have a natural tendency to engage in harmful behavior, regardless of environmental factors. In support of this view, critics of the social circumstance theory point out that there are people who grow up in difficult circumstances but do not resort to crime, indicating that innate character traits play a significant role.
In my view, it is likely that both factors play a role in criminal behavior. While social issues can be a significant driver of crime, it is also true that some individuals may be more inclined to engage in criminal activity due to inherent character flaws. Therefore, addressing both the root causes of social problems and providing intervention programs that focus on individual development could be effective in reducing crime rates.
In conclusion, there are varying opinions regarding the root causes of criminal behavior. While some argue that criminal activity is solely attributable to social problems, others believe that individual traits play a more significant role. In my opinion, it is essential to consider both perspectives and work towards comprehensive solutions to reduce the prevalence of crime in our society.
Sample 10:
Crime is a complex issue with multiple contributing factors. While some argue that most crimes result from circumstances like poverty and social problems, I believe they are caused by individuals who are inherently bad in nature.
On one hand, there are several factors that lead people to believe that most crimes stem from circumstances. Firstly, individuals who grow up in deprived environments often lack access to basic needs such as education, healthcare, and stable employment, leading them to potentially turn to crime as a means of survival or escape from their circumstances. For example, high crime rates in low-income neighborhoods can be attributed to individuals struggling to meet basic needs such as food, housing, and healthcare, and with limited access to education and job opportunities, they may resort to criminal activities like theft or drug dealing to make ends meet. Secondly, exposure to violence and crime from a young age can normalize these behaviors. For instance, children from households with domestic violence may become desensitized to violent behavior and replicate it in their own relationships.
On the other hand, I do believe that crime is caused by individuals who are inherently bad in nature. Firstly, those who commit crimes may have a predisposition to violence and deviant behavior, regardless of their upbringing or environment. Ted Bundy, for instance, despite his stable upbringing and education, committed numerous murders. His actions suggest an inherent predisposition to violence and deviance, highlighting the role of personal moral character in criminal behavior. Secondly, some research indicates that genetic and environmental factors can increase the likelihood of engaging in criminal activities. For instance, a longitudinal study conducted by the National Institute of Justice followed a group of individuals from childhood into adulthood and found that those with a family history of criminal behavior were more likely to engage in similar activities.
In conclusion, while circumstances like poverty and social problems contribute to crime, I believe that personal moral character and inherent predispositions play a more significant role in criminal behavior.
Sample 11:
Crime is a prevalent issue in modern society and understanding its root causes is important for its effective prevention and control. Some people argue that most crimes are the result of circumstances such as poverty or other social problems. Others believe that criminal behaviour stems from individuals who are bad in nature. In my opinion, most crimes are the consequence of socioeconomic circumstances.
Individuals who believe that crime is the result of inheriting bad nature think that even though people who live in affluent societies with minimal social problems, are subjected to face crimes. They believe that personal choices and moral failings are significant contributors to criminal behaviour. For example, studies have indicated that people who possess personality traits such as impulsivity and aggressiveness are more likely to engage in criminal activities.
On the other hand, proponents of the view that crime is a result of poverty and social issues argue that individuals coming from poor backgrounds are forced to commit crimes because of necessity. When a person’s basic needs such as food, shelter and security are unmet, they may resort to illegal activities as a means of survival. For instance, incidents like theft and burglary are more common in economically deprived societies where everyone is striving to make ends meet. Furthermore, social problems such as lack of education, unemployment and substance abuse exacerbate the situation. Without access to quality education, many individuals cannot secure well-paying jobs, leading them to seek alternative, often illegal, means of income.
In my opinion, poverty and social problems create an environment where crime can flourish. When individuals are deprived of opportunities and resources, the temptation to break the law becomes stronger. Additionally, the social environment, including peer influence and community norms, plays a crucial role in shaping behaviour.
In conclusion, addressing these root causes through social policies aimed at reducing poverty, improving education, and providing employment opportunities is essential for effective crime prevention. By creating a more equitable and supportive society, the incidence of crime can be significantly reduced.
Sample 12:
Throughout history, people tended to believe that crimes were committed by those who were innately bad, but in the modern era a more liberal approach has led to the idea that crimes are often acts of desperation, committed by people whose circumstances are bleak. This essay will explore both perspectives, concluding that the latter is usually true.
First of all, it should be noted that some crimes are committed by people who appear innately driven towards such acts. These people may have some sort of hereditary psychological condition that means they do not feel empathy for others, or a predilection towards violence. This is a controversial perspective and although it feels true for many, it is hard to prove. Many of the most violent criminals have traumatic backgrounds, such as child abuse, neglect, or sexual assault, which suggests that they were not born with their criminal compunctions, but rather that these developed very early, which thus places them more into the circumstances than nature category. However, the lines are blurry.
Certainly, it does seem as though most criminals are created out of difficult circumstances. To understand this, one just has to look at impoverished communities around the world. These are places where crime flourishes because the people there are desperate and forced to do immoral things in order to survive. In such states of despair, people tend to put themselves first and overlook social norms, laws, and the usual empathic perspective that would stop most people from hurting others. In such areas, people tend to be conditioned for a young age to ignore the law or even social decency, joining gangs and becoming influenced by dangerous people. This tends to be a problem due to a lack of resources, opportunities, and education in such areas.
In conclusion, it appears likely that most crime is the result of people’s unfortunate circumstances, meaning that criminals are not inherently bad. However, there may be some people who were born with a certain compunction towards violent or criminal activity.
Lời giải
Sample 1:
Television has become an integral part of our daily lives, and its influence on children cannot be underestimated. While some argue that children can learn effectively through television and should be encouraged to watch it both at home and school, I strongly disagree with this notion. In this essay, I will present arguments against the idea of promoting excessive television watching among children.
Firstly, television watching is a passive activity that lacks the interactivity and engagement required for optimal learning outcomes. While children may absorb information from television programmes, they often lack the opportunity to actively participate, ask questions, and engage in critical thinking. In contrast, traditional educational settings such as classrooms promote active learning, where students can interact with teachers and peers, ask questions, and engage in discussions. This active involvement enhances comprehension, critical thinking skills, and the ability to apply knowledge in real-world situations. This is why young children do not learn effectively from watching TV.
Furthermore, excessive television viewing can have detrimental effects on children's physical and mental well-being. Prolonged sedentary behaviour associated with watching television can contribute to a sedentary lifestyle, leading to various health issues such as obesity, cardiovascular problems, and poor posture. Moreover, excessive screen time can adversely affect children's cognitive development and attention span. Research has shown that excessive exposure to screens, including television, can lead to attention deficits and decreased academic performance. In contrast, encouraging children to engage in physical activities, interactive play, and reading promotes their overall well-being and cognitive development.
In conclusion, television is not a substitute for interactive and engaging learning experiences. Moreover, excessive television viewing can have negative effects on children's learning, physical health, and cognitive development. Therefore, it is important to encourage children to participate in interactive learning environments, such as classrooms, rather than watching TV.
Sample 2:
Television, as a learning tool, could be useful if children watch the right programmes for a limited duration of time each day. I do believe that TV can be a very powerful learning tool for children, and that is why they should be allowed to watch TV programmes both at home and school, but within the teacher's and parent's watch.
To begin with, though I am no longer a student, I can still learn better by watching TV rather than reading books. Whenever I tune on to the History Channel, BBC or National Geographic Channel, I can learn new things. This is also true for school-going children. My younger brother, who is a college student with a History major, heavily relies on History Channel documentaries to enhance his knowledge of history.
Moreover, TV programmes are the audio-visual presentation of an event, story or fact, and thus have lasting impressions on our brains. If the right programmes are chosen for children, they will learn faster by watching TV. For instance, one of our neighbours allows her 3 years old daughter to watch Rhymes on the internet TV channels, and she can recite most of those rhymes. According to her mother, the girl has learned more effectively by watching animated cartoons that have rhymes than by reading books. Since TV is a powerful learning tool, we can use it in school for educational purposes.
In conclusion, as parents and teachers, we must pick suitable educational programmes for our youngsters both in school and at home. I believe that TV is a good pedagogical tool, and hence its use in the school and home for both educational and recreational purposes should be allowed.
Sample 3:
Modern technology has undoubtedly made learning easier and better. Most children's parents encourage them to watch shows to gain information and acquire new knowledge. While I agree that watching television has some positive effects on a child, I believe this trend has a more detrimental effect on our children and society in general.
First and foremost, watching television can have some positive effects on children. There are, in fact, considerable advantages to incorporating television into homes and educational institutions. Many informative broadcasters, like National Geographic and Discovery, exist solely for educational reasons. Moreover, viewing television may increase the concentration and attention of some people. For instance, children with autism and behaviour problems have a concentration weakness; research has demonstrated that these children have enhanced their focus and concentration and are capable of watching television for prolonged periods. Therefore, it is obvious that somehow this trend has some beneficial consequences.
Similarly, I believe that watching television has several negative adverse effects. Spending time watching television can divert attention from healthy pastimes like outdoor activity with colleagues, leading to weight gain and feelings of loneliness. In addition, some programmes are created for entertainment, not teaching; these programmes have violent scenes and inappropriate terminology, which hurt children's brains. In addition, prolonged watching television may prevent reading a book and informative articles. Consequently, children would lack intellectual and problem-solving abilities. The negative impacts of television on the psychological and physical well-being of children can be determined.
In summation, I believe that television watching has more drawbacks than benefits. Under the supervision of both their parents and educators, children may spend more time watching purely for informative and educational reasons.
Sample 4:
Nowadays, television sets are now utilized as an educational tool. Many people believe that teenagers can absorb more efficiently while watching television. I fully agree with the concept that television might benefit youngsters in increasing their knowledge. This essay will look into the several reasons for this approval.
I feel that television is incredibly good for youngsters for two primary reasons. First, kids have access to a plethora of informative television channels, such as National Geographic and discovery, which are quite captivating to watch. This option might, in my opinion, considerably expand students’ understanding of Biology and Geography. Another consideration is that watching television helps reduce the school-related anxiety that teenagers are prone to. If, for instance, a youngster receives a poor grade in a specific subject, classmates would likely tease him or her. Consequently, I would suggest that televisions may be advantageous in some instances. It is evident that, by viewing the news on television, students receive a significant amount of information and learn about the world's various cultures and critical problems.
In contrast, I feel that we should not push youngsters to watch television constantly because it makes them less productive and inactive. Moreover, numerous studies have already demonstrated that televisions not only make individuals idle but also cause overweight. I believe that many schools offer physical education classes, even though television can make children less active.
In summation, although it is obvious that television makes an individual less active, I am convinced that teenagers learn more efficiently while watching television, for the reasons I have explained throughout.
Sample 5:
In this 21st century, digitalization has replaced all the old-schooled theories in educational institutes. Moreover, it is claimed that teenagers can effectively study while watching television at home and school. Although I agree that youngsters sometimes can learn from watching television, I do not consider it to be a good idea to encourage this activity.
Firstly, children's study is occasionally enhanced by television viewing. Numerous television programmes provide visual information and tales that enhance the process of learning interesting as well as the content easier to understand. It is a good way to encourage students to learn, particularly when they are tired of academics and assignments. Some applications, for instance, present appealing stories of literature, enhancing children's comprehension. These tools also make it simpler for youngsters to memorize poetry, as it is challenging and tiring for young children to remember poetry by continuously repeating them.
In contrast, I believe that prolonged watching of television may damage a child's academic performance. First, television programmes can serve as a distraction from their academics, especially when they are not attentive. Some programmes employ games to assist youngsters to learn more efficiently, yet youngsters may become more involved in the pleasure and so acquire little. Furthermore, continuous TV viewing alone could lead to an absence of human engagement. If children have queries while watching the television, their instructors cannot immediately address them, which would be most likely to lead to misunderstandings.
To conclude, even though viewing television encourages children to take an interest in learning, I believe that youngsters should not consume too much television because it has a negative consequence on their academics.
Sample 6:
With the development of technology, the media plays an important role in the field of education. Many people are of the opinion that when students are taught with the help of computers, mobile phones, and even television, they learn productively. As far as I am concerned, educating a child with the help of television at school and home is commendable, but there should be a limit to the exposure, otherwise, there may be a hindrance to their mental and physical development.
Childhood is a period when everyone enjoys the simple pleasures of life. Running with friends, pursuing adventures, enjoying ice cream and chocolates are some of the activities that make them happy. Nowadays, children are glued to their television or computer screens. There is no scope for physical activity, and they become obese or unhealthy. If the children continuously come in contact with television at home as well as at school, the rays from the screen may affect their eyesight.
Apart from this, when children watch television at home and school, they become addicted. For example, when a child is shown animated videos to understand certain topics, they get an excuse to watch videos on youtube. They tell their parents that the teacher had asked them to watch those videos to understand the topic better. In this way, the parents are bound to allow them and are unable to keep track of their activity. Moreover, some programs on television show excessive violence, which excites the children. They may try to copy their favourite superhero and get hurt in the process. The crime shows may even instigate them to behave in a rude or anti-social way which ultimately becomes detrimental to their development.
Yet, it is irrefutable that television is an effective tool to educate children and adults alike. While shows on National Geography, Animal Planet and Discovery tap on the scientific evolution of a child’s mind, cartoons or game shows help them relax after a long day of study and activities.
To put it in a nutshell, even though watching television both at home and school might help the children, the negative effects outweigh the positive side. So, according to me, elders should keep an eye on their wards and allow them limited time to watch television at home and school.
Sample 7:
As a professional in the field of education, I strongly disagree with the idea that children should be encouraged to watch television regularly at home and at school. While it is true that television can be a source of information and entertainment, it is not a suitable medium for effective learning for children.
First and foremost, excessive television viewing can have detrimental effects on a child’s physical and mental health. Studies have shown that children who spend too much time in front of a screen are at a higher risk of obesity, sleep disturbances, and attention problems. Moreover, the content of television programs is often not age-appropriate and can expose children to violence, inappropriate language, and negative behaviors.
Furthermore, watching television does not promote active learning or critical thinking skills. Unlike interactive educational activities, such as reading, writing, and hands-on experiments, television viewing is a passive experience that does not engage children in the learning process. It is important for children to develop their cognitive abilities and problem-solving skills through active participation in educational activities, rather than passively absorbing information from a screen.
Instead of encouraging children to watch television regularly, it is essential to provide them with alternative and more effective learning opportunities. Schools should focus on creating a stimulating and interactive learning environment, where children can engage in hands-on activities, discussions, and group projects. At home, parents should limit screen time and encourage their children to participate in outdoor activities, sports, and hobbies that promote physical and mental well-being.
In conclusion, while television can be a source of entertainment, it is not an effective medium for children to learn. Instead of promoting regular television viewing, it is crucial to provide children with active and engaging learning experiences that foster their overall development.
Sample 8:
Some parents believe that watching television is bad for their children. So, they try to restrict their children from watching TV. In a different way, others think that there is nothing bad in watching TV programmes. Personally, I think that watching TV brings tremendous benefits to children unless they spend a lot of their valuable time in front of a TV set daily. It is recommended that children should spend less than a couple of hours daily watching TV programmes, and those programmes should be suitable for them. For the following reasons, which I will mention below, I believe that television plays an essential role in a child’s development.
First of all, television helps a child to extend his or her range of interests. Children can find out many new things and make many exciting discoveries for themselves. In addition to this practical benefit, television improves children’s vocabulary, their memory and gives them the opportunity to gain more knowledge. It is essential for a child’s growth. Of cause, someone can say that there are plenty of different resources of information such as books and teachers. But, I think, in our modern world children must learn faster and use all contemporary technology in order to succeed.
Secondly, watching cognitive programs helps children to learn more about wildlife, our environment and about the importance of preserving our forest and wild animals that live there. However, scientists say that a child should not watch TV for more than 40 minutes successively and not more than 2-3 hours per day. For example, my mother always made us have a break after watching TV more than half an hour and let our eyes rest for several minutes before turning on the TV again. She did not let us watch the TV all day long as well. I think it is the best solution.
To sum up, I believe that television gives children and all people the opportunity to learn what cannot be learnt from books. Television and movies, in particular, allow people to feel the reality and see what they will most likely not be able to see in their lives. Personally, when I was a child, I liked to watch cognitive programs about wild animals. Unfortunately, my family had only one TV, but these programs were the only ones we all wanted to watch. So, we gathered in our living room and watched them in complete silence. I always remember those moments with a smile.
Sample 9:
It is irrefutable that TV is a very efficient teacher. However, I disagree that children should be motivated to watch TV both at home and at school. I shall put forth my arguments to support my views in the following paragraphs.
There is no doubt that TV can be a powerful means of delivering information and a nice part of the learning process. Being an audiovisual medium more effective result can be achieved. What is seen is retained longer in the minds of children. There are some things which can be very easily taught by visual illustrations. Even boring subjects like history can be made interesting with the help of TV.
However, if TV is to be used as an educational tool, then very strict monitoring would be needed as to what children watch on TV. All those talk shows and soap operas we can see every day are a complete waste of time and can even have negative effects by distracting children from their studies. Moreover, most so-called educational programmes like National Geographic cannot replace books and academic lectures because they tend to entertain people and have not an aim to give deep and concentrated knowledge. It is highly unlikely that TV channel directors would abandon their profits and change talk shows to lectures and video lessons.
Furthermore, if children watch TV in school also then their interaction with the teacher would be limited. Teachers teach a lot of things apart from academics. They can come down to the level of the student and can also stimulate children to learn. What is more, children would read less when they learn everything from TV. Reading is an active activity as compared to TV which is a passive activity. So, it would be detrimental to the holistic development of children.
To put it in a nutshell I pen down saying that, although TV is a very good educational medium, it should be used within limits and whatever children learn from TV should also be carefully monitored by parents and teachers.
Sample 10:
Nowadays, many educational institutes are focusing on the usage of screens for learning in kids. Some people are of the view that learning through screen should be encouraged for young kids. My opinion, I completely disagree with acquiring knowledge through television screens. In this essay, I am going to support my opinion before giving a reasoned conclusion.
On the one hand, screening for long hours for educational purposes is likely to put strain on the eyes of youngsters. This is because television screens are likely to release rays that may impact vision in young kids. As a result of this, the younger kids will need to wear glasses at every age. Additionally, vision impairment due to screening is not restricted to weak eyesight but also to severe headaches for days or even blurry vision. For instance, nowadays, ophthalmologists believe that long hours of screening are the main cause of vision impairment in kids. Also, they emphasize the limitation of screen time for kids at a young age.
Secondly, viewing learning programs on tv continuously is likely to impact young kids' physical and mental well-being. As when kids do screen time, they are unlikely to do any form of physical movement. Hence, sitting constantly and just watching videos online will make youngsters lethargic and tired. Moreover, learning through screens, even at home, will result in obesity, leading to other personality development issues in young ones. Along with that, learning without a screen tends to enhance analytical and cognitive capabilities in kids. For instance, when learning through screens, kids only make use of a few of their senses, while off-screen learning involves the usage of many other senses. Undoubtedly, off-screen learning involves eyes, ears, hands, and touch, which also helps develop the brain in young kids.
In conclusion, learning through tv screen can impact the eyes in young kids and may lead to vision impairment. Also, constant viewing of tv screens is not good for the physical and mental well-being of young ones.
Sample 11:
It is acknowledged that children may benefit from watching television programs, such as educational programs. However, I disagree with the recommendation that watching television should be a regular activity at school and st home, as this would produce more negative outcomes than positive ones.
It has received wide cognition that many television programs can moticate children’s learning enthusiasm, thus encouraging them to expand their knowledge in terms of normal school subjects and after-school activities. However, there are still many problems associated with the increased time of sitting in front of a TV screen.
If children spend time watching television every day at school and at home, they may face the probability of suffering obesity, eye problems and back problems. When they are studying at school, it would be advisable for them to focus on learning, acquiring knowledge on academic subjects. Besides, more active and aggressive activities should be encouraged as they are in a physical state when they should participate in more sports activities. But watching television seems to do more harm than good in their physical development.
Furthermore, it is true that children waste a lot of time playing electronic gadgets after school, resulting in the fact that many of them have become highly addicted to these gadgets. If they are asked to watch television regularly, they would certainly lack interpersonal interaction. It would be more beneficial if they play games with their parents or do the housework.
In conclusion, although television programs would do good to children’s learning in some ways, they definitely would cause more disadvantageous effects if watching them becomes a daily routine for children.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Lời giải
Bạn cần đăng ký gói VIP ( giá chỉ từ 199K ) để làm bài, xem đáp án và lời giải chi tiết không giới hạn.
Nhắn tin Zalo