Câu hỏi:

08/01/2025 113

Some people say that violence in the media promotes violence in society. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this view?

Quảng cáo

Trả lời:

verified
Giải bởi Vietjack

Sample 1:

Lawlessness is spreading throughout the nation, and it affects people in both urban and rural areas. According to some people, violence in the nation could be directly motivated by media images of hate or cruelty. From my perspective, the media is not responsible for local citizens' unchecked partiality.

As a start, studies show that children who are subjected to both parental and peer pressure are more likely to act immorally and cause damage to others. Mental health concerns, such as depression, may potentially cause individuals to engage in unethical behavior, as well. Mental illness, familial pressure, and ties to unethical organizations have all been linked to a rise in transgressions in undeveloped nations.

Facebook and Instagram, on the other hand, encourage this idea in terms of media exploitation. People are more likely than ever before to use excessively defamatory language and cursing. So, someone who uploads an intimate picture on social media will be deluged with sexually explicit remarks. The effect will be that a person could act blindly. All countries have seen a decline in their tolerance levels over time. The terrorist organization "DAESH" has also been using numerous media venues to disseminate its brutal message. They've gained the support of a big number of teenagers as a consequence.

Because of this, it is difficult to demonstrate that the media is to blame for the rising rate of violence in our society. Medicines, regulations, and laws are often included while discussing the factors that contribute to an increased chance of a violation.

Sample 2:

Violence is often shown on TV, either on new channels or on regular shows. Some people say that this makes people more violent, while others say that people are already violent. I agree with the idea that people are violent by nature, and this essay will show why I think that way.

First and foremost, the news has to tell the truth about what's going on in the world. In this truth, different parts of society attack each other over things like religion, different beliefs, political instigation, and many other things. For instance, the conflict between Palestine and Israel has been going on since 1948, and it doesn't look like it will end any time soon. This fight didn't start because of an episode of a TV show or because of bad reporting on TV. On the other hand, it began when one country took over another.

Children are the most influential generation because they are easily persuaded to commit crimes, to look brave in front of their peers after seeing violent scenes in movies and thriller shows. To give an example, some children's rags and bully the week are read by students at the school, which is likely to be a crime because of how much media affects people. Because of this, they turn to crime, which can hurt their education and careers.

In conclusion, I think that even though the younger generation is more used to seeing violence on TV, that is not the only reason why there is violence in society.

Sample 3:

It is true that a lot of violence is shown in the media in the present period, which might influence how individuals behave. Some individuals think that exposure to violent media might lead to more assaults in society. In my opinion, I completely disagree with this viewpoint.

First of all, research demonstrates that children are greatly impacted by violent video games and films. Children who play video games, for example, lack empathy for others' pain throughout their lives. Additionally, because the only goal of these games is to praise violent behavior, children are often encouraged to believe that engaging in violent behavior would provide them with a feeling of accomplishment. As a result, young children are exposed to the idea of violence via media like video games.

Second, because of the proliferation of media outlets, the public is instantly exposed to violent messages and information. These messages are widely available through text messages and videos, and they often encourage the use of violence. For instance, large scale riots are often started by violent videos that are circulated on numerous social media sites. Another issue that contributes to general societal dissatisfaction is the lack of trustworthiness of such films. Therefore, violence is promoted by a variety of media outlets.

In a nutshell, the media affects every aspect of our lives and is crucial in fostering a culture of violence. This is evident when examining the negative consequences of violent video games and other media. In order to lessen its impact on society, it is crucial that such violent material be reviewed and removed from different platforms.

Sample 4:

The impact of media violence on societal aggression has long been debated. Some argue that exposure to violence in the media encourages violent behaviour, while others believe that media content has little to no effect on real-world actions. I believe that although media violence can influence some individuals, it is not the sole factor in promoting societal violence.

The primary reason for the argument that media violence promotes societal violence is based on social learning theory. This theory suggests that individuals, especially children, learn and imitate behaviours they observe in the media. When they repeatedly see violent actions in movies, or shows, they may come to view such behaviour as acceptable or normal. This can lead to an increase in aggressive behaviour, as individuals may mimic the actions they have seen portrayed.

However, it is also important to consider other factors contributing to societal violence. Many studies indicate that personal circumstances, such as family environment and education, play a significant role in shaping behaviour. For instance, individuals raised in violent households are more likely to exhibit aggressive behaviour, regardless of their media consumption.  

I believe, on the other hand, that while media violence can have an impact, it is not the primary cause of societal violence. People have the ability to distinguish between fiction and reality, and many viewers of violent media do not become violent themselves. 

In conclusion, while media violence can influence certain individuals, it is not the main driver of societal violence. Other factors, such as family environment and socio-economic conditions, play a more substantial role. Therefore, it is essential to consider these elements when addressing the issue of violence in society rather than placing sole blame on the media.

Sample 5:

The debate on whether violence in the media promotes violence in society remains contentious. While some believe that exposure to violent content directly influences individuals to act aggressively, others argue that media alone cannot be blamed for societal violence. In my opinion, media violence does contribute to societal aggression to some extent, but it is not the predominant factor.

One reason supporting the view that media violence promotes societal violence is the desensitisation effect. Repeated exposure to violent scenes in films, television shows, and video games can make individuals less sensitive to real-life violence. This desensitisation can reduce empathy for victims of violence and lower inhibitions against aggressive behaviour. 

However, it is essential to recognise that media is not the sole contributor to societal violence. Factors such as upbringing, mental health, and socio-economic conditions play significant roles in shaping behaviour. For instance, a person with a stable family environment and good mental health is less likely to be influenced by violent media content compared to someone with a troubled background. 

On the other hand, it is crucial to consider that many people consume violent media without becoming violent themselves. This suggests that personal responsibility and societal influences are critical in moderating the impact of media violence. 

In conclusion, while media violence can contribute to societal aggression, it is not the primary cause. Factors such as upbringing, mental health, and socio-economic conditions significantly influence behaviour. Addressing societal violence requires a comprehensive approach that considers these various elements rather than focusing solely on media content.

Sample 6:

The issue of whether violence in the media promotes violence in society is widely debated. Some contend that exposure to violent content directly leads to aggressive behaviour, while others believe that media violence has a minimal impact. I believe that media violence can influence societal behaviour to some degree, but it is not the sole or most significant factor.

The first reason for believing that media violence affects society is the influence of imitation. According to social learning theory, individuals, especially children, tend to mimic behaviours they observe. When they frequently see violent actions in movies, TV shows, or video games, they might imitate these behaviours, thinking they are acceptable ways to resolve conflicts. 

However, attributing societal violence solely to media exposure ignores other crucial factors. Individual behaviour is influenced by a combination of elements, including family environment, education, and peer influence. For instance, a person raised in a supportive and non-violent family is less likely to resort to violence, regardless of their media consumption. 

On the other hand, it is essential to recognise that not everyone who consumes violent media becomes violent. Many people can distinguish between fictional violence and real-life actions, suggesting that personal responsibility and context play significant roles. Additionally, parental guidance and societal norms can help mitigate the potential negative effects of media violence by promoting critical thinking and empathy.

In conclusion, while media violence can influence societal aggression to some extent, it is not the primary cause. Factors such as family environment, education, and personal responsibility play more substantial roles in shaping behaviour. A comprehensive approach addressing these various elements is necessary to tackle the issue of societal violence effectively.

Sample 7:

One of the most potent instruments in the modern world is the media, which has many advantages but also many disadvantages. Positive or negative media information frequently has an impact on people. I agree that violent media might encourage violent behavior in society but fail to ignore its benefits which is why I want to talk about its advantages and disadvantages in this essay.

Before discussing the disadvantages of the media, we must acknowledge its current level of influence over society. In addition to providing entertainment, the media and its contents inform people about current events, emerging trends, risks, and possible difficulties. One strategy to lessen violent crimes is to show violent instances in the media so that everyone is informed. For instance, news of a robbery in a specific region encourages others in that area to exercise greater caution and build defenses against criminal activity.

Despite that, there is also a significant drawback. Television shows like this encourage the younger generation to emulate them, which eventually brings out the worst traits in them and utterly destroys their moral sense. Children, for example, often act violently after being influenced by action scenes in movies or sports like kickboxing. Something like that can destroy a child's entire future.

Furthermore, it manipulates a number of adults, who then turn to violence and devastation in their daily lives. For example, the perpetrators of a number of real-life crimes have acknowledged that they were influenced by crime television. In addition, violent television shows and films, such as those involving vehicle chases, bike races, and physical torture, can cause adults to behave dangerously in real life, which can have disastrous results. 

In conclusion, my opinion is, that if violence of any kind is replicated in real life, it could be dangerous and even life threatening. People ought to screen media content appropriately and get inspired by its advantages and discouraged by its disadvantages not the other way around.  

Sample 8:

The media, with a plethora of benefits and drawbacks, is one of the most powerful tools in the contemporary world. Broadcast content, whether favorable or unfavorable, frequently affects individuals. Since I agree with the aforementioned topic, but cannot completely refute its advantages, I'm inclined to offer my perspective on its benefits and drawbacks in this essay.

First, before illustrating the media's drawbacks, let's admit how much of an influence it currently has on society. Digital contents not only entertain people but also educate them about current affairs, new trends, dangers, and potential challenges. Publicizing violent incidents to educate the public is one way to reduce violent crime. For example, hearing of a robbery in a particular neighborhood can prompt people there to increase their vigilance and fortify themselves against criminal activity.

Still, there's a big negative. These kinds of television programs breed envy in the younger generation, bringing out the worst in them and completely undermining their moral compass. In particular, action sequences in movies or combat sports can influence children to engage in brutality. That kind of behavior has the potential to ruin a child's entire future.

Moreover, it manipulates several adults, who subsequently live lives filled with violence and destruction. For instance, crime television has been acknowledged as a source of influence by the perpetrators of some real-life crimes. Moreover, adult behavior can be disastrously affected by violent television series and movies, that feature scenes of physical altercations, bike races, or heinous murders.

In summary, it could be risky and even fatal if barbarity of any kind is recreated in real life. Thus, I believe, multimedia broadcasting content should be evaluated properly so that people are inspired by its positive aspects and deterred by its negatives. 

Sample 9:

In contemporary discourse, there exists a contention that the portrayal of violence in the media contributes to an increase in violent behaviour within society. I am inclined to agree with this viewpoint as the depiction of violence in various forms of media tends to desensitise individuals and can potentially influence their actions.

Firstly, the omnipresence of violent content in media platforms such as movies, video games, and television programmes desensitises individuals to violent behaviour. Repeated exposure to graphic imagery and explicit content numbs the sensitivity towards violence, making it seem commonplace. For instance, studies have shown a correlation between prolonged exposure to violent video games and an increase in aggressive behaviour among adolescents, indicating the potential influence of media content on behaviour.

Moreover, media representations often glamorise and normalise violent actions, shaping societal perceptions about the acceptability of such behaviour. Characters portrayed as heroes in movies or television series sometimes resort to violent means to solve conflicts, inadvertently sending a message that violence can be a justifiable means to an end. This normalization of aggression can lead to a skewed understanding of conflict resolution among impressionable audiences.

In conclusion, the media's pervasive portrayal of violence can indeed have a detrimental impact on society by desensitising individuals and normalising aggressive behaviour. While acknowledging the importance of artistic freedom and the complexities of societal influences, it is imperative to recognise the responsibility of media in shaping perceptions and behaviour. Thus, measures to regulate and monitor violent content in media platforms should be considered to mitigate its potential negative effects on societal behaviour.

Sample 10:

Many argue that the depiction of violence in the mass media encourages violence in society. I entirely agree with this opinion and believe that violent media content contributes to the prevalence of violence in society because it desensitizes human beings and influences individuals to show aggressive behaviour.

Regular exposure to violence in the media can desensitize people to real-life acts of violence. When the portrayal of violence in media becomes frequent, it may reduce emotional response and the feeling of shock associated with violent behaviour. Over time, people tend to lose their inhibitions about violence, thereby adopting a tolerant attitude towards aggressive behaviour. A recent study, for instance, has revealed that people who consume a substantial amount of violent media content, such as violent films or video games, may become desensitized to violence. This desensitization can make individuals less empathetic towards victims of violence and tend to engage in violent behaviour.

Likewise, media violence also promotes violence through glamorization. That is to say that the media often depicts violence in a way that glamorizes perpetrators as heroic, powerful and victorious. This, in turn, can create an overwhelming impression that violence is a necessary means of solving problems, achieving goals, or gaining dominance. Such depictions tend to encourage people, especially those who are vulnerable to aggressive tendencies, to view violence as a heroic act. For example, research carried out by psychologist L. Rowell Huesmann found that teenagers who watched extensive hours of violent TV shows associated with heroism when they were in primary school were more likely to exhibit higher levels of aggressive behaviour when they became adults.

To conclude, I think that media violence breeds violence in the community because it can desensitize individuals to violence and also encourage them to perform violent acts.

Sample 11:

It is often pointed out by many that the portrayal of violence in the media encourages violence in the community. I totally concur with this opinion because children and certain people may behave violently by watching it, and individuals also become numb to violence.

The prevalence of violence in mass media can make children aggressive. To commence with, children, nowadays, spend a considerable amount of time watching videos, like cartoons or films. Most of these programmes depict a sympathetic, strong and aggressive hero who can overcome every adverse situation by exercising miraculous power and thus solve his issues by brute force.  Since children and many people are unable to discriminate between exact right and wrong, they can take the aggressive behaviours of the fictional characters as a model. A case in point is recent research, which reveals that young children tend to imitate the aggressive behaviours they watch on television.

Likewise, the gruesome portrayals of violence in media breed violence in the community through desensitising people. This is because repeated exposure to violence normalizes violence over time and this, in turn, causes violent incidents in society. Put simply, desensitised individuals tend to downplay egregious harm done to others, thereby behaving violently. Desensitized people, in fact, consider that violence is a normal way of life, and they resort to violence so as to solve conflicts. This is illustrated by the fact that people who are exposed to violent content may become desensitised to violence, emulate the violence, and show more aggressive behaviours.

To reiterate, the extensive viewing of media violence may cause behavioural issues because children, as well as many people, become aggressive by mimicking protagonists it may instil violence among desensitised people. 

Sample 12:

From the last few decades, media has become part and parcel of our life, irrespective of age, gender or profession of a person. Different genres of programs, like comedy, romance, fantasy, animation have attracted audiences worldwide. But the genre that has enticed the maximum number of people is action which stimulates them to undertake certain wild activities. So, I think media does promote violence, and in this essay, I will further discuss my viewpoint.

Most of us like superhero movies like Avengers, Batman, Justice League, to name a few. Young children and sometimes, adults love to copy the frenzy shown in the action scenes of such movies. As a result, without supervision, they get hurt or incapacitate others in the process. For example, when a person riding a bike at a high speed hits another person walking on the pavement, he may get hurt. But the person he hits may die or become a cripple for life. Secondly, the image of a ‘manly’ personality is created by the ability to fight others and defeat enemies, not paying heed to the injuries they may suffer. Young minds take up these images and make it their passion and they are diverted from the correct path.

Crime shows or popular movies based on robbery, bank loots, murders, like Money Heist, Dhoom, Catch me if you can, etc, inspire people to initiate such actions. They either imitate those crimes in the same manner or take clues of how to grab the attention of the public and rise to instant fame. Sometimes, people are led astray by the violent, partial news shared on social media. They shape the young minds in such a way that they become passionate for a wrong cause and give in to terrorism. Moreover, fake news may lead to communal riots, which disturb the balance of society.

However, the history of human civilization shows that violence has been an integral part of our society way before the advent of media. The havoc caused by wars, both internal and global, raids by invaders, and atrocities like the Holocaust by Adolf Hitler during the Second World War are few examples of how violent humans can be, even without the aid of media.

Thus, to conclude, I would like to point out the fact that although humans might be violent by nature, the projection of violence in the media in various forms definitely has aggravated the rate of violent crimes in society. So, we should be aware of the type of programs to watch and keep ourselves in a positive mindset so that we are not affected by the violent scenes on media.

Sample 13:

In the last few decades, due to the evolution of media, the popularity of aggressive content on television and online games has increased drastically. While some argue that this trend makes people more violent, others insist that it has no impact on their conduct. In my opinion, despite the constant exposure to terrorising content in the media plays a significant role in encouraging violent behaviour, it is not the only element in promoting violence in humans.

Firstly, many individuals, especially youngsters are attracted towards online games, which include substantial violence and aggression. This creates a lasting impression on their mind and motivates them to imitate the same actions. For instance, a controversial, highly addictive online game called “PUBG” has played a key role in exposing children to a world of criminality.

Secondly, the portrayal of violent content in movies is unrealistically stylised and glamorous. Several action movies or crime series include gruesome acts of brutality. For example, several crime thrillers have a lot of elements of physical conflict, frauds, sadism and injustice, which in turn influence the public, especially the youngsters, to model these hazardous acts.

However, it is also known that humans are violent in nature by evolution as well. The history of human civilisation shows that violence has been an integral part of our society long before the advent of media. The merciless havoc caused by wars, both national and international, raids by invaders, and heinous atrocities such as the Holocaust by Adolf Hitler during the Second World War are few examples of how violent humans can be, even without the aid or influence of media.

To conclude, it is undoubtedly true that we are influenced by what we see, hear and experience. In my opinion, although the projection of violence in the media in various forms definitely has aggravated the rate of crimes by normalising violence and aggression, it is not the sole source and cause of violent behaviour in our society.

Sample 14:

A few individuals accept that savage media straightforwardly comes about in savage behaviour. The reference to violence reflected in news, social media and films contributes to behavioural implications in both children and adults. I agree with this idea that violent images and incitements have a negative impact on behaviour.

In fact, human behaviour learns from any act by adaptations and imitations. Psychology has clearly implied the impression that visual simulation can have on the mind of children and adults. When media broadcasts horrifying crimes, news or when any violent content is projected on screen or in newspapers, psychologists suggest these as the real factor instigating a crime in reality. Subsequently, violent or neo-noir films develop a passivity towards life, feeding an aggressive mood within the society. For example, a film on war and agony contributes to both patriotism and passive aggression. 

Moreover, simulation games and VFX universes are becoming addictive among adolescents. A large portion of time spent by a teenager on such video games aiming at ‘headshots’ instigates their social behaviour in the real world. Peer aggression and violent behaviour has been seen to be a major contribution of these games. Since people kill each other as mercenaries in these games, their social life seems to be falling apart. Films such as "squid game", became popular in Japan and in Korea reflecting the desperation among human beings in actual life. It was reported how a number of people started killing each other due to this game, resulting in banning of such shows.

To conclude, I therefore agree that any visual impetus has a longer impact for better or for worse. As a result, seeing violence bring out aggression and violent change in behaviour among youngsters and adults.

CÂU HỎI HOT CÙNG CHỦ ĐỀ

Lời giải

Sample 1:

In recent years, there have been a number of everyday problems that people in big cities have to cope with. This essay will discuss two major problems, pollution and information overload, which I believe should lead governments to encourage people to move to regional areas.

These days, increased levels of pollution have been a great cause for concern among residents of big cities. Due to high volumes of traffic, large quantities of pollutants are being released into the atmosphere, causing the degradation of air quality, which is said to be a significant contributor to various types of respiratory disease, such as lung cancer. Additionally, people in big cities are being bombarded with too much information from the media, including TV, social media, and advertising, with a large proportion of this information being fake or exaggerated. This can lead to confusion or, in some cases, social anarchy.

In my opinion, governments should do what they can to encourage city residents to move to regional areas. Firstly, it will reduce the number of vehicles in cities, which will definitely reduce the levels of air pollution, which is hazardous to the health of citizens. Furthermore, fewer people living in big cities will relieve the pressure on the housing supply, where many people are forced to live in small, uncomfortable spaces. Studies have shown that people’s living spaces have a direct impact on their mental health and how they perform at work.

In conclusion, severe air pollution and a bombardment of information are among the most serious problems facing city residents nowadays, and personally, I feel that authorities should encourage people to relocate to other areas to live.

Sample 2:

It is true that nowadays city residents have to encounter a large number of problems, especially those concerning environmental and social factors. However, encouraging people to migrate to smaller provincial towns, in my opinion, is not a viable solution to these problems.

As living in a metropolis, people are confronted with high level of air pollution, which is caused mainly by the exhaust fumes released into the atmosphere from petrol-driven vehicles. The more populated the city is, the higher the demand for traveling becomes, and as a result, the higher the level of air pollution will be. Living in this environment for a long time is supposed to be detrimental to human’s health as polluted air is the main contributor to respiratory diseases. Another problem involves social aspects such as the issue of unemployment. As many people moving to big cities do not have any skills or qualifications, they are unlikely to find a job. This higher unemployment rate can give rise to the increased criminal activities threatening inhabitants’ life.

Since dwelling in urban centers can have negative impacts, some governments tend to encourage the citizens to relocate to smaller regional towns, but I do not think this will be effective. The first reason for my belief is that this policy cannot guarantee a reduction in air pollution because people still have to commute to their workplace, which is usually located in city center. Indeed, living far away from cities means that people even have to travel a much longer distance to work, which, in fact, can increase the amount of exhaust emissions. The second reason is that finding jobs in the countryside is certainly not easier than in urban areas. Job opportunities in these places are much lower and people usually have to do low-paid jobs if they work in smaller and less developed towns.

In conclusion, it is obvious that living in big cities can create a number of problems, but encouraging people to migrate to suburban areas is, in my opinion, totally not a viable measure at least when it comes to addressing the problems concerning pollution and unemployment.

Sample 3:

It is true that people in major cities are confronting a number of problems in their routine life. This essay will discuss some of these problems and explain the writer’s view that citizens should be encouraged to relocate to the countryside or regional towns.

The urban population is grappling against two main problems out of many. The first issue is the lower quality of life due to the increasingly heavier burden on the existing urban infrastructure. This is because rural immigrants in pursuit of employment opportunities keep inundating the downtown areas of most major cities. For example, most schools and hospitals located in XYZ city are frequently overloaded, making these services inaccessible to the majority of people of lower classes. The second issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic, particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

I think government should encourage citizens to move away from major cities. This is due to the fact that this would relieve the current pressure on the infrastructure. Fewer people would need public services such as hospitals or schools and the roads would be more spacious, ensuring a smooth traffic flow with its resultant fewer accidents for city dwellers. In addition, the resources in the countryside or other less developed regions would be better exploited as there might be available workforce there. For instance, there would be more laborers during harvesting time in the countryside, or skilled or knowledgeable people would help with the construction work in smaller regions, spurring the growth of the local area as well as the nation as a whole.

In conclusion, there are many problems that people in cities are facing, and it is advisable that government encourage the residents to consider relocation to smaller regional areas with a view to solving these issues.

Sample 4:

It is true that nowadays people are shifting to larger cities. There are several negative consequences of this moot issue, and to cope with the current problems, the authorities should encourage individuals to move to smaller cities or even to the countryside.

To begin with, an enormous number of people create problems. One negative consequence is that the urban population would go on increasing and cause housing problems. This leads to the creation of underdeveloped slum areas, where underprivileged individuals must live in poor living conditions like lacking medical care or even drinking water. Another issue is the traffic jam due to the burgeoning car ownership. Arguably, cars take up more space than a motorbike while its capacity to accommodate passengers is far inferior to that of a bus. This weakness results in bumper-to-bumper traffic particularly in downtown areas where many drivers have to inch along to get away from the terrible traffic.

Governments should take steps to move a certain number of city dwellers to less populated areas. The main reason is that shifting people to towns or even the countryside helps to decrease the unemployment rate. This is because as more and more people apply for the same position within a company, it may intensify the competition among employees, making it significantly more difficult to be chosen. Towns, however, due to industrialization, are now able to provide different jobs for engineers or officers in new factories. Therefore, by encouraging job seekers to move to these newly developed areas, the government can lower the number of unemployed individuals in cities.

In conclusion, an increasing number of people living in cities certainly creates housing problems and traffic congestion, and governments should encourage its citizens to migrate to towns.

Sample 5:

More and more people live in cities today than at any point in the past and this trend will likely continue in the future. This has resulted in many problems including extreme overcrowding and governments should take measures to make living outside cities more attractive.

There are a wide range of drawbacks associated with the rise of modern cities but one of the most obvious issues is related to population density. The large number of people crammed into a relatively small area has caused expensive housing, increased traffic and severe pollution. For example, apartment prices in mega-cities like Tokyo and New York have soared to the point where only the wealthiest inhabitants can afford decent living standards. Regardless of financial status, all city dwellers have to deal with more and more traffic jams as the population increases while the area of cities remains fixed. Finally, all these people living and travelling in one place puts a tremendous strain on the environment and some cities, like Beijing in China, have become dangerously polluted.

In my opinion, governments have a duty to encourage citizens to move to more rural areas. If cities continue to expand unabated then the above problems will only get worse. We might one day find ourselves living in densely packed, heavily polluted cities that resemble scenes from a dystopian science fiction film. In order to prevent this from happening, the government can give tax breaks to companies that choose to locate offices and production facilities outside the city. This will provide more jobs for people who are willing to live in the countryside.

In conclusion, the concerns related to overcrowding in cities can and should be somewhat countered by governments incentivising living in rural areas. If this is done then we may still face problems related to cities in the future, but at least they will not be as serious.

Sample 6:

Residing in metropolitan cities has been stimulating some crucial issues in daily activities. Congestion and air pollution are problems related to living in big cities. Thus, these issues have to be tackled by governments through plausible actions such as enhancing numerous public transportations and controlling the price of basic needs instead of encouraging societies to relocate to smaller regional towns.

Societies face many issues in metropolitan cities as traffic jams and quality of air pollution. In big cities, some roads are dominated by private cars, then the number of people using these private cars is higher than in other cities. As a result, there is a phenomenon like congestion in the road that can occur with long duration. Mostly, people who are workers have to go to office and back home regularly using private cars. This situation has a bad impact on utilizing time because they spend more time just on the road and have a chance of becoming late to go to office. Another problem that has influenced widely on people is reducing air quality. When individuals live in larger cities is a risk to the respiratory system, an individual usually takes breath frequently which contains more emissions produced by private cars. Thus, individuals are able to get some diseases such as asthma.

What authorities should do is to deliver better public transportation. These facilities have to consider integration on reaching some ways, an efficiency of time and cost of transportation. If the government ponders this solution, individuals will use this type of transportation. For instance, after the government applied an integration of public transportation in Bandung, societies directly used public transportation. Therefore, the number of private cars has dropped.

To sum up, congestion and quality of air quality are common issues in metropolitan cities. Considering encouraging relocation to smaller cities is not the best solution, but governments can tackle some problems regarding living in metropolitan cities through improving of public transportation.

Lời giải

Sample 1:

The relationship between equality and personal accomplishments has gained significant attention in the last few years. Some claim that a fair society can encourage their people to succeed as they treat everyone in the same manner, while others oppose that personal achievement as a result of success and failure is based on their merits. I firmly believe that a combination of both equal and individualistic approaches is the key to success.

To begin with, gender equality is not only a fundamental right but also a necessary foundation for a peaceful and prosperous life. It is quite essential to utilize the full human potential for sustainable development. For example, in western countries, women are equally respected and given opportunities as men. However, in middle east countries or Eurasia, they do not have the same mindset, and women are still referred to be inferior to men. We observe an understandable difference in both western and eastern countries’ prosperity which gives us an understanding of the egalitarian society’s role in giving equal opportunities to men and women, to rich and poor, to upper class and lower class.

On the other hand, an individualistic approach is the second step after getting equal opportunities from an egalitarian society as it only creates favourable conditions, but an individual is responsible for taking the opportunity and making an effort to achieve the goal for its positive outcome. If we take an example of the ranking scoreboard, it can help evaluate the individuals’ performances on their merits.

To conclude, both equality and personal success are interdependent. Giving equal opportunities to all individuals is the first step to fair inclusion, and individual performance is the second step to thriving.

Sample 2:

There is a strong interest in equality and personal achievement in today’s world. In my opinion, these terms are different from each other. There must be equality in human beings’ rights, but equality in achievement can not be considered fair.

There must be quality in education for each person irrespective of their religion or family status. Everyone has the right to get a good education, and the government should provide facilities so that education will be free for all. If it is not free, then it should be less cheap so that no one hesitates to get an education. For example, to get admission to a well-known school/college, sometimes we need to pay some extra money, and it is not a good sign in our society, and due to this, some students cannot afford their expenses and miss the chance to join their preferred institute.

On the other hand, equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and one should get a prize as per their merits. For example, IT sector jobs have different roles, and everyone employed has to work as per their task assignments. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra effort to the work will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Also, if we give equal salary to each one, it may help maintain a good work environment, but it will be a disgrace for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to the others.

In conclusion, it is good to have equality in some areas, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge.

Sample 3:

According to the Ecological Systems Theory, the environment that a person lives in has the most significant influence on his/her personal development. Some argue that certain personal traits are closely associated with a person’s achievement. However, I will argue in this essay that social equality is the key to an individual’s success in general from two aspects: gender equality and education equality.

The roles that women play in societies often vary significantly among different regions of the world. Societies, that offer women more freedom in terms of educational and vocational choices, could possess more desirable opportunities to facilitate women in pursuing their dreams and achieving their potentials. Women in Australia, for example, where the equality between males and females is considerably advance, could be more likely to achieve higher personal successes than women in Pakistan where females often remain inferior to males in society.

Education equality is another effect that could largely influence on one’s accomplishment. As human society develops, the ability of literacy and the access to modern technologies become increasingly important in individuals’ personal development. Residents of regions where free fundamental education and better access to technologies, such as the internet and computers, are provided, could have increasing numbers of opportunities to exercise their personal traits, thus, to succeed in the fields of their choices.

To conclude, an egalitarian society can facilitate more achievements among individuals. The gender and education equalities are two fundamental ones that could ensure everyone in the society, both males and females, to have the relatively equal opportunity to succeed.

Sample 4:

The concern and ongoing debate in the relationship between equality and personal success have developed recently. Some are convinced that individuals have marvellous opportunities to gain their success in egalitarian societies where everyone is treated in the same manner no matter what their educational, economical and intellectual levels are. While the opponents conceive that the high level of attainment will happen only if the individuals are free to achieve both the success and failure based on their own capabilities. I entirely believe that there is a strong connection between equality and personal success and this essay aims to elaborate that the egalitarian society is the best option for people.

As the era is developing, some aspects among the general public are changing and equality is one of those aspects. The concept of equality has been spread in the whole world and it results in many successes in egalitarian communities. Egalitarian gives fantastic chance to people to gain their achievement since there is no restriction for people in order to reach their success. In this situation, skill and knowledge are the main factors to achieve it. In Indonesia, for example, it was hard for women to have positions in certain sectors such as politics and military because most people were convinced that it was not appropriate for women to become either politician or a defence personnel. Yet, as the people is more open-minded now, it is no longer an issue and women can achieve their success in any sectors based on their ability. Thus, the egalitarian trend has influenced the society’s achievement.

Besides, equal rights and opportunities trigger people to become more competitive in a positive way and have more spirit to achieve something. Furthermore, people can get motivation from their surrounding that has similar objectives. In a classroom, for instance, every pupil has the same rights to be the champ without be differentiated by the teacher. While the students are surrounded by spirited fellows, they will learn better. In this case, having equal opportunities and rights urge people to gain the best achievement. Therefore, egalitarian concepts provide more chance to every people to become successful.

In conclusion, equality motivates people to work together and help each other. In a society where discrimination is present, even based on people’s capability, greater good can never be achieved.

Sample 5:

Some people believe that an egalitarian society engenders greater personal achievements for its people. However, others reject this notion as they believe such achievements can only be obtained based on internal factors such as individual strengths. While there is a directly proportional relationship between equality and personal achievements, I only partly agree with this notion as equality can only contribute so much to an individual’s success.

Admittedly, a fair society does provide a good foundation for personal achievement. With every person being given the same opportunities and rights, everyone would have the appropriate foundation to try and excel at what they do. As such, people would likely be given the same career opportunities and privileges, which can facilitate an equal chance for success among them. The practicality of such a society can be seen in the case of Sweden and Norway, where tertiary education is provided equally and free of charge to citizens. With everyone being given the chance to pursue higher learning and by extension better job opportunities, the workforce of these two countries display a higher level of education and far better earnings compared to the average nation.

However, it is also my firm conviction that there are other individual factors contributing to personal accomplishments besides equality. This is because equality can only go so far as to offer an initial head start for people on the long road to greater accomplishment, which is not sufficient to guarantee their success. By contrast, individual qualities have a much more extensive and long-term impact on any individual’s career. Only with qualities such as perseverance and determination can a person be willing to try and fail over and over in order to gain experience and achieve what they want. This is precisely why among millions of people that are given an equal chance to succeed, only those who are truly determined and resilient can find success.

In conclusion, despite my acknowledgement of the positive relationship between an egalitarian society and the achievement of its people, I also contend that this correlation is limited due to the greater importance of individual merits. Since the prospect of an all-equal society is somewhat negligible, it is advisable that people strive to improve their personal qualities to stand a better chance of success.

Sample 6:

The connection between equality and personal success is a complex topic that has been extensively discussed. Some argue that individuals can accomplish more in societies that prioritize equal treatment, while others believe that personal achievement is only possible when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their abilities.

Some individuals argue that in egalitarian societies, people can achieve greater success. This is because when individuals are in a fair society, they can accomplish more with the assistance of others. Additionally, there are more opportunities available when society is fair in all aspects. An egalitarian society refers to a society where everyone is treated equally, regardless of their race, gender, religion, or age. For example, India is often seen as a representation of an egalitarian society due to its constitution and various practices that promote equality.

However, there are others who argue that individuals can only achieve significant personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities.  I personally share this viewpoint because in a society that is highly competitive, success can only be attained when individuals have the liberty to make their own choices. By being able to choose their own path and pursue their own aspirations rather than conforming to others' expectations, individuals can truly achieve self-fulfillment. This can only be accomplished through the utilization of one's full potential and dedication to hard work.

In conclusion, both viewpoints had equal advantages and disadvantages. However, I agree with the viewpoint that high levels of personal achievement are possible only if individuals are free to succeed or fail.

Sample 7:

An egalitarian society is one where all people are considered equal in everything such as rights and opportunities. For instance, education plays a crucial role in everyone’s life and their success. Everyone in society has the right to get free schooling, which is offered by the government of a nation. Personally, I believe that people living in such a society have the potential to accomplish more. 

Furthermore, attaining personal accomplishments will serve as a guide for enhancing ourselves and enable us to reach our utmost capabilities. Moreover, we can enhance different facets of our lives, including self-assurance, communication abilities, productivity, and more.

However, there are some individuals who hold the belief that individuals can only achieve high levels of personal success if they have the freedom to either succeed or fail based on their own abilities. I believe that equality does not hinder people's freedom to succeed or fail. In fact, I argue that individuals would be motivated and perform well in a society that promoted equality. Moreover, the inequality in a society will lead to social cohesion, negative impact on health and well being, economic growth, etc. 

To sum up, I think it is important to strike a balance between both perspectives as they have their own advantages and disadvantages. Also promoting equality in society can also positively impact an individual's personal accomplishments. 

Sample 8:

In today's world, the environment has a significant impact on people's growth in various ways. While some argue that personal success can only be attained when individuals have the freedom to succeed or fail based on their own abilities, I firmly believe that a fair society that highly values equality allows individuals to achieve even greater success.

Equality means that every individual should be considered of equal worth and should be treated fairly, regardless of their personal characteristics, skills, or way of life. This implies that everyone should have equal rights, opportunities, and be treated with the same level of respect. By promoting equality in society, individuals can benefit in various ways, including fair treatment, respect, access to opportunities, economic efficiency, and enhanced education. For instance, countries like Pakistan, Syria, Mauritania are considered as an unfair country because of various reasons, such as gender-based violence, discrimination. And in these countries still personal success is out of reach for women.

Furthermore, education significantly contributes to individual achievement. Despite the presence of social inequality, numerous countries continue to struggle with high levels of illiteracy. For example, nations such as Norway, North Korea, and Lithuania boast a 100% literacy rate, while countries like Niger, Armenia, and Azerbaijan have alarmingly high rates of illiteracy, with citizens unable to read, write, or comprehend. The disparity between possessing education and lacking it is immense, and it greatly impacts personal success.

To sum up, I firmly believe that people can accomplish greater things in a society that promotes equality. This is because when individuals have equal opportunities and fair treatment, they are able to achieve more.

Sample 9:

Many research studies have highlighted a causal connection between utopian societies and personal growth, which has prompted the contention that individuals can accomplish more in more egalitarian societies. In my opinion, one can only grow when given the liberty to commit to personal causes. 

A utopian society provides its constituents with sustenance but not necessarily individual growth. This can be evidenced both economically and socially. In developed countries, there is typically a social safety net in the form of food banks, soup kitchens, or free healthcare to support less privileged citizens. Though the unemployed or people living below the poverty line can rely on these benefits for sustenance, this arguably deprives individuals of personal incentives to exert themselves, find decent employment, and in part, escape from poverty. An egalitarian society can also stifle growth in the workforce. If companies around the world embraced a hypothetical system of equal pay for all employees, such a policy would likely cause economic stagnation, stifle innovation, damage companies’ reputations, and hamper personal motivation generally. 

As far as I am concerned, success is not linear, and one can only see high levels of achievement when granted the freedom to make mistakes. A relevant example would be Rishi Sunak, the current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. He was born into humble beginnings with both parents originally immigrants from India who sought asylum in the UK for the promise of a better life. Though the UK welcomed the family as asylum seekers and provided Rishi with education opportunities, he still applied himself, studying earnestly at school, securing quality employment at investment banks, and later entering the political world. Despite an early defeat in his bid to become prime minister against Liz Truss, Rishi continued to persevere with his campaigns and political beliefs, and finally managed to ascend to the position of Prime Minister after several debates. Similar instances of success can be seen in all industries, but the overlapping commonality is the liberty to pursue one’s purposes and the freedom to fail. 

In conclusion, high achievers tend to be those who are free to pursue their personal causes despite the safety net provided by an egalitarian society. One should try to capitalise on all opportunities being presented. 

Sample 10:

In the present era, emphasis is increasing towards equality in society and achieving success. Some argue that chances of success are higher in a society where everyone has equal rights and opportunities. In contrast, others think that it would be more beneficial if people had the freedom to achieve or fail according to their results. I believe that an egalitarian society is better as every person has a chance to succeed, regardless of gender or background.

A fair society that supports talent has a chance to achieve growth much better than a biased society. If society is biased towards some cast or wealthy people, then the only people who can achieve success are the ones who belong to affluent families. However, children from wealthy families don’t need to have more talent. It depends on the dedication and hard work of individuals. Suppose each individual has given a chance, then people will put more effort into achieving something. For instance, if admission to the university depends upon how individuals perform in exams instead of their background, people would work hard to succeed.

Furthermore, if society is biased and does not allow everyone to grow, there would be no harmony among the individuals in society. Such a society will always face struggles, and nobody will feel happy in such an environment. When people in the community feel they are not given equal rights, they start protesting, which affects the peace. To cite an example, a few years ago Patel community gathered and demanded their cast to be included in the minority because they felt that their community was not getting the same opportunity as compared to other communities, which led to massive destruction in some states of Gujarat. Moreover, if people do not have equal rights, they prefer to migrate to a place where they have equal opportunities.

To conclude, having equal opportunity to succeed is a fundamental human right, and if society wants to achieve something, then it must be unbiased and preference given to deserving people, regardless of their gender or religion.

Sample 11:

It is an irrefutable fact that equality plays an essential role in societies. Some populace thinks that individuals can achieve more success in an egalitarian society. In contrast, others think that a high level of success depends on an individual’s merits, hard work and dedication. However, I firmly believe both equality and personal merits play paramount roles among people. This essay will analyze both views using examples to demonstrate points and prove arguments.

On the one hand, equality is essential in many aspects, such as men and women. In the past, only men tend to go to school or do work at the office, while nowadays, the majority of women work. Anyone has the right to have an education and work, whether poor or rich. In other words, people have to judge them on their talent, not on their social status or family status. For instance, many higher-level schools take donations in order to get admission to that school. Therefore, poor people cannot get admission because of the financial crisis. At this moment, the government should provide free or low-budget education so that everyone can get an education. Thus, equality plays a significant role in order to become successful.

On the other hand, individual achievement is equally important because, without failure, they cannot learn and achieve new things. To be more precise, failure is the key to success. If the person does not go through failure, they do not know the value of success. We learn lesions as well as mistakes through failures. Not only failure but hard work and dedication are also equally important. Everyone should get merits for their hard work. To exemplify, the IT sector’s job has different roles, and every employee has to work on the task assigned to them. If we give equal importance to each one, then the one who is giving extra will feel demotivated, affecting their performance. Another thing is that if we give equal salary to each one, it may help to maintain a good workplace environment but, it will be a dishonour for the one who has the highest knowledge compared to others. Hence, only equality in job achievement is not a good sign, and also one should get a prize as per their merits.

To sum up, promoting an egalitarian society motivates individuals to strive for personal excellence, but we should also pay attention to people’s knowledge. Hence, both are equally important to achieving achievements in their life.

Sample 12:

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.

Sample 13:

In my opinion, an egalitarian society is one in which everyone has the same rights and the same opportunities. I completely agree that people can achieve more in this kind of society.

Education is an important factor with regard to personal success in life. I believe that all children should have access to free schooling, and higher education should be either free or affordable for all those who chose to pursue a university degree. In a society without free schooling or affordable higher education, only children and young adults from wealthier families would have access to the best learning opportunities, and they would therefore be better prepared for the job market. This kind of inequality would ensure the success of some but harm the prospects of others.

I would argue that equal rights and opportunities are not in conflict with people's freedom to succeed or fail. In other words, equality does not mean that people lose their motivation to succeed, or that they are not allowed to fail. On the contrary, I believe that most people would feel more motivated to work hard and reach their potential if they thought that they lived in a fair society. Those who did not make the same effort would know that they had wasted their opportunity. Inequality, on the other hand, would be more likely to demotivate people because they would know that the odds of success were stacked in favour of those from privileged backgrounds.

In conclusion, it seems to me that there is a positive relationship between equality and personal success.

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.

Nâng cấp VIP

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.

Nâng cấp VIP

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.

Nâng cấp VIP

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.

Nâng cấp VIP