IS YOUR WEDDING THE HAPPIEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE?

An argumentative comparison

Dedicated to “N” and “S” in the hope that they recover from the stress of their wedding and live happily ever after

A wedding is a ceremony held to announce to the community that two people wish to spend the rest of their lives together. It is a public declaration of love and commitment and as such, is cause for celebration. Weddings all over the world are, therefore, described as joyous occasions during which families and friends come together to celebrate the momentous decision of the couple. Logically, their wedding should be the happiest day of the couple’s life and so it is on some occasions, but it is far from being so on others. Wedding ceremonies can be a source of absolute joy but also of great misery. The key criterion is the type of society in which the ceremony is taking place.

In more individualistic societies such as those in the developed world, the individual, his desires, aspirations and proclivities are given precedence over culture and traditions. It is the individual who takes major decisions about his life and decides on the direction it should take. The notion of freedom is the natural culmination of movements such as the Reformation, the Renaissance, the Age of Enlightenment and the French Revolution to list a few, and is now entrenched in the West. There is a second factor that has a bearing on the issue and that is the age at which people get married. Marriage is not the end all and be all of life; people wish to receive a good education and pursue a career as well. This takes time, and when young people finally decide to take the leap, they are mature adults who know exactly what they want and intend to get it. They may, as a result, decide to tie the knot in the Bahamas, on a beach, with a priest and no guests at all. Alternatively, they may prefer a simple ceremony at the registry office or decide to go the whole hog and rent a stately home for the day. As far as choices go, the sky is the limit, no one interferes, and as such, the wedding is a day to remember.

Not so in more traditional, collectivist societies. In such societies, it is the customs, the traditions and social expectations of the society handed down through the generations that take precedence over anything the individual may desire or aspire to. The moment the decision is taken to get married, ritual and time honored practices take over reducing the couple to be married to puppets under the control of the puppet masters, the families and the rest of the community. Every step to be taken is set in stone and any wish to deviate from the prescribed path is met with harsh rebuke. For the puppet masters, marriage is the single most important step in life and concerns the community as a whole, but not so to all the so called “puppets”. Societies don’t exist in vacuums; there is, thanks to globalization, a wealth of opportunities to connect and discover, first hand, the way people live in other parts of the world. Another factor is education: Many young people in such parts of the world go to western countries and the USA to be able to receive a better education and while there, are subject to the influence of a far more individualistic society than the one they were accustomed to. Therein, lies the problem.

Individuals are subject to a multitude of influences throughout their lives; it is these influences along with personal interpretation that molds them into the kind of people they become. Parents of young people in more traditional collectivist societies are the way they are as a result of the cultural influences they have been subjected to. Letting go of such cultural norms as those espoused by the society is not an option. The young people however have been on the receiving end of a medley of cultural influences both from their homeland and from the more individualistic West. As a result, they have very different world views from their parents whose opinions they feel under no obligation to respect or accept. Neither party is interested in a compromise and is set on imposing their own opinions on the other. The resulting clashes come their wedding day cause much pain, angst and rifts that can last for years. The period leading up to the wedding, the wedding day itself and the following days cause stress and misery all round. A modern couple, for instance, would find the need to prove virginity to family members waiting outside the bedroom door the height of indignity whereas for the families, it is a matter of life and death. In short, weddings are not always all they are cracked up to be.

Assuming that one’s wedding day is always the happiest day of one’s life is a mistake. Societies come in different forms; traditions, customs and rituals come into play to varying degrees. Serious problems can occur depending on the extent to which people hold the accepted ways of doing things dear. As always the solution is civilized discussion and compromise or the acceptance of a serious rift.

DRIVERLESS CARS (This essay would get a 70 or 75)

Technology has been developing faster and faster and it will continue to do so. With the rising importance of technology, there has been a rise in devices which use artificial intelligence. Self driving cars can be given as an example. However, driverless cars have caused many debates in the world. Some people think that they will be beneficial while others believe that they will be dangerous. Therefore it is fair to assume that driverless cars have both advantages and disadvantages.

Driverless cars provide considerable advantages in terms of controlling speed limits, decreasing driver errors and removing the need for driving licenses. First of all, autonomous devices are able to perceive objects in the immediate vicinity by using technologies and techniques such as radar, lidar, GPS and computer vision. This makes it easy for people to control speed limits. Secondly, thanks to the control of speed limits, driver errors can be decreased and the number of traffic accidents can be reduced. Finally, currently, disabled and older people are not able to get driving licenses, which reduces their mobility and impacts their quality of life. Thanks to driverless cars, driving licenses will not be necessary for these people and they will live without the help of other people. In short, driverless cars should not just be written off as an impossible idea but this is not the whole picture.

Although there are plenty of advantages of driverless cars, there are a lot of disadvantages. Firstly, if people buy driverless cars, unemployment will increase because drivers such as taxi and truck drivers will lose their jobs. Another disadvantage is that there may be a computer malfunction or an attempt at hacking into the onboard system in the driverless cars. When this is the case, people will not be able to control their cars and this may have serious implications .In other words, it can cause accidents involving injuries and even death. Finally, the infrastructure and roads are not best suited for driverless cars in most countries, especially in Turkey .Lack of modern roads and street lights can be regarded as an example. Therefore, these may have negative impacts on the use of driverless cars.

As a result, there are people who think that driverless cars have disadvantages in terms of unemployment, hacking, computer malfunction while others think they have advantages in terms of controlling speed limits, decreasing driver errors and removing the need for driving licenses. It is my contention that driverless cars will be a useful invention for the world but measures should be taken against the possible pitfalls outlined above.

ROBOTICS (This essay would get a 70 )

Technology has been developing faster and faster and it will continue to do so. With the rising importance of technology, artificial intelligence is on the rise in developed and developing countries. Robots can be given as an example of artificial intelligence. The link between robots and developing technology is obvious. However, whether the development of robots should be supported has caused many debates .Therefore, people are mainly divided into groups, one of which supports the view that the development of robots should be supported while the other opposes to it. I agree with the former opinion. First of all, robots have positive influences on the health sector. For instance, a robot which is known as Da Vinci was invented .It has both been enabling doctors to operate comfortably, and patients to recover faster. Flexibility and precision are two of the most important qualities good surgeons should have. By making these possible, robots enable doctors to achieve success in operations. Moreover, this robot can decrease the risk of operations. Overall, the development of robots should be supported because robots might make a great contribution to the healthcare sector. Secondly, robots will help people discover new jobs for themselves. The development of robotics will cause new fields of employment to emerge opening up many new areas of employment. In other words, the development of robots will make people happy because it can decrease the unemployment rate. Moreover, new job opportunities can promote other innovations in different areas. As a result, robots will be good for business in every respect and their development should be supported. On the other hand, some opponents think that the development of robots should be stopped because they claim that robots cause people to lose their creativity. They further argue that robots cause people to be consumers instead of being producers. This actually seems reasonable to some extent but they do not bear the other side of the coin in mind because robots enable people to save time and effort. When this is the case, people can develop themselves with ease because they can cooperate with robots. It must not be forgotten that the more developed the robots, the greater the opportunities they provide. To conclude, there are people who consider that the development of robots should not be supported because they believe that robots cause people to suffer lack of creativity. In contrast, some people think that the development of robots is necessary because robots provide both the health sector and people with a lot of benefits. It is my contention that the latter opinion is more logical because we live in the age of technology. --

REFUGEES: YOU COULD BE IN THEIR SHOES

There are vast differences in standard of living and quality of life between various areas of the world. While some live in the lap of luxury with all the mod-coms and all the latest technology, others can’t even take basic facilities and amenities for granted. Thanks to developments in the communications industry, the latter are well aware of how the other half live and the kind of life they enjoy. Wanting a seat at the table is only natural so they up sticks and brave deserts and stormy seas to reach the promised land. These people are migrants and their journey is planned down to the smallest detail. Then there are others who either turfed out of their homes and the country they have called home at a moment’s notice. This latter group of people is called refugees.

Refugees differ from migrants in the sense that they don’t wish to leave their homes, all their belongings and the life they have known to throw themselves on the mercy of complete strangers. They leave with tears in their eyes looking back on a country they love falling to wrack and ruin. Conflict regions like parts of modern day Syria, Rohinga state and the Sahel region of Africa are cases in point. In areas such as these, villages and towns have been razed to the ground by bombs, missiles and arson attacks; there is literally nothing left and people are obliged to flee for their lives. The lingering drought in certain parts of Africa has a similar effect on local populations. Facing starvation, people shoulder the old, the infirm, the babies and the little they can carry and set off on the path to safety. You would be excused for thinking that the miserable plight of such people would bring out the best in us and we would be falling over each other to help in any way we could. This is far from being the case, however.

Most people are conditioned to take care of number one; this is ingrained in their DNA. They may pay lip service to the values we hold dear and try to take the moral high ground but deep down they are very different beasts. They would much prefer the problem to ‘go away’ and the refugees to become someone else’s problem. First and foremost there is the obvious fact that refugees are ‘different’: they may subscribe to a different religion as in the case of the Rohinga who are Muslims living in the majority Buddhist country of Myanmar; they be a different race or tribe as in the case of Ethiopia or be looked down on for historic reasons as in the case of Arab refugees. This in itself is a formidable barrier to any hope of building bridges but there is also the economic cost. These people who come streaming across the borders are sick, injured, starving and exhausted; they need to be provided with food and shelter, medical attention and counseling. The initial burst of hospitality soon wears thin, funds are reduced to a trickle and the local population begins to grumble. Eventually, there is a spate of hate crimes, camps are set alight and all the misery suffered by the refugees is pushed to the back pages of newspapers and to the backs of people’s minds.

An attitude such as this is bound to bread a deep seated hatred fueled by years of day to day suffering which no amount of education can remove if it comes too late. The seeds of rage and resentment fester and grow in the children and the young who grow up in refugee camps resulting in a generation of youth who are beyond help. The outlook is very grim for these people and those who turned their backs on them in their hour of need. This should be reason alone to try and seek out a mutually beneficial solution to the problem. It goes without saying that the first thing the international community needs to do is deal with the problems that caused the refugees to take to the roads in the first place. Every avenue should be explored to address issues of minority rights in countries where the said minorities have had to flee. If it is proven that crimes against humanity have been committed, the international criminal courts should intervene. In sort, the leading powers of the world should not drag their feet. A second solution is to try and benefit from the skills refugees possess to transform them into useful members of the new society they have become a temporary part of. Refugees come from all walks of life: there are doctors and nurses, teachers and engineers and many more besides. These people would feel a lot happier if they were allowed to use their skills for the benefit of all. There will be far less resentment in the host country if the visitors are seen to be pulling their weight.

In conclusion, there will always be groups of people who are displaced for reasons ranging from natural disasters to civil war. The populations of host countries that receive refugees should explore every avenue to try and make these unfortunate people welcome. Making it easier for them to become productive members of society for the duration of their stay is a solution that should please all sides.

FORTUNATELY FOR DOCTORS AND PATIENTS, WE HAVE THE INTERNET

The human body is a miracle of creation but even some ‘miracles’ occasionally malfunction. Attacks by foreign forces such as bacteria, viruses and toxins can lay people low as can various forms of misadventure like accidents. In such cases a master mechanic, a doctor, is needed to provide his know-how and restore the victim to good health. Yet can doctors be expected carry out this momentous task on their own? In the modern world of instant connections via the World Wide Web, help is at hand thanks to medical websites, online forums and blogs.

Some may like to go back to the days before the internet, the dark ages, and leave doctors completely in charge. In fact, most doctors would probably agree but they only have themselves to blame. A patient obviously has a vested interest in trying to grasp what exactly is happening to his body, what the prognosis and the implications of the ailment are. Sticking one’s nose in the air and telling him to take such and such a pill, shooing him out the door and demanding an exorbitant fee is not going to wash. Unlike the dark ages, people in the current world are neither illiterate nor ignorant and understand what doctors say to them. Seeing oneself as second only to God in the sense that one is repairing what the Creator himself produced is hubris to say the least. Doctors need to remember they are human as well whatever they may personally believe and as such, are expected to act accordingly. Being economical with the truth, doctors leave patients no option but to turn to a resource which is only a click away. Many reputable medical schools like The Mayo Clinic and many organizations like the NHS now have excellent websites which are easy to navigate and fill in all the supporting details of the diagnosis the patient has been hit with. For example, a thyroid patient might learn that his itchy feet don’t mean he has athlete’s foot and that the itching is a symptom of his disease. A patient having a panic attack may realize that heart attacks don’t go on for hours and relax. In short, the internet seriously reduces doctors’ work load and helps patients to get a better understanding of their ailment.

It must be accepted that not all doctors are snooty and some would genuinely like to interact more with their patients, sooth them, allay their fears, clearly explain what is happening and what to expect. The reason they are unable to do so becomes obvious when you enter the ER on an average day and see the electronic sign above reception stating that the average waiting time is two hours.. This despite the fact that the 15 minutes rule is rigorously upheld, doctors in state hospitals are forever trying to catch up with impossible targets. Through put, spelt thru put, is the mantra and the average state hospital can be best compared to an assembly line. Add to this the fact that doctors, being second only to God, are expected to go a day and a half with no sleep, cat-nap when they can and forget about square meals, it is a wonder they can diagnose the common cold. This being the case, it is necessary to sympathize with the patient who goes into a state hospital coughing violently and is sent away having been given paracetamol and advised to drink honey and lemon and then discovers thanks to the internet that he has TB. The internet, in other words, can provide a valuable safety net preventing errors in diagnoses and helping out harassed doctors.

Nothing in the world is black and white; most things are shades of grey. The same is true for medical websites. So long as the sites referred to are reputable ones, medical websites provide a valuable service to both doctors and patients by providing the former with a more in depth understanding of their condition and lightening the workload of the latter. All one needs to do is to be sensible by dotting all one’s ‘i’ and crossing all one’s ‘t’.

PRESERVING WHAT IS LEFT OF NATURE

This is a problem solution essay with argumentative elements and I have dubbed it an argumentative problem solution essay. After all, one can perfectly easily have strong feelings about the solutions one presents. My second reason for using this style is to put the message out there that the so called templates that you have been tought are not set in stone.

Once upon a time, the world was a beautiful place: there were lush forests, emerald valleys, magnificent trees, beautiful flowers and crystal clear rivers, lakes and seas. Then man entered the scene and nothing has been the same since. Mankind has taken the phrase “like a bull in a china shop” to a whole new level. Nature is being devastated at an alarming pace to the extent that environmentalists are setting up so called nature museums, The Eden Project, to encapsulate slivers of nature in specially designed bubbles all around the world. If we don’t want The Eden Project to be the only place left to see nature in its full glory, we need to protect what is left of places of natural beauty. This can only be done by keeping man and the trappings of civilization out.

One important aspect of man’s life is heavy industry and it should never be allowed to enter places of natural beauty no matter what the reason. Heavy industry means bulldozers, building materials, toxic fumes, industrial runoff and large areas bereft of any sign of life. The fumes belched out by industrial complexes will cause acid rain, which in turn will destroy anything left standing after the bulldozers and cement mixers have left. The dense woodland in many parts of the UK for example is now finally going to be replaced thanks to a new project funded by the government. Another example is the protected zones and national parks on land and sea in various countries. If he doesn’t want to be left with a world akin to a lunar landscape, mankind should put nature first and preserve what little is left. Keeping industry out is not the only answer to the problem; there is more that can be done.

A second issue that needs to be considered if we are to preserve places of natural beauty is not allowing infrastructure projects anywhere near such places no matter how cost effective and practical. Roads that need to be built should circle such places despite the higher cost; pipelines, cables and the like should be laid elsewhere and in short, all the trappings of so called civilization should be kept out. The damage and destruction caused by such projects is monumental and there is no going back. This is why so many people were appalled when they heard about the third airport in Istanbul: the building of the access roads to the said airport has already wrecked havoc on the dense forests in the area laying them bare in readiness for the cement mixers. A second example is the infamous pipe line in the US which is going to pass through Indian Territory that has been preserved from destruction thus far thanks to Obama, but has now lost its protector. In short, a little more planning and forward thinking, and what is left of nature can be saved.

The last issue that needs to be addressed is man himself. In our modern world, travelling has become easier. People can wiz round the planet in a matter of hours and enjoy every luxury that modern travel can provide. Cities are the same everywhere: stone, bricks and concrete. Nature however, is a different story: there is still a lot to explore, to trample all over, dump remains of picnics in, and capture on video so others can come and continue the good work. Man has brought nothing but trouble to nature raging destruction where ever he went. This being the case, the ideal scenario would be to leave nature to its own resources for our own good. After all, nature doesn’t need us, we need nature.

In conclusion, if mankind is to preserve what little is left of places of natural beauty he should keep his grubby mitts off them. He should not try to improve on nature; he should restrict his activities to areas where the damage has already been done. The remaining places of natural beauty are the last bastions of a world which once existed; they should be allowed to remain so.

URBANISATION

The major cities of the world have come a long way since the process of urbanization gathered momentum in the 20^th century. They are forever expanding outwards, upwards and very soon downwards as ever higher buildings replace rambling baronial residences and Victorian terraces. Mega cities like Istanbul are like small countries. In fact the population of the latter is currently equal to the total population of Greece. Although urbanization has some definite advantages, the giant metropolises of the world have created certain disadvantages as well.

Urbanization  has various undeniable benefits. The different areas in a city are linked by a network of roads, subways, railways, and buses, bullet trains, private vehicles, lorries and the like travel these roads 24/7. Superb connections link people and services like never before. People can access their workplaces, schools, hospitals, public buildings and malls in minutes. The sick get treated, business is transacted, young people are educated and everybody is entertained. Every type of good imaginable from mangos to melons and sweet potatoes is available in supermarkets irrespective of season, all major fashion stores compete to dress urban dwellers and even daily newspapers from all over the world are available in every large metropolis. The practicalities of living in this type of an environment are obvious. There is practically no demand that cannot be met in big cities, which continue to attract more and more people from the countryside each passing day. Yet this is not the full picture: this unnatural way of living has done a lot of damage too.

The negative impacts of urbanization cannot be denied. The first is on the environment. The spread of cities has meant the destruction of forests, woods, copses, fields, valleys and the like, which has had a knock on effect on all the wildlife we share the planet with. The habitats of many species have been shrinking rapidly over the years leading some animals to the brink of extinction. The growing concern over what we are doing to our countries has prompted some countries such as the UK to start planting new forests. The second environmental issue which is a natural consequence of urbanization is pollution. The transport vehicles and factories belch out toxic fumes; the same factories dump unsavory chemicals in the rivers and lakes; residents produce mountains of trash, which has to be dealt with; the noise in the cities is deafening and the excessive light is deeply disturbing. In short cities are not the heavens they are made out to be. This is not all though; there are other problems as well.

Another negative impact of urbanization involves the changing relationships between people. Living in closer proximity does not mean people are closer together; quite the reverse. People in cities hardly speak to their neighbours or even know their names. Everybody is trapped in their own little worlds and pass others like ships in the night. Anonymity is what characterizes human relations in cities. The resulting alienation can lead to serious psychological problems. Depression, anxiety disorder and also more serious problems and their unwanted consequences are more common in cities. Those who cannot cope in the urban jungle we have created for ourselves may turn to drugs, alcohol or even opt out by committing suicide. Loneliness is rife and so is a nagging feeling that there should be more to life than the rat race. People feel dissatisfied without realizing the source of their problem. They feel they are missing something without knowing what. In short, cities may be tough places to live.

In conclusion, one thing that needs to be realized is that urbanization is not all it is cracked up to be.  There are undeniable up sides to city life but the picture isn’t as rosy as one would like to think. Cities change human nature and can cause an undercurrent of despair while addressing many practical issues. There are a lot of lessons concerning city living both municipalities and city dwellers need to be reminded of.   

TOYS

Bringing up the young as successfully as possible, preparing them for life and all that they will face is a problem that plagues modern parents. Couple this with their need to work full time and a very disturbing picture emerges. People cannot be in two places at once hence what are they to do with their precious children? The latter’s cognitive skills need to be developed, their intellectual capacity needs to be increased, their creative skills need to be fostered alongside their hobbies and interests. The only way out of the dilemma is to devise a way to do all this and remain at work during the day is to find the right medium to impart all these skills. Enter toys. The abundance of toys the modern child is showered with has to be seen to be believed. It cannot be denied that a certain number of toys are beneficial and provide various advantages but the modern playroom does provide some disadvantages too.

Play has long been the way mammals acquire various life skills and humans are no exception. Play helps develop all manner of cognitive and physical skills. The function of toys is to promote play and guide thinking thus providing kids with a means to self enhancement. Toys that are bought for kids can be classified into two groups as those which  support cognitive development and those that introduce life skills. In this respect, legos, jigsaws, building blocks and the like can be listed as educational toys. The former two are so popular that parents enjoy them as much as their kids. Board games on the other hand bring people together round a table, promote socialization and the learning of social skills. They encourage bonding in a family or among a group of friends. Dolls and doll’s houses introduce social roles and prepare girls for life. In short there is no denying that toys have their place in child development and serve a useful function but moderation is not something doting parents subscribe to.

Too much of most things is bad for one and that includes toys. The feeling of guilt experienced by absentee parents cannot be gotten rid of by buying kids every new doll that hits the shelves or every new corgi that emerges in a shop window. Retailers are very good at guilt tripping parents but the truth is that too many toys are bad for the kid. First of all, kids don’t learn to appreciate what they have. The average kid doesn’t need a dozen Barbie dolls for instance one or two will do. A cuddly toy to take to bed is useful but does the kid need a whole menagerie? There will usually be one favorite which will be adored anyway. Second of all, kids don’t learn the value of money or appreciate the sacrifices parents make to buy certain toys. The toy industry is big business and toys are expensive. Is it really wise to turn children into the victims of capitalism and the free market economy so early in life? Wouldn’t it be wiser to teach them values such as sharing, compassion, empathy and the like? Buying too many toys just to appease a guilty conscience might land parents with a spoilt brat with no concern for anyone but himself who makes continuous demands on parents. Once parents have started down that path, there is no going back.

To cut a long story short, toys certainly have an important place in people’s lives but the whole business of buying toys can be carried too far. Parents should focus on what is really good for the child and not on their feelings of guilt. They should remember the function toys are supposed to serve and spend accordingly. They would do better spending quality time with their children and making it count than buying another doll or truck.

THE PROBLEM WITH TUITION

Everyone needs to receive an education in order to get ahead in the world. People cannot get a good job without a good education. This means they will be unable to maintain a certain standard of living or quality of life. It also means their country cannot benefit from their skills and what they can give back to society. For all these reasons, it should be possible for everyone who wants to do so to get a good education. However, there is a problem: education, especially higher education, is expensive. Some people cannot afford to pay for their education and need help. This help can be provided in two ways: postponing the payment of tuition and scholarships.

First of all, students can go ahead and attend university if the government ‘lends’ them the money. The government can pay their tuition and when the students, graduate having gained the qualifications they need, they can repay the government. This way, everyone wins: the country gains a highly trained member of society who has broader horizons, and the individual has the potential to lead a comfortable life. As a result, it makes sense on both a financial and a practical level to allow students to repay the government at a later date. It is only thanks to a far sighted approach of this kind that the country can get ahead.

Second of all, the government or private individuals and organizations can grant full scholarships, which means there is no pay back, and the tuition is paid by third parties. Most organizations will demand a return on their investment and will therefore insist on a good average, not just passing grades. If the student’s success rate drops or if he fails, he is liable to lose his scholarship. Companies like to invest in outstanding students who they consider special and may then provide employment as well. Again with such a system there are no losers: both the individual and society benefit. The company also benefits by gaining a highly talented member of staff.

In conclusion, the young generation is important for society as they will take over from their elders and carry the country forward. It is everyone’s interest to see that they are able to do so. For this reason no stone should be left unturned in the effort to help them.