REPAIR VERSUS REPLACE

    My mother's generation had many skills that young people lack today.In the past,people could mend clothes, sew on buttons and fix a broken tap but this is not true of current generations who learnt  to replace rather than repair. This essay will discuss why these changes have occured and what effects this is having.

    Today fashion changes quickly but in the past it changed slowly. Clothing and furniture,for example,would last for many years; even generations. However, these days with pervasive advertising  and communication via social media, information about new items travels quickly and we tend to throw out the old to buy the new. Another reason why fashions change is that manufacturerers  are motivated to make goods that do not last very long. For example,cars today are built to last five to ten years, whereas in the past, cars would last much longer. By having early obsolescence, manufacturers can sell more goods.

      This change in attitude has deskilled the public and is damaging our environment. We have lost both the skills and will to maintain our possessions. In fact often we see it as exciting to make new purchases.Another change is that we now create more negative environmental impacts because many of the goods we buy and throw out are not biodegradable. We have become a generation of consumers and we are damaging the environment. This is a huge change from the past.

       In conclusion, today we tend to buy new items rather than repair older possessions.In the process,most of us have lost the skills and desire to repair older items and a further consequence is that we are damaging our environment due to excess waste products.

MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE

        Throughout history, the fallibility of justice has harmed some innocent people. There is an important concept concerning the issue; it is called ‘’miscarriage of justice’’. Miscarriage of justice can be defined as a failure of justice. Due to miscarriage of justice, an innocent person is found guilty and a wrongful conviction is not overturned for several years, until after the innocent person has been executed, released from custody, or has died. Therefore, there remains some disagreement as to whether the current judicial systems in the world are enough. It is an undeniable fact that miscarriage of justice has disastrous effects on people’s lives. As regards the causes of this, it can be said that it is related to confirmation bias on the part of the investigators and withholding, destruction, manipulation or fabrication of evidence by the police or prosecution.

                In the first place, one point which is believed to be absolutely pivotal is the fact that confirmation bias on the part of the investigators is important in this issue. It is obvious that man is a mortal entity and people can make a wrong decision but this decision affects other people’s life adversely. Some events concerning miscarriage of justice in the well-known documentaries can be shown as the best instance of this; although some people are not guilty, they had stayed in  the prison for a long time. It is clear that time is indispensable for humanity due to the fact that it is impossible to compensate. It is clear that acting regardless of/ disregarding the criminal standard of proof is not right but confirmation bias leads to some negative consequences such as wrongful conviction.

                When it comes to the second point, at the heart of the matter lies another contributing factor: the withholding, destruction, manipulation, or fabrication of evidence by the police or the prosecution causes miscarriage of justice. It is obvious that forensic science is an important factor during the prosecution process so forensic evidence is important to prove somebody’s innocence. Therefore, governments or officials should take precautions to prevent these situations, otherwise, some innocent people are found guilty and they can pass away or waste the best years of their life behind bars before their innocence is proved. Due to these reasons, these improper/negative situations cause miscarriage of justice.

                To summarize, the obvious conclusion to be drawn from all these points that have been explained so far is that miscarriage of justice is related to confirmation bias on the part of the investigators and withholding, destruction, manipulation, or fabrication of evidence by the police or prosecution.

KUBİLAY ESER

 

THE POWER OF A BROADER PERSPECTIVE

                                              

                The power of perspective has brought significant changes to human life throughout history. It is obvious that having a broader perspective is indispensable for people and numerous developments or inventions happened/ took place thanks to the power of a broader perspective. There is one proverb about this issue: ‘’ what we see depends on what we look for’’. It is an undeniable fact that the viewpoints of people shape their thoughts, decisions, actions, and ultimately their feeling of success. There are a lot of advantages of having a broader perspective.

                In the first place, a broader perspective increases tolerance and understanding. It is clear that people who have a broader perspective refrain from making ignorant assumptions that can be destructive, so the perspective contributes to increasing tolerance. Similarly, one of the greatest benefits of travel is broadening of people’s perspective. Spending time in another culture gives a chance to find an alternative way of living to live well, that is to say, the perspective increases understanding. 

Likewise, when it comes to business relations and relationships, a broader perspective strengthen business relations and relationships. In order to have a successful business, sellers need to know what customers need and what they are looking for. Therefore, sellers have to think and see life from their customer’s perspective. A broader perspective strengthens business relations by providing with seeing from the customer’s perspective. In addition, people who have a broader perspective refrain from entering into a potentially contentious situation and find a middle ground, so having a broader perspective helps people to strengthen relationships.

                In the second place, people having a broader perspective are  the best candidates to hire and the better problem-solvers because they  are not subject to  unnecessary stress and stereotypes. Increasingly in the global economy, being aware of many different cultures has become important, in other words, to put it differently, having a broader perspective has become important. So, a person who has a broader perspective becomes the best candidate to hire. At the same time, a broader perspective provides a person with a skill to solve myriad problems or conundrums by analytical thinking, that is, people become  better problem-solvers. Besides, people may become a bit stressed because of uncontrollable events, a broader perspective can ease this angst, similarly, stereotypes are incorrect, oversimplified and fixed. Each of us, as individuals, is always evolving, growing and changing. Having a broader perspective contributes to the elimination of stereotypes of this kind.

                All that has been said  raises the issue of whether having a broader perspective is favorable or unfavorable. It is obvious that there are lots of advantages of having a broader perspective. Increasing tolerance and understanding, strengthening business relations and relationships, becoming the best candidate to hire and a better problem-solver by eliminating unnecessary stress and stereotypes can be listed as the advantages of having a broader perspective. It should not be forgotten that having a broader perspective is indispensable for people who have global aims and targets.

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

                                         

           
 The industrial revolution is defined as the period between the 18^th and 19^th centuries. The period started with the first cotton mill in 1733 in England. England wanted to keep its industrialization a secret. Samuel Slater was a famous and important name in these years. Samuel Slater was an early English-American industrialist known as the father of the American Industrial Revolution and the father of the American Factory System. In the UK, he was called ‘’Slater the Traitor’’ because he brought British textile technology to America.Although the industrial revolution is seen as appealing to many people, there are advantages as well as disadvantages.

The industrial revolution marked a major turning point in the Earth’s ecology and people’s relationship with their environment. The industrial revolution dramatically changed every aspect of human life and lifestyles when machinery began to replace manual labor. Fossil fuels replaced wind, water and wood and were used for the manufacture of textiles and the development of the iron making process. The full impact of the industrial revolution would not begin to be realized until about 100 years later in the 1800s when the use of machines to replace human labor spread throughout Europe and North America. This transformation is referred to as the industrialization of the world. This process gave  rise to sweeping increases in production capacity and would affect all basic human needs, including food production, medicine, housing, and clothing. Not only did society develop the ability to have more things faster, but also it would be able to develop better things. That process of industrialization  continues today. There have been movements and periods in history which have proved to be important milestones leaving their mark on the years to come and forever changing the social, economic and cultural landscape. Some were religious in nature like The Reformation; some were artistic and philosophical like The Renaissance; yet others were economic like The Industrial Revolution. The former two movements have been widely studied but the latter is often overlooked. In fact, this movement which started with the invention of the spinning jenny and continued to impact all areas of business and social life throughout the 18^th and the 19^th centuries had some far reaching consequences.

There is a wide discussion in many parts of the world as to the effects of the Industrial Revolution. It is clear that working conditions, living conditions, urbanization, public health, and life expectancy, child labor, working-class families and the role of women, the emerging middle class, wealth and income are important effects in this period. Actually, there remains some disagreement as to how life for the average industrial worker was forever changed by bringing wealth and power to Great Britain throughout the 19^th century. Therefore,  the effects of industrialization on society and on daily living in a new industrial city should be explored.

            Firstly, in terms of working conditions, workers made up 80% of society and landowners were enclosing common village lands since the population was increasing in Great Britain. Besides, having no bargaining power to demand higher wages, fairer work hours, or better working conditions meant that working life was very tough for the workers of that period. In addition, there is a big problem: lack of medical attention due to the fact that injured workers would typically lose their jobs and  receive no financial compensation for their injury to pay for much-needed health care. It is clear that the government should have intervened in the free market to improve working conditions and workers should  not have been forced to work. That is to say, the government should have established a commission to investigate working conditions in the new factories and mills. If there are unsafe conditions, it is the government’s responsibility to look out for the safety of its citizens and set minimum safety standards.

            Secondly, in terms of living conditions, working in new industrial cities had an effect on people’s lives outsides of the factories as well. But it is an undeniable fact that during the first sixty years of the Industrial Revolution, living conditions were, by far, the worst for the poorest of the poor. Obviously, cities should have become places with opportunities for sport and entertainment.  It is the duty of the government in any welfare state to provide legislation to ensure that the living conditions of the working class are improved. This was not done during the 19^th century as the modern welfare state had yet to be established. Instead it was believed that the  government should intervene as little as possible to improve living conditions for the working class. After all, if the government gave handouts to the poor, there would be no incentive for them to find work on their own.

            Thirdly, in terms of urbanization, this period witnessed  the rise of cities. In pre-industrial society, over 80% of people lived in rural areas. As migrants moved from the countryside, small towns became large cities. As a result, working-class neighborhoods were formed and they were  bleak, crowded, dirty, and polluted. It was believed at the time that the government should not intervene in the free market to regulate industrial pollution or the filth in working-class neighborhoods. In fact, the government should have established a commission to investigate the negative effects of industrialization on urban life.

            Fourthly, in terms of public health and life expectancy, in the first half of the 19^th century, urban overcrowding, poor diets, poor sanitation, and essentially medieval medical remedies all contributed to very poor public health for the majority of British people. In addition, drinking water resources, such as wells, were frequently contaminated with diseases such as cholera, tuberculosis, typhus, typhoid, and influenza. Unfortunately, it is true that in 1849, ten thousand people died of cholera in three months in London alone. Poor nutrition, disease, lack of sanitation, and harmful medical care in these urban areas had a devastating effect on the average life expectancy of British people in the first half of the 19^th century. It was believed that, the government should not intervene in the free market to improve public health. Citizens, it was felt, should be  free to hire a doctor, go to a hospital, or seek their own medical remedies, as they had been doing for centuries. The government, it was thought, had not been and should not be in the business of building houses for poor people.

            Fifthly, in terms of child labor, unfortunately, child labor was integral to the first factories, mines, and mills in England. The tedious and dangerous factory work had negative effects on the health of children. There is one fundamental question: Why was child labor used? Generally, as regards the causes of this, it is claimed that child employees are better than adults due to the fact that they are more obedient and child labor is cheap. What is more, most people believed that these impacts were expected to intensify in the following decades and unfortunately they were right because child labor is still a big problem in the modern world, in the twenty-first century, according to research carried out by international survey companies, especially in Southeastern Asia.

            Sixthly, in terms of classes, it is an undeniable fact that middle classes or ‘’ middling sort’’ emerged in industrial cities, mostly toward the end of 19^th century. The society consisted of aristocrats born into their lives of wealth and privilege, and low-income people born into the working classes. Besides, ‘’white collar’’ workers  such as business people, shopkeepers, bank clerks, insurance agents, merchants, accountants, managers, doctors, lawyers, and teachers emerged. However, it was believed that the government should not intervene in the private family lives of its citizens. The middle class it was felt, was doing fine. In fact the government should invest in the public school system to educate its citizens and encourage the continued rise of the middle class.

By way of conclusion, the obvious conclusion to be drawn from all of these points that have been explained so far is that the industrial revolution has had lots of detrimental effects, what is more, the detrimental effects of the industrial revolution are still going on constantly. Due to this reason, precautions should be taken to minimize them. No matter what happens, nothing is more important than human life so it should be given due importance and it should not be endangered, that is to say, living properly is the most important thing for people in the world. In other words, to put it differently, the revolution led to negative results i.e. the social impacts of the industrial revolution in cities brought poverty and harsh living conditions. There is one proverb about this issue: ‘’stood on the shoulders of giants’’. It is not wrong to say that the revolution played an important role in rapid urbanization.

KUBİLAY ESER

THE SOCRATIC METHOD AND PLATO’S PHILOSOPHY​

      Education has become one of the main themes of philosophy due to its common points and correlations. Education can be defined as a process of learning and teaching which can be actualized on one’s own or with a teacher using various materials and methods. In its simplest form, philosophy is the search for knowledge and truth by judging and critical thinking. In the history of Greek Philosophy, philosophers used different methods to teach their students philosophy and educate them with their own techniques. Socrates, who known as the founder of Philosophy, constituted a method whose name is the dialectic method or the Socratic method and it was based on making dialogues. Other than this, his well-known student Plato justified a different method, which is almost the opposite of the Socratic method, for effective education in society. He also mentioned his and Socrates's method in The Republic. Throughout the history of philosophy, it is debated by philosophers to decide which one is more productive and applicable in society.

       The Socratic method or the dialectic method is based on the dialogue technique which requires consistently asking and criticizing. Socrates believed that argumentative dialogue between individuals and asking question after question stimulate critical thinking and good reasoning. With that, he also asserted that it helps to solidify students’ knowledge of the case by thinking critically under pressure. But the disputed part of his method was about the belief that claims it can be applied and succeed with everyone. According to Plato’s book whose name is Menon,ın order to prove that, he asked a geometry problem to an illiterate peasant and helped him to find the correct answer by regularly asking questions and criticizing.He believed that through this method the individual can find his own mistakes and think again until he finds the correct answer. Because of that reason, having knowledge about something is not a necessary factor or in other words, it isn’t a priority to achieve the right answer.

        The reason for emphasizing critical thinking and giving less importance to having knowledge in the Socratic method was his thought that asserts knowledge is the only tool to find answers; The fundamental way to learn something is thinking and making criticizes about information by using your mind effectively.His explanation for this idea was knowledge can only take you to a particular place, in order to proceed and to be aware of other options, you have to review and make criticisms about your argument. That may explain to us why most of the education systems don't use ‘Essentialism’ which teaches just by giving information and use ‘Progressivizm’ which provides a contrast with essentialism due to learning by experiencing and thinking for effective learning.  

       As an illustration to the usage of the Socratic method in the classroom, we can exemplify a teacher who randomly picks a student and ask her/him questions continuously. Today, some colleges use this technique due to its efficiency. In Harvard Law School, the professor starts asking question to dozens of students during a class session and then, some of the other students oppose his/her idea or specify the wrong points. In that way, students can see the unobserved parts of the case and represent different solutions. Furthermore, the student may become a more accountable person and join the discussion by reading before lectures. With this in mind, it might be a disturbing situation for a student who couldn't answer the professor’s question at the first time and also it may condition the student to join next lecture because of this experience. In this wise, her/his confidence might be affected badly and this way causes unwillingness to attend the professor’s lectures. In order to prevent this harm, teachers can start to use this technique in elementary school and students can become habituated.

       Plato’s method for education can be contrasted with Socrates’s even though he was educated by him.First of all, Platon believed that education should be used as a tool to protect public order by society.In order do that properly, education should be institutional instead of being individualist and learning must be a process of transferring information which is the opposite of learning by criticizing and experiencing like in the Socratic method.He mentioned his ideas about social structure in the ideal state that is shaped by education in his famous book ‘The Republic’. In the book, he wrote that every individual should be educated according to his nature, capability, and skills. In order to ensure the accordance between capability and education, he classified the society in three groups which are rulers, soldiers or in other words protectors and workers. He thought that the people who have a tendency to work in a job which requires physical ability should be in the group of workers.In the same way, the people who are innate courageous and brave should be in the group of protectors. But, when it comes to the rulers, he believed there must be more specific elimination.Plato thought that rulers should be chosen from among protectors’ group with an examination. In that way, the purpose of education for Plato was defining the appropriate social status of individuals according to their capacity. In that way, every person can devote his life to what is the best fit for him.

       He believed in teaching math, philosophy or geometry to the people who are just in the group of rulers because intellectual aristocracy is the rule of the intellectual elite. He believed that knowledge should be given to the people who can evaluate, criticize, and use it widely.With this in mind, he was against compulsory education and explained it in The Republic with this sentence; Knowledge which is acquired under compulsion obtains no hold on the mind. Forcing someone to learn something without considering his abilities won’t be beneficial for the person or the state. Therefore, education has to be individualistic and done by the correct person.

     Socrates’s philosophy and method in education are different from Plato’s philosophy in many ways. Primarily, Socrates interpreted education as an active process that individuals took part in themselves. In contrast, Plato asserted it was a passive process because the people get all information and acquire knowledge from a teacher and don’t try to find the right answer by criticizing. Secondly, Socrates believed that education has to be non-dogmatic while Plato argued the opposite one ‘dogmatic education’.As a result of reasoning in the Socratic method, he used induction in the learning process.On the contrary, Plato used deduction while teaching something. Socrates taught a lesson by talking and discussing the issue with his students and his philosophy was based on having argumentative conversations. But Plato interpreted philosophy as a whole of truths and taught it by writing and reading.

     As another difference between Plato’s and Socrates’s philosophy in education is the possibility of having an education. Plato thought education has to be individualistic while Socrates asserts it has to be institutional. The reason for this and other clashes of ideas might be their approach to the regime; Socrates justifies democracy, on the other hand, Plato takes the side of autocracy. Because Socrates was justifying democracy, he asserted that everyone should be educated in equal standards and take part in education.For Plato, he considers education as an individualistic process on account of autocracy.He believed that education should be given to the elite which he defined as the rulers. It may seem unfair and hierarchical at first but, if we think about today’s education and the people who work in jobs that they are not fit to do because the job wasn't given to them considering their capacities and  abilities, the idea of hierarchical education might seem right and feasible.

                                  SUEDA DİNÇ

         

   

   

SHOULD PRIVATE SCHOOLS BE ABOLISHED?

 Today, in many countries, there are private schools which are preferred by some people for their better physical conditions and the education they give/ provide. These schools are mainly open to economically privileged students because of the required fees. Scholarship students constitute just a small part of these schools’ students. It is obvious that these schools create and reinforce inequality in society and should be abolished after some steps are taken.

  

One of the main arguments against abolishing private schools is that people have the right to freely make their choice of the school they will attend or they want their children to do so . Private schools provide a variety of options in that they can have different educational approaches and philosophies. They argue that this variety gives people the chance to choose the one that meshes best with their own understanding of education, and people should be free in spending their money for this school. However, this argument overlooks the fact that getting a good education is one of the essential rights of every human. This right should be independent of the money people are able to pay. It may be true that state schools are not as diverse as private schools in terms of their educational approaches and philosophy. The education they offer is more dependent on a standard curriculum which is usually compatible with the state’s interests and they may also be more closed to new methods in education. At this point, independent nongovernmental organizations should take part inefforts to force the government to change this situation and make an effort to make state schools as  diverse as private schools are.

 It is a fact that state schools are usually more inadequate  than private schools in terms of both their educational resources and facilities but this fact doesn’t mean private schools shouldn’t be abolished. Governments and other groups should take initiative to enhance the situation of state schools. After this process, private schools should be abolished because abolishing them will also help state schools to reach better standards in that it will put pressure on politicians to support state schools and force them to allocate more from the budget for these schools. 

  

  In conclusion, protecting people’s rights is why a government is founded and the right to education is one of those rights. Private schools are not solutions to existing problems in education and cause inequality to be reproduced. It is quite understandable that people with sufficient money want to get a better education; what we need to change is the situation of state schools and after some efforts, another step should be abolishing private schools.

                                                                                                      NEBİLE SENA BAŞAR

  

THE EFFECTS OF URBAN LIVING ON THE MIND

                                                

                Over the past 50 or 60 years, urbanization has brought significant changes to our lives. Yet there remains some disagreement as to whether the effects of urban living on the mind are favorable or unfavorable. It is an undeniable fact that urban living has disastrous effects on people’s mind and it  affects people adversely in the four corners of the world.

                In the first place, one point which is believed to be absolutely pivotal is the fact that urban living affects people’s mental health adversely. It is clear that the risk of developing anxiety and mood disorders are important points in this issue. Anxiety disorders pose a  higher risk with 21 percent and mood disorders pose  the highest risk with 39 percent. It is important to emphasize that living in a city roughly doubles the risk of schizophrenia. It can be said that there are a lot of reasons concerning the risks, one of the most important reasons is stressful life events: divorce, bereavement or a serious illness, besides, income, employment, and education affect mental health. According to research carried out by Dr. Andres Meyer-Lindenberg of the central Institute of Mental Health in Mannheim in Germany, the city dwellers’ brains, don’t seem to handle stress so well, compared with people who live in the countryside.

                Similarly, when it comes to the second point, at the heart of the matter lies another contributing factor: urban living has disastrous effects on people’s brain health, especially the amygdala and the perigenual anterior cingulate cortex (pACC). The amgydala is responsible for assessing threats and generating fear, on the other hand, the pACC is responsible for regulating the amygdala. According to research, in the city dwellers, the amygdalas appear more active and not to be the same smooth connection between the behavior of the two brain regions. In addition, there is a different point: Dopamine levels. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter with many functions, one of which is to infuse the brain, besides, dopamine levels are very high in parts of schizophrenic people’s brain.

                All that has been said raises the issue of whether the effects of urban living on the mind are favorable or unfavorable. It is obvious that there are lots of harmful effects on people’s brain. The risk of anxiety and mood disorders, stress, the failure of the amygdala, pACC and dopamine levels can be listed as the detrimental effects on the minds of urban dwellers.

                                                                                             KUBİLAY ESER

TREES CAN COMMUNICATE WITH EACHOTHER

     Trees can communicate with one another. Trees share water and nutrients through underground fungal networks and also use them to communicate. Trees are interdependent and cooperative when sharing their feelings about nature and the environment. There are some people who claim that we can understand and speak their language with some techniques.

     Forest trees have evolved to live in cooperative, interdependent relationships, maintained by communication and a collective intelligence similar to an insect colony.  Their real action is taking place underground just a few inches below our feet. According to Ecologist Suzanne Simard, trees have a sophisticated and interconnected social network existing underground. In the forest, the tallest trees are hub tress. They have greater access to sunlight and through the process of photosynthesis. They need underground fungi to provide  sugar to survive, most of the fungi bodies are made out of a mass of threads called mycelium. Mycelium absorbs the excess sugar and it provides the tree with nutrients. Tress can communicate with each other via the mycelium.

    There is an important question about trees. Can we learn to speak their language? Yes, we can still keep trying to understand their language. Doctor Haskell says “Trees are biology’s philosophers, dialoguing over the ages and offering up a quiet wisdom. We should listen, they know what they are talking about.” So there are some techniques to communicate with trees. Firstly, place your hands on a tree or its roots and close your eyes and tune into its energy. Gaze upon the tree and simply observe it. Many times this will bring thoughts, questions and answers into our conscious awareness.

    When everything is taken into consideration, it’s quite easy to understand that trees can transfer information to eachother and we have the ability to understand these mechanisms. Trees speak to eachother in a language and we can listen to.

FIRAT AKKUŞ