Writing Feedback / [Toefl] Do we need different sources of news to know about truth? [NEW]

Topic: We need to have different sources of news and information to know which one is real or who is telling the truth. Agree or diagree?

Ostensibly, it is difficult to follow various kinds of sources, and more people are willing to stick to one newspaper or television to concentrate on what they're interested, such as the riots in UK or the massive uplifting in Arab Spring. However, we cannot deny that each source has its standpoint and limits, therefore, they may broadcast the new information from their own perspective, no matter it is manipulated by authorities or simply selling their own political philosophy. For example, if I want to understand what's really happening in the Middle East, of course there are plenty of news providers that I should count on. First, we have big news corporations, like BBC and CNN, which would provide vast amount of information. In the meantime, Al Jazeera from Qatar is also an option since I don't want to receive updates from the west only. Plus, we should depend on those local newspapers, like newspapers from Egypt, Tunisia, Lybia, etc, which would present you the closest investigations and specific details. Only by the information from different viewpoints and knowledge, one could integrate and combine all the information to generate the proper and unbiased understanding of the whole events.

Then let's imagine what if one can merely rely on one source. These situations are prevalent in countries where dictatorship still prevails. Those totalitarian countries could readily manipulate and control the media of what can be broadcasted, and what cannot be provided to the general public, and then massive propaganda would be implemented in countries like DPRK, where the people cannot receive unbiased information. In these countries, the residents would easily be deceived by the authorities, and then agitated to fight for some immoral and meaningless wars, or being told that the United States is an evil and capitalistic country, where people just care about money. But in fact those totalitarian countries are the place where large scale of corruption and injustice happened. Different information is power to reach the real truth.

Therefore, I shall conclude that indeed we should count on different types of sources to achieve, or at least touch the real truth.

Writing Feedback / [Toefl] best methods to get teenagers accustomed to adult life is part-time job [3]

Topic: One of the best methods to get teenagers accustomed to adult life is to get them part-time jobs. Agree or disagree?

Some argue taking part-time jobs would bring the young generation a comprehensive understanding of the adult life, letting them adjust to this kind of life more easily. However, I don't believe part-time jobs would serve as effectively as some peoples predicts, and there are a couple of alternative options that could be taken as better replacements.

Admittedly, part-time jobs would relieve the financial pressure of the adolescents, and give them the general picture of what adult lives could be. However, most teenagers would not end up being a waiter in the restaurant, a bartender in the night club, or a sales assistant in the supermarket. These positions are most likely to be taken a part-time job, which cost you a large amount of time and effort with limited payment. There is an interesting story in the film titled, "Cash back", which tells about a boy working as an assistant as a part-time job in the supermarket at midnights. In this short film, he tried to give a philosophical interpretation of what he does, which is merely exchanging his own time for money. I really feel for him in the end, because I realize it does take excruciating pain for him to get through this, knowing the adult life seems to be a boring and painstaking journey. Surely this kind of experience won't help the young people more easily to adjust to adult life, on the contrary, teenagers would rather stay under the shelter of their parents, and schools, and totally abandon the anticipation of a better future.

In addition, a bunch of other options are waiting for the young kids to consider, and part-time job might not be the best one. Certainly the communication with your parents will bring you much more reliable suggestions. Parents are the most intimate adults one could meet with, and their examples would provide you most vivid and precise understanding of the adult life. Plus, internship in the industry that you'd like to devote is also a good choice, since at least you do what you love, not those repeating, meaningless labor work. For instance, I once volunteered to work for an independent film festival during summer vacation, and the experiences in this event almost changed my life. Because of the love and passion about films, I was fascinated to witness how a film festival is organized, and really enjoyed to work with the filmmakers that I admire. Eventually I made my mind to start my career in the film industry. Obviously this sort of experience would bring more benefits for one to get used to adult life than simply taking a part-time job.

Therefore, I believe part-time jobs might not serve its alleged merits, and one could take some alternative options into consideration when trying to experience the adult life

Ps. internship and part-time job is different, right? otherwise I may revise the 3rd para.

Comment is Free.

Writing Feedback / [Toefl] All University student should be required to take history courses? [7]

Topic: All University student should be required to take history courses no matter what field they specialize in. Agree or Disagree?

Some argue that history should be a compulsory discipline for college students, while others stand in opposition, questioning whether this policy is necessary or not. I agree with the former group, and regard history as one of most significant subjects that one should take, especially our college fellows.

Ostensibly, history is irrelevant with some their disciplines, but I doubt if it is a fact, or it is merely our illusion. Some students declare that history has nothing to do with their subject, and it is a waste of time to put their effort on this meaningless course. However, from my perspective, not only is history relevant with almost every major, it but also is one of the most primary and necessary undertaking for college students. When I was studying biology at college, the course of biology history is one of most popular courses. As you are interested in your major, you absolutely would be fascinated about the history of your precursors, discovering how they made their contribution to this subject, knowing who started some divisions of this discipline, like Watson and Crick are the founders of DNA, and Mendel starts genetics, etc. Or perhps one studies creative writing, then obviously the history of literature will be necessary for him or her to set as a mirror, and to understand what kind of story has already been told, and what sort of forms and techniques have been experimented, therefore, s/he could gradually develop his/her own style. Otherwise it is possible that you are just repeating the styles of your ancestors, without any ideas that someone has used this technique, maybe 100 years ago. Therefore, learning the history of the students' major cannot be a smarter idea.

Furthermore, my standpoint remains as same regarding the general public history. This planet has already become a world of technicians and specialists, and conflicts arise when different opinions and ideas cannot result in some common agreements. Then sharing certain kind of knowledge, like history, would surely benefit the ecosystem of modern society, and bring merits in discussing and balancing various kinds of interests and viewpoints. College students, as the pre-intellectuals, certainly should grasp this precious treasure of human kind. For example, the 20th century has witnessed plenty of disasters, especially the two World Wars. Lessons have been learned from their outcomes and aftermath, so no large scale of military conflicts, involving numbers of countries, had happened afterwards. And also no nuclear bomb has been implemented after the disaster in Japan. History has made us more cautious when we making every decision, because clearly a wrong command would readily sentence lots of innocent people to death. We have benefited a lot from our common knowledge of what has happened, and the subject of history should continue to serve its function in college education, otherwise the society would disintegrate into a myriad of solipsistic particularities that generate hatred, wars, or even genocide.

History has served as a significant force for the development of human kind in the past, and present, therefore we shall not abandon history in the university curriculum, which would bring us a better future.

Writing Feedback / [TOEFL] better to have rules about clothing that people wear at school or workplace [NEW]

Topic: It's better to have rules about the type of clothing that people wear at schools or in their workplace. Agree or Disagree?

It has been a long-term debate on whether students should wear uniforms on campus and the reasons to this controversy are various. Admittedly, this sort of united form would render some benefits to the school administrators, since it is one of best ways to encourage conformity. Students would be not likely to disagree with others due to this peer pressure. However, it is individualism and liberal thinking that schools should deliver, promote, and embrace, not those conformity ideas. When entering into the school campus, students are supposed to be aware of the multi-cultural factors of the campus, starting from the costume of the passengers, to different types of organizations and communities. The information that the educational institutions should deliver will be like: we are living in a society of different opinions and ideas, from which creativity and imagination would emerge. As in the film named "Wave", school educators are trying to teach students the concept of Fascism, by turning the classroom into a Nazi type. Students in the movie are forced to wear same white shirts and blue jeans. They find it interesting at the beginning, and perceive the united force as energy for better study. But once you are involved into this situation, it is extremely difficult to let go, since gradually the class would eliminate whole types of dissent, and cheer up as being a united group. While the instructors tried to dismiss the community, resistance started and one guy got killed in the conflict in the end. Yes, it cannot be denied the same-clothing issue does have its merits, but clearly the drawbacks it raises outweigh the benefits.

However, the point of view varies regarding other particular occupations, such as police officer, and judge, etc. Uniforms of the police officials stand for the order of the society, and their presence would certainly benefit the public transportations. There is a typical plot in the work of film director Pierre Etaix. One guy need to park his car on the street, but there is no empty position remained, so he tried to park the car in an illegal position in that he is in the middle of a crisis, therefore really hurried. Then one person appeared, sitting in a café besides the parking lot, and asking him to stop. The hurried guy smiled at him, saying that I really apologize for this behavior, but I have no choice. But when the person in the café started to take out his police uniform lying on the chair, putting on the police hat, the hurried guy realized that it is a police officer who he is dealing with, and had to drive his car away to other places immediately, without any complaint. The effectiveness of uniforms in some cases will give you unexpected convenience.

Therefore, I shall conclude that we need to prohibit the rules of types of clothing on campus, however, the criteria should be adapted when dealing with some special occupations.

Writing Feedback / [TOEFL] In the past, people were friendlier than we are now. Agree or Disagree. [NEW]

When dating back to the old times, people argue that we, as human kind, were friendlier than we are now, indicating that they are not being treated the same as they used to be. Is this a matter of fact, or just an illusion? I believe it is merely our nostalgia that drives us to this irrational impulse, and people have not become less friendly in recent times.

Admittedly, sometimes we are not being treated in a mild and kind manner, and we do suffer some rude and unfriendly encounters. But this does not necessarily mean that people in the past would not receive this sort of treatment. It is well known, in some psychoanalysis, that people have a inclination to eliminate bad experiences, experiences that made them feel unhappy. Memories of people being unfriendly obviously belong to this group. Gradually people would forget the unhappy experiences, and what remain are those happy memories, such as a friend's smile, flowers from lovers, and total unexpected help from a stranger. These beautiful recollections stay, and those bad ones slowly fade away. Therefore, what we remember of the old days are only wonderful experiences, while we do have a more comprehensive understanding of the recent life. I believe it is one of the major reasons why we tend to perceive people becoming less friendly.

In addition, the circumstances are becoming progressively better, comparing the old times. Citizens are increasingly conscious of the significance of friendly attitude that would contribute to the modern society. As in a documentary on lesbian rights, I see more and more people in favor of these civil rights campaigns, rather than those anti-lesbian communities. Acceptance of the minority from the society has enhanced more than ever, and a recent legal approval of homosexual marriage in NYC has strengthened this viewpoint. Furthermore, the "Free Hug" movement has happened in a lot of places on this planet, as people on the streets randomly offer hugs to strangers who would accept their warmth and friendliness. And those are strong evidence, demonstrating that the society is getting increasingly friendly.

Therefore, I shall conclude that people are not getting less friendly in recent days, on the contrary, much more hospitality and friendliness are happening right now.

Writing Feedback / It is better to save money for unpredictable future than to spend it on a travel [NEW]

Topic: It is better to spend money on travelling and vacations than to save money for future. AGREE or DISGREE?

My Work:

Investment on vacation would be a nice choice for some people. It is one of most popular activities to have relaxation and entertainment, especially for those who have already spend large time on their work with no time for pleasure. However, to spend money on holidays might not be as efficient as it used to be. Since the internet technology has greatly advanced in today's society, we already could observe this planet through our computer, by using some newly-invented software, like Google Earth. It is said that with its 3D function, the paintings hung in the Louvre Museum could be observed meticulously without the security guy standing next to you. You can magnify the paintings to see its details by the software, which is not allowed even on scene in the museum. Plus, waiting in the queue for these exhibitions is not a problem any more, because the internet service would be available for all the audience at the same time. Therefore, it really seems to be an unwise idea to have your money merely spent on some exotic excitements.

On the contrary, to save money for the future will never be too late. Admittedly, always insisting on the future would sacrifice some instant happiness, like having vacation and some other. However, it is way intelligent to have plans for the future, rather than prefer some meaningless holiday issues. For instance, if I choose to use my salaries from the part-time jobs for travelling, I would have no financial support for my later study on English, and then it would totally ruin my future plans to study abroad. So, comparing to these relaxations, it is valuable to focus on these fundamental demands first. After the wonderful holidays, life goes on anyhow. What if one have no money to pay the rent? What will you do about your college tuition fees? Or you forget to pay the bill from your credit card company. These issues are much more important than just being a tourist.

Therefore, I believe it is better to save money for the unpredictable future, rather than insisting on spending money on vacation.

Please feel free to comment,
anything is welcome ,
thank you all.