Writing Feedback / technology impact - we should keep the knowledge of traditional skills alive [3]

THIS IS TRAINING FOR MY IELTS EXAM, PLEASE DO ALL THE RELEVANT COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS. THANK YOU!

When a country develops its technology, the traditional skills and ways of life die out. It is pointless to try and keep them alive. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?

The phenomenon of globalisation has leaded us to a wave of change and improvement of our traditional skills and lifestyles. Actually, changes have occurred since a million years ago, and without progress, we wouldn't be where we are. However, I do not totally agree with the opinion that it is pointless to try and keep them alive.

In the Stone Age, the man created the fire by rubbing two stones or two sticks, and he also created other tools as a lance with a stone and a stick in order to hunt for food and cook. These tools allowed him to survive. Currently, we have fire and other tools to get food and live that are much more sophisticated and make our life much easier. Evidently, we developed our technology and those skills that once were traditional have disappeared. It would not be reasonable to keep on producing fire in the same way as we did a million years ago, since change is the key of progress.

Although such ways of life have died out, we know how we created them, where we come from and how we got to where we are, and in my opinion, this is the most important. Therefore, any country may -and, in fact, it must- develop new technologies to improve its productivity and ensure the economic and social development of the citizens, keeping them up to date with the new technologies and teaching them how to use them.

I think that investment in new technologies is as important as training for citizens in order for they to know how to use them, but it is valuable to keep the knowledge of traditional skills alive by teaching the new generations what they were once and how they used to live and work, only because of cultural identity matters.

Writing Feedback / Same laws should be applied to Tobacco as they are applied to Heroin [3]

THIS IS TRAINING FOR MY IELTS EXAM, PLEASE DO ALL THE RELEVANT COMMENTS AND OBSERVATIONS. THANK YOU!

Should the same laws which prohibit the sale and consumption of heroin be applied to tobacco? Discuss

Nowadays, the consumption of tobacco is typical in the youth and adults, and unfortunately, the use of drugs such as heroin is also becoming common between the youth. But there is a notable difference between the effects of tobacco and heroin. This is why the same laws that prohibit the sale and consumption of heroin must not be applied to tobacco.

Consuming tobacco or using drugs are personal decisions that everybody makes and, as we have realized, laws will not keep anyone from smoking a cigarette or injecting heroin. Thus it's more important to educate than to prohibit, because the youth may find the "prohibited" as attractive, and if they don't have the foundations to make a good choice, they will go astray, no matter if it's about a cigarette, heroin, alcohol, etc.

Someone who smokes a cigarette is still able to work, drive, and share with his/her family and friends, among others. But someone who uses heroine goes drowsy, feels that his/her arms and legs are heavy, does not think clearly, becomes euphoric, gets collapsed veins, and in general, heroin alters the brain and the nervous system. Therefore, heroin users cannot do usual activities as the aforementioned.

In my opinion, it is clear that, given that tobacco causes severe diseases such as lung cancer, the sale and consumption of tobacco must be restricted, but not prohibited as heroin since tobacco doesn't damage to the same extent than heroin. However, as I said before, it's more important to educate children and teenagers about the effects of using prejudicial substances, because even the black market may be more powerful if we don't teach our youth how to make good decisions.