Should important information be shared or not?
It is argued that knowledge should be spread publicly amongst the academic world, whilst other assume that several specific informatuon must be confidential to the authorities solely. This essay will discuss both views and offer my opinion.
Proponent of the former assumption mught believe tha informatuon should be open to the public for a number of reason. Firstly, publicized information allows people to broaden their horizon. This is because of the ever-growing demand for indepth understanding of specific subjects, which is inevitably associated with the exponential development of science and technology. For instance, university pupils might find it challenging searching for specialized information given the only available source being library books abd common websites. Therefore, academically qualified knowlege from institutions will come in handy. Secondly, the fact that information is omnipresent also benefit reseachers and scientists. To be specific, surveys conducted on citizens or other science - related activities should aim to assist people and the society, which is why a reliable data base should be widely accessible.
Opponent of the aforementioned statement might believe differently. To begin with, strictly controlled information prevents readers from becoming overwhelmed and misled. For example, given the demand for vaccines and remedy during pandemics, fraudulent news may distract people with untested results of drugs from medical institutions, posing unpredictable threats. Moreover, authorities' endeavor to provide citizens with selective and exact information is a sign of successful collaboration, communication and mutual trust.
To conclude, I strongly believe that people should be given access to a comprehensive yet profound and sufficient information resource.