Month: January 2018
Preference for male babies makes a society weak. Discuss.
• Female infanticide has existed for thousands of years
• in Greece (200 BC) authorities did not oppose the killing of handicapped, female and unwanted children
• preference for male babies still persists in areas of South Asia, Middle East and Africa.
• is it justified in a modern, globalised world?
• parents in rural China have a preference for male babies as they are seen as a ‘pension’ for their old age. Similar ideas are found in parts of India and Pakistan where labouring in the fields ensures some income for families
• huge sums (dowries) have to be found to ‘get rid of daughters’ by marriage
• preference for male babies has led to sex-selection; abortion which targets female foetuses almost exclusively and general neglect of girl children
• all this has led to a distorted gender imbalance, e.g. a recent report claimed that some 110 million Chinese males will not be able to find a wife
A sample intro. Add your own scope and thesis.
The gender preference for children has been largely based on two theoretical frameworks that have little to do with each other. One is gender discrimination, and the other is parental investment. Gender discrimination approach focuses on the preference of boys over girls. This is primarily studied in Asian countries. Where parental investment is concerned, no clear factor emerges on why some parents prefer girls over boys, sociologists have opined that care in old-age could be a driving factor for some parents.
Sample paragraph.
Son preference remains common in countries from East Asia to South Asia, extending even to the Middle East and Africa. But what is largely forgotten is that increased levels of crime, anti-social behaviour and violence are statistically proven to come mostly from males. One may be tempted to say that while parents want a male child, they are unable to raise a male child that is worthy of worship.
History is irrelevant for modern times. Discuss.
• an understanding and appreciation of history can be a pointer to future events
• ignoring history runs the risk of shutting eyes to the future
• those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it
• we can learn to understand change and how our society has evolved and will probably evolve
• history can be one-sided since it is often written by winners in conflict or those in power
• history is irrelevant since it did not stop wars, financial crises or even pandemics
• history is irrelevant in a VUCA world; brings up many questions.
Check out this other essay on history.
A suggested intro. Add your own scope and thesis
Historians do not perform heart transplants, improve highway design, or arrest criminals. In a society that quite correctly expects education to serve useful purposes, the functions of history can seem more difficult to define than those of engineering or medicine. History is in fact very useful, actually indispensable, but the products of historical study are less
tangible, sometimes less immediate, than those that stem from some other disciplines.
A suggested paragraph
History offers a storehouse of information about how people and societies behave. Understanding the operations of people and societies is difficult. An exclusive reliance on current data would needlessly handicap our efforts. How can we evaluate war if the nation is at peace-unless we use
historical materials? Some social scientists attempt to formulate laws or theories about human behavior. But even these recourses depend on historical information, except for in limited, often artificial cases in which experiments can be devised to determine how people act. Major aspects of a
society’s operation, like mass elections, missionary activities, or military alliances, cannot be set up as precise experiments. Consequently, history must serve, however imperfectly, as our laboratory, and data from the past must serve as our most vital evidence in the unavoidable quest to figure out why our complex species behaves as it does in societal settings. This, fundamentally, is why we cannot stay away from history: it offers the only extensive evidential base for the contemplation and analysis of how societies function, and people need to have some sense of how societies
function simply to run their own lives.
Does it answer the question?
‘Increasing life expectancy is always a desirable goal.’ do you agree?
Medical advancements have led people to lead longer lives. Specific diets, medicines and procedures are leading people to live longer but are also reducing the quality of life. Countries like Japan and Singapore have the highest number of ageing population which can cause problems economically. It is often seen that people with longer lives die lonely, this has significantly been seen in countries like Japan, Sweden and the UK. Keeping all these points in mind it can be contended that increasing life expectancy is not always a desirable goal.
Economically, higher life expectancy is considered as a marker of Social welfare. In many countries people believe that higher life expectancy is the indicator of a better and well-equipped healthcare system. For example, in Singapore the healthcare system is efficient and there are policies to take care of the elderly. This is also evident from the fact that Singapore topped the world in life expectancy in 2017 with an expected lifespan at birth of 84.8 years. On the other hand poorer countries have lower life expectancy because of poorly managed Healthcare systems, lack of access to clean water, food and sanitisation. Thus, higher life expectancy is desirable and necessary because it is an important indicator of the economic strength of a nation.
However, higher life expectancy also means that the healthcare systems and infrastructure are burdened. Higher life expectancy means that there is a need for additional medical professionals, equipment and facilities to take care of the ageing population. This leads to burdening of human resources and finances which are allocated to take care of people with longer lives. In order to raise the funds for these services to be provided, the working citizens of the country have to bear the expenses in form of taxes. Apart from raising funds for better healthcare, governments also need to introduce policies and programmes for the overall wellbeing of the ageing population. This is seen in Singapore where the government introduced the Merdeka Generation Package aimed at citizens born in the 1950s, to provide them with better peace of mind over future healthcare. Government schemes and packages like these ease the financial burden of medical costs for the elderly but put significant strain on the working younger generations. Thus, increased life expectancy is undesirable to a certain extent because it puts strain on the healthcare systems and the financial budget of a country.
However, it cannot be denied that longer life expectancy provides people with an opportunity to fulfil their life long dreams and spend time with loved ones. Today people are preoccupied with earning money and half their lives are spent in this pursuit. A longer life gives people the chance to experience whatever they have missed in their early years. Today many elderly can pursue additional skills like playing the piano or a guitar. Similarly, they can enrol themselves in online courses to learn skills that are required in a technologically advanced world. Thus, longer life expectancy gives us a chance to experience life in unique and diverse ways.
Longer life expectancy however does not mean that people have a better quality of life. Many elderly who have a longer life live a life that is of poor quality. Elderly people who live longer do not necessarily live meaningful lives as most of the time they are extremely sick and spend their end days either bed ridden or in a hospital. In such circumstances, the elderly are also considered a burden by society. This can be evidently seen in countries like India where many children abandon their parents or send them to old age homes. The separation of the elderly from their families leads them to live sad and lonely lives. Thus, increasing life expectancy can lead to painful and sorrowful lives which are spent in isolation and abandonment.
Longer life expectancy also makes people take life for granted. If people have shorter lives they may value it more and rush to complete tasks that are meaningful. A longer life expectancy can also lead to boredom and cynicism. The knowledge that our lives are limited gives us the motivation to pursue better things in life like creativity and nobility. Thus, increasing life expectancy is undesirable because it gives our life little purpose.
In conclusion, though longer life expectancy might be desirable in economic terms, it is overall undesirable to have a longer life expectancy because it leads the elderly to live lives that are spent in isolation, abandonment, and poor circumstances. Instead, life even if short, should be meaningful and provide purpose to people.