GP Essay Questions on Arts 5/100

GP Essay Questions on Arts. Have a look at these GP Essay Questions on Arts from the past papers

  1. Would it matter if all the performing arts venues in your society, such as concert halls and theatres were closed down?
  2. ‘Only modern architecture and modern art have a place in today’s world.’ How true is this of your society?
  3. ‘People the Arts, living or dead, receive far more recognition than those in the Sciences, even though it is less deserved.’ Consider this claim.
  4. “All art is propaganda in some form.” Discuss.
  5. How far should architecture be both beautiful and practical? Discuss with reference to particular examples in your country.
  6. “It is impossible to prove that one art form is superior to another.” Do you agree? Refer to specific examples from painting, music or literature to support your answer
  7. ‘Enjoyable, but ultimately of little practical use.’ Consider the value of music or art or literature in the light of this comment.
  8. ‘Public money should not be wasted on supporting the Arts; they should support themselves.’ Discuss.
  9. ‘A work of art can never be valued just in financial terms.’ Discuss
  10. Do the arts, such as music and literature, really play a significant part in Singaporean society?
  11. ‘The arts cannot change the world, but they can make it more beautiful.’ Discuss this view with reference to one of the following: painting, sculpture or music.
  12. Contemporary music has no artistic value.’ Is this a fair comment?

GP Essay Questions on Politics 4/100

GP Essay Questions on Politics and Governance. Have a look at these GP Essay Questions on Politics from the past papers

  1. ‘As society becomes more complex, we have more government and less freedom.’ Discuss.
  2. “Good government requires the courage to take unpopular decisions.” Discuss this statement with examples to support your answer.
  3. Consider the view that efficient government is more important than democracy.
  4. ‘ The key criterion for good government is how well the economy is managed.’ Is this a fair assessment?
  5. To what extent do young people in your society take an interest in politics?
  6. How far should religion influence political decisions?
  7. ‘No politician’s reputation can survive the judgement of time.’ How true is this?
  8. How far should countries aim to be self-sufficient?
  9. Should the love of one’s country still be encouraged?
  10. As long as people in the public eye do their job well, does it matter what they do in private?
  11. Does the presence of a foreign power ever help a country with problems?
  12. Many developed countries are paying increasing attention to the needs of the disadvantaged? How far is this true in Singapore?

What is truth? Discuss this in relation to the world today.

Truth has not only occupied minds of philosophers in the past but has been a relevant topic even in today’s world. The quest for truth has led people into new directions leading to the redefinition of the term. Truth in today’s world is not within grasp and appears to be intangible. Truth has become elusive. Truth today requires thought.

Detractors to the above stand contend that the prominence of truth today can be seen in scientific advances. Scientific advances have made truth easily reachable. Modern world looks at everything today through the lens of science. For example, politicians of many countries have termed climate change as fake, but research conducted by scientists from all around the world provides evidence to show that our planet is heating up and the cause is human activity. Similarly, people revert to science to know whether poor diet leads children to develop obesity. Barring the ego’s of some doctors and scientists who have purposefully put out false information about health, vaccines and dangers from cell phone usage, science has largely been able to provide us with truths. Therefore, truth in today’s world is viewed primarily through the lens of science. The champions of this stand suggest that people today take an empirical approach to truth. 

While the drums of science continue to validate what is true and false, truth today has taken the shape convenience. Truth today is spliced with lies. People today only tell the truth that fits their worldview. For example, someone reselling a house only reveals good things about the house without revealing issues about the house. Similarly, a car seller might only tell how excellent the car is but will not reveal the problems. People today only speak the truth that benefits them or caters to their interests and motives. Social media influencers also fall within this category, promoting a product or service for which they receive some benefit.  It is not surprising then that people today reject any piece of information or fact that threatens or contradicts their perspective.

Although access to the internet makes it easier for people to find truth that fits their perspective, many are unable to tell fact from fiction. For example, people can find varying articles on issues of gun violence, immigration and politics but many are unable to logically and rationally digest the information. The bigger issue the arises from this is the formation of echo chambers, and hence the reverberation of misinformation and hence, disinformation. The social media troll farms from Moldovia are a prime example of how truth can be distorted, and how lies can impact an election. Therefore, truth in today’s world is based on convenience rather than objectivity. Some might go as far as to say that truth is based on herd mentality.

However, while truth has become increasingly subjective today, there are objective truths that exist as well.  Objective truths remain true even when nothing exists. For example, fact-checking websites like Snopes and Politifact do present truth to the audiences. In a world where truth is subjective, fact-checking websites allow objective truths to be revealed. But despite such methods of validation, truth today needs to be sought and rationalised.

It is quite apparent that the concept of truth has become subjective in modern society. People believe only in the truths which do not contradict their opinions. There are only a few entities that believe in the objectivity of truth in today’s world. Truth gives us clarity and exposes the anomalies in the society. With the rising use of social media, the emergence of AI technology and cases involving deep fakes, the future of truth remains uncertain. 

New Media has changed our lives for the better. How far do you agree?

“Those who control the media, control the mind”. Indeed, this statement holds much validity in today’s society as a result of the media’s significant presence in our lives and d ability to dictate our actions. Technological advancements have catalyzed the evolution of media, giving rise to new media in the form of the internet, smartphones and video games, amongst many others. Mankind has been positively affected by new media it is a tool that many uses in their daily lives. Despite the harmful aspects of new media, it can be agreed that new media has indeed changed our lives for the better. It has transformed the face of education, provided better avenues of entertainment and relief and has aided the masses in the dissemination of information. All of the aforementioned are unprecedented changes that have affected the individual and community, changing their lives for the better.

               New media has played a pivotal role in positively transforming the educational scene globally. The Internet has become an increasingly effective platform for educators who wish to disseminate information and has provided students with greater opportunities for learning. Case in point would be Multiple Open Online Courses (MOOCs) which has educational material mostly in video format for nearly all age groups and subjects. Examples of MOOCs would be Khan Academy and Coursera, which ties up with universities such as Harvard University and Stanford University. Through this, individuals whose education was hampered due to poor socio-economic backgrounds or lack of basic literacy would be able to access education at their own convenience. This is also an important change because students can learn at their own pace, in comparison to the bullet train speed of information covered in schools. In South Korea, schools’ syllabi will be fully digitized by 2014, resulting in greater convenience for students and overall cheaper school fees in the long run because updating and replacing print material would not be required. Not only does this evolution from print material results in greater convenience, but it also improves flexibility in how education is provided because of the accessibility of a myriad of resources. In India, inexpensive tablet PCs will be distributed to schools to facilitate easier means of accessing information and providing facilities for students to learn effectively. This is a revolutionary change, akin to the benefits that South Korean students will receive as well. Although the provisions of tablet PCs and the significance of the internet has surfaced benefits, individuals from developing countries face an interesting conundrum. Those with low levels of educational qualifications or lacklustre economic backgrounds may see themselves as unable to afford such technology and may be lacking in media literacy, this may result in the inability to reap the full benefits that such services can provide. However, this is where subsidies by the government and private firms can come in to ease the accessibility of these services. The incentive in doing so would be that the long-term benefits outweigh the short term costs. Thus, through new media, education has evolved into being accessible to more and therefore has changed lives for the better.

               Another aspect which new media has significantly affected is the ease of information dissemination. Through the internet, smartphones and social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, information has managed to travel faster and further. Catastrophic events such as the Boston Bombings in 2013 went instantaneously viral through social media. Within minutes, everyone was informed about the massacre and received minute-by-minute updates on the situation. This enabled the instant mobilization of rescue missions and investigation into the injustice committed. Without new media, it would have been less likely that the masses, both locally and worldwide, would have been aware of this situation. Additionally, the rehabilitation of the city would have slowed down. The internet was also utilized in locating the criminals, creating relief as justice was being done. Another instance of the use of new media was the Arab Spring, where Facebook and Twitter were used to rally support for the cause and improve the regional situation so many wished to see a change in. Without such means, the movement would have been slower in garnering support and informing the masses of the causes. The dealing with the 2013 haze crisis in Singapore is testament to the positive change that resulted through new media. The government constantly posted regular updated on the National Environment Agency website, Twitter and online news channels to inform citizens about the Pollutant Standard Index (PSI) levels. In the absence of such information, citizens would have underestimated the severity of the situation, resulting in detrimental impacts on their health. This aspect of informing established an effective means of protecting citizens’ welfare. Therefore, the new media has changed the way we are informed through the dissemination of information, resulting in positive change.

               One of the functions of the media is to provide entertainment. New media has successfully filled in this role and changed lives for the better with creating outlets for release. According to the media catharsis theory, the media is an avenue for the release of one’s emotions. If an individual is angry, he or she simply switches on the game console and indulges in endless hours of DOTA or Grand Theft Auto. This is a transformation from more passive means of entertainment, such as watching television, as one is actively engaged in the script of the video game. After emerging triumphant, the individual feels more relieved and less burdened with emotions, moving on. This change lives for the better, as it is an outlet for the release of stress and anxiety. Video games could also serve as a means to bond over common interests and help in developing critical thinking skills. However, this is contrary to the cultivation theory that insists that engaging in such violent games may cause a criminal or murderer to emerge. Although trends have been observed, the instances of criminals and murders being significant gamers are relatively isolated, coincidental and do not factor in the other trigger factors of such inappropriate behaviour. Therefore, the ability to release one’s emotions and bond over common interests, new media in the form of video games can be claimed to have changed lives for the better.

               Despite the aforementioned positive attributes of new media, it is worth acknowledging that new media has its limitations as well. Through the emergence of social media platforms, a rather narcissistic society has come to be. A 2012 Pen Research survey conducted revealed that 91% of Facebook users post photos of themselves from an increase from 60% in 2010. This can suggest that individuals are becoming more active in portraying themselves in a particular manner on social media, creating a self-absorbed and obsessed mentality. The vast and extensive nature of the internet has created opportunities for increased vulnerability for groups of users due to inappropriate material. The presence of pornography on the Internet and obscene videos such as Miley Cyrus’ Wrecking Ball can imply that the internet is not a safe place for the young. However, many countries apply strict censorship laws and individuals also apply self-censorship to such material. However, despite the means of controlling the flow of inappropriate information, new media has its limitations making lives worse off.

In conclusion, new media has played a pivotal part in our lives. Overall, it has indeed changed our lives for the better in terms of education, entertainment, and awareness. Contrarily, the perils of such a platform are present as well. To ensure that new media continuously plays a positive role in transforming our lives, those controlling the media must exercise caution and responsibility in how what and why something is present in the media. The media should quintessentially serve the needs and wants of the greater society, however, idealistic that may seem. As new media is constantly changing, so is its impact on society, whether it be positive or negative. New media has indeed changed our lives for the better and it is up to us, the consumers, as well as those controlling the media to ensure that the status quo remains or changes for the better.

Foreign aid does not solve long-term problems. Discuss.

The Republic of Congo, Haiti, Mozambique and Tanzania are some of the poorest countries in terms of GDP. These countries have received foreign aid from various countries however, contrary to popular belief, foreign aid has not helped them grow economically. The condition of these countries might have improved for a short while, but in the long-run foreign aid has only deteriorated their condition. Thus, it can be said that foreign aid does not solve problems in the long term and only acts as a crutch.

Foreign aid has been counter-productive for many countries because it leads to corruption. It is a well-known fact that the majority of foreign aid helps the governments of poor countries line their pockets. The money never reaches those that need it the most. Most of the foreign aid is used by the country’s rulers and elites and leave nothing for the people who actually need this aid. For example, the United Nations has spent more than $14 billion in Syria over the last 5 years in providing humanitarian aid to innocent Syrians. However, recent investigations have suggested that the funds were used by ISIS leaders and militia groups to provide resources to their supporters. Similarly, Malawi received a considerable amount of foreign aid, however, corruption within the system led the elite politicians and businessmen to use more than $30 million for their own benefit. Thus, many critics believe that providing foreign aid does not help countries. Instead, the countries are left crippled and the elite enjoy all the benefits. Thus, foreign aid acts as a crutch and can end up being wasteful.

Supporters of the view suggest that foreign aid should not just be given in monetary terms but be given in terms of technical support. Donor countries should make sure that they do not make the country financially dependent. Instead, the donor countries should support countries to become self-sufficient. For example, Taiwan received financial aid and support from many countries from 1960s-1980s and successfully weaned itself off foreign aid. Taiwan is one of the most successful economies today. A well-known study in India documented how the spread of mobile phones in the Indian state of Kerala enabled fishermen to arbitrage price differences across local markets, increasing their profits by 8 per cent on average as a result. Kenya’s ubiquitous mobile banking service M-Pesa appears to have enabled poor women to move out of subsistence agriculture into non-farm businesses, providing a significant bump up the income ladder at the very bottom. Thus technological aid has a better effect compared to monetary aid in solving long term problems.

Nations with political instability do not reap benefits from foreign aid in the long-term. A prime example is Venezuela. Despite the population needing foreign aid for their welfare, the delivery of humanitarian aid has become a political battle between the president, Nicolás Maduro, and Venezuela’s opposition Juan Guaidó. The country received foreign aid in terms of food and medicine from Russia and the Red Cross organisation respectively. However, no amount of foreign aid has helped to bring stability in the country. Thus, foreign aid acts as a crutch as it can provide people relief for a short time but cannot solve long term problems.

In conclusion, foreign aid cannot be always helpful in solving a country’s long-term problem if aid is primarily in monetary terms. Most of the times countries face issues that cannot be solved through financial aid. In most cases, foreign aid does not solve the problems but increases inequality and entrenches dependence. Foreign aid can only solve some short-term problems and not long-term problems.

Education is the most powerful weapon that can make the world a better place. Discuss.

A majority of governments across the world have recognized the importance of education as a tool to boost progress and make a world a better place. For example, the Sustainable Development Goals set out by the United Nations place priority on providing quality education. The administrators of SDG also validate their mission by attesting the number of people that have got out of poverty due to education. Supporters of education suggest that it is the most powerful weapon to bring change and it can help people to do greater good for the world.

Education brings equality to society and allows social mobility regardless of status. Education systems around the world have changed their systems to bring equality among people. An example of this can be the education system in Finland, where there are only one standardized test and all students in the same classrooms and provides extra educational assistance to those who need it. Moreover, private schools in Finland are non-existent. This ensures that students have equal access to education regardless of socioeconomic background. Thus, education is a social leveller and by bringing us closer to equality it makes the world a better place.

Education also empowers people and gives them the power to question those in power. In recent years there have been many student activists’ protests to question the authorities. An example of this can be the students from more than 130 countries, who skipped school for the global climate strike which gained widespread attention. Another notable example can be of the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting, where students organised protests and rallies against gun violence. The protest aimed to spread awareness about gun violence.  Critics might point out that it is idealism that leads to this social change and not education. However, they should not forget that education is the tool that enables them to know about these issues and gives them the courage to stage these protests. Therefore, education makes the world a better place by giving students and youth power to question those in power.

Education, when controlled by governments, can be used as a tool to gain control over people. An example of this can be seen in Indian history, where Lord Macaulay, replaced native texts with English texts and also proclaimed that they wanted to create a class of Indians, that were Indian in race and blood but British in taste and morals.  In present times, North Korea uses similar tactics where education is used to brainwash people. The children throughout their education learn about leaders like Kim Il-Sung and Kim Jong-Il and their greatness is emphasised in the books.  In Pakistan, students are taught that India is the aggressor and they should do everything possible to counter India and its politics. Thus, education makes the world a difficult place to live in when it is used to dominate people.

While education makes the world a better place by bringing equality, rationality and giving power to the voiceless, education can have a negative impact on society when it is used for wrong reasons. Education, when used for wrong purposes, can lead to the subjugation of people. Thus, it is necessary to develop educational systems in a progressive way so that education in all senses makes the world a better place. By and large, education is the most powerful weapon to change the world for the better as it has reduced poverty and brought about greater equality among people.

General Paper Essay Questions 3/100

 General Paper Essay Questions for GCE A-Levels exams. General Paper Essay Questions asked in past prelims.

  1. Should the needs of the individual always be sacrificed for the good of society?
  2. ‘Affluence is a curse, not a blessing.’ Do you agree?
  3. Assess the effectiveness of public campaigns in your society.
  4. How far do you agree that culture has become too commercialised?
  5. Can the death penalty be justified today?
  6. How far should your society have restrictions to differentiate between citizens and foreigners?
  7. Is it increasingly more difficult to believe in faith?
  8. ‘The arts, more so than the sciences, feed our minds.’ How far do you agree?
  9. ‘Only the individual can protect his own privacy.’ How true is this in the age of social media?
  10. Should you worry that your children will have no air to breathe, no water to drink and no food to eat?
  11. ‘The greatest pleasures in life are often the simplest.’ To what extent is this statement true?
  12. Can corruption ever be eliminated?

Essay Questions 2/100

Essay Questions Collection from Past Prelims. These are the essay questions from various JC’s past prelims.

  1. To what extent has technology had a negative impact on work-life balance in your society?
  2. Is less regulation always desirable?
  3. ‘Everyone is talking but no one is listening.’ Is this a fair comment on the new media?
  4. ‘The future of your society lies in the sciences rather than the arts.’ What is your view?
  5. ‘There is nothing to fear from failure.’ Do you agree?
  6. ‘The rise of women means the displacement of men.’ Discuss.
  7. Should government policies be concerned mainly with economic gains? Discuss with reference to your society.
  8. Is a world without racial conflict an impossible dream?
  9. ‘Mind your own business.’ To what extent is this good advice today?
  10. ‘Technology provides assurance in a world fraught with uncertainty and insecurity.’ Do you agree?
  11. ‘The success of social media is also its problem.’ Comment.
  12. ‘Educating for the future should focus not on academic excellence but on values.’ Do you agree?