This is an agrument about whether smoking should be prohibited in public place

Recently, the debate over whether people who smoke cigarette in public places should be allowed or be banned with different laws and regulations has aroused wide concern. People retain diverse attitudes towards this hot issue. Before presenting my view, I intend to explore both sides of the argument.

Many people claim that people taking cigarette in public should be accepted by others and administrators. To begin with, by smoking on the streets and so on, you can easily start conversations with others and even quickly make new friends and improve the relationships. Moreover, it can cater the needs of smokers and can stimulate the development of the society by gaining the money from smokers, because cigarette industry plays a major part in the local revenue, if lots of smokers don’t buy cigarettes, which will give a negative impact on social development. Furthermore, to stop taking cigarette in blocks may bring out some negative outcomes such as violence and crime. It will undoubtedly exert a negative influence on society security and residents’ daily routine.

Some other people, however, strongly hold that it is essential for the local government to publish rules to limit and prevent smoking behaviors in public places for several factors. Firstly, some researches have shown that tobacco contains varieties of dangerous materials, many of which even potentially give rise to serious diseases including cancers. Therefore, it is extremely worth for us to make an announcement to prohibit smoking in public regions. In the second place, as a consequence of using the fire to light up cigarette outside, serious fire emergency will happen and it will put public facilities and staying people in a dangerous position. Lastly, in public zones smoking will mislead teenagers and young adults, so it is necessary, obviously speaking, to prevent smoking in public areas and build a health environment for most of non-smokers.

From the above discussion, we can see that there is actually some truth in both statements. Personally, I totally agree with the second view that we should ban smoking in public places. Apparently there is some truth in supporting smokers taking cigarettes in public places but, to put the issue into perspective, many of us have realized that smoking will lead to a number of problems to the environment and humans, after all., the public place is not the special area merely for smokers and at the same time smoking is not a good habit at all.

This is an agrument about whether the teacher can be replaced by the computer

Recent years, the debate over whether the teacher who plays a major part in educating students should keep his or her position or be replaced by computers and electronic facilities has become the focus of the public. People retain diverse attitudes towards this hot issue. Before presenting my view, I intend to explore both sides of the arguments.

Many people are of the opinion that, teachers or professors teaching students with face to face still plays the major role in education system. To start with, by using computers, students will be lack of chance to practice some essential skills such as cooperation and competition though starting conversations and playing games together directly. Moreover, by electronic facilities, students have few chances to communicate with human teachers and deal with questions they have when they learn knowledge. Furthermore, to read articles or to do homework by typing words into computers though a long time may bring out negative outcomes such as boring and distraction, it will undoubtedly exert a negative impact on the efficiency of gaining knowledge.

Some other people, however, strongly hold that it is absolutely necessary for us to give up this traditional teaching method and take some innovations by installing computers to translate teaching sources in classrooms for several explanations. Firstly, by using electronic equipments and Internet, schools or universities can reduce the total fees, therefore, lots of people including those who live under poverty lines are able to accept education. In the second place, as a consequence of using computers and Internet to teach students, they are able to study at home or any place they want. Lastly, for the society, learning through computers will save lots of the public funds, so it is extremely worth, obviously speaking, for governments and education institutions taking computers as the major way to teach students.

From the above discussion, we can see that there is actually some truth in both statements. Personally, I strongly support the first view that we should keep the traditional teaching methods, which teachers are the key in it. Although I agree with computers replacing teachers up to a point, to put the issue into perspective, many of us have realize that human teachers teaching students can have a better effects, after all, computers are machines, they merely can input and output data.