Science has been developing rapidly over the past few years and it becomes practical for scientists to find a way to make people live for 100 years, or maybe over 200 years. Some people believe this is a good thing while others believe this brings more issues. Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the last decade, many scientific researchers, the world over, proved that there is a possibility of extending human lives for more than 200 years. While some opine that prolonging people’s life would have positive effects, others argue that this has detrimental effects. This essay is an attempt to analyse both sides without any prejudice.
On the one hand, many believe that increase in person’s life acts as a precursor for learning different things from the older generation. In fact, there are many skills and knowledge that is a part of our legacy, has destroyed. For instance, Taj Mahal, a historic building located in North India, had been built with various traditional skills. If elder people could live longer, then present generation would learn all these techniques from them. Thus, as this makes clear, keeping people alive for many years would bring benefits to the society.
On the other hand, some are of the opinion that the long life of individuals has significant drawbacks since it acts as a catalyst for overpopulation. This means that the earth’s resources are already dwindling, and even insufficient for the present population. Destroying agricultural lands for building industries and homes, and increasing fuel prices in all spheres of the world are some of the causes of population explosion. Hence, it is obvious that the expansion of the human cycle has deleterious effects.
At the end of the day, both camps have strong and valid arguments. However, elongating people’s life would result in the depletion of natural resources that make critical situation for living beings. Therefore, to my mind, prolonging human life-span would have serious problems in the future.
extend human life, <interesting topic task 2 >
extend human life, <interesting topic task 2 >
JAN 2014 L 8.5 R 8 W 6.5 S 6.5
FEB 2014 L 8 R 8 W 7 S 6.5
APR 2014 L 8 R 9 W 6.5 S 7
JUN 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6
July 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6.5
OCT 2014 L 7.5 R 7 W 7 S 7
FEB 2014 L 8 R 8 W 7 S 6.5
APR 2014 L 8 R 9 W 6.5 S 7
JUN 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6
July 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6.5
OCT 2014 L 7.5 R 7 W 7 S 7
-
andytruong1202
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:06 pm
Re: extend human life, <interesting topic task 2 >
Before writing, brainstorm some ideas and pick the best one. This essay would give you somewhere at 6+durai wrote:Science has been developing rapidly over the past few years and it becomes practical for scientists to find a way to make people live for 100 years, or maybe over 200 years. Some people believe this is a good thing while others believe this brings more issues. Discuss both of these views and give your own opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the last decade, many scientific researchers around the world have proved that there is a possibility of extending human life for more than 200 years (more than 100 years, or maybe over 200 years). While some opine that prolonging people’s lives would have positive effects, others argue that this has detrimental effects. Therefore, this essay is an attempt to analyse both sides without prejudice (where is your opinion?). (try to rephrase the topic correctly.)
On the one hand, many believe that increase (this is not a good synonym for prolonging and extending) in a person’s life acts as a precursor (i don't think this word is appropriate here )for learning different things from the older generation (Unclear topic sentence - what do you mean by this?). In fact, many skills and knowledge, a part of our legacy, have been forgotten (What are you trying to say?). For instance, Taj Mahal, a historic building located in North India, was built by those with various traditional skills (I get no messages from this sentence). If elder people could live longer, then present generation would learn all those techniques from them. As this makes clear, keeping people alive for many years would bring benefits to society.
Unclear reasons, wrong word choices.
On the other hand, some are with the opinion that the long life of individuals has significant drawbacks since it acts as a catalyst for overpopulation (clear topic sentence). This means that the earth’s resources would be dwindling (good vocab), though these resources are sufficient for the present population. Destroying agricultural lands for building industries and homes, and increasing fuel prices in all spheres of the world are some of the causes of population explosion. Hence, it is obvious that the expansion of the human cycle has deleterious effects.
At the end of the day, both camps have strong and valid arguments. However, elongating people’s life would result in the depletion of natural resources that make critical situation for living beings. Therefore, to my mind, prolonging human life-span would have serious problems in the future.
Re: extend human life, <interesting topic task 2 >
hi Andy,
Just few things about your comments,
Over the last decade, many scientific researchers,the world over,(its an idiom) have proved that there is a possibility of extending human life for more than 200 years (more than 100 years, or maybe over 200 years)|( they gave, may be over 200 years, that include 100 years as well, it's not required to mention every part of question . While some opine that prolonging people’s lives would have positive effects, others argue that this has detrimental effects. Therefore,'therefore ' is not necessary here this essay is an attempt to analyse both sides without prejudice (where is your opinion?).( here, in discussion essay, you can give your opinion either at start or end of your essay, I gave at the end (try to rephrase the topic correctly.)
even in argument essay, if you prefer you give your opinion at the end, because IELTS can be written anyway provided you answer the question, in case if you find topic hard, you tell examiner that you analyse both sides before reaching conclusion, but Ryan tells students one way of approaching argument and discussion essays to make easy to remember the structure.
anyway, thanks for your comments,
Durai
Just few things about your comments,
Over the last decade, many scientific researchers,the world over,(its an idiom) have proved that there is a possibility of extending human life for more than 200 years (more than 100 years, or maybe over 200 years)|( they gave, may be over 200 years, that include 100 years as well, it's not required to mention every part of question . While some opine that prolonging people’s lives would have positive effects, others argue that this has detrimental effects. Therefore,'therefore ' is not necessary here this essay is an attempt to analyse both sides without prejudice (where is your opinion?).( here, in discussion essay, you can give your opinion either at start or end of your essay, I gave at the end (try to rephrase the topic correctly.)
even in argument essay, if you prefer you give your opinion at the end, because IELTS can be written anyway provided you answer the question, in case if you find topic hard, you tell examiner that you analyse both sides before reaching conclusion, but Ryan tells students one way of approaching argument and discussion essays to make easy to remember the structure.
anyway, thanks for your comments,
Durai
JAN 2014 L 8.5 R 8 W 6.5 S 6.5
FEB 2014 L 8 R 8 W 7 S 6.5
APR 2014 L 8 R 9 W 6.5 S 7
JUN 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6
July 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6.5
OCT 2014 L 7.5 R 7 W 7 S 7
FEB 2014 L 8 R 8 W 7 S 6.5
APR 2014 L 8 R 9 W 6.5 S 7
JUN 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6
July 2014 L 8.5 R 7 W 6.5 S 6.5
OCT 2014 L 7.5 R 7 W 7 S 7
-
andytruong1202
- Posts: 80
- Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 12:06 pm
Re: extend human life, <interesting topic task 2 >
Hi Durai,
At least you need to tell the reader that you're gonna give your opinion, otherwise, they will never know. In my opinion, the introduction is like the map of your essay; when someone reads your introduction, they will know what you're gonna say next.
But it doesn't fit well into the sentence in this case, so I'd use "around the world" to give the sentence better flow.Over the last decade, many scientific researchers,the world over,(its an idiom)
I'll give you this one but I'd say "at least 100 -150 years" to make it more realistic.have proved that there is a possibility of extending human life for more than 200 years (more than 100 years, or maybe over 200 years)|( they gave, may be over 200 years, that include 100 years as well, it's not required to mention every part of question .
I put "therefore" to hold the two sentences together. You don't have to write, but it's better to have it there.While some opine that prolonging people’s lives would have positive effects, others argue that this has detrimental effects. Therefore,'therefore ' is not necessary here
[/quote]this essay is an attempt to analyse both sides without prejudice (where is your opinion?).( here, in discussion essay, you can give your opinion either at start or end of your essay, I gave at the end (try to rephrase the topic correctly.)
At least you need to tell the reader that you're gonna give your opinion, otherwise, they will never know. In my opinion, the introduction is like the map of your essay; when someone reads your introduction, they will know what you're gonna say next.