Friday, 27 December 2013
Some people think that humans can use animals in any way for their own benefit. Others, however, believe that people should not use animals in a wrong way. Discuss both these views and give your opinion.
Man use animals for various purposes, which sometimes can amount to abuse and even cause their death. Many animal right activists have, recently, raised concerns about the ill-treatment of animals by human beings. This essay intends to analyse both sides of this issue in detail.
On the one hand, many believe that man is a superior being and therefore it is justifiable to cause pain and even kill animals for his survival and welfare, especially in scientific experiments and as a means of food and entertainment. For example, many life saving drugs for humans have been tested in animals like guinea pigs before they are is used by man. This has resulted in the invention of many life saving medicines which are essential for man to maintain his health and prolong his life. Similarly, many animals like pigs and chicken are reared and killed for food and elephants and lions are used in circuses to entertain people and make money. Although many consider these to be cruelty to animals, most human beings think that it is essential for man’s well-being.
On the other hand, animal lovers contend that showing cruelty to animals is unjustifiable because it is a violation of animal rights. They also believe that animals experience pain and stress just like human beings and therefore it is cruel to ill-treat them.
Although it may amount to a certain level of cruelty, it seems logical to make use of animals for the needs of man. Even in nature, we see stronger animals attacking and killing weaker ones for their food. Moreover, man greatly benefits from animals, in transportation, farming and scientific experiments.
In conclusion, my suggestion is that it is inevitable to use animals for the benefit of man, but they should minimise animal sufferings in all ways possible.
Tuesday, 24 December 2013
Research has shown that spending much less time in office can reduce the use of energy (for example, electricity, gas). Thus some companies close for some days a week. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
Inspired by the realisation that energy consumption can be checked by reducing the time spent by employees in offices, many companies have adopted strategies like reducing the number of days in a workweek. However, some people feel that such a plan can have a negative impact on the performance of businesses and the welfare of employees.
On the one hand, there would be a substantial reduction in office expenses in terms of electricity consumption, water usage and fuel costs. Moreover, with the reduced workweek and longer leisure time it is likely that the productivity of employees would improve, compensating for the hours lost. For example, the number of days in a workweek has been reduced from six to five in many government offices in India. While it has substantially cut down energy costs in terms of lighting and running of office machinery, the work completed in a week has not been seriously affected. Similarly, the commuting of employees and movement of office vehicles have been reduced, resulting in substantial fuel savings.
On the other hand, critics believe that shortened workweek can affect work output and reduce the earning capacity of employees. This would mean that losing a considerable number of man-hours at work would affect the performance of companies. Moreover, the loss of wages due to fewer hours can discourage workers.
After considering both views, from a broader perspective, the substantial energy saving achieved by modern companies should be given greater prominence. Moreover, the drawbacks can be minimized by introducing alternative methods like telecommuting, where employees do not come to office, but work from home using modern telecommunication systems.
In short, although there are minor disadvantages to this system, shorter workweeks can have greater benefits to individuals and society by saving the depleting energy resources of the world.