Photographs used to be more important in the past than they are today as they were rarer and less staged, thus evoking more memories of that moment. How far do you agree with this statement? (400 words)
At this moment in time, whensocial media facilitate and encourage a constant, somewhat maniacal sharing of every mundane detail of our lives, photographs seem to belosing their primary function: preserving our most cherished memories.Some may argue that, because of the rampant emergence of newplatforms for multimedial content, pictures are significantly more present in our lives now than in the past. Notwithstanding,there are strong grounds for believing that, because of this, photos no longer have a sentimental value and are easily forgotten in the course of time–doomed as they are to linger indefinitely in our computers, in the form of binary code.
In days gone by, families would gather around a thick, overused photo album and relive the mostsignificantevents of their lives, whether they bejoyful or bitter-sweet. Among the benefits of traditional photography is the necessity to be selective, in the sense that the limited storage capacity of a roll of film mandates that the photographer choosenothing but the pivotal moments. Not only can such pictures evoke far more intense memories, they also feel distinctive, attached to a specific period or situation.The pandemic multiplication of photographs, nowadays, deprives each specific image of its emotional value, because their proximity in space and timewith one another produces a reduplication of memories, and therefore not one single picture can be determined to be unique or poignant. For this reason, photographs are relevant only in the present and become soon neglected. Conversely, the mere fact of owing a photo album is likely to encourage one to browse it, perhaps during the holidays, family visits and suchlike.
The other side of the coin is that an increased number of photographs implies a greater amount of moments which can be saved from oblivion. In this way, it is possible to document an entire lifetime and have a comprehensive view of every stage of someone’s life, in as an environmentally friendly way as possible. The usage of pictures in today’s world has changed conspicuously, shifting from anout-of-body memory device to animmediate communicative system. Unfortunately, today’s self-centred society constitutes an unhealthy environment for the younger population, which is constantly encouraged to take contrived, staged pictures aimed at promoting their status and nothing else.
Where once fewer photographs were a guarantee of quality and vivid memories, now more than ever beforeit is quantity that governs our mind-set. Pictures have a shorter lifespan and, beautiful though they might bethanks tocutting-edge technology, they have lost that peculiar sentimentaldepth that made them precious in the first place. As far as I am concerned I believe a balance is to be found between the necessity to conserve our memory and the comfort of having one’s entire life at one’s fingertips.
It is better to be a child today than it was 40 years ago. Do you agree?(400 words)
Significant changes have occurred in the last four decades, so much so that a stark contrast emerges with respect to how children are being raised now, as opposed to forty years ago. While to a certain degree it is true that children live better today, I believe that the current upheaval of our value system, precipitated by the advent of new media, is posing a great threat to youth. On this account, I am in agreement with those who argue that the drawbacks of modern society outweigh the benefits, with negative implications for the future generations.
Being a child half a century ago was an entirely different experience. What made it significantly better was the reduced amount of technological distractions available, which resulted in healthier hobbies and a heavier reliance on imagination. Children had to be inventive in order to avoid boredom, that is to say that even the smallest piece of wood could well become the most entertaining toy ever. Away from smartphones and suchlike, there was more time for healthy exercise, whereas nowadays obesity rates have reached worrisome levels due to excessive time being spent behind computers. Another case in point was the lack of intrusive social media, which appear to be exerting a tremendously deleterious effect on the youngest generations as far as privacy and social behaviour are concerned. Moreover, the advancement of communications technology has changed forever the way the brain works, notably how one perceives and processes a text. Linear reading has long since been replaced by non-linear reading, so that modern students are no longer able to keep their focus throughout a long extract or book, instead they skim through it and retain the bare minimum only.
On the other hand, there are some indubitable advantages of being a youngster in the present day. First and foremost, living conditions are far better as a result of innovative treatments being developed, or wider awareness of previously-overlooked dangers – global warming, processed meat and cigarettes being striking examples. New pharmaceuticals such as vaccines contribute to raising the average life expectancy and reducing drastically the impact of diseases. Therefore, much as it would appear the opposite, this is a safer world to live in. Secondly, by having unrestricted access to new realities, by being able to explore faraway lands from the comfort of one’s sofa, children learn more rapidly than ever before. Not only are they capable of mastering any device at an early age, they also have the opportunity to grow up as open-minded as possible, free from any bias deriving from society, as was the case with the previous mind-set.
Enthusiastic tough we may be about technology, we should attend more to what is best for our children. To protect them from the dangers of a hyper-connected world must be the aim of new parents today, providing they keep in mind the pros as well as the cons. There appears to be room for improvement in the way we raise our sons and daughters and, in my opinion, the naivety and genuineness that characterised past childhoods are qualities to be reinstated.
What are the developmental benefits of learning a second language at a young age?
That learning a new language is no easy feat is common knowledge, but extensive research suggests that the way our brains are configured might make it even more difficult a task after a certain age, called critical period. It is evident that adults struggle a great deal more than children do in the linguistic department; however, the benefits of acquiring a second language certainly go beyond the learning process. It exerts a tremendous effect on the learner, as far as their reasoning skills and overall persona are concerned. On this matter, scientists have reached consensus and my stance is in agreement with the results of their studies, which unequivocally demonstrate that foreign languages should be taught from as early an age as possible.
On a first, physiological level, learning a language has undeniable implications for our brain. It has been proven to trigger a re-wiring of our mind, namely to force the constitution of new synapses, which may well be regarded as a positive side effect. Due to the fact that, while young, our brains are still evolving and susceptible to change, it appears evident that studying a language from early childhood has significant advantages. Moreover, such developmental benefits contribute to the improvement of the student’s skills even in unrelated disciplines, notably mathematics. Seldom do students who master a foreign language underperform in other areas; this stems from the fact that the difficulties posed by translation require learners to develop lateral thinking and problem-solving strategies. The younger the pupil, the easier it will be to bridge the gap between the two idioms.
Languages are also magnificent cultural vehicles, hence the beneficial impact on one’s behaviour and open-mindedness. There is enough evidence to argue that each language mirrors a peculiar and unique perception of the world. Therefore, children who from a young age are exposed to different truths are expected to grow up with wider horizons and to be more culturally aware, as well as respectful of the diversity of our planet. One of the pivotal consequences is being able to accept that other realities might be, in some respects, better than ours. In the present climate, not only is being open to different worldviews an invaluable quality, it is also a precious asset for the job market and a useful, if not indispensable requisite to travel and meet new people.
In conclusion, it is crucial that language learning start while very young so that the child will develop an unprejudiced mind-set before reaching a mature age, when either it is too difficult to learn the language or we are too biased to accept new ideas and values. In my opinion, this is a resource of the utmost importance that every citizen should have access to, and a discipline to be taught for the sake of a better world.
How has the diet changed in your country over the last 50 years? Do you think it will continue to change? In what way?
Italy’s cuisine and, more generally, the Mediterranean diet have always been considered among the best worldwide, both because of its flavours and for being balanced and healthy. Despite the arrival of fast food chains and the modernization of food processing, whose ramifications led to the crisis of the local markets, a new interest in healthy cooking was kindled by sensationalized TV shows and the mushrooming of recipe books. This may well be the turning point after which people will turn to traditional cooking, so that craftsmanship may thrive again.
Historically speaking, Italy has been defined through the ages by geographical and social division: such is our diet, different not only in every region, but in every city, town or village. Although few ingredients constitute the basis for most Italian dishes, our food is known for being extremely diverse, and therefore rich in a variety of substances which may hold the key to a very long and healthy life. Nevertheless, our millennial traditions have long since been on the verge of extinction due to the economic and technological changes brought by globalization. In this day and age, bakeries and suchlike local shops strive to stay open, since a small family-run business cannot keep up with the rhythms and competitive prices of behemoth supermarkets. Hence, our envied dietary system is at risk of surrendering to cheap, unhealthy food, a catastrophic event which may provoke a worrisome surge in weight-related health conditions.
The last few years have been particularly important in this regard, as the globalizing effect has slightly but significantly subsided. These days, famous chefs and nutritionists are constantly on our TV screens, concocting some elaborated dish in a way that is enthralling and captivating for the viewer. Although fastidious at times, the incontrollable growth of such programmes might just be what our artisans have been waiting for fordecades. By promoting a balanced diet and a healthy lifestyle, it seems they have prompted Italians to sway towards better eating habits. As a matter of fact, new pizzerias and restaurants open regularly, attracting informed crowds with mouth-watering dishes, but more importantly with organic or local ingredients.
Traditions hardly change, but when put under the pressure of a new hegemonic culture system, as the American one, eventually they crumble down. Italian cuisine has never stopped enticing foreign markets, but under no circumstance should we allow it to fall prey to such mechanisms. By working towards a resurgence of the Mediterranean diet, Italians will be assured better and longer lives, along with a flourishing, locally-based economy.
What is the greatest danger we face in today’s society? Use reasons and examples to support your answer.
Vexed by numberless problems and fraught with danger, today’s world fails to provide a safe environment for the youngest generations. To select which represents the greatest danger is no easy a task; however, by looking at what the media seem to be mostly concerned by, one can have a clear image of our greatest fears. While some would rather focus on the imminent extinction of bees and global warming, I argue that terrorism and international politics are the issues that currently have the heaviest impact on our everyday lives.
In the past year, the terroristic and psychological warfare between Western states and terroristic cells has reached unprecedented levels of violence. Acts of terrorism with atrociously high death counts, notably suicide bombings and truck attacks, have been a grieving constant in the newspapers, as a result of which a feeling of understandable fear has spread all over our continent. It is felt that the attacks in Paris or Berlin substantiate a permanent, overbearing threat posed by religious and political extremists, which has taken a heavy toll on the tourist industry. However, in no way should terrorism be allowed to win by surrendering to fear; on the contrary, governments worldwide must take a firm stance against it and respond with effective countermeasures.
Along the same line, political tensions are mounting to the extent that the world seems constantly on the verge of a nuclear war. Because interstate relations are rapidly deteriorating, it could be said that we are experiencing a continuation of the cold war: the USA and Russia, for instance, have continued over the decades accusing one another of espionage. With this regard, the recent election of Donald Trump as President of the United States might well be a crucial moment in history. Moreover, the surge of a new wave of populism and nationalism in Western Europe, which climaxed in last year’s Brexit, signals a worrisome change of direction in the contemporary geopolitical layout.
In conclusion, fear for the worse is what characterizes the current state of events, and prudence has been the response of the population. While attempting to thwart terroristic attacks with constant, strict surveillance, governments should also tend to their diplomatic duties in order to avoid a sudden collapse of this already precarious peaceful period in the West. That being said, there is little ordinary people can do but hope for a better future.
Rivalry within the workplace is a positive thing. How far do you agree with the aforementioned statement?
It might be said that it is rivalry the engine that propels history. The world has known many a feud, be it the U.S. and Russia during the cold war, or Federer and Nadal in tennis. While today celebrities and sportspeople are at the centre of attention, rivalry has always been a fundamental asset in the strife for the greater good. Undoubtedly, there are drawbacks to be considered, notably when the competition becomes unhealthy and the participants lose track of the cause at its core. In the workplace, depending on the area of interest, rivalry may be either productive or damaging. Ultimately, it is the balance between competitiveness and cooperativeness that makes for a perfect working environment.
When rivalry is intended to produce good, concrete results, it is certainly a strategy to be pursued. Charity organizations, for instance, oftentimes arrange events in the form of a race or suchlike. However, even in more money-driven contexts is competition desirable: sales departments depend on such dynamics in order to boost a company’s reputation; the advertising world thrives on conflict. Therefore, rivalry can work as a powerful motivator and performance enhancer in the office, providing It serves a bigger purpose and is not encouraged just for the sake of it.
On the other hand, to focus exclusively on the achievement rather than effectively producing quality results might pose a threat to the harmony of the environment and hamper the path towards progress. As a matter of fact, it is a common scenario that in which, once the goal has been reached, the interest for the greater cause abates and, eventually, dies. Ultimately, it all becomes about defeating the adversary and nothing more, which is not supposed to be the motivation behind rivalry. A good case in point is the spread of doping phenomenon, a disgrace for the integrity of sports and for humanities altogether. Even in the workplace, feuds are prone to degenerating into aggressiveness and inappropriate behaviour, for example when an employee exploits a co-worker’s defaillance to advance in their career. Hence, competition comes with numberless risks which not only may damage the company, but also the moral compass of its participants.
Although it is commonly held that rivalry is inherently good, what makes for a good front cover is always its undesired effects, proving that most people join a contest just for fame, publicity or a feeling of self-accomplishment. With this regard, in order for the entire system to work as an efficient, well-oiled machine, a balance needs to be found between cooperation and competition.