7/21- 5 essays a week
1. Do the rich have a responsibility to help the poor in society?
- Causes of the gap(in Japan)
Increasing of non-regular employee due to deregulation. And difficulty to become regular employee due to that
- Increasing the divorce and difficulty for single mother to have sufficient income
- East Japan great earthquake evacuee
----------------------------------------
Yes, I think the rich have a responsibility to help the poor in society.
The gap between the rich and poor has been increasing recent days. It has been a serious problem which is one of the reasons for low-birthrate issue.
I think there are two ways the rich would help the poor.
Firstly, the government should take measures for redistribution of wealth more positively. The government should impose higher tax to the rich person and companies with high profit.
Secondly, the rich people and high profit companies should donate to the poor to help the poor in the developing countries, or help the poor people such as evacuees of great earthquakes. Some people are poor just because they are lazy, but in most cases, the poor people are in the vicious circle and cannot get out of the situation even though they are working hard, thus they are eligible to be helped.
In conclusion, it is the responsibility of the rich to help the poor by giving their wealth so that all the people will be equally happy eventually.
2. How should we deal with the “Breakdown of the class room”?
Cause Decrease of authority of teachers and parents
Due to Overflow of information
Breakdown of the class room has been a serious problem in Japan. It has been often reported that many children cannot listen to their teacher, walking around and chatting. Even though such issue did exist in the past, but it has been much more serious than before. I would like to tell you the cause and how to solve it as follows.
First, the main cause of breakdown of the classroom could be that teachers and parents are losing authority. Recently, in many cases, parents are too busy to discipline their children. Also, the overflow of information has made children savvy and partly this may be the cause of lack of adult’s authority.
Second, how to solve the situation? It is good question. I haven’t found the right answer yet to solve the situation due to the cause I said. At least, parents could pay more attention to their children. It is said that feeling of being cared for is important for children because it eases and motivates them. It is said children would be motivated if they are raised up with praising. Taking what parents can do step by step, our wish and affection must be conveyed to the children, then eventually the breakdown in the classroom will be stopped.
.
3 Should moral values be taught in school?
Background
- Environment changes: nuclear family, Decrease of time with parents
- TV news and computer games full of violation and murder
- Overflow of information
Yes, I think moral value should be taught in school. There are two reasons I think so as follows.
Firstly, due to increase of nuclear families, recently there are not so many adults to teach children about moral value. In past, their grandmother and grandfather living together would taught it. Instead of them, school should take the role to teach the moral value.
Secondly, the environment around children has been deteriorated. TV news always tells murder , war and bullying. Computer games often show violation and war. Through the internet, they can access indecent images or extreme thoughts words. In the flood of such information, they tend to be lost in their ways. So, to guide them to right direction should be essential all the more.
In conclusion, the role for school has been more important than past. School should teach moral value into children as well as parents and adults around them should do so. The important thing is that we, adults must be always good model for them.
４ How to solve the “cyber bullying” issue
Background
- Overflowed information due to IT and media
- Decreasing the authority of adults for children
- Lack of moral value
Measure
- Education
- Mutual monitoring system on the internet
- 第１のステップとしては、大人は子どもと親密なコミュニケーションのつながりを築くべきであり、そうすることで、青少年はコンピューターいじめを含めた出来事を進んで大人に知らせるであろう。
- 第２に、生徒はパスワードなどの個人的な情報を親戚以外には知らせてはいけないということを教えられるべきである。
- 第３に、コンピューターいじめには絶対応答してはならず、また、書かれていることが全て真実であると信じてはならない。チャットルームを利用する人々が、想像通りの人とは限らないし、本人が言っている通りの人とも限らない。実際は50歳の男が14歳の女の子だと主張して、若い子を食い物にしようと探しているかもしれない。
- 第４に、未成年者はチャットで知り合った人と、公共の場で親が立ち会わない限り、会う約束をしてはいけない。
- 第５に、怒っている時に衝動的なメッセージを送るのは避けるべきである。自制心が戻り、冷静になってからメッセージを書くことで、敵意は排除され、分別ある文章となる。怒りにまかせて書いたメッセージは、送ってから後悔するものである。そのようなメッセージは、相手に復讐心を抱かせ、新たなネットいじめを生むのである（Joinson, 2003）。
- ネットの世界が絶対ではないことを教える。
-----------------------------------------
Recently, netbullying has been a serious problem in Japan. Bullying among children has existed since long ago, but once they leave the school, they used to be able to forget it. But now, they can access the internet wherever they are, so they cannot escape from mean words on the internet. Sometimes, such mean and heartless words drive the target into suicide. To solve the situation, I want to suggest the two points as follows.
Firstly, the measure should be taken in the field of education. The advance of IT has made overflow of information for children. So teachers and parents should control the information around children so that they are not influenced by the extreme expression and violence on the internet. Also, teaching moral value to children is essential.
Secondly, on the internet, there should be mutual monitoring system. For example, in a classroom, one of the students in turn may watch the internet and report to parents and teachers if there is inadequate expression or posting. I have heard that such method has been already introduced in some schools in the US.
In conclusion, it is not the matter of merely on the internet. Cyberbullying issue is the bullying issue which has been more obvious and rapidly infectious, and more underhand anonymousness because of the internet. Basically, it is the responsibility for the adults around children to protect them from bullying including cyber-one.
5 Changes needed in Japanese education system
・学校教育と実社会との乖離。 社会に出れば正解のないことのほうが多いのに学校では一つの解を求めることを中心に教えられる。実社会での不適応を招き、多様性を受け入れ難くなる。 欧米のように問題解決、ディスカッションの授業を設けるべき
・先生も業績を求められるようになり、以前より余裕がなくなっている。人を育てる職業として広い世の中を経験する機会が必要。もっと視野が広がるし、たとえば共働き家庭への理解なども進むであろう。
There are two points to be changed in Japanese education system.
Firstly, the gap between what is taught at school and the actual society they experience after graduation. At school , in any subjects, they are told to seek for a single answer. On the other hand, once they graduate, our world is full of issues with no answer or multiple answers. So current education system may make them difficult to adjust to the society after graduation, and many Japanese are not good at accept diversity still now because of such education system. So I think Japanese children should learn more problem-solving methods and debates like western countries.
Secondly, the environment around teachers should change. Recently, they are asked to output achievements, and to report anything to the upper organizations. So they have become more like businessman, rather than teacher who must teach children with affection and broad mind. And because they are in very narrow environment, school, so they do not know about real society very well. It is natural that it is difficult for them to teach students how they should cope with society after graduation. So teachers should take the intern programs in the companies so that they can experience real world, which lead more understanding of current society and families, including working mothers, then they can teach the children about real society more specifically.
7/29 - 8/2 2 Science and Technology
6 The pros and cons of human cloning
Recently, human genome project has been completed, which means the whole structure of human DNA is cleared. In future, cloning any part of human body, or cloning whole human body will be theoretically possible. However, I think cloning whole human body must be prohibited for the three reasons as follows.
Firstly, it is ethically wrong and desecration of nature. According to natural providence, all the creatures should be born by their mother.
Secondly, if artificial human is born by human cloning, he or she will be a person with feeling. If they exist, they would be in total agony about their existence. To justify their reason de etre would be difficult. To making clone human is already humiliating their dignity.
Thirdly, the existence of clone human must disturb society. For example, the census register, taxing, and social welfare for clone human would be complicated issue.
In conclusion, human cloning will be strictly prohibited. On the other hand, genetic engineering is very beneficial if we use it correctly. Creating part of organizations of human body give us plenty benefit for treatment of disease and injury. Creating the food should solve the poverty in the world, if such food is proved to be safe. So I expect genetic engineering should advance in the way it makes us healthy and happy without violating dignity of nature or god.
7 Should there be restrictions on Internet content?
Yes. I think there should be restriction on internet content. However, such restriction should be done by parents, not government. I would like to tell you three reasons for that as follows.
Firstly, the restriction should be for protecting children from harmful information.
As you know, the internet is full of extreme expressions, violations, and indecent descriptions. They must have bad influence for our children. So it is the responsibility for the parents to protect children from such harmful information.
Secondly, there are many tools available for parents. There are many software such as filter which are available and easy-to-operate.
Thirdly, the censor by government may deprive citizens of freedom. If the government censor the internet, it is to restrict the freedom of citizen to say and express. It may be against the constitution. As for adult, we are mature enough to tell what is good from what is bad. It is not necessary for government to intervene.
For above reasons, I think the internet should be restricted, but only by parents. The intenet has given us a lot of benefit. It practically made the border between countries meaningless. We should appreciate and take advantage of such great benefit as well as we should get protect children from harmful information as required.
8 Did the internet make election campaign easier?
Recently the regulation has been released so that the election campaign using the internet has been available in Japan. My answer is yes and no. There are good points and bad points for that as follows .
Firstly, I will mention about good points. To the voters who have concern with politics usually, the net campaign makes it easier for them to check the various kind of information about candidates. In this way, net campaign can broad the options for such voters. to the candidates, it reduced the cost for election campaign. They could advertise their policy via the website instead of tons of brochures. It is eco-friendly too.
Secondly, I will mention bad points. It cannot raise voting rate. People without concern with politics do not access the candidate’s website because they remain with not concern with politics even if candidates started election campaign on the internet.
So, it did not raise the voting rate, which was rather less than that of last election.
And, they have to monitor a lot of postings when there are any extreme expressions or slander against the candidates. People who read such posting could not determine which is true and false.
So, it depends on our morale using the internet for election will be more effective or not. It does reduce the cost for campaign, it is true, however, it does not increase the voting rate. It is not the matter of the internet. The political parties and candidates should think more about how to solve this problem. In my opinion, when voting itself is available on the internet, the voting rate will be changed.
9 The merits and demerits of using e-mail
Merit overcame the time gap: anytime anywhere: evidence: copy to many people
Demerit F2F meeting decreased: without expression, emotion: misunderstanding leads conflict: literacy
Now e-mail is indispensable communication tool for our work and private life. There are lots of merits and demerits. I would like to tell you about major ones as follows.
Firstly, I would like to mention the merits. Unlike phones, we can communicate with others without concerning if they are available or not. If they are not available, they can answer later. We can communicate with people in distant nations for the same fees as when communicating with near ones. Also, we don’t have to mind the time gap between us and them. We can spread one email to many people, and pictures and word documents can be sent at the same time.
Secondly, on the contrary, because of its usefulness, people tend to depend on email. Email deprive us of many chances to have face to face meeting, which is the most effective way for us in the true sense. And, it depends on the literacy and writing skill of the people that how we can communicate as we expected. Sometimes, misleading sentence of the email lead us to misunderstand each other, and without ensuring, such misunderstanding gives us negative thought toward the others. And, sometimes it gives us the impression that they are too lazy to say it on the phone or face to face meeting because emailing is quite easy.
In conclusion, I think email should be one of the greatest inventions we have made recently. The merits of email overweighs the demerits to a large extent. However, we should be careful when using emails not to trouble or hurt the others. For example, at work, when asking very important tasks to someone, we should follow up the email by phone or face to face meeting. And we should read our emails repeatedly to check if there is fatal error that would be misleading. We should not forgot hearty consideration all the more in this era of IT.
10 Is shale gas the ideal alternative power source?
I think shale gas is not the alternative power source. There are three reasons as follows.
Firstly, digging out shale gas could affect the environment. It is said digging out the shale gas could pollute underground water, and the shale gas was said to be origin of .crude oil and coal. So using shale gas is equal to use such source in advance. The CO2 emission for that is the same as the other power sources such as oil and coal. In this sense, it is never “alternative”.
Secondly, it could be the US’s strategy to promote the shale gas. If Japan imports the shale gas from the US, the cost would be much higher than other nations. We should not let the US whatever they want.
Thirdly, we have methane hydrate methane hydrate is power resource that is under the bottom of Japan sea. By improving the technology to dig out them, Japan could get power source by itself. Moreover, it is said to emit less CO2 than other power source. It could be a revolution in the true sense if we can succeed in digging out and make it in use.
８/4 - 10 Medicine
11 What makes organ transplants so controversial?
Definition of death
Family’s denying
I think there are two main points to make organ transplants controversial.
Firstly, it depends on the definition of death. Due to the improvement of medical technology, people’s lives can be maintained for weeks or months even if their consciousness will not come back again. So the definition of death now depends on the law, which defined the death means brain death. However, defining the death by law it self could be the problem. For example, when a woman whose brain is dead is pregnant, should her life be maintained to let the fetus grow up?
Secondly, there are many cases that even if a person registered as a organ donor , his family often denies organ transplant against his will, and many patients are dying without organ transplant they long for.
In conclusion, artificial law system contradicts the death, which is ideal and relative, and case-by-case issue. Therefore, I think a person’s will should be prioritized. To prioritize the individual’s will, some regulation is necessary for that. Also, everyone should have the chance to think and decide if they want their organ to be transplanted in such case equally. Foe myself, it would be a pleasure if part of my organ can rescue somebody after my death.
1２．Should euthanasia be legalized in Japan?
Recently, the most popular cause of death is cancer. The terminal care of cancer patients always closely related to the issue of euthanasia. I think euthanasia should be legalized in Japan.
Euthanasia is divided into two types: positive euthanasia, to make patients die by giving medication. Legalization for euthanasia should differ depending on such type.
Firstly, Negative euthanasia, to let patients die by removing respirator or stopping further artificial care. In my opinion, I agree with negative euthanasia. It simply means to die in dignity. And it is important to make sure the patients’ intention while they are alive. As well as intention for organ transplant, it should be legalized for every people to declare their will when they become a certain age like 20.
Secondly, positive euthanasia,which is very controversial. It is necessary to make people declare like the case of negative one. Besides that, what should and should not be done for doctors should be strictly regulated to avoid abusing of medication to stop the prolonged terminal care.
In conclusion, people have right to death in dignity, or death the way they want. Recently, as the main cause of death should be concerned with this issue, each of us must think about it and have our own idea about the way to die we really want.
<Business>
13 Should the mandatory retirement system be abolished?
I think mandatory retirement system should be abolished. There are three reasons as follows.
Firstly, recently in Japan, decrease in labor power is serious problem. Abolishing mandatory retirement and let the elder people keep working should be one solution for that.
Secondly, comparing to the past, the people around sixty have got much younger mentally and physically. This is due to advance in medical technology and nutrition. So it is not necessary to make them stop working when they are still young enough.
Thirdly, people’s lives have become longer than past. Now the average span of life in Japan is 82. So 20 years could be too long without working.
In conclusion, expanding working life could be win-win solution for the elder people and the society. Of course, if the mandatory retirement system is abolished, we should respect their will and consider about the elder people’s condition and it should be necessary not to force them work when they are not healthy. Also, as to young people, we should give them to work as a regular employee. So we should consider so that the increasing of elder workers will not deprive young people of the chance to work.
