Tag Archives: persuasive essay

Discursive: Teenagers spend too much time on their mobile phones and computers, to what extent do you agree with this view? By Subhan Bin Yousaf 11-E

Standard

As decades pass, the impact of technology continues to increase and affect the minds of the youth. For example, teenagers in early twentieth century were often seen helping their fathers in the farm or helping their mothers maintain the welfare of their house. Moving on to a century later, times have changed, teenagers who are expected to prove themselves as finally being mature and responsible, actually deliver the opposite of what the parents intended. The question is: what actually is driving them to behave in such way? Why have parents lost hope with their own children? Why are the 20th century generations’ civilians concerned about the future of the twenty-first century generations’ civilians? Lets break down this issue and find out reasons why.

 

The problem is that technology of the twenty-first century has enslaved the modern youth in its grasp. People in favour of handing mobiles in the hands of teenagers believe that by owning a mobile or a laptop, A student can use these devices to assist them in their studies. Professor Nawaf Sheikh of Saudi Arabia’s International University, has stated that owning a mobile actually can help a student carry out his study activity. He says that teachers themselves encourage students to own a mobile over which a teacher can provide notes to her/his students with a touch of the screen. Those opposed to handing teenagers mobile phones believe that owning a mobile phone can lead a student’s outstanding performance in studies to downfall. Professor Jojo Jehangir of the ministry of youth affairs, believes that there is mounting evidence that mobiles can destruct good grades. Over his 20 years in this profession, he has researched that over sixty-seven percent of students with outstanding results, fall down the mountain of success, with the mobile phone being responsible for their downfall. He says that the percentage continues to get piqued year after year.

Teenagers have grown lethargic ever since they were handed the mobile phones. Proponents of the use of mobiles for teenagers say that mobiles actually help a teenager with his activity and fitness. Professor Samwell Tarly of Oldtown’s Citadel institute has stated that teenagers download applications in their mobile, which assist them in finding an activity to carry out or the fitness enthusiastic teenagers download applications which track the feats the teenager ran throughout a day’s period. At the same time, Opponents of handing mobile phones in the hands of teenagers maintain that teenagers have lost their will to move a muscle, they remain restricted to their beds and if they are called upon, you summon them after your third call or they summon you when you have to go to them yourself. Doctor John Watson of London’s Institute of fitness believe that enslaving oneself to grasp of technology means to experience a lack of interest for exercise, activity, work or sport. You become used to laying on your bed which is why teenagers behave this way.

 

Teenagers see a mobile phone as a source to socialize with people. Those who support handing mobiles to teenagers suggest that when teenagers interact on social media through their mobile devices, not only do they socialize, but they remain calm and in joy as they talk to their friends. Monica Geller, a senior journalist has wrote in his book that using a mobile to interact on social media helps reduce the stress in a teenager’s life, helps build in confidence in a teenager as he interacts with all kinds of people. Furthermore, Critics of handing mobile phones in the hands of teenagers believe that using social media can also impact a teenager negatively. A teenager can find himself reading hate speech, motivating him to hate a particular group, he may find himself exploring the dark side of the web. Doctor Skyler White of Albuquerque’s University of Human Relations has found out that using social media has led to a noticeable change in a teenager’s behavior, He behaves aggressively, finds out about ways to inflict suffering to the people he/she hates.

To sum up, I am in favour of handing mobiles phones to teenagers because using mobiles can help a teenager save his notes and study additionally from the Internet. Mobile devices also have applications which help to find activities for a teenager or help him with his fitness. Using social media on mobile also helps a teenager remain happy, away from the stress of the world, Increases confidence of a teenager and helps him gain knowledge of modern studies. If you don’t hand mobiles to teenagers, they will never learn to mature or ever learn to cope with the business of the world or its different people. Its upto you to decide if mobiles are beneficial for character development or a source for being distracted from the world.

Discursive Writing: Should teens be able to buy violent video games? Discuss. By Amal Adil

Standard

Isn’t violence a part of everyone’s lives? Haven’t we all experienced or seen violence at some point in our lives? The world has changed, the environment has changed, and people have changed. It’s the era of technology and here, technology means video games. Who were video games made for? And who are they for now? Teenagers, right? All these questions will be discussed in the following passage.

Supporters of the topic believe that teens should be able to buy violent video games as they give teens exposure to the outside world. Veronica Merrell, a psychiatrist states that, “if teenagers are playing violent video games, let them. It will help them handle violent situations later on in life”. Similarly, a teenage boy, David Dobrick, 15, said, “I play violent video games all the time. Nobody ever told me I was too loud or too violent. I actually feel that these video games actually help me handle different circumstances”.

However, people against the topic argue that violent video games are what make most teenagers so moody. A recent article in the Times newspaper stated, “by playing violent video games, teenagers tend to become very hyperactive and react to small things very violently”. Likewise, a mother of 2 teenagers, 14 and 16 says that, “both my children have become so addicted to these “fighting” video games that they snap at me every time I try to talk to them when they are playing these games. I can’t even take these games away because they become so moody and angry afterwards. Teenagers are said to be ‘unbearable’ if their precious video games are taken away.

At the same time, advocates of the topic maintain that violent video games have helped many people in different circumstances. Alex Chamberlain, aged 16 recalls that the fighting moves that he uses in his video games came in handy when he was about to be kidnapped. God knows what would have happened if he hadn’t played that game. Also, Bruce Lee states, “I admit, I learnt half of my karate moves from this video game I used to play when I was a teenager. Yes, it was violent but look where it got me.”

In retrospect, opponents of the topic maintain that violent video games affect the lives of many people. James Milner, a high school teacher said that it is mostly those who play violent video games all day long that get into rough fights with everyone on small matters. A research also states, “62% of teenagers that play video games get into fights regularly and their brains tell them it is normal as they use violence in video games all day.”

Proponents of the topic feel that teenagers who play video games have become sharper and much more intelligent. Alex Morgan, another famous psychiatrist claims, “teenagers who play violent video games use different strategies while playing and have to make decisions very quickly. This strategy can also be used by them in real life”. Similarly, another study claims that teenagers who play violent video games in which team strategies are used, they can work better in teams and can communicate with people better.

On the contrary, challengers of the topic claim that if teenagers have younger siblings, playing violent video games affects young children as well. Katie Bell, a mother of two, 14 and 8, complains, “my teenage son is always playing violent video games and my 8 year old son plays them with him. I feel like he has become very moody and has a lot of mood swings. He always talks back to me and shouts at me”. This shows that teenagers playing violent video games little children and when they grow up, they also indulge in violent activities, also affecting the society.

So, in conclusion, I think that teenagers shouldn’t play violent video games as their actions become similar to those in the games and they indulge in aggressive activities which affects their families in society. They can also become very addictive making teenagers caged in their rooms all day. Teenagers shouldn’t play violent video games as they mess with their brains and hearts.

 

 

Discursive: Should teens be able to buy violent videos games By Noor Ul Ain Saif 10 – B

Standard

Ans. Should teens be accessible to violent videos games? Or should violent video games be banned from them? Mainly adults feel that violent videos games produce violent teens and high levels of violence in the surrounding, but mainly teens argue that those are solely for fun. Both points are valid and will be discussed in this essay.

Opponents of the topic maintain that violent videos games develop a violent mindset of the youngsters playing it and normalize guns, bombs and murders. It is believed that the increasing violence in today’s world is a result of the violence presented in the videos which develops an aggressive behavior in the young adults. A recent study at Harvard by the psychology specialists proves that eighty seven percent of school shooters are teens between the ages the 15 and 18. The psychologists infer that the teenagers are influenced by violence in video games that create a violent, and aggressive and intolerant mindset.

However, proponents of the topic feel that video games do not have a bad impact on the teens and are solely for fun and skill. They argue that instead of developing a violent mindset, videos games teach teenagers self defense techniques and also shows them the real, rebel world. Arnold Johnson, a young teenage boxer says that he developed the passion of boxing from a violent video game and learnt many boxing techniques from it. This supports the topic saying that violent videos games have an important advantage that happens to be very useful these days. What do you think? Do u believe violence in video games can be served as helpful?

Nevertheless, people against the topic argue that violent video games are highly addictive and are the reason teens are always glued to their devices: shooting fellow playing and causing chaos. In a recent experiment by the Youtube Celebrity Mr.Beast, he gave two teens videos games, to one a peaceful game like minecraft and to the other a violent game like PUBG. His experiment showed that after one hour the teen got bored of the peaceful game and turned it off, however the other teen kept playing the violent game for 6 hours and only turned it off because he was tired. This experiment determined that the games are highly addictive.

In retrospect, advocated of the topic maintain that it is not specifically violent games that are addictive but every kind of game is addictive. They believe that violent games aren’t only at fault and are rather stress relieving as the teens enjoy them. A quote by the owner of playstation goes as, “Nowadays, video games are the escape from this cruel reality.”

Consequently, critics of the topic believe that violent video games teach teens to go against a particular group of people, for example people for color, as in violent games, mostly they are to go against a particular sect. A research shows that 67% of video games are influencing racism, homophobia and religion based preference.

At the same time, campaigners of the topic believe that the violent games are only for the entertainment purposes and only some influence teens to go against a particular group and it is usually bad people like terrorists. So it is inferred that their games only cause people to act towards the ‘bad’ people.

In conclusion, it is learnt that violent video games have many bad effects on teens and the environment. In the opinion, violent video games should be banned for teens as they take influence of the violence and absorb it. As the novelist, Martha Benson says, “video games are the main reasons for the destruction of this generation.”

 

Word count: 625

 

Discursive: Q. Should Teens be able to buy violent video games? Discuss. By Abubakr Faisal

Standard

The world of video games and virtual reality (VR) is growing incredibly in the twenty first century. From teens to adults, everybody is interested in playing video games. YouTube and Twitch TV have made it so much easier for the younger generation to make money. The trending part of these apps always show the gaming videos being the most viewed ones on the entire app. Nowadays most of the gaming videos are streamed by teenagers and they tend to become more successful in life at young age than their parents could be their whole life. And most of these gaming videos show a great deal of violence in them. People with weapons slaughtering each other for their entertainment. A lot of people have the same question in mind: Should teens be able to buy violent video games? Should violence violence really be the thing that goes around the younger generation’s mind? Should they even be allowed to watch these violent video games, let alone be able to play them? All these questions should be discussed in the essay below.

 

The most asked question right now is whether teens should be able to play violent video games or not. Charlie’s parents had the same question in mind when Charlie started to become very aggressive towards everyone and very violent if no one listened to him or if things did not go according to him. His parents claimed that they had let Charlie play Call Of Duty (COD) since the age of 9. Within 5 years, Charlie had changed dramatically and the change had occurred before he had turned into a teenager. Research from S.T.A.R Laboratories shows us that when a child is born until the age 18, his brain is still developing and learning. Which is why you are considered mature enough at the age of 18. While his brain was still in its development stage, Charlie adapted to the changes in his environment and the end result is what we now know about Charlie.

On the contrary, opposers of the topic may suggest that Charlie’s brain did not go haywire just because of playing COD. There are other games similar to COD that can also deal a significant amount of damage to a child’s brain like the Battlefield and Halo series. Research from the Video Game Testing Centre (VGTC) shows that all of these violent games have 85% to 90% chance of changing the mind of people under 12. Opposers also claim that all the violent games have an age limit stated at the bottom left corner of the disc case which goes to say that it is not the developers fault but the parents own fault as they buy these video games for their children.

 

Moreover, supporters of the topic claim that the younger generation is becoming very violent. Sara, a teacher of grade 3 at Froebels International School, claims that the children she teaches are becoming violent and aggressive by the day. A recent survey conducted by the school shows that about 70% of the children just watch YouTubers play these video games rather than playing them themselves because they claim that they are only allowed to play on weekends. This survey shows that even though the children are not playing the games themselves, they are still getting inspired by these popular YouTubers. The school also claims that the number of fights per year has also spiked and that a more number of fights get reported every month than before. The supporters of the topic claim that these video games are making their children more aggressive than ever.

However, people against the topic claim that it is the parents fault that they do not notice what their children are watching. They claim that while there is an option of using the YouTube Kids app, the children use the YouTube app which is for the adults. They claim that the children, if they want to watch something, should watch it on YouTube Kids, which is appropriate for their age. Research from YouTube themselves shows that there is 35% drop in the downloads for the YouTube Kids app and a 30% increase in the downloads for the YouTube app. Opposers claim that the parents have bought their children phones and they have free will to watch whatever they want.

 

Likewise, advocates of the topic maintain that their children who either play these video games or watch them have made them more aggressive than ever. The neuroscientist, Trevor Bungs, did a recent case study in which 100 students’ brains were tested. The test results showed that 64 students’ brains were affected by these violent video games. Advocates use this information to prove that these violent video games are affecting the minds of the younger generation.

However, challengers of the topic claim that not all the children played these video games and that some of them were affected just by violent movies, and that not everyone plays violent video games. A recent case study from the VGTC shows that the most trending video game in 2019 was Minecraft which is not a violent video game. In fact, they claim that Minecraft actually boosted the minds of the teenagers who played it as it requires to use your brain.

 

In my opinion, teenagers should not be able to buy violent video games as it makes them more violent and that they should actually play games which involves solving mysteries and puzzles which would actually help to boost their brains instead of ruining them.

Discursive: ‘Parents do not have enough control over their children’  By Areesha Obaid

Standard
As the world has evolved over the many years so has the style of parenting. In old years there was a certain way of parenting mostly strict, and children would have to follow their parents. Parents controlled their children, but over the years this has changed and parents have changed the way of parenting and let their children loose off the control. Do you think you have enough control over your child?
Firstly, supporters of the topic believe that, parents do not keep a check on their children which is why they have lost control of their children. The mother of Adrian a drug addict at just the age of 17 states that if she had kept a check on Adrians phone he would not be a drug addict today.
In retrospect, critics of the topic suggest that parents should not keep a check on their child’s phone. After a recent research Dr. Carl a psychologist states,”These days children are very possessive of their cellphones. It acts as an emotional vault and if you snoop through it, they feel as if their privacy has been invaded.” He further says,”You should just ask your child about what they are doing or just wait for them to communicate with you.” Basically you should not invade your child’s privacy as that would result in a loss of trust.
Secondly, followers of the topic argue that parents should not always listen to everything a child says. A boarding school principal states,”Emotions make your child weak, they are just an excuse. It is not necessary to listen to everything they say.” This is how they control children.
In contrast, people against the topic argue that parents need to listen to what their child is saying and communicate with them. A recent research shows that 80% of the teenagers fall into depression and other stress related problems because they can’t share their problems to their parents; the people who they can actually fully trust and depend on. Clearly this means that parents should listen to whatever their child is trying to tell them. They believe this gives their child confidence and does not try to do anything that would hurt the child or their parents.
Furthermore, advocates of the topic maintain that parents should not let their child work when they are in school. They state that when a child goes to work no one is responsible for them and they are under no supervision. This is the time where they can go where they want and do whatever they want to do. This gives them too much freedom and no one holds them accountable for what they do with the money they earn. This leads to parents losing control over their child. This is mounting evidence that parents do not have control over their children.
On the other hand challengers of the topic claim that, children should be given the freedom to work when they are in school. A teen interviewed said that, “I work part time jobs it adds to my experience, my education is not affected and doing this job just helps me save money for college and shopping.” Parents claim that it brings no harm to the child and just helps the child be financially independent and teaches them how to be adults. This clearly shows that giving a child freedom does not lead them to be out of control.
Some people believe that, parents should check their children’s phones, not give them freedom, and should not listen to what their children are saying to them. Similarly, some people believe the opposite. I believe that whether a child is under control or not depends on how the child is brought up. I further believe that parents should not invade a child’s privacy, they should definitely listen to them and give them limited freedom.

Discursive: Parents do not have enough control over their children. To what extent do you agree with this statement? By Haider Khan

Standard
Do you think parents have enough control over their children? Do you believe children are under enough control to do what their parents want them to do? Or do you believe that children are being given too much freedom and that it is not good for them? So I ask you, should parents be lenient and allow their children to have no specific time to be home etc or should they be strict and not give their children freedom? Let’s discuss.
Those who support the topic, that parents donot have enough control over their children believe that due to this lack of control, children tend to lean towards illegal things such as, drugs, alcohol and many other things. According to Adam Copeland a police officer states that, “Most of the cases I’ve been receiving about abusive, aggressive teenagers come from families that are too lenient, do not have enough control on their children.”
However, opponents of the topic argue that parents do indeed have enough control over their children, as the children have a specific time of coming back home and also have to do the household chores. According to Kabir Hashmi, a student at LUMS University states that, “Even as an adult my parents still keep a specific time for me to come home, I also have to ask for permission before leaving the house.”
People in favour of the topic claim that parents do not have control over their children due to their own mistakes such as, giving children internet access round-the-clock and buying mobile phones for them so they can have a social life. According to a research carried out, about 92% of students at a public school have mobile phones and their parents have allowed them to use the internet at any time and at any place. This shows that bad parenting leads to children being drug addicts or convicts. The usage of these phones, internet leads to bad ideas in the children’s brains which is why Professor Tommy Shelby states that, “Children’s brains does what it sees and believes what others want it to believe.”
Moreover, critics of the topic believe that parents should be slightly lenient with their children as according to Veronica Lodge working at the Department of Health believe that, “Most of the children that have been sent to me are mostly children who’s parents are too tough on them.” This means that most children who do illegal things such as drugs tend to have strict parents and they start doing these things because of the pressure put on them by their parents.
Advocates of the topic maintain that some children mostly in the West tend to disrespect their parents, calling them by their first name or swearing at them. A survey carried out in the state of Ohio shows that 70% of children are not respectful to their parents, or anyone in general. Marry Jenkins, a mother states that, “I have one son and he does not treat me like his mother rather treats me like some maid…”
Finally, those opposed to the topic suggest that parents should raise their children to be respectful and obey the law, while the parents being lenient. This will not only lessen the cases of domestic violence drastically but will also bring peace to everyone. According to Dr. Lucifer Morningstar, “If parents raise their children in a calm and nice manner, those children will be nice to other people on a daily basis and that will lead to peace throughout the world.”
In addition to all these arguments, I personally believe that parents do indeed have enough control over their children as they have given their children a specific time to be home etc and if they were to become more lenient, their children would slip out of their hands and if they were to be more strict, those children would never have lived life.

Discursive Essay: Should teens be able to buy violent video games? Discuss. By: Raja Ahmad Mahmood 

Standard

Q) Should teens be able to buy violent video games? Discuss.

 

By: Raja Ahmad Mahmood

Grade: 10-F

 

Video games? Violent video games? Is the brain of a teenager rewired by a barbaric and violent virtuality? Can this virtuality turn to reality? Or, can this reality turn to virtuality? Not only teenagers, but should adults also be able to buy these violent video games? Should these games even exist, or a big deal is made out of these games by everyone? The answers could be found soon.

 

People in favour of the topic claim that a teen’s brain can be rewired positively by these violent video games. A father of a 14 year old, made his son learn driving laws and to help people unhelped or helpless by a very known violent video game, “GTA 5”.

 

Conversely, those opposed to buy video games suggest that negativity always remains in every part of violence and the brain of a teen can be rewired negatively. A thief who tried to rob many banks in  San fransisco and who murdered many there, taught his son to murder people and steal stuff from them, by the same video game, “GTA 5.” Due to this action, this game is going through court rounds but will soon be relieved as the game was made to be played by people above the age of 21.

 

Nonetheless, advocates of the topic maintain that the game manufacturers have put in a sign up and age restricted registration  system in these video games. John Clarke, the CEO of a video game manufacturing company said in an interview, “Our age-restricted registration does not allow children to play our violent games as we care about their future and the society’s future.”

 

Unquestionably, critics of this topic believe that age-restriction does not matter at all. Jim moriarty, a professor from the National University of Psychology states, “Age-restriction is just a locked door on a path with no walls or fences around it.”

 

Thirdly, campaigners of the topic argue that the sellers of these video games don’t sell video games to people below the age of 21 and especially to people who look suspicious.”

 

At the same time, challengers of the topic claim that any person could be bought. A parent of three children, states, “There are many people out there who could be bought or be used, any child could pay this person and buy a video game and hence none of these policies can work,

 

Fourthly, pressure groups in favour of the topic maintain that violent video games are not bad for health. Professor John Bolton states, “Our university’s research and advancements have decreased 80% of harmful rays from screens and physical aches in people.”

 

But, opponents of the topic maintain that physical and eyesight problems are not only the problems to be considered. Sir Jonnathan Arnold, a lecturer from the medical department of the University Of Colorado says, “Violent video games are rewiring human brains, although these changes are drastic in teenagers, Adults are also having their brains rewired, but at a lower rate. These games should not be made as humans have started to have psychological problems and diseases, including adults.”

 

In conclusion, violent video games are very bad, socially, mentally and physically. I believe that positivity can be found in every aspect of life and that there is no need to ban these games as a wise man once said, “If there is a will, there is a way.”

Positivity can be found no matter what.