Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 31 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 87% |
Arguments: | 34 |
Debates: | 0 |
China invaded the region as it claims the land that is being disputed and should have the freedom to move within the area which India is occupying.
You are just looking at the negative sides to it. What are not reported in the news are about how many friends have met online, and become close friends in real life. I for one, have met a few good friends I have interacted with online.
There is no evidence to support that humans are becoming socially inept. This also has no relevance to the topic. Although the extensive groundwork for social network may have created a delusional sense of justice, it does not indicate that it has made us less social.
This evidence is not relevant. Twitter may not be as popular in China as in Singapore. Facebook is banned in China as well, hence your argument is rendered null and void.
There is no evidence to support your statement. People still hang out outside often, however, they often lack the time to do so due to parents wanting them to study, work.etc Not everyone wants to stay home all day, but they are left without a choice in this fast-paced society, resorting to social media as a way to keep in contact with friends.
Social Media does not take up a lot of time unless you make so. When people meet up, they usually have a reason, and a conversation topic. They usually talk more. Silence is not commonly found when people meet up, unless they are shy by nature. Therefore, your argument is invalid.
Do you have any evidence to support that statement? Some people do not want to meet each other in person because they are often busy with work or studies, not because there is the added convenience of being able to connect online.
Are you sure Farquhar is easily replaceable? Are you sure that Singapore will not be different because Farquhar is not around? Farquhar stopped infestations in a few days. Are you sure anyone has the guts to use his own pocket money to get rid of infestations? I suggest you stop using guesswork and relook into Farquhar's contributions and see whether you think anyone could have done Farquhar's job as well, if not better.
If I am wrong, then what had Raffles done that is more than Farquhar. Raffles established the trade settlement. Farquhar kept it from falling apart.
Both William and the locals benefitted from it. Their communication is improved, therefore, they can understand each other perfectly, and can work together properly.
|