Argumentative Essay

Some say that all writing is an argument of some kind. Even if you’re writing an informative essay, you still have the job of trying to convince your audience that the information is important. However, there are times you’ll be asked to write an essay that is specifically an argumentative piece.

An argumentative essay is one that makes a clear assertion or argument about some topic or issue. When you’re writing an argumentative essay, it’s important to remember that an academic argument is different from a regular, emotional argument. In an academic argument, you have more constraints to consider, and the focus is more on evidence and logic, and less on raw emotion.

Argumentative essays are common in academic writing and show up in all disciplines. You may be asked to take a stand on a social issue in your introduction to writing course, but you could also be asked to take a stand on an issue related to health care in your nursing course, or perhaps make a case for solving a local environmental problem in your biology class. So, it's important to learn some basic elements of a good argumentative essay.

The Goal

When several people are arguing, casually or politically, often the goal is to win the argument. In academia, that's not always true. Instead, there are two more important objectives.

If it's a matter of fact, find out what's true, or probably true, and why.
If it's a matter of opinion, find out what positions we can reasonably support, and why.

Suppose that Alice and James write papers about the value of video games in education and share them. Alice walks in thinking video games are a waste of time, but James convincingly demonstrates that they have powerful educational value. Alice might feel embarrassed that her original position was weak, but nevertheless she'll be more knowledgeable on the issue, and that's the goal here. We're trying to learn things about ourselves and the world.

Argument Types

When your instructor asks you to write an argumentative essay, you’ll often be given something specific to write about. However, there are times when you’ll be given a choice of topics. You might even be asked to write an argumentative essay on any topic related to your field of study or a topic you feel that is important personally. Depending on the topic, you are likely to use one or more of the following argument types.

Proposal Arguments – In this type of argument, you must propose a solution to a problem. First, you must establish a clear problem and then propose a specific solution to that problem. For example, you might argue for a proposal that would increase retention rates at your college.
Rebuttal Arguments – In a rebuttal argument, you build your case around refuting an idea or ideas that have come before. In other words, your starting point is to challenge the ideas of the past.
Causal Arguments – In this type of argument, you argue that something has caused something else. For example, you might explore the causes of the decline of large mammals in the world’s ocean and make a case for your cause.
Definition Arguments – In this type of argument, you use a definition as the starting point for making your case. For example, in a definition argument, you might argue that college basketball players should be defined as professional players and, therefore, should be paid.

Techniques

Know your audience. Consider your audience. In many courses, your actual audience is presumably the class and instructor, but you're writing as if other people could also be reading it. In other situations, the target audience could be different. Make reasonable assumptions about the reader's background knowledge. You can't explain everything, and if you explain things everyone knows, they will either get bored or feel insulted. Also, imagine what objections the audience might raise, and write about those. If you can't think of how a reader might react, share your outline with a few classmates and ask for their thoughts.
Limit your appeal to emotion. Relying too much on emotion could be seen as manipulative. The goal is that the reader believes your message because it's true or reasonable, and not because you toyed with their heart. That being said, there is a place for emotional appeal, particularly in the introduction or conclusion. Presumably you chose a topic that you feel is interesting or important; show the reader why they should care.
Be fair and charitable. Common topics for argumentative essays include topics such as school uniforms, single-sex vs. coed schooling, abortion, gun control, the death penalty, animal testing, whaling, gender, and other hot-button topics. If you choose a topic about which you're passionate, it's easy to get excited. There's nothing wrong with excitement, but be understanding and generous. Try to frame an opposing view as reasonably as you can, and then explain why you think it's incorrect or unconvincing.
It's not a persuasive essay. In a persuasive essay, the goal is to change the reader's belief. To make that happen, the writer might make heavy use of emotional appeals, they might ignore strong counterarguments, or they might rely on anecdotal evidence. Those strategies are typically permissible in persuasive essays but less so in argumentative essays. An argumentative essay should show what evidence and reasoning indicates, whereas a persuasive essay should change the reader's mind. Those two goals can overlap, but they're not the same thing.
There are several common structures. If your argument and the counterargument has one main complicated point, consider using a block structure. If the two arguments are composed of many smaller claims, consider using a point-by-point structure. Many writers prefer to address the counterargument before explaining their own argument because the resulting essay ends constructively and positively. Adapt these structures to fit the information and arguments that you have.

Vocabulary

If you want to state a person's position strongly, consider the following verbs: advocate, allege, argue, believe, claim, contend, deny, insist, maintain, reject.

If you're stating a position with less firmness, consider these verbs: favor, imply, indicate, question, recommend, suggest, support.

Here are some useful expressions for introducing and addressing contrary positions.

Although it has been suggested that MSG is unhealthy, recent research indicates otherwise.
Some people believe that MSG is unhealthy. However, recent studies demonstrate the opposite.
Opponents of MSG consumption claim that it is unhealthy, but recent findings show no nutritional drawbacks.
It has been stated that MSG is harmful. Yet, evidence indicates that it is safe.

Example 1: Cheap Thrills

Cheap Thrills: The Price of Fast Fashion

Suzanne Roberts
Excelsior University
April 1, 2014

The cost of clothing is a concern for most American families. In an article for Newsweek’s parenting column, Springen (2008) offered this advice to parents tackling back-to-school shopping: “Steer your kids towards affordable stores like Old Navy and H&M, but don’t force them to buy knockoffs. These days, even preschoolers can spot a pair of fake Ugg boots … and may taunt classmates about them” (para. 1). This advice appears sound and sincere. However, such common wisdom hides the uncomfortable reality that most westerners are more concerned with getting a bargain than with the darker side of mass-consumer fashion.

Attachment to cheap, disposable clothing, commonly known as fast fashion, is supporting a corrupt labor system, unsustainable production practices, and a culture of mindless consumerism. While the issue is complex, western consumers can contribute to a culture of change by revisiting some of their preconceived notions about frugality.

With frequent stories in the news about factory accidents, the average consumer is at least somewhat aware of the conditions most clothes are made under. According to Dishman (2013) of Forbes, “Fashionistas often have a love/hate relationship with [mass-market] retailers like H&M because they equate the inexpensive price tag to the company’s ability to manufacture its merchandise in sweatshops filled with underpaid workers” (para. 8). Yet, this ambivalence does not translate into action because shoppers are used to getting what they want fast and cheap. In his essay “The Branding of Ethical Fashion and the Consumer,” author and industry expert Nathaniel Beard (2008) described the “polarization” between the growing sense of moral obligation in fashion and the consumer who is “increasingly used to, and comfortable with, the availability of trend-led fashionable clothing that is extremely cheap, and where there is actually relatively little guilt felt about its disposability” (p. 450). The instant gratification of an inexpensive garment, such as a pair of sale pants from the Gap for three dollars, wins over humanitarian responsibility because it is convenient, fun, and more easily reconciled with the individual’s bottom line. Plus, everybody is doing it. A middle-class mother or college freshman might reasonably argue they cannot afford to spend more because of financial restrictions. Yet, a westerner’s definition of deprivation often looks pretty rosy in comparison to the average living and working conditions in the underdeveloped world. Perhaps, buying fewer items is a better financial solution than repeatedly buying cheap thrills.

Similarly, consumers are willing to turn a blind eye to the health and environmental implications of their shopping habits in favor of steep discounts. According to Gershon (2005), “a third of a pound of pesticides, which contain known and suspected carcinogens, are used to make a simple cotton t-shirt” (p. 56). He also noted that large amounts of chemical pesticides and fertilizers are used on both cotton and wool, which is harmful to life, both human and animal, and contributes to pollution (p. 56). Once again, this information is available to shoppers but often avoided because it contradicts the accepted mentality of consumption. Beard (2008) acknowledged fashion companies do try to mislead consumers with their use of catch phrases such as “ethical” and “fair trade” (p. 450), but he also emphasized that these same individuals rarely ask hard questions about their clothing (p. 448). Accepting a company’s marketing as truthful and focusing instead on individual savings is simply easier than purchasing less or doing research. The gratification of a cheap thrill is immediate, whereas the detriment to a wearer’s health and the environment they live in may not noticeably surface for many years.

Health complications and chemical hazards during production and consumption are not the only environmental risks associated with fast fashion. The negative consequences of this cultural habit continue when a consumer disposes of a one-season garment in a charity shop or landfill. According to H&M global head of sustainability Helena Helmersson, “People in some countries cannot even afford H&M’s brand of cheap chic and that just reinforces the company’s ‘huge responsibility’ to ditch the throwaway attitude in favor of sustainability” (as cited in Dishman, 2013, para. 9). Helmersson described the attitude of the masses in terms of having room for improvement, but the truth remains that her company, and the hundreds of others like it, propagate this phenomenon with their cheap fabrics, construction, and manufacturing. The people who frequently purchase this type of garment will wear it for a small number of seasons before discarding it in favor of a new, but similar, garment. Thus, the cycle of more-is-more consumerism is upheld.

Brands like H&M often maintain they can produce eco-fashion on the cheap, but this is the type of misleading marketing to which Beard (2008) referred in his article. For example, H&M recently released a collection of organic and recycled clothes that follows several similar efforts in recent years (Dishman, 2013). Yet, these types of efforts rarely address all of the relevant issues, both environmental and humanitarian. For example, H&M’s 2010 Spring Garden collection contained cotton produced with GMOs, which contradicts the marketing strategies they used to promote the collection (Dishman, 2013, para. 3). Additionally, these collections over-simplify the complexities of the interplay between all of the issues involved in the industry.

According to Beard (2008), the chain of a garment’s production includes multiple stages of manufacturing, transportation, retail, and disposal, which makes accountability a real challenge (p. 448). Companies can easily obscure ugly truths while promoting positive elements. A garment at H&M may (or may not) be made from organic cotton. But that organic cotton is likely to have been picked and processed by sweatshop labor, and pollution probably occurred during transport. These types of campaigns are quick fixes designed to ease a consumer’s qualms about what they are buying, while disregarding the malevolent nature of the supply chain.

In “Wearing Your Values,” Gershon (2005) recognized that the price of quality garments is currently quite high, but he also argued that the prices will decrease if companies recognize the potential market for ethical clothing and streamline new practices (p. 57). Consumers can contribute to this change by showing companies they are willing to make reasonable financial investments in doing the ethical thing. A culture that is too invested in possessing large quantities of cheap, disposable garments contributes to a system that exploits natural resources and human rights. Frugality should not come at such a high cost.

Word count: 1,070

References

Beard, N. (2008). The branding of ethical fashion and the consumer: A luxury niche or mass-market reality? Fashion Theory: The Journal of Dress, Body & Culture, 12(4), 447–467.

Dishman, L. (2013, April 9). Inside H&M's quest for sustainability in fast fashion. Forbes.

Gershon, J. (2005). Wearing your values. E: The Environmental Magazine, 16(4), 56–66.

Springen, K. (2008). The devils want Prada. Newsweek, 152(12), 74.

Example 2: How Japan Tortures Citizens With Its Outdated Drug Policies

How Japan Tortures Citizens With Its Outdated Drug Policies

Aaron Moore
High School Writing
2023-09-17

“Don’t do drugs, kids!” is a sentence hammered into each and every kid with competent parents for very good reason. Drugs are infamously dangerous and have been a topic rigorously surveyed by every developed country since the beginning of their criminalization. Drugs are a very prominent problem around the globe and are dealt with differently in every place. Japan deals with drugs in a very systematic and strict way when in reality, drug addiction is something that should be dealt with in a more delicate manner. In Japan, drug users are shunned by society, making it very hard to be rehabilitated after struggling with drugs, therefore making it difficult to become a functioning member of society. Instead of harshly punishing these addicts, Japan should have a more decriminalizing stance on drugs instead of one that is not much more than a foundation for stigma and suffering.

The core of the problem lies in how the Japanese government treats drug abuse as a criminal issue rather than a health and societal one. A heavily critical article on Japanese drug policies by the East Asia Forum condemns Japan as being very far behind in drug policies compared to other first-world countries. The article states that Japan is the only nation in the G7 that has yet to realize that “Punitive approaches to drug use turn a public health issue into an intractable police matter without addressing the underlying concerns” (Christensen, 2023). The mentioned underlying concerns here can range from a wide variety of issues, from public health concerns like the spread of diseases to even economic burdens like high costs of incarceration and empowerment of the black market.

An obvious concern is that decriminalizing drugs would lead to an increase in consumption. With no harsh penalties, people would be more open to experiment with drugs. However, evidence from countries that have decriminalized drug possession suggests otherwise. A fact sheet made by the Drug Policy Alliance (2015) states how in Portugal, drug decriminalization in 2001 led to not a rise, but a decline in young drug users. The key is to pair decriminalization with comprehensive public education and treatment programs that emphasize the risks and consequences of drug use. Japan could adopt a similar model, focusing on prevention through education and harm reduction strategies. When decriminalization is paired with access to healthcare and support services, it encourages responsible behavior and empowers individuals to make informed decisions.

Another underlying concern of the Japanese government are the cultural values of Japan. Japan has a strong cultural emphasis on discipline, social harmony, and personal responsibility. Critics would argue that drug decriminalization goes against these values and that society would not tolerate behavior that could harm individuals and disrupt social order. While it is important to respect cultural values, it is also vital to recognize that addressing drug use through punishment often leads to more harm, both for individuals and society. The compassionate approach of decriminalization aligns with traditional Japanese values of care and community support. By focusing on rehabilitation and reintegration, Japan would be promoting responsibility and social harmony. This approach provides people with the resources they need to overcome addiction and return to being productive members of society, which ultimately strengthens society rather than weakening it.

People who are undereducated on the topic of drugs can easily argue that drugs are inherently harmful to humans, therefore they shouldn’t be decriminalized. While it is true that drugs can be extremely harmful when used wrongly, this is a blanket statement that clearly oversimplifies a complex topic. Many substances that fall under the wide category of “drugs” have many recognized medical benefits. Substances like cannabis and other psychedelics have shown promising results in treating conditions such as chronic pain, PTSD, depression, and anxiety, as stated in the national library of medicine of the USA (Morgan et al., 2013). Not giving citizens access to medication that could improve someone's quality of life can be even considered a violation of human rights. In a country as developed as Japan, it is simply appalling to restrict citizens of potentially life-saving medication.

In conclusion, Japan remains heavily uneducated about the complexities of drug use, with current policies rooted in outdated perspectives that focus on punishment rather than public health. The evidence from other countries shows that decriminalization, coupled with education and harm reduction, can effectively reduce the harms associated with drug use. It is time for Japan to renew its drug policies, moving away from criminalization and toward a more compassionate, science and evidence-based approach that prioritizes health, safety, and societal well-being.

Word count: 775

References

Christensen, P. (2023, April 4). The hypocrisy of Japan's punitive drug policy. East Asia Forum. Retrieved September 19, 2024.

Drug Policy Alliance. (2015, February). Approaches to Decriminalizing Drug Use & Possession. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. Retrieved September 19, 2024.

Morgan, C. J., Noronha, L. A., Muetzelfeldt, M., Fielding, A., & Curran, H. V. (2013, June). Harms and benefits associated with psychoactive drugs: findings of an international survey of active drug users. NCBI. Retrieved September 19, 2024.

Example 3: Are Animals Really Happy?

Are Animals Really Happy?

Betsy Brown
High School Writing
September 19th, 2024

Imagine a life put in a tiny cage, deprived of freedom, just given food constantly, living as a textbook for human education. This is the reality for countless animals living in zoos across the world. While advocates claim that zoos play a vital role in conserving endangered species and embracing education, the ethical consequences of keeping wild animals captive exceed these possible advantages.

Zoos educate people. “When educating people about the importance of conservation of species and their habitats in zoos, it is important to create a connection between them and nature,” Mcelroy (n.d.) says. Zoos, where visitors can observe the actual living animals up close and see them with their own eyes, bring an unforgettable experience and an understanding of animal conservation. With the need to conserve endangered species, the public must learn about conservation, and the interaction between animals and humans could potentially protect wildlife. However, putting animals in small enclosures, only to deepen people’s understanding of wildlife, is unethical. In the wild, animals are designed to inhabit large areas, hunt, and interact with others. But what about the conditions that zoos provide to animals? None of them are enough for animals to live as they used to live in the wild. Keeping animals in cramped spaces with restrictions to access the natural habitat they require to survive, is the same as diminishing animal basic rights. In this biodiversity world, people must respect animals, just as we value our human rights, and not treat animals as if they are our possessions.

Providing places for connection between humans and animals is not the only way for humans to make conservation develop. Many activities are done to provide a better understanding for humans about animals and their lives. For instance, at one of the famous zoos in Japan, the Ueno Zoo, there are programmes where students can directly interact with animals by taking care of them. These educational assistance programs are often held at Japanese primary schools as school events, and students can learn about animals as well as their habitats, entertainingly and memorably. In fact, it would encourage people to embrace pro-conservation and reverence for the natural world attitudes. However, interactions between humans and animals may also heighten the urge for certain people to possess wild animals as “pets” and could give the impression that abusing animals for “cheap titillation” is acceptable. In fact, according to the National Library of Medicine, a recent research paper of the literature on the relationships between animals and visitors in zoos across several nations and continents has taken this into account (Learmonth, 2020). This means that the physical activities held in zoos might be effective for students, but simultaneously, they should not be fully promoted, as the drawbacks are serious.

Additionally, these activities are not completely conservation-focused, indeed, they have commercial goals. Exotic animal exhibitions are the main draw for most of the zoos, and they take precedence over really aiding in conservation efforts. Though some zoos do take part in endangered species breeding projects, the majority of animals kept in captivity are not included in these programs. Zoo animals that are not threatened with extinction and no need to be conserved, are used as financial targets for zoos' economic gain.

“But to be honest, how do we even know what animals feel?” Whenever people say that animals feel unhappy in the enclosed space at zoos, some oppose by saying this. It is obvious that animals and humans speak differently, and there is no way we can communicate with each other perfectly. However, behaviors such as pacing, self-harm, or lethargy, often referred to as “zoochosis” are commonly seen in zoo animals. Animals with these signs show that they have stress and frustration brought on by captivity (What Is Zoochosis and How Do Animals Get It?, n.d.). Because of their large size, social behavior, and such, elephants especially feel uncomfortability. They are confined alone and experience intense loneliness, and every zoo elephant suffers psychologically from being caged up in tiny yards whereas their free-ranging counterparts wander up to 50 miles a day, and many get arthritis and other joint issues from standing on hard surfaces. According to Marris, “At least 20 zoos in the United States have already ended their elephant exhibits in part because of ethical concerns about keeping the species captive” (Engle, 2021).

In conclusion, zoos cannot excuse the cruel treatment of animals kept in captivity, even though they might provide certain educational advantages. The mistreatment and psychological trauma that zoo animals endure highlight the necessity of reconsidering human interactions with the natural world. Instead of depending on old and harmful techniques, conservation efforts should concentrate on protecting the natural ecosystem and species in the wild.

Word count: 796

References

The Benefits of Zoos for Conservation and Education. (n.d.). Center for the Environment & Welfare. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

Engle, J. (2021, October 8). Are Zoos Immoral? The New York Times. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

Learmonth, M. J. (2020, November 4). Human–Animal Interactions in Zoos: What Can Compassionate Conservation, Conservation Welfare and Duty of Care Tell Us about the Ethics of Interacting, and Avoiding Unintended Consequences? NCBI. Retrieved September 29, 2024.

Mcelroy, M. L. (n.d.). The role of zoos in educating visitors about conservation of wildlife and habitats: a design for Sunset Zoo in Manhattan, Kansas. K-REx. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

What Is Zoochosis and How Do Animals Get It? (n.d.). In Defense of Animals. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

Example 4: Eco-friendly Cars?

Eco-friendly Cars?

Miri Murakami
High School Writing
October 5th, 2024

In the past few decades, electric cars have gained popularity due to their quiet operation, ease of driving, and most importantly, their “eco-friendliness.” As global warming accelerates each year, many people view electric cars as a solution to reduce carbon emissions and slow down global warming. However, numerous studies suggested that electric cars are not good for the environment and they do not represent a comprehensive answer for global warming.

One common argument made by people who favor electric cars is that electric cars are good for the environment because they do not emit carbon dioxide. For example, Toyota Marin, a Toyota dealership company, claimed that electric cars “lower carbon footprint and positively impact the environment” (5 Reasons Why Electric Cars Are Better Than Gas Cars, n.d.). This statement itself is true. However, it overlooks an important fact: a large amount of carbon dioxide is emitted during the process of producing electricity, which is the power source for electric cars. In Japan, about 72% of the energy is produced from thermal power generation, and globally, about 60% of the energy is produced from thermal power generation. Thermal power generation is widely known for its extreme emission of carbon dioxide and is considered as one of the main contributors to global warming. Though electric cars themselves do not emit carbon dioxide, since their power source relies on electricity, which accelerates global warming, they indirectly contribute to global warming.

Another statement from the people who consider electric cars to be eco-friendly is that electric cars require fewer natural resources compared to gasoline cars. Still, we must not ignore the fact that electric batteries, the essential part of an electric car, require rare metals such as lithium-ion, cobalt, nickel, manganese, silicon, and electrolyte, which have the potential of causing disastrous environmental issues when mining and processing. According to Harvard International Review (2021), for mining one ton of rare metal, thirteen kilograms of dust, ten thousand cubic meters of waste gas, seventy-five cubic meters of wastewater, and one ton of radioactive waste are produced. These wastes can cause water pollution, radioactive waste, and the disruption of the ecosystem. In the interview by Nikkei, Toru Okabe, a professor and the director of the University of Tokyo’s Institute of Industrial Science, argues, “EV batteries and motors contain large quantities of rare metals… [and] the process of mining the ores from underground and extracting useful metal produces vast amounts of harmful material. You generate hundreds of times as much waste just to make one vehicle” (Matsumoto, 2024). From these statements, it is clear that the production of electric cars carries the risk of enormous harm to the environment.

Moreover, the manufacturing process of electric cars, from production to disposal, is extremely harmful to the environment and causes many negative effects. Car production requires resources such as rubber, glass, plastic, steel, and paints, all of which harm the environment during production and processing. Once the cars are made, they again contribute to carbon dioxide emissions since they will be shipped to many countries around the world. Even after the life of the car ends, it remains harmful to the environment since cars are hard to dispose of, and many of them end up in landfills, emitting toxic chemicals and contaminating the ground.

Electric cars are not as good for the environment as people consider them to be; actually, they are the polar opposite of eco-friendliness. Traditional gasoline-powered cars cause huge damage to the environment as well. Regardless of type or power source, the car itself is extremely toxic and destructive, and it is crucial to accept this reality and reconsider our current lives based on motorization. In the United States, there were 290 million cars in 2020, among a population of 330 million, meaning there is nearly one car per person. The population of the world is 8 billion, and if countries worldwide achieved similar levels of motorization as the United States, there would be around 7.2 billion cars on the planet.

It is important to take a broader perspective and question the necessity of cars in our daily lives. If motorization progresses and society becomes dependent on cars globally, it is evident that our environment will not be able to accommodate such numbers of cars, whether they are electric or gasoline-powered. The environment will surely be destroyed by the intense demand for energy sources such as fuels and electricity and polluted by chemicals. It is necessary to rethink the current car-dependent society and shift towards creating communities that rely less on cars.

Many people buy electric cars thinking that they are good for the environment and a viable solution for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. Even though electric cars can overcome one of the shortcomings—the emission of carbon dioxide during operations—they cause other problems, such as increasing the demand for electricity and potential harm to the environment by mining rare metals, and will never be the fundamental solution for the environment. Instead of being swayed by marketing trends, buzzwords, and advertisements of car industries, it is necessary to have a more sustainable lifestyle and reconsider the dependence on motorized vehicles.

Word count: 868

References

Cook, D., & Jenshel, L. (n.d.). The environmental impacts of cars explained. National Geographic. Retrieved October 4, 2024.

Dickert, C. (2023, September 10). What Electricity Sources Power the World? Visual Capitalist. Retrieved October 3, 2024.

The Environmental Impact of Shipping a Vehicle by Sea. (n.d.). JCS Global. Retrieved October 4, 2024.

5 Reasons Why Electric Cars Are Better Than Gas Cars. (n.d.). Toyota Marin. Retrieved September 25, 2024.

Hyatt, K. (2024, April 5). What are electric car batteries made of? Edmunds. Retrieved October 3, 2024.

León, M. A., & Roshan, O. (2023, September 8). The rare earth problem: Sustainable sourcing and supply chain challenges. Circularise. Retrieved October 3, 2024.

Matsumoto, S. (2024, February 2). Let's get real about EVs' environmental impact, rare metal expert says. Nikkei Asia. Retrieved October 3, 2024.

Nayar, J. (2021, August 12). Not So “Green” Technology: The Complicated Legacy of Rare Earth Mining. Harvard International Review. Retrieved October 5, 2024.

2022 Share of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources in Japan (Preliminary). (2024, February 14). Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies. Retrieved October 3, 2024.

Yacobucci, B. D. (2022, August 29). Critical Minerals in Electric Vehicle Batteries. CRS Reports. Retrieved September 25, 2024.

Example 5: The Day AI Lost

The Day AI Lost

Corey Carlson
High School Writing
October 10, 2024

In this technology-driven world, the field of translation is shifting from humans to devices every day. Businessmen and students are often caught in sight with applications such as Google Translate, DeepL, or ChatGPT displayed on the screen of their devices while facing a foreigner or solving homework from a second language class. The convenience of these online tools today is bringing up the question of whether education in second languages is worthwhile anymore. However, it is certain that some key aspects of human life and society, such as nuance, connection, and development, will be difficult to replace with the power of AI.

While some people point out the advantages of using AI as a learning platform, other people point to the downsides of learning foreign languages. Here, the main argument is whether learning a new language is worth the time and effort when AI is there to translate everything with only the effort to press the enter key (Baluta, 2024). Especially for those who speak English, learning another language does not become a priority when nearly 1.5 billion people speak their language (Dyvik, 2024). To put their claim together, why bother attempting to learn a new tongue and not ask AI when they provide people with a fast and satisfactory way to express themselves in other languages?

Although remarkable speed and ease is an advantage of AI learning, the fact that the information provided might not be true always trails around. As “Artificial intelligence is only as knowledgeable as the information it has been trained on” (5 Pros and Cons of AI in the Education Sector, n.d.), if the trained information was biased, the students could possibly receive lessons based on those distorted knowledge. Particularly, since the topic is about a language that the users knows nothing about, it could be harder than other topics for them to notice whether the information they gained is reliable or not. As learning true information is the minimum requirement and top priority in education, AI which does not meet this could be said as inadequate.

As the argument between the pros and cons of AI utilization and second language acquisition goes on, there are concrete reasons why AI can never beat human teaching. One of the main and obvious points are subtleties (Will AI Replace The Need For Learning Languages?, 2023). Although it is not so hard for humans to pick up minor nuances in the tone of others, AI is not so fond of this skill. Expressions such as irony and sarcasm could be taken more seriously than needed, and friendly and business tones could become mixed up at times. This not only fits for written language but in speaking as well. To gather, nuance and tones are indispensable in human communication, and as long as AI cannot cover this area, it is impossible to say that human teaching is no longer needed.

Another obstacle that AI cannot overcome is the cultural respect that comes with learning a foreign language. After all, language is not all about grammar and vocabulary. Rather, the cultural background of its development and the humanity of the people who use them count bigger. Replacing a shared language learning experience with AI learning would be equal to taking away the opportunity to foster mutual respect and social bond between the ones people communicate with, and if the language is a minor tongue, it might even eliminate the chance to “preserving cultural heritage against extinction” (Will AI Replace The Need For Learning Languages?, 2023). Therefore, to protect the human nature of accepting one’s culture and to keep alive fading languages, it is important that people continue to learn new languages.

It is often said that learning languages has a positive impact on one’s cognitive skills. The process of learning has several effects on the human brain, and the task of remembering new vocabulary and grammar rules especially enhances one’s memorization abilities. Numerous studies conducted until today have shown that bilingual people do better on work involving memory than monolingual people, and that their ability even leads to better multitasking and decision-making skills (Endeavour Speech LLP, 2024). Not only does the impact reflect on the present life, but it may also have a positive effect on the later life of humans. The decline in risk of diseases such as dementia and Alzheimer’s is pointed out between those who learn a new language, and it is an effect that people who rely only on AI can never experience.

To conclude, the benefits of learning foreign languages outweigh the disadvantages of it or the merits of using AI due to elements such as tone, connection, and cognitive development. The ongoing development of AI shows that using them as an assistance tool is not completely deniable. However, as the ability to absorb new languages and to communicate with the world is a capability that only humans have, it will be a waste to give away all of its potential and to be wholly devoted to the power of AI. It is crucial that humans protect their natural-born talent.

Word count: 859

References

Baluta, C. (2024, March 21). Learning a New Language: Pros and Cons. LinkedIn. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

Dyvik, E. H. (2024, July 4). The most spoken languages worldwide 2023. Statista. Retrieved September 23, 2024, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/266808/the-most-spoken-languages-worldwide/

Endeavour Speech LLP. (2024, May 15). The Cognitive Benefits of Language Learning Boosting Brain Health and Mental Agility. LinkedIn. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

5 Pros and Cons of AI in the Education Sector. (n.d.). Walden University. Retrieved September 22, 2024.

Will AI Replace The Need For Learning Languages? (2023, August 21). Pep Talk Radio. Retrieved September 23, 2024.

References

Argumentative Essay. (2023). Excelsior Online Writing Lab, Excelsior University. Retrieved 2024. CC BY-SA 4.0. Some of the above content was copy/pasted from here.
Argumentative Essays. (2024). Purdue Online Writing Lab. Retrieved 2025.
Meyers, A. (2013). Longman Academic Writing: Essays to Research Papers. Pearson.
Sexton J. and Soles D. (2019). Composition and Literature. B.C. Open Textbook Collection.
Smith, S. (2022). Persuasion essays. EAP Foundation. Retrieved 2024.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse