Scribd
Upload
34 views2 pages

Essay 14 - Trương Thế Hoàng

Uploaded by

Hoang Bi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
34 views2 pages

Essay 14 - Trương Thế Hoàng

Uploaded by

Hoang Bi
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Part 1.

The excerpt ‘Education Philosophy’ discusses the history of childcare,and the nature of
children as well as child-educating methods. Firstly, the author elucidates the change in
children’s role in the family from manual workers in the 19th century to the recipients of care,
love with less work associated with, which is largely due to technological and industrial
revolution, combined with the increase of bourgeois class. This trend also manifested itself
through the rising popularity of child care first devised by John Locke, in which family plays a
central role. Subsequently, defined as naturally untainted entities despite external factors by
Jean Jacques Rousseau, children are different from adults in terms of perspective and
psychology. Sharing the same notion, Johan Heinrich Pestalozzi invented an approach to
nurture a child comprehensively based on creating an emotionally comfortable environment.
Part 2.
The graph illustrates how much energy was produced from different sources in France
between 1995 and 2005.
At first glance, except for petrol, all the energy production increased slightly. Additionally,
coal, gas and gas were the largest energy sources throughout the period, followed closely by
nuclear power.
Upon closer scrutiny, in 1995, French produced roughly the same amount of power from
coal, gas, and petrol, each accounting for less than a third. Meanwhile, nuclear were the only
popular green energy generated in France, with around 6, 4%, which is a little higher than
the figure for other sources combined at approximately 5%.
Turning next to a decade later, in 2005, despite lessening reliance on petrol as a supply of
energy to half, France’s energy sector still relied heavily on coal and gas with the same
proportion of 30%. Also witnessing an upward trend, nuclear energy rose its percentage in
France’s energy landscape by 4%, which is the same increasing rate for other sources.
Part 3.
Many people worry that innovative technology will supplant humans in future
workplaces, whether industrial, administrative, or creative. Others however, insist that
while technology is an invaluable tool, it could never replace people. Discuss both
views and give your opinion.

Answers:
Since the advent of technology, human beings have faced two major phases which were
predicted to totally supplant human labor in industries, one is the computer age in the 1990s
and the other is the era of AI recently. However, the truth is, we still held an unchangeable
position in the labor market, irrespective of technological advancements. Despite some
people believing the displacement of men brought forth by technology, I gravitate towards
the notion that humans cannot and will never be replaced by any agents.
On the one hand, it is unquestionably correct that technology grants employers an invaluable
tool compared to their human employees. Foremost, technology is efficient. While a man,
after the consensus about labor’s right, must and can only work 8 hours a day, 6 days a
week, a robot or computer, for instance, can work around the clock tirelessly as long as it is
plugged to an electricity source. Combined with its increasing intelligence and power and the
burgeoning speed of digitisation, technology, as a result, seems to provide companies with
perfect substitution to human workers. In this respect, technology is obviously superior to
humans regarding efficiency. Secondly, these innovations and inventions are, by no way,
living beings and therefore, companies will not have to cover the usual fee, salary associated
with normal employees. This means the only cost put on such companies will be the
installation, operation and maintenance fee, which is far more cost-effective than a human
counterpart.
On the other hand, while this scenario is possible in the foreseeable future, I , rather, firmly
believe that technology will transform but not supplant the traditional workforce. First,
technology is yet to emulate the emotions of human beings. Being an employee in this era
entails the application of not only qualifications and knowledge but also the ability to
sympathize, a cornerstone of being human. Since society also prioritizes emotional features,
technology will never be eligible for an opening, particularly in jobs such as educators, artists
and therapists. For example, a good doctor is not just a doctor with unrivalled diagnosis and
treating prowess, but rather he has to understand his patients emotionally to better the
treatment, which AI can never replicate.
In my opinion, in lieu of eradicating the appearance of humans from the labor markets,
technology may be deemed an efficacious tool, advocating human employees in their works.
On the face of it, technology and humans may be exclusive. They can, however, exist
harmoniously and foster a symbiotic relationship, thereby setting a breeding board for
human’s reach new heights.
In conclusion, while technology appears to have an efficient and cost-effective edge over a
human worker, it cannot supersede anthropogenic factors in labor markets due to its critical
lack of emotion. This poses a challenge and simultaneously creates an opportunity for
humans and technology to revolutionise the job market

You might also like