Chủ đề: Scientific Research - Bài mẫu IELTS Writing và Từ vựng kèm theo
Introduction: Paraphrase lại đề bài: 1 – 2 câu.
Thesis statement (giới thiệu nội dung chính của toàn bài): Trả lời trực tiếp câu hỏi của đề bài.
Body 1: Giải thích vai trò của Government
1st idea: Các scientific research là mấu chốt để tìm ra giải pháp của các vấn đề xã hội (y tế, năng lượng thay thế)
Support: Các nghiên cứu y học cần phải được thực hiện bởi Governments để tạo ra các vắc-xin. Các nghiên cứu về năng lượng chống lại Global Warming chỉ có thể được chi trả nhờ Government
2nd idea: Đáng tin cậy
Support: Ví dụ, những chương trình nghiên cứu vũ khí hạt nhân phải có sự gíam sát của chính quyền để tránh nguy cơ khủng bố
Body 2: Giải thích vai trò của Private companies
1st idea: Nhiều sản phẩm khoa học đã được tạo ra nhờ tư nhân
Support: Ví dụ như sự phát minh Iphone của hãng Apple mở ra kỉ nguyên smartphone
2nd idea: Các công ty tư nhân phát triển sản phẩm riêng của họ và tạo ra sự cạnh tranh trong thị trường
Support: Điều này giúp xã hội có thêm những sáng chế mới và giá thành chúng rẻ hơn.
Conclusion: Paraphrase lại thesis statement và nêu lại quan điểm, ý kiến cá nhân đã đề cập trong bài.
Scientific research plays an important role in the development of humanity. Some people think that the responsibility for conducting and managing it should be taken by governments, and not by private companies. Personally, I believe that both governments and private businesses should have the right and duty to carry out research.
I believe that governments should play the leading role in performing research due to a number of reasons. Firstly, scientific research is the key to finding solutions to the pressing concerns of society. Thorough medical research, for example, needs to be conducted by governments to develop vaccines against potential epidemics. Research into renewable energies is also crucial to dealing with global warming. These kinds of research require a great deal of spending, which can only be afforded by the government. In addition, scientific studies controlled by governments will ensure that reliable and ethical methods are used, and minimize the risk of these studies being used for criminal activity. For instance, studies related to nuclear power or weapons must be carried out or supervised by governmental organizations to protect a country from terrorism or other warfare.
However, private companies can do research which is not carried out by governments. In fact, many useful scientific discoveries have been made by private institutions. To illustrate, the invention of the iphone by Apple, a corporation in the US began the era of smartphones and facilitated modern forms of interaction between people all over the world. Furthermore, encouraging profit-driven companies to conduct scientific investigations will help them develop their own products and create competition in the marketplace. Society will therefore benefit from new inventions and better products.
In conclusion, although governments should control and carry out major scientific studies, private companies should not be deprived of the right to do research.
Many argue that scientific research should only be controlled by the government, others hold the view that individuals companies should be allowed to do reseaches on their own. I firmly believe that both sides should be allowed as they hold their own positive and negative aspects. The following paragraphs will discuss this in detail.
To begin with, science exepriments facilites should mostly be controlled by the goverment. This leads to the fact that many random facilities could be doing forbidden stuff without the acknowledge of people in power. For illustration, many facilities that have been known as science facilities in Brazil actually ended up being places to produce and sell drugs. Thus, it is crucial that governments watch over these places to ensure no regulations are being vaiolated.
Conversely, while it is important to watch over scientits, they can feel a heavy pressure because of that which can reduce their performance. In addition, majority of scientits prefer to work in quiet places without getting interrupted. For instance, one of Oxford researchers showed a signifacnt reduce in performance when he was being watched. Hence, researcher having their own companies can make them feel more comfortable and relaxed.
In conclusion, although scientists need their own areas where they can do their work peacefully, it is crucial for the government to look over these places to make sure everything is being followed by the laws of the country. Ultimately, i belive that researchers should be given freedom and not be restructed by the pressure of governments, but also need to look over them every couple of months to ensure the country's safety.
It’s widely accepted that conducting scientific research is a typical high income with high risks project, while the governments are capable to undertake the risk of scientific research and provide sufficient capital for scientists to complete their research. However, I disagree with the claim that the governments ought to dominate all the scientific research.
On the one hand, the governments have an undeniable responsibility for research in some key areas. For one thing, research into nuclear technology, national defense or military intelligence is in the national interest or involves high levels of secrecy and should be carried out only by the government. Additionally, in basic scientific research, which is directed purely towards the advancement of knowledge, or where results cannot be guaranteed, there is little incentive for the private sector to invest in these areas and therefore the governments take the leading role.
However, the aforementioned examples do not automatically mean that this situation should be suitable under all circumstances. There are some reasons for private companies to participate in scientific research. To begin with, research is done more efficiently by private companies due to the fact that they are profit driven, pushing them try their best to enhance successful rate. Every dollar is spent wisely to ensure maximum benefits and every resource is used effectively to avoid waste. Furthermore, based on the market-oriented approach of private companies, the outcomes they have developed are closely associated with the market need. Also, excessive government intervention may affect scientists' thought and limit their ability to freely create.
In conclusion, for some research that involves national security issues or projects with low probability of return, it’s responsible for governments to manage. But in other cases, such as developing new products, private companies may perform better.
There is an ongoing debate about whether scientific research should be conducted and regulated by governments rather than private companies. I fully agree that governments should lead and control scientific research because of the need for public accountability, ethical oversight, and a focus on long-term societal benefit over profit.
Firstly, government-controlled research ensures that scientific endeavors prioritize public interest rather than profit-driven motives. Private companies, while essential for innovation, are often beholden to shareholders, which can lead to conflicts of interest and short-term profit goals. This influence can skew research agendas toward areas with high financial returns rather than addressing critical issues like public health, climate change, and basic science. In contrast, government-funded research can focus on solving pressing societal problems without the pressure of immediate financial gain, as seen in government-led projects addressing infectious diseases, renewable energy, and environmental protection.
Secondly, scientific research conducted under government oversight is generally subject to stricter ethical standards, which protects public safety and welfare. Governments can implement comprehensive regulatory frameworks and ethical guidelines to ensure that research is conducted responsibly, particularly in sensitive fields like genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, and artificial intelligence. For instance, in the development of vaccines, government-led research typically undergoes extensive clinical trials to ensure public safety, whereas private companies might prioritize speed and cost efficiency over thorough testing. When governments lead scientific research, it is more likely that robust ethical standards will be maintained, reducing risks to society.
Furthermore, scientific breakthroughs often require long-term investment and a degree of risk that private companies may not be willing to undertake. For example, space exploration and fundamental physics are areas that require sustained funding and a high tolerance for failure, which are more feasible within government-funded programs. Landmark achievements, such as the Apollo moon landing or the Human Genome Project, were made possible due to extensive public investment and the vision of long-term benefits rather than immediate returns. By funding and controlling these types of projects, governments can drive advancements that might otherwise be neglected by private industry due to the associated costs and risks.
However, it is also true that private companies bring efficiency, agility, and additional funding to the research field, which can complement government efforts. In fields like technology and applied sciences, private sector involvement has led to significant advancements, as seen in the rapid growth of artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and renewable energy technologies. Nonetheless, even in these areas, government regulation remains crucial to ensure that private research aligns with ethical standards and contributes to public welfare rather than merely corporate interests.
In conclusion, while private companies play a valuable role in scientific innovation, I firmly believe that governments should lead and control scientific research. This approach ensures that research is conducted with ethical integrity, prioritizes public interest, and allows for the long-term investment needed for breakthrough discoveries. Government oversight in scientific research is, therefore, essential for ensuring that scientific advancements benefit society as a whole.
Regarding should scientific research taken care of and controlled by governments or private companies, this event includes a lot of points. In my opinion, I believe that both carried out and managed scientific research can provide more benefits to society.
There are several reasons to support the government in the management of experimental research. The governments will consider the benefits of the public at first not profits when during the experiments. This means that research funded by the government will solve social issues like healthcare, environmental protection, and basic science experiments. These results can bring long-term benefits to the world, not merely commercial benefits. Moreover, the government can provide stable funding support because scientific research requires long-term patience, and it cannot have a result in a short time. Therefore, the government can continue to invest and will not be affected by market influence.
There are several reasons why private companies should also have control of scientific research. Firstly, during the research period, normally the participation of private companies can be more focused on innovation and efficiency. With the promotion of market competition, businesses can quickly transfer the result of research to products and services to consumers. This efficiency transformation progress can promote the development of both technology and the economy. Secondly, private companies mainly multinational enterprises owning plenty of finance and resources can invest in research and development, which can solve the insufficient investment problem of the government. Finally, private companies can explore various research directions depending on the market’s needs and customers’ preferences. As a result, they can provide the products and technologies that are related to reality which help to improve social development.
In conclusion, my view is that during the progress and proceed of scientific research, both the government and the private sector should join, this will lead to expanding their benefits. Consequently, I partially agree that the government should dominate scientific research, but I also believe that the participation of the private sector is essential.
In today’s interconnected society, there is a prevailing proposition that governments instead of private companies, should be responsible for scientific research. With this, I completely agree.
There are several supporting reasons, one of which is that authority agencies are more appealing to scientific talents. That is because researchers who work for governments are authorized to utilize resources and technologies nationwide. Some rare resources and cutting-edge technologies, which are exclusive to government sectors, are not accessible to privatized enterprises. With this superiority, scientific breakthroughs are more achievable. As a result, it is much easier and faster for scientists to witness their endeavours contributing to the public and to have a sense of achievement. This is why outstanding scientists are more willing to work for states.
Another underlying factor is that authority control of scientific investigation can better benefit the entire association. To be more specific, the primary obligation of countries is to guarantee the welfare and safety of citizens. When investigation is conducted under government control, it is more likely to prioritize research projects that are of substantial benefit to society. For example, government-funded exploration often focuses on domains such as healthcare, education and environmental sustainability. However, profit might take priority of private companies over public interest. Consequently, the whole society can benefit more directly from the scientific study implemented by governments.
In conclusion, based on the aforementioned arguments, I agree that scientific research should be conducted by states instead of private companies as this will attract more talented scientists to achieve more significant outcomes which prioritize public interest.
Xem thêm các tài liệu Tiếng Anh hay, chi tiết khác:
TOP Việc làm "HOT" dành cho sinh viên:
Đăng nhập để có thể bình luận
Nếu bạn đang tìm cách nâng trình tiếng Anh thú vị hơn thay vì học theo cách truyền thống, việc học qua phim ảnh và video có thể là lựa chọn lý tưởng. Cùng 1900.com.vn khám phá Top 13 website học tiếng Anh qua phim ảnh & video online chất lượng hiện nay — giúp bạn vừa giải trí vừa tiến bộ, nâng cao khả năng nghe nói và phản xạ tự nhiên hơn.
1900.com.vn tổng hợp bài viết về Câu điều kiện loại 1 (First Conditional) đầy đủ các kiến thức bao gồm: Định nghĩa, cấu trúc ngữ pháp, cách dùng, các ví dụ minh họa và bài tập vận dụng. Từ đó giúp bạn nắm vững kiến thức và học tốt Tiếng Anh hơn.
1900.com.vn tổng hợp bài viết về Speaking Forecast 2023 | Bộ đề dự đoán chi tiết mới nhất cung cấp cho người học một loạt các chủ đề, câu hỏi và phương pháp luyện tập để giúp họ nâng cao khả năng giao tiếp tiếng Anh của mình. Từ đó giúp bạn nắm vững kiến thức và học tốt Tiếng Anh hơn.