Pro-Con Exercise

Write your topic: Hydraulic Fracturing/Fracking

Write your tentative question:  Why isn’t the government doing more to put a band on or regulate the fracking process?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

While fracking does prove to be able to provide a large quantity of natural gas and oil for our domestic use, the problems associated with it are clearly detrimental to the health of our society and more should be done to regulate this pressing issue.

Claims that support/strengthen your argument:

1.  In order to get the natural gas from beneath the ground, land must be cleared and forests are destroyed in numerous locations around the country that not only makes the surrounding area look unpleasing, but creates a quality of life for that’s unhealthy for the residents in the area.

2.  When the land is mined for these resources a water, sand, and chemical mixture is propelled into the ground at high pressures in order to break through the shale stone layer of the Earth’s crust.  Unfortunately, this mixture, and any residue that comes from it, are often not disposed of properly and tend to leak into local rivers and estuaries thus, polluting the environment for both the organisms and humans living there.

3.  There have been claims in which excess gas, or shafts that weren’t lined properly and allowed leaks, have formed pockets in the surrounding ground which have then mixed with local residents water systems and pipes and caused gas to leak into their houses when they had the water on.  In a few instances the gas that built up in the houses lead to greater troubles, such as, explosions.

4.  It is known that one of the results of fracking is methane leaking into the local area and surroundings.  Methane is extremely bad for the environment, being that it is believed to be one of the major components of ozone depletion and global warming, and is a great health hazard to those who are exposed to it directly.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument:

1.  It proves to be a big boost for our economy and has the potential to provide and bring thousands of jobs here to the U.S..  With the current problem that unemployment is so high and there are so many individuals without jobs, this could be a true turn around for our economy.

2.  There are estimated values that the supply of natural gas that is “hidden” beneath us could last us for roughly 100 years.  This would mean that we could have less of a reliance on foreign countries and industries for oil and gas, and could turn into a major world exporter of fuel.  This too would provide a boost for our economy that is greatly needed.

3.  The EPA has yet to find any direct results or negative outcomes that fracking has had on its’ surrounding areas.  That any of the current reported problems or things that have happened are all due to other reasons and not solely to fracking.

4.  It solves a lot of the energy problems that we currently face here in the United States and seems to be liked by both democrats and republicans, although democrats are much quicker to shoot it down.

Pro/Con

Write your topic:

The dangers in unhealthy foods and what we should be eating instead

Write your tentative question:

Just how bad are the foods we eat? What should people look out for and eat instead?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

A growing number of people, kids and adults both included, are choosing the unhealthy food options over a nutritional diet. There are a lot of long term health effects, like obesity, that are caused by eating processed foods with high amounts of fats and sugars; people should be more aware about the harmful effects about a lot of foods and find healthy alternatives.

Claims that support/strengthen your argument:

1. I want to expose just how unnatural the foods are that we are eating. I will need to include specific ingredients that are used that are processed and how much ingredients, like sugars, are being added into our foods. In order to reveal the effects of unhealthy foods, I would like to go into detail about why these foods are so unhealthy.

2. There is a correlation between obesity and fast food/packaged foods. I want to find specific numbers and statistics that prove how more and more people are being diagnosed with obesity, and how there are more fast food options available to people. I would also want to find specific cases of people/families/common lifestyles that admit to how they eat these packaged/processed foods and are now facing the challenges of obesity.

3. The majority of people are more inclined to choose the unhealthy option over the healthy one. I want to provide evidence that people tend to choose junk food over fruits, vegetables, and homemade meals. And that even those who do choose to make foods at home, a lot of people resort to canned foods or anything that make it easier and faster to cook at home. I basically want to incorporate just how big of a problem this is among people. And I might narrow in on specific people, like kids, college students, and young adults in general.

4. There are healthy alternatives that are available to people, they just need to be introduced to them. I want to include what nutritional  options are out there and how these are the foods that people should be eating. And it would be great if I could find statistics on certain foods that include how popular certain healthy foods are so that people realize that healthy food doesn’t necessarily mean disgusting or bland food.

 

Claims that undermine/challenge your argument:

1. One claim that will definitely challenge the idea of needing to eat healthier is that healthy foods are very expensive. A lot of people choose to eat fast food because it’s cheaper and most people can afford that. It’s very hard to maintain a healthy diet when the prices are so high. I’m going to try to counter this claim by including how people can either try to grow their own produce; identify the super markets with healthy foods, but lower prices; and find any deals that allow the buyer to buy healthy foods for good deals, like buying in bulk.

2. A lot or chain restaurants and fast food restaurants claim that they have healthier options, like salads and fruit. In order to counter this, I want proof that these alternatives that are available are not all that healthy. Salads get drenched in fattening dressing, and are loaded with meats and cheeses to cover the taste of the lettuce. And a lot of the lettuce used is iceberg lettuce, which has virtually no health benefits. Even if there are “healthier” options at these joints, most people do not pick them over the other choices.

3. Some people simply believe that healthy foods just don’t taste good. And for a lot of people who grew up eating an unhealthy diet don’t believe that it’s possible to stop eating the only foods that they know. So I want to find sources that identify a lot of foods that are both healthy and found to be popular based on their taste, like a fresh smoothie over a milkshake.

4. A lot of people argue that they don’t have enough time to cook food for the family and that it’s just easier to go pick up fast food. While it definitely is difficult for people to find the time, it is still possible. There are plenty of healthy meals that are extremely quick to make, and there are also meals that can be made in advance and then heated up later or used for a couple meals. It’s better to have the same healthy meal twice a week than constantly have fast food.

Pro/Con

Write your topic: 

Good or bad effects finance brings to our lives

Write your tentative question: 

Why do most people think finance always brings us good lives? What kind of data base do they use to prove that? Does that reliable? Why do most governments want to develop finance to build their countries? Is this reasonable? How did finance change our lives? Does it  help us to raise living standards? Does finance have any bad effects? What are they? Does these bad effects influences people’s lives and countries economics? How so? Which one influenced more, good or bad effects?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree): 

I think the stock market and haphazard investment does bad for people’s lives.

Claims that support/strengthen your argument

  Identify the claims that support your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to support 

each claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step, 
      start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. The stock market or investment would cause foam economy which is really bad for countries. Such as 2008 finance crisis. “Yet the crisis showed the invalidity of the most important assumption that the value of the underlying cash flows is invariant to their repackaging” This means that however the finance developing,the real value of money would never changes. Therefore, it was just not necessary for contry to develop finance.

2.The stock market or investiment would cause people to be lazy and just want money falling down from the sky. They don’t know investment and stock still needs knowledge .

3.The stock market or investment would cause people loss money too. Like I mentioned the finance cirsis and especially the Chinese stock market, those kinds of issues would cause people loss money.

4.Although the stock market or investment would earn money , people’s lives don’t really rises. For example china.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument

Identify the claims that challenge your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (reason, stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to counter

this claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step, 
      start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1.It would be not hard to say investment is a good way to develop economy, that’s why most countries try to develop finance as their goals in decades. Investment would really helps rising economy too, such as America.

pro/con

Write your topic: weather and moods

Write your tentative question: why do people always relate bad weather to depression? Is it just a common sense that people are told to think this way since they were born, or are there any scientific explanations behind it? If there do exist scientific reasons, how does weather influence our negative emotions invisibly? If not, what is the true factor to influence our moods?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree): People should be responsible for their moods’ changes, rather than weather.

Claims that support/strengthen your argument
Identify the claims that support your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.
What evidence (stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to support
each claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. In a few cases, weather relates to moods, but it doesn’t mean that weather is a reason to cause moods’ changes. Someone else say it is true, so it implies the fact is true. People relate mood to weather because of psychological autosuggestion.

2. Seasonal affective disorder (SAD) is also possible to happen in summer. There are some true personal experiences shared in an article called “Seasonal Depression Can Accompany Summer Sun” in NY Times. So the disease contains summer SAD and winter SAD.

3. People use a small amount number of extreme cases to represent the whole, such as SAD.

4. The experiments which conclude weather changes mood does not consider other factors, such as age, gender. There is an experiment conducted by Goldsteim in 1972 by questionnaire, suggesting that sex, belief in external
Control may be related to reactivity to the weather. Klimstra wrote a report on Individual Differences in How Weather Affects Mood, acknowledging that people may be happier in sun and may be happier in rain as well.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument
Identify the claims that challenge your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.
What evidence (reason, stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to counter
this claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. Suicide rates are high in areas with low temperature and less sunshine. For example: Alaska has the highest suicide rate among all states the US. On the Statewide Suicide Prevention Council website: “The rate of suicide in the United States was 11.5 suicides per 100,000 people in 2007. In 2007, Alaska’s rate was 21.8 suicides per 100,000 people. Alaska has the highest rate of suicide per capita in the country.” Also, the suicide rates of Sweden and Norway are very high.

2. Seasonal affective disorder (SAD), which mostly occurs in winter, with symptoms like depression, anxiety and extremes of moods. “SAD occurs in both the northern and southern hemispheres, but is extremely rare in those living within 30 degrees latitude of the equator” (Mental Health American.org).

3. Some experiments claim that bad weather causes depression and good weather is happy. For example, Howard and Hoffman (1984) had 24 college students keep track of their moods, which shows a significant effect on mood correlated with the weather. And also, another study by Keller and his colleagues (2005) declares the same opinion.

Pros/Cons Exercises

Write your topic:

Smartphones and the public’s relationships                      

Write your tentative question:

Does smartphones benefit or ruin the public’s life, especially for the public’s relationships?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

Nevertheless, Smartphones bring convenience to people’s lives, they indeed cause conflicts of  people’s relationships. People who do not arrange the usage time of smartphones hurt their relationships than smartphones themselves. Therefore, people should appropriately arrange the usage time of smartphone and increase the time of communicating with friends, families and partners in order to maintain relationships.

 

Claims that support/strengthen your argument

            Identify the claims that support your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to support

each claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. Smartphones allow parents and adolescents to contact frequently and freely. Frequency of adolescent-initiated calls for social support increases the communication and closeness between parents and adolescents. Similarly, parents ending calls with “I love you” may related to the adolescent’s feeling of caring and warmth, elevation self-esteem.

2. Smartphones leave the freedom of the romantic relationships. People can text to their partners via smartphones in order to speak out what they cannot say face-to-face, such as, expressing love and caring to each other.

3. Smartphones can tie partners together. The ubiquity of cell phones makes them available as tools dating partners use to maintain their romantic relationships. Contacting freely and sharing funny things via text and Internet increase the closeness between partners.

4. People prevent themselves from mobile addiction via controlling themselves of using smartphones.

 

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument

            Identify the claims that challenge your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (reason, stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to counter

this claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. High frequency of parent-initiated calls to adolescents let adolescents perceive ubiquity of parental monitoring. This may cause conflict and quarrels between parents and adolescents and decreases the self-esteem of adolescents when they are staying with their friends.

2. Smartphones allow uncertainty about when, how, and how much to communicate-uncertainty to which relational partners need to respond. Sometimes, late for response increase quarrels and hurt the romantic relationship.

3. The ubiquity of smartphones arise the problem of keeping eyes on partners. Highly frequent calls and numerous texts make partners feel embarrassed and choky.

4. Mobile addiction reduces the concentration of adolescents during studying. Staring at the smartphone to look for something funny on Twitter or Facebook all the time may hurt the romantic relationship. Living in the virtual world for a long time causes the deficiency of communicating with others in the real world.

Pro/Con

Write your topic: Technology and Education

Write your tentative question: Would implicating technology into the classroom provide better results than the traditional methods of teaching?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

Technology in education yields better results than the traditional form of teaching. Therefore schools should be pushing for more technological integration into their curriculum at the same time learning the best ways to adopt all the resources available to better meet the needs of their students.

 

Claims that support/strengthen your argument

            Identify the claims that support your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to support

each claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. Education in the classroom would help better prepare students for the 21^st century workforce. All forms of technology and applications of the internet play a major role in society today. By indirectly teaching students How to use and understand such things would provide to be an irreplaceable life skill for their futures.

2. (Active Engagement) The use of technology provides a more direct approach to educating students. Rather than simply textbooks and black board examples, students have more of an opportunity to interact with their education. (For example: Interactive Smartboards, online experiments, videos, tangible examples of learned topics, etc.) This makes common lessons more retainable by peaking the interests of students.

3. The application of technology would allow teachers the ability to tend to the needs of many students with a variety of difficulties rather than approach them all as a group problem in classrooms.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument

            Identify the claims that challenge your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.

What evidence (reason, stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to counter

this claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. The implication of technology does not always yield better results to the traditional method. In the end it depends on the students and the abilities of the teacher. Plenty of students have had no trouble with education in the past making technology not as necessary as it seems to be; it becomes more of a privilege then a necessity.

 

2. Integrating technology into the classroom is not as easy as expected. Not only is this a costly investment that many schools in this country cannot afford but also it takes a great deal of time to prepare before it becomes something of use. Integrating specific tools into a class can be more challenging than expected. It takes a great deal on the teacher to plan and learn all aspects of the tools and resources they wish to bring to the class. On top of that, students must also become accustom to the changes. This in itself could affect performance in a negative way before they begin to understand how everything works and how they can use this technology, resources, and programs to their benefit.

3. An increase of online plagiarism may end up as a result of dependence on technology for research and other assignments assigned to test the abilities of students. Many assignments such as essay topics or research topics reflect the ability of students to obtain information and apply it to prove a point or something relevant; much like thesis essays. But many of these open ended assignment end up being similar to others from other schools and other classes and therefore could be taken and used fairly easily. As compared to the past, plagiarism was more difficult because obtaining the works of others was more challenging and opportunistic at best, but now with so many different resources, posts online, such things are common place to find.

4. A “digital divide”; in this case between the more wealthy compared to the less wealthy. If technology in education were to yield better results, then the people and educational districts that could afford it would out pace low budget areas, more so than now. Public schools would be out matched by all private or well-funded schools.

Pro/Con Grid Exercise

Write your topic: Distracted driving due to new automotive technology

Write your tentative question: Has the technology in cars reached a point where it is much more distracting
rather than helpful?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):
While new innovative ideas are being made to help assist a driver, they are in turn more distracting and take
away the driving experience

Claims that support/strengthen your argument
1. Anecdote about car giving a live update on what the weather is outside at the moment. Why do you need a

live update if you’re already inside the car, which is outside? Can’t you just look outside?

2. Article discussing how cars have the ability to check whether there’s another car by you when you merge

onto the highway. Why not just turn your head and check like how people have been doing for years?

3. Internet enabled devices in cars. Reading out Facebook status updates while driving is completely

unnecessary; it can wait.

4. Distracted driving guidelines recently issued by NHTSA

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument

1. “The technology is needed for older drivers who have trouble driving.” To counter this, I don’t think you

should be allowed to drive if you are having trouble doing so in the first place.

2. “Technology will never advance if we keep limiting our current automotive tech”

3. “Self driving cars can become real as a result of all of this new technology.” That’s great and all. but self-driving cars is a whole other topic that should also be looked upon heavily

4. “The new technology makes driving easier.” Well, driving shouldn’t be easy. It requires a great deal of concentration and awareness.

Pro/Con Grid

Topic: E-Waste Recycling in China

Tentative Question: Should we continue dumping waste on countries for the sake of trade, even though it is ethically irresponsible, or should we stop this practice, but jeopardize our relationship with China?

Tentative Thesis: We should continue trade with China.

Support:

1) We need e-waste recycling to balance supply/demand of key metal resources.

Technology grows rapidly each day, with year-old devices being seen as “obsolete”. In order to supply the rapidly growing industry, more metal is needed. China is the world’s #1 producer and consumer of metals (China Nonferrous Metals industry Association, 2009; China Metallurgical Industry Press, 2009). 

2) We need e-waste recycling because there is only a limited amount of metal.

It is necessary to preserve the use of “virgin resources”. The extraction of this limited number of resources depletes the world’s reserves, and requires the native people of that land to be removed from the premises.

3) We need e-waste recycling because it is mutually beneficial for the US and China.

The US needs to recycling electronic equipment because the byproducts can prove deadly to humans and toxic to the environment. China buys the e-waste from American recycling companies, fueling a multi-billion dollar industry. Similarly, China benefits financially from taking old electronics and recycling them by extracting the precious metals in order to re-use in new devices.

4) We need e-waste recycling because we need to maintain good relations with China.

The e-waste recycling trade with China generates a $7.2 Billion dollar industry with the US. E-waste recycling, or “electronic machinery and equipment” is the 3rd most popular commodity in trade with China. Additionally, US trade (imports/exports) constitutes a whopping 25% of the US’s entire GDP as of 2011, with China being the US’s #1 trading partner. Therefore, maintaining an amicable relationship with China is necessary in order for the US to maintain its status as one of the world’s leading superpowers.

Challenge:

1) We do not need e-waste recycling because the towns in China that handle the recycling are getting sick.

Although e-waste recycling can prove toxic when mishandled, it is on the onus of the respective mayors of each town to protect the health and welfare of its citizens. Instead, they cover the scandal up. We need to reform government corruption and e-waste handling practices, not cease e-waste operations.

2) We do not need e-waste recycling because it is illegally being dumped onto other countries.

There is already legislation in place to stop the illegal distribution of e-waste. In the U.S., 65 percent of the population is currently covered by some sort of state e-waste recycling law. In addition, China’s government and much of Asia (including Korea and Japan) promote e-waste recycling.

3) We do not need e-waste recycling because it emits CO2 and other chemicals into the atmosphere.

Although this is true, there is legislation already in place to reduce the CO2 emissions. China, for example, has levied a tax onto certain types of e-wastes which prove harmful to the environment.

4) We do not need e-waste recycling because workers are harmed by its chemicals while receiving little pay.

In adjustment to the world currency scales, “little pay” in the eyes of the US is perceived as a lot of pay in China, where cost of living/eating is generally lower than in the US. Additionally, workers admit they subject themselves to harmful work because it is more pay than they would originally receive working other jobs. As a result, they are better able to support their families.

 

Sources used:

http://www.law.northwestern.edu/journals/jihr/v10/n3/2/

https://www.uschina.org/statistics/tradetable.html

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&sid=4a31b47c-cc77-440e-a3e3-912ed19b275e%40sessionmgr104&hid=121

Pro Con Exercise

Write your topic: Mayor Bloomberg’s ban on the sales of sugary drinks over 16 oz.

Write your tentative question: Should the government be able to implement health regulations for the best of the society even if it will interfere with the people’s right to choose the kind of diet that they want?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

Sometimes people do not make the right decision that is best for them. Similar to how a parent gives a set of rules for its child to follow, the government must also do the same for its citizens to promote healthy lifestyles and put an end to obesity.   (My argument might change)

Claims that support/strengthen your argument

1. Recent studies prove that avoiding sugary drinks and drinking sugar-free substitutes and water instead can slow down weight gain in children.

2. A conducted research was done where 224 overweight and obese teenagers were given bottle water and diet drinks for a year. In that year, they only gained an average of 3.5 pounds compared to another group of teenagers that gained on an average of 7.7 pounds.

3. There needs to be laws that will help people make the right decision that is best for them.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument

1. The foundation of America is based on the idea of freedom. There are people who believe that they should have the choice to choose the type of diet that they want.

2. Five hundred New Yorkers were surveyed regarding the ban and 53 percent thought the ban was a bad idea. The people should have a say in this law because it is limiting their rights.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-57447670-10391704/half-of-new-yorkers-say-bloomberg-ban-on-giant-sodas-is-bad-idea/

3. Passing this ban will set a precedent and this will lead to more restrictions which may lead to a violation to the people’s rights.

4. The government should be focusing on more important topics such as smoking in public that affects not only the smoker, but also the people around the smokers.

Pro/Con Grid

Lucenko
WRT 102
Pro/Con Grid

Although the primary goal of an intelligent academic argument is to move beyond simple for/against positions by identifying and trying to solve problems through truth seeking and reasoning, it is useful in this early stage of your writing to identify the benefits and costs, or advantages and disadvantages of an issue of mutual concern (and possible solutions). By doing so you will move beyond your first reactions, to search for at least two sides to an issue in question, and to weigh the value of competing claims.

In this exercise, you will brainstorm and draft some advantages and disadvantages related to your argument. To help generate ideas, think of the various interests or points of view surrounding this issue (parent/child, educator/student, politician/citizen).

Write your topic: eBook V.S. paper book

Write your tentative question: does eBook do more good or more harm to readers and writers?

Write your tentative thesis (this should be a statement that is debatable, with which someone could disagree):

Change in the way of reading is certainly a big deal to people. Based on all the achievements eBook has made so far, there’s no denying that eBook has replaced paper book in a certain level and there must be some reason behind it. Despite the fact that eBook is still in development, and there are some downsides to use eBook instead of paper book, the digitalization of book is a positive and necessary worldwide trend instead of a potential threat.

Claims that support/strengthen your argument
Identify the claims that support your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.
What evidence (stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to support
each claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. EBook is more environmentally friendly. Evidences may include stats that shows how much natural resources paper books use in a year, articles that criticize the massive usage of trees and other resources in the expense of paper books.
2. Property of both. Compare to paper book, eBooks is more convenient to carry or read, to share and keep ideas. EBook is more sustainable and has larger capacity. Example may be Kindle, smart phone, IPad.
3. EBooks are cheaper than paper books. Stats show that eBooks have become the preferred choice for reading over paper books for students, especially digital textbooks for college students.
4.

Claims that undermine/weaken/challenge your argument
Identify the claims that challenge your argument; for each one, draft one or more sentences.
What evidence (reason, stats, studies, trends, anecdotes, expert opinion) will you need to counter
this claim? Aim for a good mix of evidence. As you look for evidence at this step,
start compiling your annotated bibliography.

1. Digital piracy. Copy right of eBook is hard to perverse. Authors or writers might not get paid for their works. Ebook might be a potential threat to readers, writers and printing industry. To counter this claim, I will show evidence that how modern companies protect their copy right for digital goods and our system of anti-piracy has become more and more powerful. Article “Digital Printing will save book publishing”
2. Longtime eBook reading might cause eye disease, especially to teenagers who are still under growth. For this claim, I will show the study that proves people actually don’t feel uncomfortable while reading eBooks and as our technology develops, eye disease cause by eBooks will not be a great concern soon.
3. Paper book is concrete and tangible, it has the value as collection or gift or something you can give to your children. Also, paper is more aesthetically appealing. For this claim I will argue that for collectors, they can still buy paper books, there’s no conflict with eBooks and paper books existing at the same time. After all, what we read is the content of the book. For most people in the world, they buy the book for its content not appearance.
4.