Sociology

In the book, The World is Flat, Thomas Friedman writes about his journey to India during which he realizes that globalization has changed the core principles and concepts of economy. The book is devoted to the theme of globalization. Friedman suggests that the world has become flat because globalization has erased all competitive differences between developed and emerging countries. From Friedman’s perspective, the flatting of the world is a direct result of the development of the workflow software. Furthermore, Friedman distinguishes among three periods of Globalization. Special attention is paid to the examples of companies in India and China, the business units that provide a wide range of services. These companies have become integral elements of the global supply chain for such global brands as Dell and Microsoft. Overall, the book is written from an interesting and rather unexpected perspective. The language is easy to understand while numerous examples make the personal opinion of the author supported by reliable evidence from real modern companies.

The book is devoted to the in-depth analysis of the idea of flatteners or the events which led to the elimination of competitive advantages between emerging and developed countries. Friedman lists ten flatters including the collapse of the Berlin Wall, Netscape, workflow software, open-sourcing, outsourcing, offshoring, supply chaining, insourcing, in-forming, and the steroids. From the first glance, these events, developments, and concepts do not fit together because they cannot be put into one line by function or sequence of emerging. Nevertheless, Friedman draws a clear connection among all of these factors. For example, talking about the collapse of the Berlin Wall in 1989, Friedman notes that this allowed people from both sides of the wall to join the economic mainstream. In other words, the collapse of the wall gave people an opportunity to exploit the economic opportunities they were previously deprived of. The next factor, Netscape, is also logically explained. Friedman points out that the Web in general and Netscape, in particular, made the audience for the Internet global. The Internet made the world flat because it has no restrictions for users and can be used by any person living in any country.

At the same time, Friedman hints that software and technological developments minimized the importance of human relations. Today machines can talk to other machines and the involvement of humans is no longer vital for successful operating. The global collaboration is carried out by machines while the human factor is no longer the key element of this collaboration. This statement is not fully explained though. While machines are confidently replacing many human-related activities from daily life, the human factor cannot be underestimated because all decisions are still made by people, not computers. Open-sourcing, on the other side, contributed to the flattening of the world but the effect was rather positive. For example, working on online projects, sharing ideas, communicating, informing, doing business, and meeting new people on the Internet has a positive impact on the world. The distances have lost their devastating value and today people can reach each other in seconds even when they are thousands of miles apart.

Another aspect covered by Friedman is outsourcing. He argues that outsourcing made the world flat because it allowed companies to divide activities into companies and subcontract the ones which can be performed more efficiently and cost-effectively in another country. Nevertheless, Friedman does not mention that outsourcing gave emerging markets is an opportunity to grow, prosper and enter the global economic arena. Moreover, Friedman does not talk about the benefits of outsourcing for the companies who gained an opportunity to decrease their operational expenses. Finally, there is no mentioning of the fact that outsourcing allowed decreasing prices and, as a result, customers could buy products at more attractive prices. Regarding offshoring, Friedman states that the internal relocation of the company’s processes to foreign countries was beneficial for the companies as well as accepting countries. At the same time, as Friedman suggests, offshoring created competition among emerging countries for the opportunity to have businesses offshore to them.

Special attention should be paid to the discussion on in-forming and steroids. Interestingly, Friedman introduces these two new concepts into his discussion on the flatness of the world to show how information technologies have shaped global economic development. In particular, Friedman provides an example of Google as an unlimited source of information. Never before in the history of humankind, so many people could find so much information about so many things. The growth of search engines is tremendous as more and more people rely on the Internet as a reliable and, more important, quick source of information about anything they want or need to know. Furthermore, Friedman refers to personal digital devices (mobile phones, insane messaging, etc.) are steroids contributing to further flattening of the world.

In addition to the ten specific flatteners of the world, Friedman suggests three additional components that have created a new global arena. For example, only a decade ago, one machine was unable to perform multiple functions while today convergence of machines made it possible to perform multiple tasks on one machine (printing, emailing, faxing, and communication, etc). Furthermore, the flatteners combined led to the development of the new business model. Taking into account this need for the new business model, the collaboration among people became horizontal. It means that people and companies had to add value through innovation working across departments and countries. Of course, understanding and active usage of technological developments are the essential elements of effective horizontal collaboration.

Finally, Friedman talks about the opening of the previously closed economies to the world. The attention of the readers is drawn to the emerging markets of India, China, Russia, Central Asia, and Latin America. Nevertheless, Friedman focuses only on one aspect of their emergence – they added new brainpower to the global economy and fostered global collaboration. Looking at the factors outline by Friedman, it would be logical to suggest that the author argues in favor of flattening the world. Nevertheless, the concluding sections of the book are rather unexpected because Friedman proposes remedies to fight the flattening crisis. One of the solutions outlined by Friedman is for the United States to update the skills of its workforce. There is an evident lack of correlation between the discussed flatteners and the offered remedies.

In conclusion, the book is rather interesting because Friedman talks about globalization and its impact on making the world flat. Many examples are of interest to modern readers. However, there is no central idea of the book. The conclusions reached by Friedman are limited to the United States of America only while the major part of the book is devoted to emerging markets. Despite this failure, Friedman succeeds in creating an interesting book about globalization and its impact on the world.

References

Friedman, Thomas. The World is Flat. Farrar, Straus and Giroux publishing, 2005.

The Latino American community or the Hispanic Americans refer to a huge and diverse population, which shares a common heritage and language but are significantly different from each other. They mainly include the Mexican Americans or Chicanos, the Puerto Ricans, the Cuban Americans, and the Central and South American consisting of Columbians, Panamanian, Ecuadorian, Chilean, Nicaraguan, Costa Rican, Argentinean, Guatemalan, Peruvian, Honduran, Salvadoran, and Dominicans. There are more than 45.5 million Latinos in America where the Chicanos constitute 66.9%, the Central and South Americans 14.3%, the Puerto Rican 8.6%, the Cuban 3.7%, and the other Hispanic communities 6.5% of the total Latino population.

In this article, the four of the largest Hispanic communities have been discussed. They are the Chicanos, the Puerto Ricans, the Cuban Americans, and the El Salvadorians. Although individually each of the given four communities has an immensely diverse and rich cultural background, all of them have been categorized under the same term, which is Hispanics. All of these cultures share the same Spanish language but each community has its way where the words are pronounced and spelled differently and has different meanings and dialects for each. Thus, although these cultures appear to be the same in every way, they are unique and different from each other. Bilingualism is also practiced among these communities where both Spanish and English are used in educational institutions and workplaces. Through bilingual education, the children are taught in their native language and are gradually introduced to the English language. However, bilingual education is still not available in many states even though it has numerous positive aspects.

The Chicanos or the Mexican Americans are Americans having Mexican ancestry. At the present, almost 28 million people in the USA have Mexican origin. The Linguistics of the Chicanos has forever been a topic of discussion in the USA. Almost 26% of the Chicanos are bilingual, 23% are of English dominance and the rest 51% are of Spanish dominance. As most of these Chicanos have Spanish-speaking parents, they learn that language before learning English. Thus, bilingual education has had an extremely positive effect on these children helping them survive in America. Some have even become accustomed to using the Spanglish language, which is a combination of both English and Spanish and is mainly used near the US-Mexican border. Politically, the Chicanos are extremely active and even have a Mexican American Political Association (MAPA) for promoting their interests in the USA. It was formed in the ’60s and is a human and civil rights organization to stop discrimination against Mexican Americans. They have very firm religious beliefs and most of them are Christians, mainly Roman Catholics and Jews. Economically for them, fair payments, benefits, and wages are still a dream. For them their family tradition is everything and they all stay together.

The Puerto Ricans are the people born in Puerto Rico and their population has been estimated to be around 4 million. They mainly speak Spanish but also use English. 40% of them are bilingual, 39% have English dominance and 21 percent have Spanish dominance. Their ancestors were the Taino Indians who came from South America. They were originally used as slaves. Like the Chicanos, most of them are Roman Catholics but some of them firmly believe in Judaism and Protestantism. In 1950, a law was made allowing them to draw their constitution. However, they have mostly stayed out of politics utilizing their ethnicity to set themselves apart from others and improve their economic conditions. Their family and socio-economic backgrounds depend heavily on unity. They give their families a lot of importance and respect for elders and relations are a critical part of their culture.

The Cuban Americans are the people of Cuba and come 3rd in terms of population after the Puerto Ricans with almost 2 million people. Although some of them have immigrated to the USA, most of them still live in Cuba. Their main language is also Spanish and most of them are Roman Catholics. Nevertheless, they also have religious ties with Protestants, Santeria, and Jewish Cuban Americans. The Cubans also include some Chinese population who are descendants of indentured laborers from Cuba. They are economically very poor and the immigrants in the USA have to work very hard for meager salaries so that they can send their wages home to their families. After Fidel Castro came to power, Cuba’s relationship with the USA deteriorated and after her alliance with the Soviet Union Cuba was converted to a social republic. Soon afterward, the Cubans migrated to the USA. They later adopted their culture. They too have very strong family ties as they hold their cultural heritage and traditions together.

The population of the Central and South American Hispanic cultures is around 6 million and one of the groups is the El Salvadorians. They are from El Salvador and just like the above three cultures speak Spanish and have more Spanish dominance in their culture. They share similar religious beliefs with the Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, and Cubans, as most of them are Roman Catholics. However, some of them also believe in the Pentecost religion, as its teachings are similar to their culture. The president in El Salvador is both the head of its government and the head of the state. Politically, El Salvador is a democratic, representative and presidential republic having a multiform and multiparty system. Earlier they were a poor culture and had immigrated to the USA to flee from poverty and war. However, unlike the Chicanos, Puerto Ricans, and the Cubans, the El Salvadorians are economically quite successful and theirs is the 3rd largest economy in the region. Although their economy has been brutally affected by, natural disasters they have never let down and always fought back. Politically they have not done anything worthwhile and normally do not take part in elections. Socially too their interaction with the USA is work-oriented. Family is very important for them just like the others and their whole life revolves around it.

As all of these cultures are very poor, most of the children do not get proper education and they have one of the highest rates of school dropouts in the USA. Without any educational qualification, these four Hispanic groups are not able to secure proper jobs and have to work hours for a small salary. Due to this, most of them illegally enter into the US without any work permits and papers. Thus, most of them have no legal or political standings and have to fight hard for their survival in poor working conditions. However, each of these cultures aspires to have better lives, for both themselves and their families.

As modernization continues, people become more obsessed with the desire to enjoy certain rights. Most of the freedoms that people have increasingly gained access to can be summarised into one – the freedom of choice (Hazel & Barry, 2010). People enjoy the freedom of choice when they are allowed to take charge of their lives and decide their destinies. According to Hazel and Barry (2010), freedom of choice improves happiness and life satisfaction among the people who enjoy it.

However, there have been many questions concerning the effects of freedom of choice on people’s wellbeing (Hazel & Barry, 2010). While some scholars have suggested that this freedom improves people’s wellbeing, some maintain that it is a recipe for self-destruction (Snibbe & Hazel, 2005).

Despite this purported standoff, a closer look at the events that precede and follow choices reveals that apart from bringing happiness and life satisfaction, freedom of choice also improves wellbeing. This paper discusses the effects of freedom of choice, beliefs and positive illusion on wellbeing.

The assertion that freedom of choice may not improve life is based on the fact that some choices are unguided and misplaced (Wenger & Fowers, 2008). Although this assertion may be true, it does not make the option of imposing choices on people a better one. According to Wenger & Fowers, (2008), there are high chances that choices and interests are mismatched if people are not allowed to make their own decisions.

This observation is common in making career choices for young people. Children often find themselves under pressure to pursue certain careers which may not necessarily be in line with their interests and talents (Wenger & Fowers, 2008). Wenger and Fowers (2008) claim that parents tend to use their children to pursue dreams which they failed to achieve during their early days.

These children cannot have the commitment and energy necessary to succeed in such fields. As a result, their wellbeing is severely compromised. In addition, it has also been found that the chances of a parent choosing a wrong career for a child are higher than the chances of a child choosing a wrong career for him or herself (Wenger and Fowers, 2008).

When people are given opportunities to make their own choices, they become more willing to take responsibility for the outcomes of such choices (Wenger and Fowers, 2008). Wenger and Fowers (2008) also assert that people who are willing to take responsibility for their actions tend to be more careful in their activities than people who are not willing to be held accountable.

Therefore, people who take charge of their choices are more likely to succeed than people who leave their fate in the hands of other people. In addition, people who choose their own careers do so in respect of their talents and interests (Wenger and Fowers, 2008). Career choices guided by talents and interests are more likely to lead to success than the imposed ones. In this regard, freedom of choice improves the chances of success and, consequently, wellbeing.

People’s choices are influenced by their beliefs. Psychologists have revealed that people from different cultural backgrounds would make very different choices under similar circumstances (Snibbe and Hazel, 2005). Snibbe and Hazel (2005) established that in the United States of America where individualism is high, people make choices to fulfill their personal expectations.

On the other hand, in eastern countries such as China, people make decisions to meet societal expectations (Snibbe and Hazel, 2005). According to Snibbe and Hazel (2005), whatever beliefs they may have, human beings are always committed and energetic when pursuing something they believe in. As a result, those who do what they believe in are more likely to succeed than those who are doing what they have been asked to do. Therefore, it is right to conclude that people who make their own choices are more likely to succeed.

It is not always true that people who enjoy the freedom of choice make the right choices. Sometimes wrong choices are made because people are under the illusion that those are the right choices (Taylor, Kemeny, Reed, Bower & Tara, 2000)). Under such circumstances, Taylor et al. (2000) observed that there are times when illusions positively impact on the well-being of a person.

Taylor et al. (2000) studied the relationship between positive illusion and well-being in patients with a terminal illness. In this study, some women who had undergone breast cancer treatment were under the illusion that they will heal and become stronger than they were before the illness. However, medical reports indicated that their cancer was progressing towards final stages and they could not survive for long.

It emerged that these patients performed better during disease management than those who had accepted their fate. The same study analyzed HIV patients and the results remained consistent. This led to a conclusion that positive mental state leads to positive physiological changes in the body. Taylor et al. (2000) also claimed that positive emotional state had a positive impact on CD4 T-cells. This shows that people who are under the illusion that they are good at something to become good at that thing.

In conclusion, freedom of choice improves wellbeing. People who make their own choices are more likely to make choices that agree with their interests than people who rely on others for decisions. Such people tend to be committed and careful in following up on their choices.

People who make the wrong choices for themselves manage damages better than people whose wrong choices were made for them. On the other hand, positive illusion improves the physical well-being of patients. This means that a strong belief brings resilience to fight and succeed.

References

Hazel, R. M. & Barry S. (2010). Does choice mean freedom and well-being? Journal of Consumer Research. 37(2): 344-355

Snibbe, A. C. & Hazel R. M. (2005), You can’t always get what you want: social class, agency, and choice, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88: 703–20.

Taylor, E. S., Kemeny M. E, Reed M. G., Bower J. E. & Tara L. G. (2000). Psychological Resources, Positive Illusions, and Health. Berkeley, Cal: University of California

Wenger, A. & Fowers, B. J. (2008). “Positive Illusions in Parenting: Every Child Is Above Average”. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 38 (3): 611–634.

According to Weitz (2010, p. 161), “abortion occurs when a woman decides to terminate her pregnancy”. This practice makes sure the pregnancy does not result in a child. Many individuals use prescription drugs or surgeries to terminate their pregnancies. These methods depend on the stage of the pregnancy.

Abortion has encouraged “many religious leaders, theorists, scholars, and philosophers to engage in endless discussions” (Weitz, 2010, p. 168). The agreeable fact is that abortion is unacceptable because it results in death. Some theorists have “explored the major reasons that can force women to embrace the practice” (Gold, 2009, p. 20). This essay describes the major laws governing practice in the United States. The essay also identifies the pros and cons of abortion.

Laws on Abortion

Several laws govern the issue of abortion in the United States. The “first landmark ruling on abortion took place in 1973” (Gold, 2009, p. 19). The Supreme Court “presented its decisions in Doe v. Bolton and Roe v. Wade cases” (Gold, 2009, p. 19). Many American states prohibit the practice.

However, abortion is allowed when the life of the targeted person is in danger. Many hospitals “in the United States cater to such abortions” (Weitz, 2010, p. 168). Many states also permit abortion if the pregnancy is associated with rape or incest. Abortion Laws (ALS) also vary significantly from one state to another.

Every state has unique laws to govern the manner in which abortion is performed. For instance, the practice must be supervised by a professional physician. Some states also expect the process to be carried out in a healthcare facility. This process should also be “carried out within a specified phase during the pregnancy” (Gold, 2009, p. 21).

These laws have discouraged more women from terminating their pregnancies. Many states “restrict late-term abortions because they can result in death” (Gold, 2009, p. 21). Health practitioners should ensure every patient understands the risks associated with abortion.

Pros and Cons of Abortion

Physicians can perform the practice in order to safeguard the lives of many women. Some pregnant women might develop new complications and health problems. This situation explains why abortion is necessary in order to deal with such complications. Rape and incest are common malpractices in different societies. Abortion is therefore helpful “when the pregnancy is associated with incest or rape” (Weitz, 2010, p. 170).

Some teenagers are unable to achieve their dreams after becoming pregnant. Many people encourage such teenagers to abort in order to achieve their goals. A number of diseases and infections are common during pregnancy. Some of these diseases can be life-threatening and unbearable. Physicians “can, therefore, embrace the practice in order to address such problems” (Gold, 2009, p. 21).

On the other hand, abortion is characterized by different challenges. To begin with, abortion can affect a person’s life and even result in death. Abortion also fails to support the concept of posterity. The practice is also associated with infertility. Some health complications occur during the process. According to Weitz (2010, p. 169),” chances of miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies increase after abortion”.

The psychological effects of abortion are also undeniable. This “stress and pain can eventually make it impossible for many individuals to achieve their potentials” (Weitz, 2010, p. 171). Many religious leaders discourage the practice because it threatens human life. In conclusion, abortion will remain a major concern for very many centuries.

Reference List

Gold, R. (2009). All That’s Old Is New Again: The Long Campaign to Persuade Women to Forego Abortion. Guttmacher Policy Review, 12(2), 19-22. Retrieved from http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/12/2/gpr120219.pdf

Weitz, T. (2010). Rethinking the Mantra that Abortion Should be “Safe, Legal, and Rare”. Journal of Women’s History, 22(3), 161-172. Retrieved from http://www.ansirh.org/_documents/library/weitz_jwh10-2010.pdf

Karl Marx developed the Theory of Alienation to explain the relationship between capitalism and its effect on the wellbeing of workers. According to the theory, workers lose control of their lives after securing employment and as such become alienated from their families, communities, and society. Marx maintained that workers lack control over their work and lives. Alienation occurs when people are separated from their communities and families due to stringent working schedules.

According to Marx, alienation of labor occurs when workers make sacrifices for the sake of their work and in that way fail to gain happiness. In addition, it occurs when workers use their work to gratify their physical needs only at the expense of their spiritual needs. This happens because employees do not own the means of production and cannot, therefore, determine their pay or working conditions.

Workers become alienated because they are controlled by authorities that deny them the power to alter their working conditions. As a result, work distances them from their communities, families, and society. The workers’ main focus becomes their work because it is their only livelihood. A large portion of their time is spent working in industries. In many workplaces, workers lack the power to decide how they relate to each other because of the lack of control of the means of production.

Their relationships are affected by competition, indifference, and lack of cooperation. Finally, workers become separated from their own nature because their work lacks the critical aspect of thoughtfulness that defines human nature. Workers are subjected to external pressure and are not given the power to alter their working conditions to suit their work.

Martin Luther King Junior did not use the term alienation directly. However, he used the term segregation to describe the alienation of African Americans due to racial segregation. The abolishment of slavery did not eradicate racism and discrimination. In the mid 20th century, African Americans were still experiencing racial segregation.

King maintained that racial inequality was immoral and unethical. His people were prevented from visiting certain areas and using certain public facilities that were frequented by the whites. In addition, they were prevented from working and living in certain areas. For many years, King advocated for the emancipation of African Americans from racial discrimination and segregation. His efforts were augmented by the actions of Rosa Park who refused to give a seat to a white passenger on a bus.

Her actions marked the beginning of a new era in the fight against racial inequality in America. According to King, all people were equal and deserved equal treatment and access to opportunities. He always emphasized the importance of equality for everyone in society. For instance, he maintained that everyone had a right to access to public facilities such as schools, churches, and restaurants. In addition, he criticized the decision to deny African Americans their voting rights.

Racial inequality led to a division of American society into different social and economic classes. The whites enjoyed great privileges and access to all amenities. Another factor that facilitated segregation and alienation of African Americans was the economic policies that denied them equal access to jobs and businesses.

King advocated for the abolishment of these policies because they barred his people from working in certain businesses. Racial segregation made African Americans feel powerless and helpless. Marx’s and King’s notions of alienation applied to different situations. However, they had similar effects on people and communities.

I do not agree with the notion peddled around that only individuals who get more money are successful. More money does not determine success in life. It is obvious that money accords comfort since one can get anything needed at any time. Nevertheless, I disagree that it implies one is successful. The ways such money is utilized is also a pertinent issue. There are poor people who are successful with every sense of the word.

Success in life is measured by what we have achieved. Even in a small way, accomplishing one’s goals determines success. Money does not control this in any way. We can succeed in academics, in marrying, in building a dream house, in educating children, and even in becoming a clergy man. However modest, all these do not need huge sums of money but a great deal of determination.

I believe that the individuals who use a lot of money in gambling cannot be termed as successful. One cannot gain important knowledge through gambles as can be compared to learning the English language. One stands to only lose a lot of cash as well as worthy time gambling. Where an individual makes a mistake in the manner he uses his cash, he will have committed the worst thing in his entire life.

In addition, one can develop a worthy life whether he has a lot of money or not. Wise use of money can assist one achievto e what he really desires in life. For instance, reducing one’s daily expenditure on nonsensical things could save money for more important things.

Furthermore, attaining all the good things of life is easy if individuals learn how to save well the little that they have with them. In as much as a person may not be earning too much money, clever use of the little money available can make him succeed in all activities of life.

I also think that success in a person’s life also implies other elements in life such as joy and well-being and not just cash. It is possible for any family to live happily and be successful without having too much money. There are so many dimensions of success in life. Having a close knit family that enjoys being together is just one measure of success. Money does not give any person a happy family. Therefore, money too cannot give one success.

It is true that money is an essential component of life. We cannot survive without money. However, money is not everything. Many other factors play a part in determining what success is. It is, therefore, a lie that individuals with too much money are the most successful. There are many rich people today in the world who live a sad life. They are sad because there are things that they lack which denies them the idea of success.

Success occurs at so many different levels. The ultimate level that determines one’s success in life is the accomplishment of all the major things that he ever desired in life.

Where this element lacks and he is not happy for a certain reason, then he cannot be said to have wholly succeeded regardless of how much money he has. True success is measured by the contentment in the accomplishment of all the important things that one sets to do in life. Where there is no contentment, then failure sets in.

Opening Statement

Practical abilities of an individual are vital in defining one’s future, and his or her ability to transform society. Life is based on what an individual can do to transform it to be a better place for all humanity. We all agree with the fact that interpersonal relationship is crucial in our society. Our society is knitted in a strong fabric based on how we relate to one another. We know how to stay together as a society, and respect everyone.

The love we have for other members of the society and support that we are always ready to give to others have defined us as a unique country. We are always concerned about the welfare of others, and this is a positive thing. This is attributed to interpersonal relationships.

However, the nature of the disagreement in this argument is an attempt to equate the interpersonal relationship with practical abilities. Claiming that practical abilities are of lesser value than interpersonal skills is a lie that has no basis.

The vehicle of our society is driven by the fuel of our practical abilities. When this fuel is lacking, then this vehicle will be grounded, and the result will be anarchy. Interpersonal relationships will cease to have the meaning as everyone will try to earn a living using any means, including infringing into other people’s rights. Interpersonal relationships only exist in a society that has plenty.

That is when it makes sense for the society members to appreciate the need to live in an orderly manner. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the most basic need of a human being is the physiological needs (King 78). This can only be achieved by practical abilities.

After meeting these needs, then social needs, such as interpersonal skills may be realized. This is a clear indication that interpersonal skills are secondary to practical abilities. This is the basis of our argument in this debate.

We understand why the proposers of this motion argue that interpersonal skills are better than practical abilities. It is because they are living in a society where physiological needs have been met. Therefore, they consider it as less important as they seek to achieve higher ranking needs.

However, their shortsightedness has made them misunderstand this issue in its right context. If we ignore our practical abilities, we may lose what we currently have, and this may bring chaos in this society.

The United States of America is the greatest nation in the world because of the practical abilities of great men and women who founded it. We are great as a society and admired by many, not because we can convince the world over some issues, but because we lead by practical examples. We act, and the world can see the impact of our actions, and this speaks on behalf of the American society.

The American dream, a force that has been driving this country towards success, is based on the practical abilities of individual Americans (Cullen 54). We are the only superpower in the world today because of our practical capabilities. People around the world admire the country, and this explains why we have the highest percentage of an immigrant in the world.

America is the most diversified country in the world because people come from all corners of the world just to share in the American dream. The dream makes them believe that it is only in this country that they can achieve their goals in a practical manner.

This is so because we have demonstrated to the world that we have practical abilities in different fields. It is because of this that I believe that practical abilities are more important than interpersonal relationships.

Responding to Opening Statement

It is a clear fact that practical abilities are what define the greatness of a country or a society (Sternberg 71). It forms the base upon which interpersonal relationships can blossom. My argument is supported by several theories and practical researches, the top of which is the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. According to this theory, one must meet primary needs, which are basic, before any secondary need can be met.

It is a fact that practical abilities focus on meeting the primary needs of members of this society. An interpersonal relationship is a social need, and in Maslow’s ranking, it comes third after physiological and security needs. This only shows that it is unrealistic to argue that such a tertiary need ranked third may be more important than the need ranked first.

We understand that the proposers in this discussion have not experienced the negative effects of poverty in society. I have taken some time to analyze what is taking place in the third world countries, especially in Africa and parts of Asia, and the truth is that we are lucky because we have practical abilities that have enabled us to fight poverty. We have the innovators, and for this reason, own some of the largest companies in the world.

Our society can give donations to various countries because our practical ability makes us have an excess of some of these basic needs. Society members can seek higher social satisfaction because our practical abilities have helped us secure the first two basic needs (Heider 24).

When people have plenty, they need to engage in activities that may jeopardize security diminishes. This is so because they will have a reason to embrace peace and security to protect their wealth. We associate this with our practical abilities.

Let the proposers be reminded that our glorious position in the world is subject to what we are doing now. If we embrace a change that will make our society weak, then it may affect our ability to maintain this position.

Closing Statement

We have listened to the arguments put forward by the proposers in this debate, and we agree with them on the fact that interpersonal relationship is important. However, we have proven to this class that was trying to argue that interpersonal relationship is more important than practical abilities is a misguided approach of reasoning.

Although their argument is useful, they forget the fact that interpersonal skills can only be relevant when we have practical abilities. If we ignore practical abilities, we may expose our society to harm. People will not appreciate the need to have practical abilities in various fields. We will start looking for experts from outside the country.

This will make us lose our glorious position as a country where dreams are realized. It is because of this that I request you- ladies and gentlemen- to oppose the argument that interpersonal relationship is more important than practical abilities.

Works Cited

Cullen, Jim. The American Dream: A Short History of an Idea That Shaped a Nation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Print.

Heider Fritz. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Cengage, 2013. Print.

King, Paul. Climbing Maslow’s Pyramid. Leicester: Matador, 2009. Print.

Sternberg, Robert. Practical Intelligence in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Print.