instruction
stringclasses 21
values | input
stringlengths 35
47.2k
| output
stringlengths 2
23.6k
|
|---|---|---|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is nasty or nice. -5 means strong nasty, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong nice. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: this is terrible. Kansas should have kept how it was instead of teaching the beleif of evolution like it was a fact when it is jst a theory and a beleif system of atheirsts
Response: As a Christian who accepts evolution as fact, I think it is great that Kansas has gone back to teaching actual science instead of religious delusions of the IDers. And the claim of evolution being "just a theory" shows how much you know about science. Gravity is just a theory, do you accept that? There is Nuclear theory, do you claim the atomic bombs never went off in Japan? | -0.6 |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments phrased as counters. | Argument: Costs of illegal migrants and harm to labour market
Illegal immigrants cost the state in money, time and resources. It is difficult to give an accurate number on the cost of illegal immigrants for the rest of the population (the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has come up with numbers as high as $1,183 per household in the state of California1), but they are likely to put a strain on resources by not paying taxes whilst demanding social services such as healthcare and education. As a result, they take taxpayer's money away from those who are lawfully entitled to use these services and put a burden on the state. Moreover, illegal immigrants undercut the labour market by accepting low wages and working under illegal conditions. This is harmful to lawful residents because it takes employment opportunities away from them and encourages employers to seek illegal labour in order to keep costs down. Removing the illegal workforce would increase the number of jobs available to lawful residents and force employers to pay fair wages and provide safe working conditions.
1 Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), "The Costs to Local Taxpayers for Illegal Aliens", 2006,, accessed 31 August 2011
Candidate 1: "Repatriation is a more direct solution to the problem, and it is not sure whether these alternatives would work. Tougher border controls will only result in immigrants finding better ways to avoid them; improving economical conditions in poor countries is a slow and insecure progress, and the situation in many developing countries in unlikely to improve anytime soon. Giving illegal immigrants temporary working visas will not stop some immigrants from staying in their host country after their visas have expired if they prefer the living conditions. Even in the case where they do decide to go back to their country of origin, this means the money they have earned will be spent there, and not in the country they have worked. This means the states loses out on revenue."
Candidate 2: "It is impossible to prove that all illegal immigrants are a drain on the system and so their cost to society cannot be used as a justification for repatriation policies. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes in some way and actually contribute to the economy of a country. For instance, every time an illegal immigrant buys something, they pay the same amount of sales tax or VAT as any other person. Illegal immigrants do not always undercut the labour market. The illegal workforce is a necessary part of the economy because lawful residents do not want jobs such as casual labour, agricultural or domestic jobs. Illegal immigrants often provide vital services that would otherwise be too expensive or hard to find if regular workers were employed e.g. cleaning, childcare and manual labour. Goods would become too expensive to produce if, for example, parts of the agriculture industry had to employ lawful residents/migrants."
Candidate 3: "The repatriation of all illegal immigrants is an impossible task to start with, so if this policy is adopted and fails in its execution, this will lead to a greater loss of trust in the government. If immigration policies focus more on the integration of illegal immigrants, this will have a more beneficial effect than criminalizing them. Marking illegal immigrants as criminals that have to leave the country as soon as possible will actually incite more conflict between migrants and populists."
Candidate 4: "The repatriation of illegal immigrants is not immoral because they do not have the right to be in that country in the first place. Laws are put in place to prevent people to live certain countries without a legitimate reason, and if these laws are wilfully breached, people must face the consequences. It is true that people have the right of freedom of movement, but this right is restricted to the borders of one's home country, and are widened by international agreements. But even then the freedom of movement can be restricted, even for people in Western countries. If we take the example of a European or an American that wants to go on holiday to a tropical island, we see that freedom of movements is relative. Legally this person can be free to go, but if he or she does not have money to pay a ticket or refuses to do so, this right can still be taken away."
Candidate 5: "There are many alternatives to a repatriation policy that will more effectively target the problems caused by illegal immigration. Countries can toughen border controls and have better systems in place for granting asylum. Voluntary repatriation is unworkable, even if accompanied by financial assistance, because many illegal immigrants want to stay in the country. Involuntary repatriation is inhumane and harmful because it restricts the freedom of movement for people, and separates them from their family and friends, whilst they are forced to go back to potentially harmful situations. Repatriation will not stop the numbers of people coming to the country. Illegal immigration does not occur because a country is a 'soft touch': very few, if any, countries have no problems with illegal immigration. The reasons behind immigration are social, political and economic and have nothing to do with an individual country's policy on illegal immigration. Those who turn to illegal immigration are often desperate and will pay no attention to the immigration policies of a country."
Candidate 6: "Although it might be true that immigrants might be harmed by repatriation in some cases, the majority of illegal immigration takes place because of economic reasons, and those people can return safely. The United High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) sets the conditions for voluntary repatriation on the grounds of legal (absence of discrimination, free from persecution), physical (freedom from attack, safe routes for return) and material (access to livelihoods) safety1. If this is not the case, these people should be given temporary asylum. Victims of trafficking are usually given special protection, as is the case with the EU, which also imposes tough rules on criminals involved2.
1 Refugee Council Online, "Definitions of voluntary returns", accessed 31 August 2011
2 European Commission, "Addressing irregular immigration", 30 June 2011, , accessed 31 August 2011"
Candidate 7: "It might be true that repatriation is a costly option, but so are other alternatives. Illegal immigrants are already putting a costly burden on the state by using its resources without giving much back. If this situation is left on its own, the long-term costs of keeping illegal immigrants might be higher than the relative short-term cost of repatriation. Alternatives, such as nationalisation of immigrants are also very costly and time-intensive, and would moreover encourages more potential migrants to come and obtain the country's nationality."
Candidate 8: "A repatriation policy will not effectively target this area of illegal immigration. Criminal networks will always find ways of smuggling people into a country and evading detection. All a repatriation policy will do is make these gangs more sophisticated when it comes to hiding illegal immigrants. This not only makes it more difficult to discover and undermine these networks, but also puts the illegal immigrants that are involved in these criminal activities at risk. If there is a standard repatriation policy for all illegal immigrants, vulnerable groups such as trafficked women are less likely to seek help, because not only is it likely that they will be repatriated, but they also put the lives of themselves and their families at risk by going through this procedure, rather than receiving anonymous help. As a result, illegal immigrants that are often at the bottom of criminal organisation will be worse off, while the criminal at the top will get more power over their victims."
| It is impossible to prove that all illegal immigrants are a drain on the system and so their cost to society cannot be used as a justification for repatriation policies. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes in some way and actually contribute to the economy of a country. For instance, every time an illegal immigrant buys something, they pay the same amount of sales tax or VAT as any other person. Illegal immigrants do not always undercut the labour market. The illegal workforce is a necessary part of the economy because lawful residents do not want jobs such as casual labour, agricultural or domestic jobs. Illegal immigrants often provide vital services that would otherwise be too expensive or hard to find if regular workers were employed e.g. cleaning, childcare and manual labour. Goods would become too expensive to produce if, for example, parts of the agriculture industry had to employ lawful residents/migrants.
|
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
The authors provided an R package for the QRISK3 algorithm to predict the risk of cardiovascular disease.
My main comment is related to the size of this package, which has only one simple function with two simple datasets.
I am not sure that this tiny package can be presented as an F1000Research article.
There are not any new findings represented in this article compared to the author's previous works.
I suggest enriching this package with more visualization and data manipulation functions and datasets.
Besides, I do not think it needs to highlight validation of R performance with SAS or C. This is part of your quality control, not an outcome.
Also, I have some minor comments:
- Why didn't you use the R 3.6.2 instead of 3.4.2?
- Why you did not make the categorical variables as ordered factor R object instead of a simple numeric object?
(in this case, you do not need to think about the conflict of the meaning of "1" and "0").
- The range of patient ages is not consistent between text and table.
- "Height", "Weight" and "Weight/Height" in table 1 should be lowercase the same as the package. | Structure
Recap
Other
Weakness
Weakness
Todo
Weakness
Structure
Todo
Todo
Other
Weakness
Todo |
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: Technology that widen the gap between rich and poor?
Technology, in the past two hundred years, has taken a dramatic progress in many fields of our society, such as telecommunications, manufacturing and buildings, etc. Certainly, technologies have also contributed to the great change of our daily lives. However, today some people consider that the range of technology regarding of public has a negative effect on increasing the gap between rich and poor. Personally, I find it hard for me to agree with this opinion by the following reasons.
In the first instance, the progress of material technology leads to the sharp fall of price of a great number of products. About ten years ago, mobile phones ware very expensive for most members of my country, only a few of rich individuals have enough money to buy one. Today, mobile phones become a common one of household items, which due to the cheaper materials and better producing technologies. Thus, most members of our society can benefit from the consequences of technical advancements, especially the poor people.
Secondly, technical developments improve productivity, which help people to escape from daily chores, and invest more time and energy in studying and living a more meaningful life. With the development of Internet, we can enjoy the pleasure and conveniences which it brings about for us every day. In the past time, we had to spend a lot of time searching information and waiting for letters of our friends who lived far away from us. Nowadays, we can talk with our friends online, no matter where we are and how far between us. In addition, the Internet gives everyone access to the same information, this therefore leads to greater equality between individuals.
Undoubtedly, everything has two sides and technology is not an exception. To some extent, the gap between rich people and poor is widen by technology, because only the rich people have ability to afford the expensive high-tech products, and these products can help them to earn more in return. Nevertheless, I think it is a limp opposition to the remarkable advantages of technology, and technology is not the root cause of the gap.
In conclusion, the good technology bringing to us is undeniable. Under proper use of technology, the human being can be benefit a lot and perpetually from the advancement of it.
Argumentative components: the good technology bringing to us is undeniable
Under proper use of technology, the human being can be benefit a lot and perpetually from the advancement of it
most members of our society can benefit from the consequences of technical advancements, especially the poor people
the progress of material technology leads to the sharp fall of price of a great number of products
About ten years ago, mobile phones ware very expensive for most members of my country, only a few of rich individuals have enough money to buy one
Today, mobile phones become a common one of household items, which due to the cheaper materials and better producing technologies
the Internet gives everyone access to the same information
this therefore leads to greater equality between individuals
With the development of Internet, we can enjoy the pleasure and conveniences which it brings about for us every day
technical developments improve productivity, which help people to escape from daily chores, and invest more time and energy in studying and living a more meaningful life
we had to spend a lot of time searching information and waiting for letters of our friends who lived far away from us
we can talk with our friends online, no matter where we are and how far between us
the gap between rich people and poor is widen by technology
only the rich people have ability to afford the expensive high-tech products, and these products can help them to earn more in return
it is a limp opposition to the remarkable advantages of technology, and technology is not the root cause of the gap | Major claims:
the good technology bringing to us is undeniable
Claims:
the good technology bringing to us is undeniable
Under proper use of technology, the human being can be benefit a lot and perpetually from the advancement of it
most members of our society can benefit from the consequences of technical advancements, especially the poor people
technical developments improve productivity, which help people to escape from daily chores, and invest more time and energy in studying and living a more meaningful life
the gap between rich people and poor is widen by technology
Premises:
the progress of material technology leads to the sharp fall of price of a great number of products
About ten years ago, mobile phones ware very expensive for most members of my country, only a few of rich individuals have enough money to buy one
Today, mobile phones become a common one of household items, which due to the cheaper materials and better producing technologies
the Internet gives everyone access to the same information
this therefore leads to greater equality between individuals
With the development of Internet, we can enjoy the pleasure and conveniences which it brings about for us every day
we had to spend a lot of time searching information and waiting for letters of our friends who lived far away from us
we can talk with our friends online, no matter where we are and how far between us
only the rich people have ability to afford the expensive high-tech products, and these products can help them to earn more in return
it is a limp opposition to the remarkable advantages of technology, and technology is not the root cause of the gap |
How high is the likelihood (0 - 1) that you would recommend your friend to use the following argument as is in a speech supporting/contesting the topic, regardless of your personal opinion? | Celibacy has a positive side as it promotes self awareness and avoids pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. Within holy orders it allows for greater dedication to God's work. | 0.60674722 |
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: Modern technology has impacted the traditional cultures in both negative and positive ways
Nowadays, technology has been developing significantly, impacting many aspects of our life. While there is belief that technology advances means a lost in traditional cultures, I would argue that although the affect of technology on culture is undeniable, it has also contributed to the preservation of traditonal culture.
Thanks to modern technology, our life has been improved with many gadgets. The invention of mobile phone and internet has changed our traditional ways of communicating as well as working, it has also been much less labourous than in the pass with the assistance of electrical machineries. However, these newfangled practices has replaced many old traditional ones. For instance, factories equipped with new and highly-productive system has replaced old handmade products, the exchange of letters among friends is so hard to be seen as we have had emails and social network instead, new video games has superseded the old-physical ones. Many old traditionally cultural things have long gone as a result of modern technology.
However, despite the drawback mentioned above, technology has also made some contributions to the maintenance and study of traditional cultures in some ways. Internet has aided to assess the young generations to the cultural identity of many nations from all around the world. With the help of advanced methods, many art masterpiece has been well restorated and well preserved. Modern devices also assist the scientists to study the ancient societies much more deeply, hence discovering more cultural traces.
To give a brief conclusion, Modern technogy has impacted the traditional cultures in both negative and positive ways.
Argumentative components: the affect of technology on culture is undeniable, it has also contributed to the preservation of traditonal culture
Modern technogy has impacted the traditional cultures in both negative and positive ways
The invention of mobile phone and internet has changed our traditional ways of communicating as well as working, it has also been much less labourous than in the pass with the assistance of electrical machineries
these newfangled practices has replaced many old traditional ones
factories equipped with new and highly-productive system has replaced old handmade products, the exchange of letters among friends is so hard to be seen as we have had emails and social network instead, new video games has superseded the old-physical ones
Many old traditionally cultural things have long gone as a result of modern technology
Thanks to modern technology, our life has been improved with many gadgets
technology has also made some contributions to the maintenance and study of traditional cultures in some ways
Internet has aided to assess the young generations to the cultural identity of many nations from all around the world
With the help of advanced methods, many art masterpiece has been well restorated and well preserved
Modern devices also assist the scientists to study the ancient societies much more deeply, hence discovering more cultural traces | Major claims:
the affect of technology on culture is undeniable, it has also contributed to the preservation of traditonal culture
Modern technogy has impacted the traditional cultures in both negative and positive ways
Claims:
the affect of technology on culture is undeniable, it has also contributed to the preservation of traditonal culture
Modern technogy has impacted the traditional cultures in both negative and positive ways
Many old traditionally cultural things have long gone as a result of modern technology
Thanks to modern technology, our life has been improved with many gadgets
technology has also made some contributions to the maintenance and study of traditional cultures in some ways
Premises:
The invention of mobile phone and internet has changed our traditional ways of communicating as well as working, it has also been much less labourous than in the pass with the assistance of electrical machineries
these newfangled practices has replaced many old traditional ones
factories equipped with new and highly-productive system has replaced old handmade products, the exchange of letters among friends is so hard to be seen as we have had emails and social network instead, new video games has superseded the old-physical ones
Internet has aided to assess the young generations to the cultural identity of many nations from all around the world
With the help of advanced methods, many art masterpiece has been well restorated and well preserved
Modern devices also assist the scientists to study the ancient societies much more deeply, hence discovering more cultural traces |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: There is no concrete proof that a zero tolerance approach to crime exists0
There is no proof that zero tolerance is effective and yet it comes at the great expense of full police accountability and practical financial outlay.
An examination of the main ‘success stories’ of zero tolerance reveal that not all success can be attributed to the zero tolerance approach. In fact, the vast majority of the improvement in these circumstances were largely attributed to simultaneous social and economic changes.
In New York, the decline of crime rate started prior to 1993 and the arrival of Rudy Giuliani to his post. During Giuliani’s time in power a similar decrease in crime was happening in other major US cities. The main factors that can be attributed to this decrease in crime were economic and demographic ones. With huge economic growth millions of jobs were being created and taken by young people. Simultaneously, there was a move from cocaine to other drugs and this also reduced street crime. The economists Steven Levitt and John Donahue even famously argued that the primary cause of the decrease in crime in New York during the 1990s was actually the legalization of abortion in 1973. [1]
Therefore, it is these social and economic problems which should be targeted if we are to see a successful reduction in crime.
[1] Donohue, John J., and Levitt, Steven D., ‘The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2000, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=174508&http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Impact_of_Legalized_Abortion_on_Crime , accessed 21
Candidate 1: "There is no point building in inner cities if we don’t protect these resources from graffiti and vandalism by concrete and certain means. Zero tolerance reduces the amount of dead ground used for drug dealing and so returns parks and open spaces to the community. Unless businesses are protected from vandalism and petty crime, it is usually uneconomic for them to return to the worst areas. It is these businesses which are vital to raising the standard of living. Zero tolerance policing is often seen to lead to the return of public transport and services to deprived areas because it can be protected through a guaranteed means. [1]
[1] Kurki, Leena, ‘Restorative and Community Justice in the United States’, 2000, 27 Crime & Just. 235, www.julianhermida.com/polnotesbrokenwindows.htm , accessed 21 September 2011"
Candidate 2: "Protecting businesses and creating a reputation for low crime and sound policing attracts inward investment and immigration both to a country as a whole and to individual areas. The cost to a country of theft and vandalism per year is a significant chunk of GDP, in the United States for example a 1994 report estimated the annual cost at $674 billion. [1] Deterrence reduces the number of crimes that police are forced to investigate and although prisons are expensive the reduction in recidivism should start to empty them in time. [2]
However, with economic hardship comes higher likelihood of petty crime. It is for this reason that those in the lower classes are more likely to commit crime than those in higher classes. This effect is heightened in the aftermath of a recession. As people feel less and less willing to pay and put the blame on society, they are more likely to steal. It is cost effective in as much as it is less expensive than prison and is ultimately less expensive to society than ignoring the criminality.
[1] Shapiro, Emily, ‘Cost of Crime: A Review of the Research Studies’, Information Brief Minnesota House of Representatives, August 1999, p. 15, www.house.leg.state.mn.us/hrd/pubs/costcrime.pdf , accessed 21 September 2011
[2] Friedman David D., ‘Rational Criminals and Profit-Maximizing Police: Gary Becker's Contribution to the Economic Analysis of Law and Law Enforcement’, Cambridge University Press 1995, http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Becker_Chapter/Becker_Chapter.html , accessed 21 September 2011"
Candidate 3: "Economic and demographic changes will always impact crime rates and of course, these factors would have played their part in the noticeable improvement in New York. However, zero tolerance has proved successful in many instances and provides a more stable promise of crime reduction less susceptible to transient factors (such as economic and demographic ones).
For example, the Swedish parliament introduced its ‘drug-free society’ as the official goal for the drug policy in 1978. Long before such policies were called ‘zero tolerance. The Attorney General in 1980 stopped allowing for waivers for possession of drugs for personal use. Meanwhile, police were to prioritize the crack down on those in possession of drugs. In 1988 all non-medicinally prescribed usage became illegal. Finally, in 1993 the police were permitted to take blood or urine samples from suspects. [1]
This zero tolerance approach is now cited by the UN as one the main reason for Sweden's relatively low drug prevalence rates. [2]
[1] Wikipedia, ‘Zero Tolerance’, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance , accessed 21 September 2011
[2] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Sweden’s Successful Drug Policy: A Review of the Evidence, February 2007, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Swedish_drug_control.pdf , accessed 21 September 2011"
| Economic and demographic changes will always impact crime rates and of course, these factors would have played their part in the noticeable improvement in New York. However, zero tolerance has proved successful in many instances and provides a more stable promise of crime reduction less susceptible to transient factors (such as economic and demographic ones).
For example, the Swedish parliament introduced its ‘drug-free society’ as the official goal for the drug policy in 1978. Long before such policies were called ‘zero tolerance. The Attorney General in 1980 stopped allowing for waivers for possession of drugs for personal use. Meanwhile, police were to prioritize the crack down on those in possession of drugs. In 1988 all non-medicinally prescribed usage became illegal. Finally, in 1993 the police were permitted to take blood or urine samples from suspects. [1]
This zero tolerance approach is now cited by the UN as one the main reason for Sweden's relatively low drug prevalence rates. [2]
[1] Wikipedia, ‘Zero Tolerance’, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_tolerance , accessed 21 September 2011
[2] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, Sweden’s Successful Drug Policy: A Review of the Evidence, February 2007, http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/Swedish_drug_control.pdf , accessed 21 September 2011
|
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: burning the flag does not harm anyone.; Topic: We should prohibit flag burning | con |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, decide to what degree (between 0 and 100) the response is sarcastic. 0 means not sarcasic and 100 means very sarcastic. | Topic: Gay marriage
Quote: (2) Like Olson, almost 60% of liberals believe that sexual orientation is determined at birth, but only 21% of conservatives accept this. Most conservatives apparently cling to the discredited belief that sexual orientation is merely a choice of "lifestyle."
Response: Of course throughout the whole Genome Project, although they have searched high and low for the gay gene, and they know where to look, they can't seem to find it. But I wouldn't deny that some chemical screw up in the fetal stage of development might not impact the sexual proclivities in some human beings. But so what if that is true? \nAccording to the bible, the sin nature affects all aspects of our lives from diseases to the aging process to unnatural proclivities to sins such as rape, murder, adultery, homosexuality, incest, susceptibility to sex, alcohol and drug addiction, and innumerable other activities of the flesh which declare that we are seriously flawed due to our fall from grace which was brought about by our original sin of rebellion against God by disobeying Him via Adam and Eve. So there exists no consensus at all which declares that the liberal/secular humanist interpretation of reality is in any way correct. But that doesn't stop your side from claiming victory as the correct interpreters of the non-evidence.\n | 20.0 |
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: if the right to keep and bear arms was abolished, it would decrease the number of weapons that are available and lessen violent crime.; Topic: We should abolish the right to keep and bear arms | pro |
Generate an argument that follows the given topic, stance and argument aspect. | Topic: abortion
Stance: CON
Aspect: evil | I think the idea of a woman having an abortion is very wrong and evil , but it 's not my place to tell someone else how they should live their life or what they can do with their body . |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Work for themselves vs work for employer
Most people want to work for an employer, because they want to feel secure about their salary, or feel comfortable about other problems of having own job such as paying tax, worrying about selling, etc. Despite these problems, personally, I would prefer to have my own job. My arguments are listed as follows.
First, time is the more valuable thing, which I have in my life. By having my own business, I can manage my own time. I could work whenever I want, or I do not need to give reasons to my boss for a delay. I can arrange time to travel when I would like. In addition, I can work long hours for earning more money. Totally, the most important reason for me to be self-employed is the sense of free.
Moreover, earning money is the fundamental reason that why people work. The amount of money is always the most important criterion for everyone to choose a job. If I work for other people, I have to give my ideas to employers cheaply. Therefore, I never have been rich in my life, because my salary is not dramatically changed. In spite of many problems of having own business, I can earn more money based on my creativity and personal ideas.
To sum up, in spite of the fact that many people are not eager to work for themselves, I would like to run my own business to control my own time, and to earn more money based on my noble ideas. | I would prefer to have my own job
By having my own business, I can manage my own time
could work whenever I want, or I do not need to give reasons to my boss for a delay
I can arrange time to travel when I would like
I can work long hours for earning more money
the most important reason for me to be self-employed is the sense of free
time is the more valuable thing, which I have in my life
I never have been rich in my life
If I work for other people, I have to give my ideas to employers cheaply
my salary is not dramatically changed
I can earn more money based on my creativity and personal ideas
earning money is the fundamental reason that why people work
The amount of money is always the most important criterion for everyone to choose a job
many people are not eager to work for themselves
I would like to run my own business to control my own time, and to earn more money based on my noble ideas |
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: should one follow fashion trends rather than a personal style?
With increasing availability to the Internet, people can collect a wealth of information about the latest fashion trends over the world, such as the most popular shoes style this season or the best-liked clothes color this year. However, some people think that dressing in a personal style should be advocated rather than following fashion trends. From my perspective, fashion trends have a more essential role to play in people's lives than personal dressing styles.
This is because following fashion trends enables people to keep up with the world's latest transformations, which is of vital importance if we consider the fact that people are living in a global village today. When individuals keep the habit of grasping the world's cutting-edge fashion information, they are gradually changing their attitudes to viewing the world, which means they are more open to accept diverse voices from people around the world. In contrast, if they stuck to their own fashion styles, disregarding the world's top fashion designers' achievements, they would stay conservative in their own worlds. As a result, they might fall behind shortly.
Furthermore, people with inadequate aesthetic knowledge or poor originality develop their own senses of fashion when treasuring the latest fashion information. Without following fashion trends, such people would have a hard time choosing and matching clothes, let alone forming their own dressing styles.
Despite this, it is undeniable that following fashion trends constantly may undermine individuals' personalities. Individuals purchase their clothes according to the latest fashion trends, which may result in the phenomenon that people would wear the same style of clothes. Consequently, the world would look monotonous.
With those arguments in mind, I would conclude that people should, especially for ones lacking basic aesthetic knowledge, care more about fashion trends in lives as they can keep pace with the world's changes. On the other hand, creative design talents can value their own dressing ideas, developing their own fashion styles as they like.
Argumentative components: fashion trends have a more essential role to play in people's lives than personal dressing styles
people should, especially for ones lacking basic aesthetic knowledge, care more about fashion trends in lives as they can keep pace with the world's changes
creative design talents can value their own dressing ideas, developing their own fashion styles as they like
following fashion trends enables people to keep up with the world's latest transformations, which is of vital importance if we consider the fact that people are living in a global village today
When individuals keep the habit of grasping the world's cutting-edge fashion information, they are gradually changing their attitudes to viewing the world, which means they are more open to accept diverse voices from people around the world
if they stuck to their own fashion styles, disregarding the world's top fashion designers' achievements, they would stay conservative in their own worlds
they might fall behind shortly
people with inadequate aesthetic knowledge or poor originality develop their own senses of fashion when treasuring the latest fashion information
Without following fashion trends, such people would have a hard time choosing and matching clothes, let alone forming their own dressing styles
following fashion trends constantly may undermine individuals' personalities
Individuals purchase their clothes according to the latest fashion trends, which may result in the phenomenon that people would wear the same style of clothes
the world would look monotonous | Major claims:
fashion trends have a more essential role to play in people's lives than personal dressing styles
people should, especially for ones lacking basic aesthetic knowledge, care more about fashion trends in lives as they can keep pace with the world's changes
Claims:
fashion trends have a more essential role to play in people's lives than personal dressing styles
people should, especially for ones lacking basic aesthetic knowledge, care more about fashion trends in lives as they can keep pace with the world's changes
creative design talents can value their own dressing ideas, developing their own fashion styles as they like
following fashion trends enables people to keep up with the world's latest transformations, which is of vital importance if we consider the fact that people are living in a global village today
Without following fashion trends, such people would have a hard time choosing and matching clothes, let alone forming their own dressing styles
the world would look monotonous
Premises:
When individuals keep the habit of grasping the world's cutting-edge fashion information, they are gradually changing their attitudes to viewing the world, which means they are more open to accept diverse voices from people around the world
if they stuck to their own fashion styles, disregarding the world's top fashion designers' achievements, they would stay conservative in their own worlds
they might fall behind shortly
people with inadequate aesthetic knowledge or poor originality develop their own senses of fashion when treasuring the latest fashion information
following fashion trends constantly may undermine individuals' personalities
Individuals purchase their clothes according to the latest fashion trends, which may result in the phenomenon that people would wear the same style of clothes |
Are the two argumentative components below, taken from essays, linked? | Argumentative component 1: "some lecturers deliver lectures very informative and interesting way", argumentative component 2: "When the students attend that lectures, they can obviously feel that it was very useful and they did not waste their time" | Yes |
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
The manuscript submitted by Rodríguez Morales et al. represents a bibliometric evaluation on Babesia, in order to contribute to understanding this neglected zoonosis and addressing future research and control strategies.
Bibliometric evaluation is an excellent tool to obtain objective information about specific areas of research and support the adoption of strategic decisions.
In detail, this study provides and summaries data on the research activity on Babesia worldwide.
It shows that the main country involved in the research on Babesia is USA, where babesiosis is a notifiable disease since 2011 (CDC) and most human cases have been reported.
Of interest the strong research activity of institutions and countries as Japan and UK, in which Babesia represents a new emerging problem both in animals and humans.
This study highlights the increased research activity on this neglected zoonosis, considered of growing importance in several countries and the need of further studies addressed to preventive and therapeutic aspects.
The manuscript, proposed as a research note, is well structured, the statistical analysis and its interpretation is sufficient, results and discussion appropriate.
To fulfil F1000Research criteria (“Research note … can be reported with one or two illustrations (figures/tables)”), authors could reduce the number of figures/graphs.
I suggest the following minor revisions in the text:
In the Introduction:
- I suggest to add Ixodes spp as tick genera involved in the transmission of Babesia to humans.
Indeed in USA most reported human cases are attributed to B. microti transmitted to people by Ixodes scapularis.
Moreover, most European human cases are caused by B. divergens and B. venatorum , primarly transmitted by Ixodes ricinus 1 .
- The authors should specify that the first case described in Croatia in 1957 by Skaraballo, refers to a “human” case.
- Moreover I suggest adding a sentence regarding the role of animal reservoirs and their distribution that contributes (as the presence of vectors) in the maintenance of the transmission cycle.
In the Methods:
You could clarify which and/or how many countries have been used as keyword for the search pipeline
Figure 6:
In the caption: the citation trends is from Web of Science (as reported in the results), not Scopus. | Structure
Recap
Other
Recap
Recap
Other
Strength
Strength
Todo
Structure
Structure
Todo
Other
Other
Todo
Todo
Structure
Todo
Structure
Weakness |
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
F. Nosten and colleagues report two cases of fatal melioidosis in the Myanmar border and remind the international community that this disease was discovered in Myanmar.
Melioidosis is probably a forgotten public health issue in Myanmar and this article has the advantage of emphasizing it.
However a description of the Myanmar environment, healthcare system and available antibiotics could help to better understand the general background around these two cases.
I have a few comments on the cases:
The first case illustrates a chronic pulmonary melioidosis with a fatal septic choc due to B. pseudomallei .
- “ lived in close proximity to the farm ” -
Could you please reinterate the context of the Myanmar border; are there irrigated rice fields in the area?
Is the patient in close contact with wet soil or any kind of water sources?
- “ Abdominal examination revealed a 1 cm liver and spleen ” -
This statement is not really clear.
Do you mean that there are an hepatomegaly and a splenomegaly?
- “ died more than 8 weeks after the onset of symptoms ” -
It would be more helpful to have the time from hospitalization.
The second case is about a fatal disseminated melioidosis from cutaneous inoculation.
What is less clear is the global clinical presentation.
The patient had initial pulmonary oedema.
Maybe it would be helpful to discuss pulmonary melioidosis and to have the result of the chest X-ray (if it could have been done in this setting).
- “ stool sample was noted to be of black color ” -
This statement doesn’t bring out any new evidence.
- “ A second blood culture obtained one day prior to his death grew Burkholderia pseudomallei after one day of incubation .” -
Does that mean that you got the result after his death?
How long did it take to get the result?
- Do the authors think that earlier result of blood cultures could have had a positive impact on the outcome of their two patients?
It could be interesting to discuss it.
- Do the authors have any comments on the Ashdown media, which is a cheap, specific and easy-to-make medium.
Could it be implemented in the Myanmar border to help diagnosing cases?
- Is ceftazidime available in Myanmar? | Structure
Recap
Strength
Todo
Structure
Recap
Recap
Todo
Todo
Recap
Weakness
Todo
Recap
Todo
Recap
Weakness
Recap
Todo
Recap
Weakness
Recap
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo
Todo |
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
Summary :
Australia’s influenza season does not typically coincide with school holidays.
However, in 2019, the influenza season occurred earlier than usual, allowing the opportunity to evaluate the impacts of school closure on influenza dynamics in Australia.
In this article, the authors present state and territory-level influenza data by week, and perform segmented regression, comparing influenza incidence before and after the school holiday.
They also count weekly increases and decreases before, during, and after the school holiday, and show age-based dynamics.
This article asks an important question of public health relevance to non-pharmaceutical interventions in a setting where it has not been previously investigated in a concise manner.
However, this article could be strengthened through additional framing, increased statistical rigor, and more nuanced interpretation.
Comments :
- The introduction leaves several unanswered questions that would help to more clearly identify the importance of the study.
The relationship between school closure and influenza dynamics has been explored in a number of previous papers, with both epidemiological data and mechanistic models.
Thus, it is unclear to me why is it important to consider this relationship in Australia, specifically.
Do the authors have hypotheses regarding trends or mechanisms that might be different from other countries?
Is it important for public health planning?
This question seems especially salient to me since school closures and the influenza season in Australia do not typically coincide, so these epidemiological trends may not be typical for Australia.
- The article concludes that there is a significant reduction in influenza in most states in Australia based on the results of segmented regression comparing influenza incidence level and slope before and after the holiday period.
I am not totally convinced by this conclusion, as Table 1 shows that the change in level is not significant for Victoria, Australian Capital Territory, and Southern Australia, and the change in slope is not significant for Queensland, Victoria, Western Australia, and Southern Australia.
This is contrary to the section of the results that states that “the estimates for the initial effect and the subsequent slope show significant declines for all states except South Australia”.
These results could be more carefully interpreted.
This would give rise to an interesting question: what are the differences between the states/territories that result in different dynamics?
- I think this article could be strengthened with a more robust time series modeling approach, like ARIMA modeling.
This would be particularly useful because the predicted vs. residual plot in Appendix 4 appears to indicate heteroskedasticity in the data.
Including model terms in a time series model could handle this issue, as well as temporal autocorrelation.
- The results also provide the percent of weeks in the pre-vacation, during-vacation, and post-vacation period in which there is a weekly decrease in influenza incidence, indicating that there is a higher proportion of decreases in the during and post-vacation period.
However, the pre-vacation period seems to include all of the early part of the season.
If there were numerous decreases in this time period, then the onset of the influenza season would not have occurred.
Thus, this finding may be a bit circular.
- It would be useful to compare this influenza season, which co-occurs with the holiday period, with another influenza season that does not co-occur with the holiday period, as a control.
This could help to isolate the impact of school closure on influenza dynamics.
- The authors specify mid-May to early September as their study period.
However, it’s unclear what total population and age-specific dynamics looked like post week 35.
Past studies have shown that school holidays simply delay dynamics so that the epidemic wave recovers to pre-holiday rates after the holiday.
I would be curious if this is the case here.
- In the model, a one-week lag was assumed.
Is there evidence about care-seeking and influenza surveillance/reporting to support this?
The discussion mentions a sensitivity analysis performed with no lag, but I wonder if the lag could be longer due to a combination of delay to seeking healthcare and delay in reporting.
- The fourth paragraph of the discussion comments on the possible causes of the association between school closure and influenza.
This paragraph rules out several possible explanations but does not then provide a plausible explanation.
Minor comments:
- A y-axis label on Figure 1 and Figure 2 would be helpful.
The Figure 1 caption says it is the influenza rate, so I assume it is influenza cases per week, but this could be clearer.
- Is the x-axis in Figure 2 the week number?
It would be easier to interpret if it was put into the same units as Figure 1, with dates instead of week counts.
- Does Figure 2 include cases for all of the states and territories combined?
- In Table 1, it is unclear whether the changes described (in both slope and level) are comparing the during-vacation period or the post-vacation period to the pre-vacation period.
The observed and predicted plots in Appendix 3 appear to show 3 different segments fit for each of these periods, but it is unclear what change is reported in Table 1. | Structure
Structure
Other
Other
Recap
Recap
Strength
Todo
Structure
Weakness
Other
Weakness
Todo
Todo
Other
Recap
Weakness
Weakness
Todo
Todo
Todo
Recap
Todo
Recap
Recap
Other
Weakness
Todo
Other
Recap
Weakness
Other
Todo
Recap
Todo
Todo
Recap
Weakness
Structure
Todo
Todo
Todo
Weakness
Todo
Weakness
Weakness |
Are the two argumentative components below, taken from essays, linked? | Argumentative component 1: "having and raising children should not be different than any other daily activity", argumentative component 2: "The second reason why I believe that fatherood is as important as motherhood is the dynamics of the relationships today" | Yes |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is emotional or factual. -5 means strong emotional, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong factual. | Topic: Gay marriage
Quote: The only state is Mass. and unless you use a friend's address, they won't marry out of state couples.
Response: So sorry; I have a friend who works and lives in the D.C. area, but he has residency in Mass., because he owns a home there. And he was able to be married only because he owns a home there ? emoticonXRolleyes | 3.2 |
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: minors should never be allowed to alter their appearance surgically.; Topic: We should ban cosmetic surgery for minors | pro |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Policy should not be dictated by religion
Article 7 of the Ugandan constitution is clear in its separation of church and state “Uganda shall not have a State religion.” The government must serve all its people equally regardless religious and cultural orientation. But this bill has been created with a religious motive. In his interview defending the anti-gay bill, MP David Bahati lamented, that God doesn’t accept homosexuality quoting a bible verse that the wages of sin is death[1]; as if the Ugandan parliament is filled with righteous souls! The constitution allows freedom of religion and prohibits the creation of political parties based on religion[2]. Laws and policies should therefore not base on bible verses as not everyone will share the same belief to such scriptures.
[1] Jack Mirkinson, ‘Rachel Maddow Interviews David Bahati, Author Of Ugandan 'Kill The Gays' Bill’, huffingtonpost.com, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/09/rachel-maddow-bahati-uganda-gays_n_794271.html
[2] U.S. Department of State, ’Uganda’, state.gov, http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/171644.pdf
Candidate 1: "The law is contrary to the constitution
Chapter 4 of the Ugandan constitution recognises fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual as inherent and not granted by the State. The constitution states; All persons are equal before and under the law in all spheres of political, economic, social and cultural life and in every other respect and shall enjoy equal protection of the law; Without prejudice, a person shall not be discriminated against on the ground of sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, or social or economic standing, political opinion or disability[1]. It defines “discriminate" as giving different treatment to different persons attributable only or mainly to their respective descriptions by sex, race, colour, ethnic origin, tribe, birth, creed or religion, or social or economic standing, political opinion or disability.
The government has acted contrary to their own law, with President Museveni remarking that what homosexuals do is disgusting, un African and had no place in his country[2] and MP David Bahati, asserting that homosexuals do not deserve to be treated as humans. Breaching such a law while relying on such logical fallacies is a sign of how the government failed on human rights.
[1] DREDF, ‘The Constitution Of Uganda; Chapter 4, human rights and freedoms’, dredf.org, http://www.dredf.org/international/UgaConst.html
[2] Mark Duell & Leon Watson, 'Gay people are unnatural and disgusting', says Ugandan president as he signs bill punishing homosexual sex with life in jail’, dailymail.co.uk, 24 February 2014, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2566425/Ugandas-president-sign-anti-gay-bill-Monday.html"
Candidate 2: "Democracy is not just about enabling a tyranny of the majority. It is about enabling everyone have a say in running the country and about protecting the rights of those minority viewpoints. Simply accepting that the majority is always right is the path to populist dictatorship; most people can be bought by promises of better times ahead and attempts to put the blame for any problems on minority groups. Human rights are intrinsic and cannot be determined on what the majority or civil society believes. The simple maxim ‘do unto others what you would have them do to you’ shows why minorities need to be protected. Everyone is a minority in something whether it is because they are a particular ethnic, sexual, language group or the views they hold we would not want to be discriminated on the basis of that aspect of ourselves. Where the majority wants to harm the minority the role of the government is to protect the minority. The bill was introduced to parliament individually by MP David Bahati[1] who spearheaded it through the end not the large Ugandan majority and the government should have stopped it.
[1] The Economist, ‘Uganda’s anti-gay law; Deadly intolerance’, economist.com, 1 March 2014, http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21597943-diplomatic-pressure-did-not-stop-absurd-law-deadly-intolerance"
Candidate 3: "Traditional and religious beliefs
More than 90% of Uganda’s population believe that homosexuality is not part of their culture and should never be accepted[1], its seen as indecency, criminality and a taboo in the community. This is something the government did not invent and not something it can simply wash out of society. Shelving the bill would not suddenly create tolerance from Ugandan society towards the gay community but instead would isolate and impose a threat to the LGBT community.
Others would have tried to create laws anti-gay laws. This ‘kill the Gays bill’ was originally intended to include the death penalty for some homosexual acts such as when one of the participants is a minor, HIV-positive, disabled or a "serial offender".[2] The bill is therefore considerably better than what the alternative could have been – the government has done its duty and moderated it. Any wider change to the culture of the country is not the duty of the government.
[1] Patience Akumu, ‘It pains me to live in a country, Uganda, that hates gay people and 'indecent' women’, thegurdian.com, 22 December 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/22/uganda-gay-laws-target-gays-women
[2] BBC News, ‘Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Bill: MPs drop death penalty’, 23 November 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-20463887"
Candidate 4: "Marginalising the minority
Human rights are fundamental and universal. They do not only apply to a certain group of people and invalid to another such as homosexuals. Criminalising homosexuality in Uganda considers all in the LGBT minority to be worse than second class citizens. Making them almost automatically criminal renders homosexuals sub human depriving them of their identity as Ugandans. The government has a responsibility to protect every citizen but in this case the Ugandan government has taken the first step in rejecting and mistreating its own people.
The new law infringes on fundamental rights to privacy, non-discrimination, equality and freedom from cruelty and inhumane treatment[1]. Even before the bill was introduced the government prevented there being room for LGBT activists to explain their cause showing their lack of freedom of expression. This and rights such as equality are universal and fundamental rights that the government of Uganda has on numerous occasions signed up for in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights among other documents.[2]
[1] Reuters, ‘Uganda's Anti-Gay Law Prompts Court Petition’, huffingtonpost.com, 11 March 2014, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/11/uganda-gay-bill-petition-_n_4940664.html
[2] Organisation of Africa Unity, ‘African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights’, achpr.org, http://www.achpr.org/instruments/achpr/#a2"
Candidate 5: "Rule of the majority
As a democratic country, Uganda favours and runs according to the will of the majority. This is also part of the constitution that recognises the opinion of the majority where all policies and rules that govern the country should base. With more than 90% of Ugandans against homosexuality and speaking in support of the anti-gay law[1], it was therefore inevitable for the government to pass such a bill despite president Museveni’s letter to parliament to ignore the law[2]. It is not the Ugandan government that has failed its LGBT citizens but the Ugandan people. A democratic government simply responds to what its people wants.
[1] Patience Akumu, ‘It pains me to live in a country, Uganda, that hates gay people and 'indecent' women’, thegurdian.com, 22 December 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/22/uganda-gay-laws-target-gays-women
[2] Warren Throckmorton , ‘Full Text of Letter From Uganda’s President Museveni to Speaker of Parliament Kadaga Regarding the Anti-Homosexuality Bill’, patheos.com, 17 January 2014, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2014/01/17/full-text-of-letter-from-ugandas-president-museveni-to-speaker-of-parliament-kadaga/"
Candidate 6: "In the same chapter, the constitution states that nothing within the article shall prevent Parliament from enacting laws that are necessary for implementing policies and programmes aimed at redressing social, economic or educational or other imbalance in society; or providing for any matter acceptable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society[1]. It is on this clause that most officials have based their support for the anti-gay law. The majority of Ugandans deem homosexuality immoral and unacceptable. There is therefore a democratic reason to enact such a law. The law is justified by democracy.
[1] DREDF, ‘The Constitution Of Uganda; Chapter 4, human rights and freedoms’, dredf.org, http://www.dredf.org/international/UgaConst.html"
Candidate 7: "Although religions supported the anti-gay law, it is not solely a religious issue; the majority of Ugandans believe that homosexuality is contrary to their traditional values and all the anti-gay protests were inclusive regardless of religious denominations. It is therefore wrong to assert that the law was passed as a religious initiative. A separation of church and state does not mean the government should never run policies that the religious want simply that the government should not be favouring a particular religion."
Candidate 8: "The fact that Ugandan government did not take measures to curb insecurities, harassment and threats towards the LGBT community, shows how reluctant it was in enforcing human rights. Unfortunately things have been even worse after the new law was passed with Uganda’s tabloid the Redpepper exposing homosexuals[1]. The new law has given a green light to mockery, attacks and harassment towards the gay community, many have lost their jobs, other have quit school and some have left the country due to such threats. This all could have been avoided by the government if it were to accept LGBT as a minority that has the same rights as other minorities. Such an acceptance would be a first step towards tolerance in Uganda.
[1] The guardian, ‘Ugandan tabloid prints list of 'top 200 homosexuals', thegurdian.com, 25 February 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/25/ugandan-tabloid-prints-list-top-200-homosexuals"
Candidate 9: "Not passing the bill would bring a threat to the public peace
Homophobia in Uganda was not introduced by this law. Refusing to sign the bill into law would result in increased brutality and cruelty to the LGBT minority from the majority of citizens who were angry that president Museveni even considered vetoing the bill. Shortly after the president’s letter to parliament requesting the shelving of the bill was revealed, thousands of Ugandans took on to the streets protesting against the move complaining that homosexuality will never be allowed in their society. Known gay Ugandans were forced not to move while others were attacked in their homes. Long before the bill was passed by parliament, homosexuals and LGBT activists were beaten, harassed and killed by their fellow Ugandans. David Kato a leading figure in demanding equal rights for the gay minority was killed in January 2011[1]. The situation may have worsened had the bill been shelved as angry Ugandans would attack the gay community seeking revenge, something that they made clear would happen during the anti-gay protests. Most Ugandans had supported a death penalty for homosexuals and clearly have few qualms about launching attacks, sometimes murderous against homosexuals.
[1] BBC News, ‘Obituary: Uganda gay activist David Kato’, bbc.co.uk, 27 January 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12299786"
Candidate 10: "Homosexuality has been illegal in Uganda since colonialism. It was signed into law and amended in Uganda’s constitution but did not change after independence. The blame should therefore go to the British not Ugandan government. If it is a violation of human rights then it is a violation that has been occurring for decades. The long term effect has been that Ugandans now are agreed that LGBT people are not a minority but criminals who deserve punishment."
Candidate 11: "The government is an impartial and independent body which should not be led by tradition but lead tradition instead. Governments don’t just exist to let events flow but to lead, to create policy, and shape events. If government never takes a lead then it would cease to exist as another leader would take its place. Under Uganda’s constitution, religions should be registered and accredited by the government and should adhere to law and government policies. The constitution recognises equality for all so the government should be encouraging a belief and tradition of such equality[1]. It is therefore wrong to argue that on a particular policy, tradition had to lead.
[1] Parliament of Uganda, ‘CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA, 1995’, parliament.go.ug, http://www.parliament.go.ug/new/images/stories/constitution/Constitution_of_Uganda_1995.pdf"
| Although religions supported the anti-gay law, it is not solely a religious issue; the majority of Ugandans believe that homosexuality is contrary to their traditional values and all the anti-gay protests were inclusive regardless of religious denominations. It is therefore wrong to assert that the law was passed as a religious initiative. A separation of church and state does not mean the government should never run policies that the religious want simply that the government should not be favouring a particular religion.
|
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: The option to work or study from home is advantage or disadvantage
Undoubtedly this is an era of internet which impacts one's personal as well as professional life. The effect is seen more on the developed countries where people choose to work or study from home instead of going to office or university. Some consider this approach to be an advantage while others reject this as a disadvantage. Both the points of views will be discussed in order.
On the one hand, the benefit that professionals or students get by connecting from home is enormous. For one, it helps working people to maintain work life balance. The best example is the new mother who can join her work as well as take care of her baby. People also get the desired flexibility in terms of working hours. For students too, studying from home is an attractive option. They save the travelling time to Universities and utilize that time on their studies. In a busy city like Tokyo, students waste a lot of time in travelling. Thus, the advantages that people enjoy by working or studying from home, are obvious.
On the other hand, one part of the society, has doubt over the productivity of people who prefers to work or study from home. Many employers argue that once an employee works from isolation, he or she spends a lot of time in communication via phone or email with colleagues. This harms an employee's deliverable. Teachers think that students get affected too as they can not clear their doubts in study topics instantly. Due to this they lag in their studies. These factors affect people who work or study from home.
Following both the point of views, the option of working or studying from home is thought to provide more benefits than drawbacks. It is hoped that people will continue to use internet to work or study and improve on the disadvantages into the foreseeable future.
Argumentative components: the option of working or studying from home is thought to provide more benefits than drawbacks
it helps working people to maintain work life balance
the new mother who can join her work as well as take care of her baby
People also get the desired flexibility in terms of working hours
For students too, studying from home is an attractive option
They save the travelling time to Universities and utilize that time on their studies
the advantages that people enjoy by working or studying from home, are obvious
In a busy city like Tokyo, students waste a lot of time in travelling
the benefit that professionals or students get by connecting from home is enormous
once an employee works from isolation, he or she spends a lot of time in communication via phone or email with colleagues
This harms an employee's deliverable
Teachers think that students get affected too as they can not clear their doubts in study topics instantly
These factors affect people who work or study from home | Major claims:
the option of working or studying from home is thought to provide more benefits than drawbacks
Claims:
the option of working or studying from home is thought to provide more benefits than drawbacks
the advantages that people enjoy by working or studying from home, are obvious
These factors affect people who work or study from home
Premises:
it helps working people to maintain work life balance
the new mother who can join her work as well as take care of her baby
People also get the desired flexibility in terms of working hours
For students too, studying from home is an attractive option
They save the travelling time to Universities and utilize that time on their studies
In a busy city like Tokyo, students waste a lot of time in travelling
the benefit that professionals or students get by connecting from home is enormous
once an employee works from isolation, he or she spends a lot of time in communication via phone or email with colleagues
This harms an employee's deliverable
Teachers think that students get affected too as they can not clear their doubts in study topics instantly |
Generate an informative conclusion for the given argumentative text. | Cross border health care delivery becomes easier Dutch citizen retired and living in Hungary goes to ski to Austria, gets injured, needs her/his original eHR from home, and his more recent data from Hungary too | The ability to share health data opens new possibilities for both patients and practitioners. |
How high is the likelihood (0 - 1) that you would recommend your friend to use the following argument as is in a speech supporting/contesting the topic, regardless of your personal opinion? | We should not adopt an austerity regime because cutting social welfare spending violates people's rights to food, housing, medicine, education, and more. | 0.790529411 |
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: Learning with a teacher is more efficient than by myself.
Every person learn in their own manner which they think that is most expedient to them. As for the learning by yourself, it has some certain profit. It gives you a chance to concentrate on what you learn cause there is no one who distracts your attention in presence of you, and your learning becomes more profound. In addition, the learning with a teacher makes us bear more burdens of studies cause they assign us homework, Nevertheless, I prefer to learn with a teacher rather than learn by myself.
Firstly, The distinguishing fact of the learning with a teacher is that you can ask about problems related your studies. In other words, when we encounter difficulty in our study which we can not make out, that asking the difficulty from our teacher is propitious way for us to solve it instantly. In addition, professors and teachers have much experience and knowledge, and are so dextrous with letting students understand their study. They know something which are not incorporated in such materials as books and webpages. Hence I, in my class, often communicate with my teacher to find a coordinated answer to a my faced problem, and my classmates are so accustomed to communicating with the teacher.
Secondly, in my mind, the learning with a teacher is more efficient than by myself. We can accomplish our assignments with little help of a teacher within less time than do it by ourself. Furthermore, the teachers play important role in leading us to right direction. Moreover, This gives us opportunity to rise our educational level to an exited degree. knowledge may be thereby better improved and strengthened.
Finally, of course, being without a teacher has shortcomings. Notable one of the shortcomings is that if someone faced so complicated confusion in his study and his many endeavors on making out it were miscarried, this might be ended in disappointment. I think that for one who depends on only himself in learning, his improvement of ability, with regard to cooperation and express his opinion, is unpromising. Hence I support this point that the learning with a teacher is better.
Argumentative components: I prefer to learn with a teacher rather than learn by myself
being without a teacher has shortcomings
if someone faced so complicated confusion in his study and his many endeavors on making out it were miscarried, this might be ended in disappointment
I support this point that the learning with a teacher is better
for one who depends on only himself in learning, his improvement of ability, with regard to cooperation and express his opinion, is unpromising
when we encounter difficulty in our study which we can not make out, that asking the difficulty from our teacher is propitious way for us to solve it instantly
professors and teachers have much experience and knowledge, and are so dextrous with letting students understand their study
They know something which are not incorporated in such materials as books and webpages
I, in my class, often communicate with my teacher to find a coordinated answer to a my faced problem, and my classmates are so accustomed to communicating with the teacher
learning with a teacher is that you can ask about problems related your studies
We can accomplish our assignments with little help of a teacher within less time than do it by ourself
the teachers play important role in leading us to right direction
This gives us opportunity to rise our educational level to an exited degree
knowledge may be thereby better improved and strengthened
the learning with a teacher is more efficient than by myself | Major claims:
I prefer to learn with a teacher rather than learn by myself
I support this point that the learning with a teacher is better
Claims:
I prefer to learn with a teacher rather than learn by myself
being without a teacher has shortcomings
I support this point that the learning with a teacher is better
learning with a teacher is that you can ask about problems related your studies
the learning with a teacher is more efficient than by myself
Premises:
if someone faced so complicated confusion in his study and his many endeavors on making out it were miscarried, this might be ended in disappointment
for one who depends on only himself in learning, his improvement of ability, with regard to cooperation and express his opinion, is unpromising
when we encounter difficulty in our study which we can not make out, that asking the difficulty from our teacher is propitious way for us to solve it instantly
professors and teachers have much experience and knowledge, and are so dextrous with letting students understand their study
They know something which are not incorporated in such materials as books and webpages
I, in my class, often communicate with my teacher to find a coordinated answer to a my faced problem, and my classmates are so accustomed to communicating with the teacher
We can accomplish our assignments with little help of a teacher within less time than do it by ourself
the teachers play important role in leading us to right direction
This gives us opportunity to rise our educational level to an exited degree
knowledge may be thereby better improved and strengthened |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Germany
Europe has been torn apart twice in the 20th century and on both occasions a German Army has been the aggressor. If the E.U. ever had a defence force, no doubt German troops would be at the heart of it. It is just over 60 years ago that German troops invaded many of the countries that today will be forced to fight alongside them. This, especially for the people who fought against a German Army and are alive today, is at best insulting and at worst, political provocation. This is even without mentioning the Holocaust and its ever-present artifacts that litter eastern Europe; a constant reminder to Europeans of the horrors a German Army had once committed.
Candidate 1: "The status of Germany is an irrelevant issue. What has happened in the past should have no bearing on judging the Germany of today. Their whole system of government and culture has changed with a new constitution and the maturity of an open-minded youth born after WW2. It’s simply an insult to judge those Germans who have done everything they can to make up for the past atrocities of their nation, by once again digging up the past."
Candidate 2: "The creation of an EU army could harm diplomatic relations with the USA
We are completely ignoring the issue of geopolitics and how the creation of this entity would be a direct move to replace NATO as the primary defender of Europe. This would of course mean a rejection of the US, as the heart of NATO. What would follow from this would be an extremely unpredictable and volatile place to practice international relations. One thing that we can predict, however, will be the ‘cold shoulder’ the US would suddenly show the EU. The US would feel as if its ally had used it to gain strength after WWII (The Marshall Plan), and now that it’s back on its feet again can forget and even challenge America’s supremacy."
Candidate 3: "The EU has managed to pass similar large amounts of apparently ‘unconstitutional’ legislation through member state legislatures. The Lisbon Treaty, for example, managed to be signed. And so, it seems that archaic constitutional convention cannot stop EU integration – the European Project is simply turning its eyes upon defence: integration has occurred in many walks of life, now it is defence policy’s turn."
Candidate 4: "NATO has established a precedent for multilateral military action
NATO has been crucial to maintaining the balance of power during the cold war. Although there have been some arguments amongst its member states, NATO has shown us that a standing multinational defence force is possible and more importantly works well overall. The recent NATO deployment in Libya is an example of its regional influence and military flexibility [1] . Considering many members of NATO are also members of the EU, the proposed European Defence Force could follow its example and complement it.
[1] BBC News (26 August, 2011) Libya conflict: Nato jets hit Gaddafi Sirte bunker. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14677754"
Candidate 5: "Constitutional obstructions
Every EU country would have an incredibly hard time making the constitutional changes necessary for the handing over of a part of defence policy to an EU institution. In fact, for many EU countries it would be unworkable. In the U.K., constitutional issues might not be as bad as say in France – but this does not change the fact that it would require deft political skill and manoeuvring, often undemocratic and without any sort of referendum, in order to make the constitutional changes necessary to create this force [1] .
[1] Wagner, W. (May 19, 2007). The Democratic Deficit in the EU’s Security and Defense Policy – why bother? . Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://aei.pitt.edu/8061/1/wagner-w-07b.pdf"
Candidate 6: "The proposition believes in a more liberal and open-minded average European soldier. There will be no communication issues in the 21st century where translators and bilingual officers are easy to come by. There will be no accountability issues when we create a proper command structure. And there will be no racism because to believe that there would be is to prejudge the whole of Europe and insult the culture-shapers’ attempts to respect and learn from Europe’s dark past, not to repeat it."
Candidate 7: "We have seen variations in opinion regarding political and economic issues (e.g. monetary union) in the EU. In the far more thorny area of defence policy, the EU member-nations’ interests are even more divergent. For example, the French position on Algeria may be different from the United Kingdom’s. This difference in priorities will ultimately lead to deadlock, as no country wishes to see its soldiers dying on a battlefield that provides no direct strategic interest to itself."
Candidate 8: "NATO and the proposed European Defence Force are designed to address very different concerns. NATO exists to deal with situations of such magnitude that the nations of Western Europe are likely to adopt a common defence policy. In contrast, the EDF is targeted at smaller geopolitical incidents which would otherwise be ‘beneath’ the notice of NATO. Unfortunately smaller incidents by their nature do not have uniform effects on all EU member-nations, and are therefore unlikely to generate a consensus of policy among EU nations."
Candidate 9: "Even if we assume that the massive costs of a standing military force can be borne by the EU and its members, the key barriers to establishing a standing defence force are often political. Creating a European Defence Force de novo would require us to decide on several thorny questions, namely the command structure, whether the role should be merely defensive or include peacekeeping, the choice of equipment and supplier, creating a common defence policy, and choosing a language of communication. All of these questions involve political considerations or economic vested interests, all of which are likely to result in on-going wrangling that will yield a stillborn EDF."
Candidate 10: "This is mostly speculation. The proposition takes a more optimistic view of US-EU relations after the creation of a European Defence Force. America will more than welcome a strong friend in the region, anything to calm the instability in the near regions of North Africa and the Middle East, not to mention the global markets."
Candidate 11: "Regional instability in certain areas of continental europe necessitates the creation of an EU defence force
Constant political instability and war in and near the Middle East call for a united single force charged with the defence of EU countries lying close to the volatile areas.. Turkey is a prime candidate for EU membership, and with its location on the border of both Syria and Iraq, will require support if its refugee problem is to remain manageable. The revolutions in Northern Africa also call for a stabilising force in the region, particularly in Italy where a ‘refugee crisis’ has coincided with the attempts of anti-Gaddafi Libyans to flee the country [1] . If the EU is to take its growing role upon the world stage seriously, it needs a dedicated defence force to make an impact in the region.
[1] Day, M. (14 May, 2011) Flood of North African refugees to Italy ends EU passport-free travel. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/flood-of-north-african-re..."
Candidate 12: "It might not have been the original aim to integrate defence. Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that defence integration should not be done. The aims are changeable; they should be reconsidered and revised, according to requirements and demands of current situations. Few would have imagined how far Europe would come in other areas such as freedom of movement or the creation of a European Common Foreign policy from a mere industrial coalition between few countries. The EDF will be a rationally reasonable step for the EU, considering the advances that the community has made in integration in other areas of policy. To protect all its achievements, to connect its member states, and to provide its citizens with more safety the EU needs a dedicated defence force."
Candidate 13: "A single army would enhance the political integration of EU members states
The European Union has significant integration and convergence of the political and economic spheres. Integration of defence policy and the establishment of a European Defence Force should be the logical next step. The African Union took this step and has achieved success in combat missions defending the Union [1] .
[1] The UN Refugee Agency (31 January, 2008) Comoros: Military invasion of Anjouan imminent, government warns. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,COM,,47b4614c0,0.html"
Candidate 14: "A large and diverse collective defence for would be impossible to command and develop
It does not take an in-depth analysis to imagine the issues, on the ground and at HQ, such as army would face. There would be communication issues, would the force use French, Spanish or English? There would be accountability questions [1] , who would be in charge and who would pay for resources? Finally, there would be hostilities within the army and potentially inherent racism between the nations involved. Such a force would not be effective in a combat situation, and valuable lives and resources would be wasted.
[1] Ioannides, I. (4 September, 2002). The European Rapid Reaction Force: Implications for Democratic Accountability. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1398915"
Candidate 15: "The economic strength of the EU enables the creation of a strong military
With the growing industrial and economic maturity of the European Union and its members, it is now financially feasible for the EU to have its own standing defence force [1] . The proposed EDF would also create a great many jobs as European defence contractors could be recruited into supplying equipment and weaponry.
[1] Amadeo, K.. The EU has replaced the U.S. as the world’s largest economy. Accessed September 7, 2011 from About: http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/p/largest_economy.htm"
Candidate 16: "Although there is instability in neighbouring regions, most of Europe is in complete and utter peace. The new force would simply be another layer of defence in a stable continent that simply doesn’t need it. War in Europe is completely inconceivable in the 21st century, and considering the threat of war should be the primary reason for holding a standing army, it seems that an EU army has no reasonable case for existence."
Candidate 17: "The creation of a standing army would be contrary to the spirit and purpose of the EU
It was not the aim of the original European Community to integrate defence. The original partnership was called the European Coal and Steel Community for a reason [1] , designed as a union for mutual economic development and the sharing of scarce resources [2] . The acceleration of the EU has therefore gotten out of hand, and it’s high time it came to an end. A defence force would be one step to far – it would signal the creation of some sort of federal super state, something that not many people in Europe want.
[1] CVCE (18 April, 1951). Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.cvce.eu/viewer/-/content/11a21305-941e-49d7-a171-ed5be548cd58...
[2] The Irish Times (26 August, 2011). A thirst for peace. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/innovation/2011/0826/1224302795053.html"
Candidate 18: "The EU needs a dedicated defence force
It is important for the EU to have a defence policy independent of NATO. With its origins in the Cold War, and its preponderance of American influence, NATO carries a great deal of historical and geopolitical baggage. This means that NATO cannot easily intervene in Eastern Europe without incurring the displeasure of Russia. This was best proven during the 2008 conflict between Russia and Georgia, when Georgia’s impending accession to NATO was seen as part of the incentive for Russian support to the ‘break-away’ regions in Georgia [1] . The European Defence Force will allow the EU to deal with crises in Eastern and Central Europe more effectively, as they will not have to tiptoe around Russia as much.
[1] Parsons, R. (8 August, 2008). Georgia pays price for its NATO ambitions. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2524629/Georgia..."
Candidate 19: "NATO has successfully defended the interests of Western Europe for several decades now – why rock the boat? It is hard to see a problem which NATO cannot solve, which the European Defence Force could instead. In any case, we will always have to consider Russia’s sensibilities when engaging in peacekeeping operations in Eastern Europe, and it is far better to have America’s bargaining power and geopolitical clout backing us when we negotiate with Russia. If we create a European Defence Force, we will marginalise NATO and the United States. This will lead to a reduced US engagement in Europe, which may in turn diminish our influence when having discussions with Russia over security issues in Europe and beyond."
| The status of Germany is an irrelevant issue. What has happened in the past should have no bearing on judging the Germany of today. Their whole system of government and culture has changed with a new constitution and the maturity of an open-minded youth born after WW2. It’s simply an insult to judge those Germans who have done everything they can to make up for the past atrocities of their nation, by once again digging up the past.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: Rehabilitation can only succeed in prison
Rehabilitation programmes are not a panacea – nor are they instantly or reliably effective. The risk of an individual committing crime can only be reduced by long-term engagement with such schemes.
Under these circumstances, the best location in which to rehabilitate offender is prison. Prison serves, in some cases, to separate prisoners from poverty and desperation, and to help them access training and education that they may have failed to engage with previously. Prison can also quarantine offenders from the influence of gangs and other sub-cultures that may compete with the positive behaviours fostered by rehabilitation. This is particularly the case for high risk offenders.
It seems ridiculous to assume that dramatic changes in an individual’s behaviour can be brought about without a correspondingly dramatic change in their environment and lifestyle. Criminality frequently develops as a survival strategy within hostile or chaotic social environments.
For many crimes, family may also be the root cause. Problematic relationship with relatives can further hinder the rehabilative process. How can we still expect family members to help facilitate the rehabilative process when they may be the reason reason why the offender committed crimes.
If there are minimal restraints put on an offender’s freedom while he rehabilitates, it will be easier for him to avoid complying with rehabilitation programmes. It will also be easier for the offender to avoid complying with other, more punitive measures, such as fines and community service orders.
As a last resort, a prison term prevents offenders who refuse to engage with rehabilitation from committing crimes for the length of their sentence. Given that a UK home office survey conduct in 2000 found that, on average, offenders committed 140 crimes a year, even a brief sentence represents a significant disruption of criminal activity [i] .
[i] Civitas, Fighting Crime: Are Public Policies Working?, February 2010, p.1, http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/CrimeBriefingFeb2010.pdf
Candidate 1: "Families and other social networks can play an important role in supporting and encouraging an offender as they rehabilitate. Wives, husbands and children can effectively monitor the behaviour of an offender when trained staff are unavailable. Given that the imprisonment of an adult family member is emotionally traumatic and financially damaging, families have a strong incentive to ensure that rehabilitation is successful.
Disruptive family environments are also catered for by the proposition resolution. Where family breakdown is a cause of criminality, social workers and rehabilitation specialists will be able to “treat” the family alongside the offender. Underlying drug or alcohol addictions can be addressed. ‘Therapeutic programs’, as they are termed, enable offenders to be rehabilitated by and within the community in a ‘living-learning situation’ [i] .
Prison on the other hand is an unsupportive environment where offenders are blamed for their behaviour and sometimes coerced into rehabilitation programs [ii] . In a prison context, an offender would be treated in isolation, without the opportunity to address underlying familial issues that might cause reoffending. Prison can be iatrogenic (increase risk) by removing offenders from their source of social support, families, jobs and accommodation; rehabilitation is more likely to be effective when it is used in conjunction with those factors, not apart from them. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that prison staff hold ‘rather unsympathetic’ attitudes towards prisoners [iii] , inferring a culture unfavourable to effective rehabilitation.
Although an offender may be prevented from committing crime for the duration of a prison sentence, this does not represent a significant advantage over the proposed resolution. For the reasons set out above, a prisoner released from a custodial sentence is likely to be incentivised to engage in crime (due to a lack of employment opportunities and social isolation), and will commit more serious types of crime.
[i] Day, A., Casey, S., Vess, J. & Huisy, G., “Assessing the Social Climate of Prisons”, February 2, 2011 from Australia Institute of Criminology, Page 8/Page 32
[ii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 300
[iii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 294"
Candidate 2: "A modern liberal state’s duty is to pursue policies and promote values that will have a real and lasting impact on its citizen’s lives. The resolution is such a policy. The opposition’s argument has been tried and failed; in the US, ‘increasing punitive measures have failed to reduce criminal recidivism and instead have led to a rapidly growing correctional system that has strained government budgets’ [i] .
Pandering to populist thinking in the name of maintaining confidence in a particular government is a short-term strategy. It is an approach designed to win elections rather than bring about social change. The most effective way for a government to fulfil its obligation to protect its citizens is to reduce deviance effectively and efficiently, even if that change has to come at the expense of political capital.
The penal system operating under the status quo brutalises individuals and entrenches criminality in communities in the name of law and order.
[i] Andrews, D.A. & Bonta, J., “Rehabilitating Criminal Justice and Policy” in Psychology, Public Policy and Law (2010, Vol. 16, No.1). Page 39"
Candidate 3: "The opposition argument assumes that punishment must be proportional only to the suffering caused to the victim of a particular crime. Opposition state that for a sentence to be truly proportionate, it must reflect the subjective responses of the victim. This analysis fails to acknowledge that the definition of proportionality extends beyond the victim.
The four objectives of criminal sentencing are complimentary, not mutually exclusive. The aspect of a sentence that seeks to punish should be proportionate to offender’s crime, but in addition, it must not obstruct the functioning of the other objectives of sentencing.
A burglary may be upsetting for the victim, and incarceration of the burglar may seem a proportionate response. However, when that sentence is weighed against the imperative to rehabilitate the burglar, we discover that rehabilitation in prison would be less effective than rehab in a community setting. When custodial punishment is weighed against the imperative to protect the public, we discover that non-violent criminals who have been incarcerated are more likely to engage in violent crime following their release. The greater cost of incarceration- to the criminal and to the efficacy of the rehabilitative process- renders the sentence disproportionate.
The comparative popularity of imprisonment has distorted our understanding of which criminals it is most suited to."
| Families and other social networks can play an important role in supporting and encouraging an offender as they rehabilitate. Wives, husbands and children can effectively monitor the behaviour of an offender when trained staff are unavailable. Given that the imprisonment of an adult family member is emotionally traumatic and financially damaging, families have a strong incentive to ensure that rehabilitation is successful.
Disruptive family environments are also catered for by the proposition resolution. Where family breakdown is a cause of criminality, social workers and rehabilitation specialists will be able to “treat” the family alongside the offender. Underlying drug or alcohol addictions can be addressed. ‘Therapeutic programs’, as they are termed, enable offenders to be rehabilitated by and within the community in a ‘living-learning situation’ [i] .
Prison on the other hand is an unsupportive environment where offenders are blamed for their behaviour and sometimes coerced into rehabilitation programs [ii] . In a prison context, an offender would be treated in isolation, without the opportunity to address underlying familial issues that might cause reoffending. Prison can be iatrogenic (increase risk) by removing offenders from their source of social support, families, jobs and accommodation; rehabilitation is more likely to be effective when it is used in conjunction with those factors, not apart from them. Furthermore, the available evidence suggests that prison staff hold ‘rather unsympathetic’ attitudes towards prisoners [iii] , inferring a culture unfavourable to effective rehabilitation.
Although an offender may be prevented from committing crime for the duration of a prison sentence, this does not represent a significant advantage over the proposed resolution. For the reasons set out above, a prisoner released from a custodial sentence is likely to be incentivised to engage in crime (due to a lack of employment opportunities and social isolation), and will commit more serious types of crime.
[i] Day, A., Casey, S., Vess, J. & Huisy, G., “Assessing the Social Climate of Prisons”, February 2, 2011 from Australia Institute of Criminology, Page 8/Page 32
[ii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 300
[iii] Day A. & Ward T., “Offender Rehabilitation as a Value-Laden Process” in International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology (June 2010: Vol 54. N.3) Page 294
|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, decide to what degree (between 0 and 100) the response is sarcastic. 0 means not sarcasic and 100 means very sarcastic. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: Your definition is that those creatures with survival advantages and characteristics will survive.
Response: No. That's not what I said. I said that natural selection is differential reproductive success. I said that those organisms that possessed advantageous characteristics would tend to reach reproductive age more frequently and therefore they will tend to produce more offspring, while those with disadvantageous characteristics will tend to produce fewer offspring. As a result, the heritable characteristics of the population will change over time.\n | 0.0 |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: A single army would enhance the political integration of EU members states
The European Union has significant integration and convergence of the political and economic spheres. Integration of defence policy and the establishment of a European Defence Force should be the logical next step. The African Union took this step and has achieved success in combat missions defending the Union [1] .
[1] The UN Refugee Agency (31 January, 2008) Comoros: Military invasion of Anjouan imminent, government warns. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,,,COM,,47b4614c0,0.html
Candidate 1: "Regional instability in certain areas of continental europe necessitates the creation of an EU defence force
Constant political instability and war in and near the Middle East call for a united single force charged with the defence of EU countries lying close to the volatile areas.. Turkey is a prime candidate for EU membership, and with its location on the border of both Syria and Iraq, will require support if its refugee problem is to remain manageable. The revolutions in Northern Africa also call for a stabilising force in the region, particularly in Italy where a ‘refugee crisis’ has coincided with the attempts of anti-Gaddafi Libyans to flee the country [1] . If the EU is to take its growing role upon the world stage seriously, it needs a dedicated defence force to make an impact in the region.
[1] Day, M. (14 May, 2011) Flood of North African refugees to Italy ends EU passport-free travel. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/flood-of-north-african-re..."
Candidate 2: "The EU has managed to pass similar large amounts of apparently ‘unconstitutional’ legislation through member state legislatures. The Lisbon Treaty, for example, managed to be signed. And so, it seems that archaic constitutional convention cannot stop EU integration – the European Project is simply turning its eyes upon defence: integration has occurred in many walks of life, now it is defence policy’s turn."
Candidate 3: "The economic strength of the EU enables the creation of a strong military
With the growing industrial and economic maturity of the European Union and its members, it is now financially feasible for the EU to have its own standing defence force [1] . The proposed EDF would also create a great many jobs as European defence contractors could be recruited into supplying equipment and weaponry.
[1] Amadeo, K.. The EU has replaced the U.S. as the world’s largest economy. Accessed September 7, 2011 from About: http://useconomy.about.com/od/grossdomesticproduct/p/largest_economy.htm"
Candidate 4: "NATO has established a precedent for multilateral military action
NATO has been crucial to maintaining the balance of power during the cold war. Although there have been some arguments amongst its member states, NATO has shown us that a standing multinational defence force is possible and more importantly works well overall. The recent NATO deployment in Libya is an example of its regional influence and military flexibility [1] . Considering many members of NATO are also members of the EU, the proposed European Defence Force could follow its example and complement it.
[1] BBC News (26 August, 2011) Libya conflict: Nato jets hit Gaddafi Sirte bunker. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14677754"
Candidate 5: "The creation of an EU army could harm diplomatic relations with the USA
We are completely ignoring the issue of geopolitics and how the creation of this entity would be a direct move to replace NATO as the primary defender of Europe. This would of course mean a rejection of the US, as the heart of NATO. What would follow from this would be an extremely unpredictable and volatile place to practice international relations. One thing that we can predict, however, will be the ‘cold shoulder’ the US would suddenly show the EU. The US would feel as if its ally had used it to gain strength after WWII (The Marshall Plan), and now that it’s back on its feet again can forget and even challenge America’s supremacy."
Candidate 6: "The EU needs a dedicated defence force
It is important for the EU to have a defence policy independent of NATO. With its origins in the Cold War, and its preponderance of American influence, NATO carries a great deal of historical and geopolitical baggage. This means that NATO cannot easily intervene in Eastern Europe without incurring the displeasure of Russia. This was best proven during the 2008 conflict between Russia and Georgia, when Georgia’s impending accession to NATO was seen as part of the incentive for Russian support to the ‘break-away’ regions in Georgia [1] . The European Defence Force will allow the EU to deal with crises in Eastern and Central Europe more effectively, as they will not have to tiptoe around Russia as much.
[1] Parsons, R. (8 August, 2008). Georgia pays price for its NATO ambitions. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2524629/Georgia..."
Candidate 7: "Germany
Europe has been torn apart twice in the 20th century and on both occasions a German Army has been the aggressor. If the E.U. ever had a defence force, no doubt German troops would be at the heart of it. It is just over 60 years ago that German troops invaded many of the countries that today will be forced to fight alongside them. This, especially for the people who fought against a German Army and are alive today, is at best insulting and at worst, political provocation. This is even without mentioning the Holocaust and its ever-present artifacts that litter eastern Europe; a constant reminder to Europeans of the horrors a German Army had once committed."
Candidate 8: "Even if we assume that the massive costs of a standing military force can be borne by the EU and its members, the key barriers to establishing a standing defence force are often political. Creating a European Defence Force de novo would require us to decide on several thorny questions, namely the command structure, whether the role should be merely defensive or include peacekeeping, the choice of equipment and supplier, creating a common defence policy, and choosing a language of communication. All of these questions involve political considerations or economic vested interests, all of which are likely to result in on-going wrangling that will yield a stillborn EDF."
Candidate 9: "A large and diverse collective defence for would be impossible to command and develop
It does not take an in-depth analysis to imagine the issues, on the ground and at HQ, such as army would face. There would be communication issues, would the force use French, Spanish or English? There would be accountability questions [1] , who would be in charge and who would pay for resources? Finally, there would be hostilities within the army and potentially inherent racism between the nations involved. Such a force would not be effective in a combat situation, and valuable lives and resources would be wasted.
[1] Ioannides, I. (4 September, 2002). The European Rapid Reaction Force: Implications for Democratic Accountability. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1398915"
Candidate 10: "The proposition believes in a more liberal and open-minded average European soldier. There will be no communication issues in the 21st century where translators and bilingual officers are easy to come by. There will be no accountability issues when we create a proper command structure. And there will be no racism because to believe that there would be is to prejudge the whole of Europe and insult the culture-shapers’ attempts to respect and learn from Europe’s dark past, not to repeat it."
Candidate 11: "We have seen variations in opinion regarding political and economic issues (e.g. monetary union) in the EU. In the far more thorny area of defence policy, the EU member-nations’ interests are even more divergent. For example, the French position on Algeria may be different from the United Kingdom’s. This difference in priorities will ultimately lead to deadlock, as no country wishes to see its soldiers dying on a battlefield that provides no direct strategic interest to itself."
Candidate 12: "It might not have been the original aim to integrate defence. Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that defence integration should not be done. The aims are changeable; they should be reconsidered and revised, according to requirements and demands of current situations. Few would have imagined how far Europe would come in other areas such as freedom of movement or the creation of a European Common Foreign policy from a mere industrial coalition between few countries. The EDF will be a rationally reasonable step for the EU, considering the advances that the community has made in integration in other areas of policy. To protect all its achievements, to connect its member states, and to provide its citizens with more safety the EU needs a dedicated defence force."
Candidate 13: "Although there is instability in neighbouring regions, most of Europe is in complete and utter peace. The new force would simply be another layer of defence in a stable continent that simply doesn’t need it. War in Europe is completely inconceivable in the 21st century, and considering the threat of war should be the primary reason for holding a standing army, it seems that an EU army has no reasonable case for existence."
Candidate 14: "This is mostly speculation. The proposition takes a more optimistic view of US-EU relations after the creation of a European Defence Force. America will more than welcome a strong friend in the region, anything to calm the instability in the near regions of North Africa and the Middle East, not to mention the global markets."
Candidate 15: "Constitutional obstructions
Every EU country would have an incredibly hard time making the constitutional changes necessary for the handing over of a part of defence policy to an EU institution. In fact, for many EU countries it would be unworkable. In the U.K., constitutional issues might not be as bad as say in France – but this does not change the fact that it would require deft political skill and manoeuvring, often undemocratic and without any sort of referendum, in order to make the constitutional changes necessary to create this force [1] .
[1] Wagner, W. (May 19, 2007). The Democratic Deficit in the EU’s Security and Defense Policy – why bother? . Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://aei.pitt.edu/8061/1/wagner-w-07b.pdf"
Candidate 16: "The creation of a standing army would be contrary to the spirit and purpose of the EU
It was not the aim of the original European Community to integrate defence. The original partnership was called the European Coal and Steel Community for a reason [1] , designed as a union for mutual economic development and the sharing of scarce resources [2] . The acceleration of the EU has therefore gotten out of hand, and it’s high time it came to an end. A defence force would be one step to far – it would signal the creation of some sort of federal super state, something that not many people in Europe want.
[1] CVCE (18 April, 1951). Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.cvce.eu/viewer/-/content/11a21305-941e-49d7-a171-ed5be548cd58...
[2] The Irish Times (26 August, 2011). A thirst for peace. Accessed September 7, 2011 from: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/innovation/2011/0826/1224302795053.html"
Candidate 17: "NATO has successfully defended the interests of Western Europe for several decades now – why rock the boat? It is hard to see a problem which NATO cannot solve, which the European Defence Force could instead. In any case, we will always have to consider Russia’s sensibilities when engaging in peacekeeping operations in Eastern Europe, and it is far better to have America’s bargaining power and geopolitical clout backing us when we negotiate with Russia. If we create a European Defence Force, we will marginalise NATO and the United States. This will lead to a reduced US engagement in Europe, which may in turn diminish our influence when having discussions with Russia over security issues in Europe and beyond."
Candidate 18: "The status of Germany is an irrelevant issue. What has happened in the past should have no bearing on judging the Germany of today. Their whole system of government and culture has changed with a new constitution and the maturity of an open-minded youth born after WW2. It’s simply an insult to judge those Germans who have done everything they can to make up for the past atrocities of their nation, by once again digging up the past."
Candidate 19: "NATO and the proposed European Defence Force are designed to address very different concerns. NATO exists to deal with situations of such magnitude that the nations of Western Europe are likely to adopt a common defence policy. In contrast, the EDF is targeted at smaller geopolitical incidents which would otherwise be ‘beneath’ the notice of NATO. Unfortunately smaller incidents by their nature do not have uniform effects on all EU member-nations, and are therefore unlikely to generate a consensus of policy among EU nations."
| We have seen variations in opinion regarding political and economic issues (e.g. monetary union) in the EU. In the far more thorny area of defence policy, the EU member-nations’ interests are even more divergent. For example, the French position on Algeria may be different from the United Kingdom’s. This difference in priorities will ultimately lead to deadlock, as no country wishes to see its soldiers dying on a battlefield that provides no direct strategic interest to itself.
|
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Government should regard investing in building roads as the most important
The population explosion results in the high demands of transportation. Many countries have suffered from pollution, noisy and casualty for a long time. From my perspective, the most possible solution to these problems is improving roads and highways because of three crucial reasons.
First and foremost, we all know that upgrading public transportation will surely aggravate the pollution and accidents. The buses, cars and trains regularly emit a noxious gas which causes lots of fatal diseases such as lung cancer and pneumonia. Moreover, the sound emanates from the engines can worsen our hearing. Most importantly, there are many accidents happening on the roads. For example, in my country, buses are attributed to the cause of skyrocketing of accidents. Each year, Vietnam has approximately twelve thousand people die of accidents which is equivalent to the death toll of the tsunami in Japan.
Secondly, investing in roads and highways can broaden the area and allow more public transportation to work. Not only buses but also other personal vehicles can move easily on the roads. For instance, I always leave school at the time that everybody rushes into the roads and hastily goes home. It is extremely troublesome for me to escape from the crowd on the roads in only one hour. In contrast, if the roads are enlarged, everyone can go home in short time and there are hardly any collisions.
Last but not least, spending on renovating the highways and roads can improve the quality. All of us are afraid of moving on the rough roads with lots of portholes. Those bad conditions result in many terrible accidents and make several people feel worried. We should not accuse the drivers of causing accidents because a part of the responsibility belongs to the authorities. What's more, a smooth surface makes the transportation and movement become safer and easier.
In a nutshell, the advantages of upgrading the roads which I mentioned above are totally convincing and indispensable. I am usually inclined to this idea and I hope that the government will regard the investment in building roads as the most important thing. | the advantages of upgrading the roads which I mentioned above are totally convincing and indispensable
the most possible solution to these problems is improving roads and highways
we all know that upgrading public transportation will surely aggravate the pollution and accidents
investing in roads and highways can broaden the area and allow more public transportation to work
The buses, cars and trains regularly emit a noxious gas which causes lots of fatal diseases such as lung cancer and pneumonia
the sound emanates from the engines can worsen our hearing
there are many accidents happening on the roads
in my country, buses are attributed to the cause of skyrocketing of accidents
Vietnam has approximately twelve thousand people die of accidents which is equivalent to the death toll of the tsunami in Japan
Not only buses but also other personal vehicles can move easily on the roads
I always leave school at the time that everybody rushes into the roads and hastily goes home
It is extremely troublesome for me to escape from the crowd on the roads in only one hour
if the roads are enlarged, everyone can go home in short time and there are hardly any collisions
spending on renovating the highways and roads can improve the quality
All of us are afraid of moving on the rough roads with lots of portholes
Those bad conditions result in many terrible accidents and make several people feel worried
We should not accuse the drivers of causing accidents
a part of the responsibility belongs to the authorities
What's more, a smooth surface makes the transportation and movement become safer and easier |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Matt Hancock : No
Proposition: you didn't learn more about the details of both the virus and the vaccine in a week | Disagreeing |
Detect the argumentative relations between the propositions identified and segmented in an argumentative dialogue. Such relations are: Default Inference (provide a reason to accept another proposition), Default Conflict (provide an incompatible alternative to another proposition), Default Reformulation (rephrase, restate or reformulate another proposition) and No Relation. | Proposition1: despite the logistical concerns there are tens of thousands of NHS thousands of NHS frontline and care staff are also, still, a month after vaccine roll-out began, unvaccinated
Proposition2: Rachel Clarke appreciates that there are logistical issues with the vaccine process | Default Conflict |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is nasty or nice. -5 means strong nasty, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong nice. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: The Cambrian Explosion -- a/k/a biology\'s "Big Bang": How it contradicts Darwin\'s branching "Tree of Life"
Response: Already covered in Icons of Obfuscation.\n | 1.66667 |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Camilla Tominey : Soon
Proposition: we are not yet quarantining flights but talking about it | Arguing |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, decide to what degree (between 0 and 100) the response is sarcastic. 0 means not sarcasic and 100 means very sarcastic. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: But now we get to the actual definition of science. To me at least, science is how knowledge is acquired, different possibilities, and objectively examining these possibilities as well as publishing them to the public for scrutiny. So basically science is the answer to the question of why or how. Why is it that when an apple is dropped, it goes towards the Earth? How fast does it go? When I drop it does it really speed up as it goes along? These are all matters of science, so basically almost everything in the world can be considered science, which is why I believe philosophy is considered a branch of science.
Response: We could go back and fourth several times carefully picking and choosing words and phrases to describe what we think science should be, and possibly not disagree all that much. But to focus on this debates resolution, we need to get to what science is in schools today - a murky combination of facts and theories. Considering what Stephen Grocott had to say (in the copy/paste in my first post) about the definition of science, I don't think we're going to get it any clearer than that. Which facts and theories are emphasized to students and which ones are not are determined by the worldviews of the teaching establishment. Scientific facts can be taught without the worldview of the teacher being a factor, but scientific theories cannot. Also, emphasizing one fact or theory over another will most likely reflect the worldview of the teacher, or the curriculum determined by the teaching establishment. So in an imperfect world, it's clear that not all of what is taught as science is actually objective and non controversial.\n | 0.0 |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Double jeopardy protects the acquitted from the threat of constant harassment by the state
We’re not just protecting ‘evil people’. The double jeopardy rule protects everyone from the danger of constant harassment from the state. The opposition would rather see a guilty man occasionally go free than see the resources of the state trained on individuals again and again and again, ‘until the state secured (the) popular result’ 1. The double jeopardy rule provides closure for both defendants and the prosecution; if the prosecution regret their case in the future, the fault lies not with the double jeopardy rule itself, but their decision to go to trial based on insufficient evidence. Citizens should not be forced to go through the stress of multiple trials due to the incompetence of the state. ‘If a person accused of a serious crime is acquitted, they are entitled to have some certainty in their future’2. That certainty can only be guaranteed if the prosecution is granted one attempt at a conviction, and one only.
1. The Independent. (2002, July 18). The abolition of double jeopardy will undermine confidence in British justice. Retrieved May 11, 2011, from The Independent:
2. Bosscher, M. (2006, November 10). Danger in abolishing double jeopardy rule. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from Online Opinion:
Candidate 1: "The people who are protected by this rule are the guilty who are wrongly declared innocent; the murderer whose voice couldn’t be identified on the tape; the rapist who couldn’t be identified because DNA testing wasn’t sufficiently developed at the time; the robber who couldn’t be identified because facial mapping technology didn’t exist to show their face beneath the mask. People may in unguarded moments confess to crimes for which they have been found not guilty. Why would the state be in their favour and against the victims that so deserve justice - why should victims suffer because evidence didn’t emerge until later?
The test for guilt will still be 'reasonable doubt' - defendents who are genuinely innocent have no need to fear because they will still be found innocent."
Candidate 2: "Abolishment of the rule would restore faith in the justice system
When we see people still unpunished for offences in society they've clearly committed, it damages our faith in the justice system. Our bargain with the state entails the state's right to judge the individual because the state protects the individual: if our attackers roam the streets because an arbitrary legal rule exempts them from prosecution despite clear guilt, then that system has broken down. When Jennifer McDermott witnessed her daughter's murderer get convicted at a re-trial, she described it as a 'victory for everyone who feels let down by the justice system.'1 Victims deserve such justice and it is an insult to them, and all of us, to see their persecutors go free. As a Home Office spokesman stated when England overturned the double jeopardy ban, 'it is important the public should have full confidence in the ability of the criminal justice system to deliver justice.'1 Justice is only applicable when the perpetrators remain within the arm of the law; double jeopardy prevents this.
1 BBC News a. (2009, May 21). Cleared man admits killing woman. Retrieved July 15, 2011, from BBC News: 2 BBC News. (2005, April 3). Double jeopardy law ushered out. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from BBC News:"
Candidate 3: "Double jeopardy ensures defendants are not brought to trial on weak grounds
The implications of this should be looked at carefully. This would grant police and the prosecution the right to prosecute an individual if the evidence against them can be ‘reanalysed.’ Surely almost all cases could see such ‘improvement in investigatory techniques,’ allowing the state to pursue individuals at will. Presumably this ‘generation’ of techniques isn’t the last; why won’t the same logic hold in asking for a third trial? A fourth? A fifth?…Subsequently, if the ‘double jeopardy’ rule is scrapped, police work will be sloppier, because police detectives will know that the insurance of a second trial exists. The ‘one-shot’ rule forces investigations and prosecutions to be of as high a quality as possible. The abolishment of double jeopardy would be ‘merely a shortcut to prosecutors seeking unlimited re-trials until they get the verdict they want’ 1. Courts cannot be permitted to be tied up in such cases, nor can prosecutors be allowed to destroy the lives of defendants by enforcing such constant emotional turmoil.
1. Bosscher, M. (2006, November 10). Danger in abolishing double jeopardy rule. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from Online Opinion:"
Candidate 4: "Vast improvements in the technology of crime-solving have occurred in recent times to ensure that defendants brought to trial are done so appropriately. DNA testing, voice identification technology, facial mapping techniques that reveal faces beneath masks - all can now solve cases and show guilt in individuals whose escape from punishment occurred only because of a lack of satisfactory evidence. For example, In 1963 when Hanratty stood trial for the A6 murder (a gruesome offence where the abused victim was shot in her car and left to die on the motorway), semen stains on the victim's underwear could not be investigated using the technology of the day1. He was convicted anyway on the facts, but if he hadn't been, and thanks to advances in technology the sperm turns out later to be his (as it has), shouldn't we use that evidence to obtain justice for those concerned? Some evidence couldn't possibly have been used at the time of trial, because the technology doesn't exist. Looked at now, it could demonstrate conclusive guilt. If such evidence exists, isn't there a compulsion to use it?2 How can we ignore it?
1 Foot, P. (2000, July 25). Hanratty was innocent. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from Guardian: 2 The Independent. (2002, July 18). The abolition of double jeopardy will undermine confidence in British justice. Retrieved May 11, 2011, from The Independent:"
Candidate 5: "The overriding objective of the justice system is to ensure that the innocent go free, not that the guilty are punished, and the system should be orientated around that objective.
Ex post-facto confessions do not make someone ‘clearly guilty’ as false confessions can arise for a number of reasons, from boasting to an innocent misstatement.
It is also wrong to assume that new evidence is better evidence. The longer a trial takes place after a crime the less strong the evidence gets; memories get weaker, people go missing, evidence can be damaged etc. There is also the problem that in a re-trial any tactical advantage of ‘ambushing’ a witness in cross-examination is lost because they know that the ambush is coming. There are therefore a multitude of reasons why retrials are less likely to achieve convictions than a well prepared first trial."
Candidate 6: "Faith in the justice system is derived from it being been to be fair and even-handed. It is not merely faith on the part of victims that offenders will be found guilty, but faith on the part of innocent defendant that they will be found innocent.
The double jeopardy rule reinforces faith in the justice system because it forces the prosecution service to make the best possible case that they can – because they only get one shot to make it. It also means that defendants can feel secure in submitting themselves to trial on the basis that an acquittal represents complete security from future accusations.
Abolishing the double jeopardy rule would actually undermine confidence in the system – overturning an acquittal is an explicit statement that the system produces false negatives. If it becomes widely accepted that a not-guilty verdict is meaningless then the principle of the presumption of innocence loses its force."
Candidate 7: "Such restrictions on double jeopardy would not be effective in practice, for they attempt to put a value on the relative importance of crimes without using either the prospect of re-offending or the impact on victims. As QC Geoffrey Robertson noted in response to the Law Commission's finding, it is irrational to confine the possibility of re-trials to 'serious crimes' alone and exclude "repetitive, professional" crime like armed robbery. If the intention of the repeal is to bring both offenders to justice and prevent further crime, it is exactly the 'repetitive, professional' criminals who should be targeted."
Candidate 8: "Abolishment of double jeopardy would ensure the guilty do not escape punishment
The problem with the 'double jeopardy' rule is that people who are clearly guilty - because new evidence has emerged, because they've confessed - are not being punished for crimes they have committed. We believe that guilty people should be punished for their crime, and our justice system should be tailored to allow that. In 2009, a footballer in London confessed to murdering his ex-girlfriend at a re-trial after fresh evidence was found to overturn the original verdict1; under previous double jeopardy laws in Britain, the murderer would have remained free. We have as great a duty to ensure miscarriages of justice are not perpetrated on victims as on accused. An offence committed ten years ago does not cease to be an offence because time has passed, or because the perpetrator has managed to evade justice in the past. The criteria by which the decision to charge an individual is taken ought to be likelihood of guilt, not whether or not they have had a trial before. 1 BBC News a. (2009, May 21). Cleared man admits killing woman. Retrieved July 15, 2011, from BBC News:"
Candidate 9: "Juries will know this is a retrial – because evidence will have to be ‘read’ from the first trial where witnesses have died, because notes from ‘last time’ will be available to advocates and the accused, because the legal procedure of the last trial will be subject to discussion in this one. If a jury knows a case has been brought again, there will be a presumption that the accused is guilty because a higher court has already decided that the new evidence makes the acquitted defendant now look guilty after all, and so granted a retrial. The presumption of innocence will no longer exist. And unless the system is going to be overwhelmed with retrials like this, in which case it would be unworkable, then second trial capacity can only (and rightly) be directed towards ‘exceptional’ cases. Such cases are well known - like that of the murder of Stephen Lawrence 1. How could individuals face trial again on the same charges, when in the glare of media attention it has been declared they should have been convicted at the first trial? How could they possibly expect a fair trial?
1. Akwagyiram, A. (2008, April 22). The legacy of Stephen Lawrence. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from BBC News:"
Candidate 10: "The rule of law means less if it is being constantly overturned
Respect for the law will diminish if criminal verdicts exist in a perpetual state of uncertainty. We need to be protected from the state in other ways, too - from the vindictive or obsessed policeman that will pursue a case because he 'knows' the accused, properly acquitted in a court of law, to be guilty nevertheless. The nature of our police force means that these instances are inevitable as it imparts a strong cognitive bias onto our policemen to look for guilt - so unless we mandate a rule determining when a line of investigation has to end, police will continue to focus on their chosen 'perpetrator' until they get the result that they have decided is correct. As Matthew Kelly QC notes, removing double jeopardy restrictions could 'lead to prosecutions routinely seeking a second bite of the cherry, if a case flopped first time for good reason.'1
Given that we are talking about a tiny proportion of cases, it is better to have the principle of finality - because the police will spend vast amounts of time and effort and money on case that are already resolved, to the detriment of crimes that will receive less attention. Therefore successful detective work, and subsequent conviction rates, will increase with the double jeopardy rule in place, not decrease, for police cannot allow themselves to remain rooted in closed cases. 1 BBC News. (2005, April 3). Double jeopardy law ushered out. Retrieved May 12, 2011, from BBC News:"
Candidate 11: "The rules and laws that protect the accused will remain at retrial
All the rules and laws that protect the accused at the first trial will be in place at a second - it's not as if the rule of law suddenly disappears. The presumption of innocence, proof beyond reasonable doubt, the right to a fair hearing and competent counsel, the judge's duty to appropriately direct the jury, etc. will all continue to apply and prevent miscarriages of justice from occurring. Nor is the system likely to be overwhelmed with retrials. Much of the current push for the end of the double jeopardy rule comes from the widespread use of DNA testing, which has allowed many old cases to be revisited with compelling new evidence of guilt or innocence. Mark Weston, for example, was convicted at a re-trial after specks of the victim's blood were found on Weston's shoes, justifying the re-opening of the case1. After a few years, the impact of DNA testing on solving similar cold cases will be expended and there will be very few retrials. 1 Bate, S. (2010, December 13). 'Loner' convicted of murder in double jeopardy re-trial. Retrieved July 19, 2011, from The Guardian:"
Candidate 12: "Double jeopardy could be abolished by state legislatures for all serious crimes whereby fresh, compelling evidence emerges
The scrapping of the double jeopardy would be practicable if it was permitted for serious crimes, like murder and rape, and only when fresh, compelling evidence of guilt emerges that calls into question the original acquittal. Such restrictions on any scrapping of the rule would not tie up courts in re-trials, for they could only be called for certain crimes in certain, restricted conditions. The British Law Commission in a 2011 review concluded that whilst the ancient rule of double jeopardy is of 'fundamental importance', it should be possible to "quash acquittals in murder trials where there is 'reliable and compelling new evidence of guilt'". In practise, this would preserve the traditional advantages of the law, whilst ensuring that those who are guilty, and can be proved so, do not remain free."
Candidate 13: "The rule of law, by its very nature, serves the cause of justice. In doing so, it is often overturned, but only in order to ensure that justice is delivered and offenders punished. Protection from the state therefore is a principle that is relinquished by those who commit crimes; it is the protection of the state from such people that thereafter becomes paramount. The double jeopardy rule enshrines in law that the key factor in any trial is the quality of police work up to that point, rather than the actual guilt of the defendant. If abolished, vindictive policemen will not affect the integrity of the justice system, the case will still be judged by the quality of the evidence whilst the defendant will have recourse to protest their innocence. The potential for innocent people to go through the stress of further trials is a price worth paying to ensure the guilty do not walk free."
| The people who are protected by this rule are the guilty who are wrongly declared innocent; the murderer whose voice couldn’t be identified on the tape; the rapist who couldn’t be identified because DNA testing wasn’t sufficiently developed at the time; the robber who couldn’t be identified because facial mapping technology didn’t exist to show their face beneath the mask. People may in unguarded moments confess to crimes for which they have been found not guilty. Why would the state be in their favour and against the victims that so deserve justice - why should victims suffer because evidence didn’t emerge until later?
The test for guilt will still be 'reasonable doubt' - defendents who are genuinely innocent have no need to fear because they will still be found innocent.
|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is emotional or factual. -5 means strong emotional, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong factual. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: Well, given that your term is a fabrication of the creationist's mind, I suppose you're right. Evolutionists don't actually exist. Therefore you could assign whatever traits you wanted to them, including dishonesty. Evolutionist is a term designed to cast evolution as a faith based notion. The problem is there is no faith in evolution, faith is a belief in something with no proof. Evolution has proof. Therefore it cannot be a faith based idea. A typical creationist attack is to misrepresent their target by creating a strawman of it. They then declare it is wrong and by proxy, the actual theory wrong. It's fundementally weak, but inline with a belief that is scientifically unsound. ]
Response: whatever.\n | -0.571429 |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments phrased as counters. | Argument: Crimea should be Russian
Russia has a strong claim to the Crimea; The territory was only handed over in 1954 by Nikita Krushchev for political reasons. [1] Previously it had been Russian for three hundred years. Historically Crimea is Russian not Ukrainian. Culturally Crimea is important to Russia too, it was the main Russian tourism destination during the Soviet Union and Symbolised Russia’s gains in the 18th and 19th Centuries. [2] Russia for most of the 1990s refused to accept Ukraine’s independence, let alone Crimea that Crimea should be a part of it with the Russian Parliament engaging in actions such as declaring Sevastopol a Russian city. [3] Therefore the sovereignty of the region should be considered to be contested.
[1] Pravda, ‘USSR's Nikita Khrushchev gave Russia’s Crimea away to Ukraine in only 15 minutes’, 19 February 2009
[2] Judah, Ben, ‘Why Russia No Longer Fears the West’, Politico, 2 March 2014
[3] Minorities at Risk Project, ‘Chronology for Crimean Russians in Ukraine’, 2004
Candidate 1: "Acting due to a change of government is not the prerogative of another state. Putin is within his rights not to recognise that government and to grant asylum to former president Yanukovych but not to take action within the Ukraine to change the situation.
The coup however was not a coup but an abdication. “Yanukovych has lost his legitimacy as he abdicated his responsibilities. As you know, he left Ukraine – or left Kyiv, and he has left a vacuum of leadership.” It was therefore Yanukovych who essentially decided that he was no longer in charge by leaving Kiev and not making any statements for several days. [1] Moreover the Ukrainian constitution (both 2004 and 2010 versions) gives the right to impeach the President to Parliament [2] this is what the Parliament has done.
[1] Psaki, Jen, ‘Daily Press Briefing’, U.S. Department of State, 28 February 2014
[2] Constitution of Ukraine, Article 85 (7 & 10), wikisource, 2004 , 2010"
Candidate 2: "This action by Russia shows (once again) that the consequences of violating international norms is practically zero. As such the action damages the credibility of that norm, especially when applied to a powerful state like Russia. [1] The main problem is Russia is a member of these organisations; as a Security Council member the UN can do nothing, similarly it is blocking a full scale monitoring mission by the OSCE. [2] As for the G8, a talking shop, is Putin really likely to care? [3]
[1] Ku, Julian, ‘Russia Reminds the World (and International Lawyers) of the Limits of International Law’, Opinio Juris, 2 March 2014
[2] AFP, 2014
[3] Judah, 2014"
Candidate 3: "Approval by one parliament may make the action legal within Russia but it does not make an invasion legal under international law. The Russian parliament has no legal authority over Crimea or other regions of Ukraine so cannot authorise the use of troops within that country – that is something only the Ukrainian parliament, or in extremis the UN Security Council can authorise.
Similarly the Crimean parliament cannot legally simply decide that Crimea is no longer a part of Ukraine, even a referendum does not enable such a transfer of sovereignty. Self determination should be internal, not external. [1]
[1] Supreme Court of Canada, Reference re Secession of Quebec, [1998] 2 S.C.R. 217"
Candidate 4: "Negotiating with the new government would mean recognising it. Russia may well recognise a new government after elections are held and the government is once more legitimate but until then there is little to negotiate. Moreover elections must be held only when there is stability. At the moment Russia won’t recognise any elections because they would be held under a situation of terror where “there is the danger that a fascist element will come to the fore, and some anti-semite will come to power.” [1]
[1] Siddique, 2014"
Candidate 5: "Historical and cultural claims are not worth much when it comes to sovereignty over territory; if they were then every country in the world would be involved in disputes with their neighbours. In 1994 Russia agreed the Budapest Memorandum with the US, UK and Ukraine in it committing “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine [and] reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”. [1] Russia signed agreements in 1997 that recognised Crimea as a part of Ukraine in return for a lease on the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. [2] Russia has therefore not been contesting sovereignty and so has no legal claim.
[1] Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, ‘Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994’, cfr.org, 5 December 1994
[2] Felgenhauer, T., ‘Ukraine, Russia, and the Black Sea Fleet Accords’, dtic.mil, 1999"
Candidate 6: "“Ukraine is not [only] our closest neighbour, it is our fraternal nation... we will not go to war with the Ukrainian people.” [1] There have been no shots fired and the action is not a hostile act, it is simply to protect the Crimeans. Russia has not engaged in an armed attack as the forces in Crimea have not fired a shot.
[1] Siddique, 2014"
Candidate 7: "While there has been some economic fallout for Russia this is likely to only be temporary, as the risk of actual conflict goes away the markets will return to normal. There is almost no chance that there will be any sanctions that do real damage because much of Europe is dependent on Russia for gas; Germany gets around 39% of its gas from Russia, and this accounts for almost 9% of its energy consumption and other smaller economies in Eastern Europe are even more dependent. [1] Impose sanctions and Russia could squeeze gas supplies.
[1] Ratner, Michael et al., ‘Europe’s Energy Security: Options and Challenges to Natural Gas Supply Diversification’, Congressional Research Service, 20 August 2013, p.10"
Candidate 8: "“Russian mobilisation is a response to an imaginary threat. Military action cannot be justified on the basis of threats that haven't been made and aren't being carried out.” Argues US UN Ambassador Samantha Power. [1] There is little threat to Russian citizens or minorities from the new government. Putin has accused the new government of intimidating minorities and increasing anti-Semitism but Ukrainian Jewish organisations have said “does not correspond to the actual facts”. [2] Any protection of citizens should not be pre-emptive.
While it is right that the Crimea should be consulted on its future this should be done without any Russian intervention. Having Russian soldiers on the ground biases any referendum helping to make it illegitimate. With the referendum having happened after intervention Russia cannot say it was reacting to the demonstrated will of the people.
[1] Mardell, Mark, ‘Ukraine's Yanukovych asked for troops, Russia tells UN’, BBC News, 4 March 2014
[2] Zisels, Josef, et al., ‘Open letter of Ukrainian Jews to Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin’, Voices of Ukraine, 4 March 2014"
Candidate 9: "This is a very different situation from a government inviting in UN peacekeepers. First the Russians are an involved party – part of the cause of the conflict due to the protests in Kiev first breaking out due to Yanukovych turning from the EU to Russia a country so involved would never be asked to be involved in a UN peacekeeping force. Secondly a UN peacekeeping force requires not only the approval of the government but of the UN Security Council. [1] This has not been forthcoming in this case.
On the other hand it is different from basing in another country as the US does as that does not involve coercion. Or for that matter taking vital strategic points such as airports and surrounding the host countries military bases. [2]
[1] ‘Role of the Security Council’, United Nations Peacekeeping, accessed 4/3/2014
[2] Fraser, 2014"
Candidate 10: "Russia is hardly the first nation to send troops across a border without UN Security Council support, indeed there is quite a list; Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Kosovo. All undertaken by western powers. Russia is not threatening the use of force it is simply guaranteeing that its citizens will not come to harm and putting the military on standby just in case such protection is necessary."
| Historical and cultural claims are not worth much when it comes to sovereignty over territory; if they were then every country in the world would be involved in disputes with their neighbours. In 1994 Russia agreed the Budapest Memorandum with the US, UK and Ukraine in it committing “to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine [and] reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine”. [1] Russia signed agreements in 1997 that recognised Crimea as a part of Ukraine in return for a lease on the base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. [2] Russia has therefore not been contesting sovereignty and so has no legal claim.
[1] Presidents of Ukraine, Russian Federation and United States of America, and the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, ‘Budapest Memorandums on Security Assurances, 1994’, cfr.org, 5 December 1994
[2] Felgenhauer, T., ‘Ukraine, Russia, and the Black Sea Fleet Accords’, dtic.mil, 1999
|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response agrees or disagrees with the quote. -5 means strong disagreement, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong agreement. | Topic: Abortion
Quote: Abortion very often is touted as an economic solution for poor women, i.e., "Black women." Strident, pro-abortion feminists cry for abortion as a "right" for which they must fight to keep. Unfortunately, this misleading notion has been embraced by some people in the Black community as a civil right.
Response: And my favourite! Contraception doesn't work kids! It's all a lie!\nhttp://www.abortionfacts.com/online_...g%20pregnancy?\n-Wez | -4.0 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is nasty or nice. -5 means strong nasty, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong nice. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: So many questions arise in the study of fossils (paleontology) that even many evolutionary paleontologists put little stock in the fossil record. Basing one\'s belief in evolution on the shaky ground of paleontology can scarcely be considered scientific.35\n"We are about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million species but the situation hasn\'t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin\'s time." - Dr. David M. Raup, Curator of Geology, Museum of Natural History, Chicago14 (http://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/fossil.htm)
Response: Gee, gives the impression that Dr. David M. Raup, Curator of Geology, Museum of Natural History, Chicago, puts little stock in the fossil record and rejects evolution, helping support the preceding assertion that surely one\xe2\x80\x99s belief in evolution based on paleontology can scarcely be considered scientific.\nBut that\xe2\x80\x99s not at all what Dr. Raup was stating. While Googling for a fuller quote, I ran across a page that showed how this \xe2\x80\x93 and many other \xe2\x80\x93 statements by Dr. Raup were distorted by Creationists. \nTo start with, here is a fuller quote:\n | 1.0 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is emotional or factual. -5 means strong emotional, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong factual. | Topic: Abortion
Quote: You may be right, you may be wrong. It doesn't matter to me either way because the Constitution allows the states to do as they wish regarding abortion.
Response: It also allows SCOTUS to strike down State laws that violate constitutional rights ;) | 3.0 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is attacking or respectful. -5 means strong attacking, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong respectful. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: Intelligent design is a recent concept (not associated with any one religion) and it hasn't had over 100 years to be studied. Why not start now? It can't happen if we block it from future generations. Why not give it a chance, study it, search for evidence, and offer it up for peer review? What are you afraid of? That it can mathematically rule out previous evolutionary theories?
Response: It has a chance. Any scientist has the opportunity to study ID. We are discussing the science classroom. We already teach it as a hypothesis in most schools. But it simply should not be taught as a valid alternative to evolution. That's what this debate is over.\n | 3.2 |
Does the following argumentative component "attack" or "support" the target argumentative component? | Argumentative component: "moderate students should have a chance to try", target argumentative component: "higher education take a lot of money and a lot of time" | attack |
How high is the likelihood (0 - 1) that you would recommend your friend to use the following argument as is in a speech supporting/contesting the topic, regardless of your personal opinion? | everybody should be made to vote because the who populations views need to be registered | 0.479291494 |
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: For me one person one vote is true democracy. Unless people vote we cant have a true feel of what the public want enforcing a vote aids a more democratic government; Topic: We should introduce compulsory voting | pro |
Generate an argument that follows the given topic, stance and argument aspect. | Topic: abortion
Stance: PRO
Aspect: lives | The fact that a woman 's health is at risk does not make an abortion any less of a legal decision , nor should it prevent her from having access to safe abortions if she chooses them - but in cases where there are real threats to their own lives or physical safety , I think we can all agree they have every right to be protected by law . |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate with opposite stance are candidates. The task is to find the best among all on-topic counterarguments. | Argument: The minimum wage provides a baseline minimum allowing people to embark freely in the pursuit of happiness
Without a minimum wage, the lowest paid members of society are relegated to effective serfdom, and their decisions of these members often force others to follow suit, accepting similarly low wages. There is no real freedom of choice for people at this lowest level of the social structure, since they must accept whatever wage is offered in order to feed themselves and their families. Their poverty and desperation for work makes it much more difficult for them to act collectively to bargain for better wages. The minimum wage frees people from this bondage and guarantees them resources with which to make meaningful choices. [1] Without resources there can be no true choice, as all choices would be coerced by necessity. Because people’s choices are intrinsically interconnected, and wages tend to reflect the prevailing pressures of demand and supply, when an individual makes the choice to work for less than anyone else, he necessarily lowers the wage that others can ask, leading to a downward spiral of wages as workers undercut one another, each competing to prove he is worth the least. A minimum wage ensures workers do not harm each other through self-destructive wage competition. [2] What the minimum wage does to alleviate these problems is that it gives individuals the ability to pursue the good life, something that has become a global ideal. People want to be happy, and find that only way to obtain the resources necessary to attain comfort and security is through employment. Fundamentally, the minimum wage grants the freedom not to be exploited, giving individuals the freedom to control their own destinies.
[1] Waltman, The Politics of the Minimum Wage, 2000
[2] Hillman, Public Finance and Public Policy: Responsibilities and Limitations of Government, 2009
Candidate 1: "The minimum wage is little more than a political tool that ultimately harms the overall economy by raising the unemployment rate and driving businesses elsewhere
Politicians have transformed the minimum wage into an indicator of social development. Governments often cite their raising of the minimum wage as an example of their commitment to fostering social justice and equality. This is all nonsense. The minimum wage is nothing more than a useful, simple tool that politicians can exploit without addressing underlying social and economic ills in society. [1] During times of economic expansion wages are generally rising as new businesses are formed and existing firms take on more capacity and workers. During such times, raising the minimum wage has no effect other than being a useful political move. In times of economic contraction, firms close and lay off workers and unemployment rates rise. In such times, the minimum wage hampers the market from clearing, keeping more people out of work than necessary. For markets to function efficiently, wages must be allowed to fluctuate freely, equilibrating with demand for labor and reflecting the macroeconomic situation. Minimum wages tend to lock in wages at pre-recession levels making countries less competitive and less quick to recover when economic downturns occur. Furthermore, minimum wages can often make countries unattractive for businesses to invest in, as the cost of hiring workers can serve as a serious disincentive. For this reason, businesses tend to locate in countries with no minimum wage laws, such as Germany, or where they are comparably low. In order to stay competitive, to bolster economic dynamism and gain global competitiveness, countries should treat labor like the commodity it is and allow the labor market to self-correct, and not institute minimum wage laws.
[1] Dorn, Minimum Wage Socialism, 2010"
Candidate 2: "There is no social justice in denying people the ability to work. The minimum wage serves to benefit insiders who are employed and harm outsiders who do not have jobs and cannot get them due to the dearth of jobs created by the wage laws. [1] The state may have the best interests of its citizens at heart when it institutes a minimum wage, but it accomplishes little when it leaves more of its citizens without work, and thus dependent upon the state for survival.
[1] Dorn, Minimum Wage Socialism, 2010"
Candidate 3: "While it is of course socially desirable that everyone be able to find gainful employment and pursue happiness, this is not accomplished even remotely by the existence of a minimum wage. In fact, it denies more people the ability to pursue happiness because the minimum wage forces unemployment up as it becomes more expensive to hire workers. The choice to work should belong to the individual, whether his decisions have an effect on the wages of others or not. Individuals can only have control of their destinies when they are not limited in the range of their potential actions, which must include the right to sell their labor at whatever rate they find acceptable, be it at some arbitrary minimum or lower."
Candidate 4: "The incentive to enter the illicit market is actually higher when there is a minimum wage. While the relative advantage of entering the black market might be diminished for some who can enter the legitimate workforce and find employment, the higher numbers of people now unemployed would find it necessary either to seek welfare payments from the government or find alternative employment. Such employment could be readily found in the illegal market."
Candidate 5: "The minimum wage restricts an individual’s fundamental right to work
Individuals are autonomous beings, capable of making decisions for themselves. This includes the ability to make a value judgment about the value of one’s time and ability. If an individual wishes to sell his labor for a certain price, then he should not be restricted from doing so by the state. A minimum wage is in effect the government saying it can place an appropriate value on an individual, but an individual cannot value himself, which is an absurdity as the individual, who knows himself better than the state ever could, has a better grasp of the value of his own labor. At the most basic level, people should have their right to choice maximized, not circumscribed by arbitrary government impositions. When the state denies individuals the right to choose to work for low wages, it fails in its duty of protection, taking from individuals the right to work while giving them nothing in return other than the chimerical gift of a decent wage, should they ever be able to find a job. [1] Clearly, the minimum wage is an assault on the right to free choice.
[1] Butler, Scrap the Minimum Wage, 2010"
Candidate 6: "Individuals gain a sense of dignity from employment, as well as develop human capital, that can be denied them by a minimum wage
The ability to provide for oneself, to not be dependent on handouts, either from the state in the form of welfare or from citizens’ charity, provides individuals with a sense of psychological fulfillment. Having a job is key to many people’s self worth, and most capitalist-based societies place great store in an individual’s employment. Because the minimum wage denies some people the right to work, it necessarily leaves some people unable to gain that sense of fulfillment. [1] When people are unemployed for long stretches of time, they often become discouraged, leaving the workforce entirely. When this happens in communities, people often lose understanding of work entirely. This has occurred in parts of the United States, for example, where a cycle of poverty created by a lack of job opportunities has generated a culture of dependence on the state for welfare handouts. This occurrence, particularly in inner cities has a seriously corrosive effect on society. People who do not work and are not motivated to work have no buy-in with society. This results in crime and social disorder. Furthermore, the minimum wage harms new entrants to the workforce who do not have work experience and thus may be willing to work for less than the prevailing rate. This was once prevalent in many countries, often taking the form of apprenticeship systems. When a minimum wage is enforced, it becomes more difficult for young and inexperienced workers to find employment, as they are comparatively less desirable than more experienced workers who could be employed for the same wage. [2] The result is that young people do not have the opportunity to develop their human capital for the future, permanently disadvantaging them in the workforce. The minimum wage takes workers’ dignity and denies them valuable development for the future.
[1] Dorn, Minimum Wage Socialism, 2010
[2] Butler, Scrap the Minimum Wage, 2010"
Candidate 7: "Employers are not stupid. Many do see the value of higher paid workers and appreciate their harder work and dedication. That is exactly why a minimum wage is unnecessary; firms in pursuit of their own self-interest will pay workers competitive wages. Furthermore, social welfare payments will not decrease with the advent of a minimum wage since while some workers will not require income supplements from the state, the higher numbers of unemployed workers will look to the state exclusively as their source of income, raising the cost to the state and the taxpayer."
Candidate 8: "The free market tends to treat workers fairly
In the absence of a minimum wage the free market will not tend toward the exploitation of workers. Rather, wages will reflect the economic situation of a country, guaranteeing that employment will be at the highest possible rate, and not be hampered by an artificial minimum. Some incomes may fall, but overall employment will rise, increasing the general prosperity of the country. [1] Employers understand that high pay promotes hard work. Businesses will not simply slash wages in the absence of a minimum wage, but will rather compete with one another to coax the best and most dedicated workers into their employ. This extends even into the lowest and least-skilled lines of work, as although workers may be largely interchangeable in terms of skill, they are distinct in their level of dedication and honesty. There is thus a premium at all levels of a business to hire workers at competitive wages. Furthermore, employers also take into account that there is a social safety net in virtually every Western country that prevents unemployed workers from starving or losing the barest standard of living. For this reason, wages can never fall below the level of welfare payments, as individuals will necessarily withhold their labor if they can receive the same or better benefit from not working at all than from being employed. Clearly, businesses will seek to employ the best workers and will thus offer competitive wages.
[1] Newmark and Wascher, Minimum Wages, 2010"
| While it is of course socially desirable that everyone be able to find gainful employment and pursue happiness, this is not accomplished even remotely by the existence of a minimum wage. In fact, it denies more people the ability to pursue happiness because the minimum wage forces unemployment up as it becomes more expensive to hire workers. The choice to work should belong to the individual, whether his decisions have an effect on the wages of others or not. Individuals can only have control of their destinies when they are not limited in the range of their potential actions, which must include the right to sell their labor at whatever rate they find acceptable, be it at some arbitrary minimum or lower.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Alternatives are better
There are alternatives to the repatriation of illegal immigrants that are much more attainable. First of all, there has to be more attention to the root causes of migration, rather than attacking the results. The money that would be spent on repatriation could be used for prevention of immigration by focusing on border controls and improving economic conditions in countries where migrants come from. Trade agreements between developed and developing countries could be improved, which gives poorer countries more opportunities to trade. Most illegal immigrants migrate to Western countries to earn money, so if there are more opportunities for foreign workers to operate legally and on a temporary basis, with the assurance that they can come back if needed, this will remove the current incentive for many illegal immigrants to stay in their host country.
Candidate 1: "Repatriation is a more direct solution to the problem, and it is not sure whether these alternatives would work. Tougher border controls will only result in immigrants finding better ways to avoid them; improving economical conditions in poor countries is a slow and insecure progress, and the situation in many developing countries in unlikely to improve anytime soon. Giving illegal immigrants temporary working visas will not stop some immigrants from staying in their host country after their visas have expired if they prefer the living conditions. Even in the case where they do decide to go back to their country of origin, this means the money they have earned will be spent there, and not in the country they have worked. This means the states loses out on revenue."
Candidate 2: "The repatriation of illegal immigrants is not immoral because they do not have the right to be in that country in the first place. Laws are put in place to prevent people to live certain countries without a legitimate reason, and if these laws are wilfully breached, people must face the consequences. It is true that people have the right of freedom of movement, but this right is restricted to the borders of one's home country, and are widened by international agreements. But even then the freedom of movement can be restricted, even for people in Western countries. If we take the example of a European or an American that wants to go on holiday to a tropical island, we see that freedom of movements is relative. Legally this person can be free to go, but if he or she does not have money to pay a ticket or refuses to do so, this right can still be taken away."
Candidate 3: "It is impossible to prove that all illegal immigrants are a drain on the system and so their cost to society cannot be used as a justification for repatriation policies. Many illegal immigrants pay taxes in some way and actually contribute to the economy of a country. For instance, every time an illegal immigrant buys something, they pay the same amount of sales tax or VAT as any other person. Illegal immigrants do not always undercut the labour market. The illegal workforce is a necessary part of the economy because lawful residents do not want jobs such as casual labour, agricultural or domestic jobs. Illegal immigrants often provide vital services that would otherwise be too expensive or hard to find if regular workers were employed e.g. cleaning, childcare and manual labour. Goods would become too expensive to produce if, for example, parts of the agriculture industry had to employ lawful residents/migrants."
Candidate 4: "There needs to be a tough stance to prevent illegal immigration.
The only way to stop the problem of illegal immigration is to take a hard-line stance and adopt policies of repatriation. This means that illegal immigrants, after it has been proven through a fair hearing that they have no legitimate reason to stay, will be granted a period of voluntary repatriation, where they receive counselling and help to return to their country. If this does not work, and the illegal immigrant wants to stay, he or she will forced to repatriate. Repatriation is needed because illegal immigrants are residing in a country which is different from their country of origin, without fulfilling the legal requirements to do so. They also do not make the same contributions to the state as other people do, such as paying taxes. This means that illegal immigrants are actively harming the legal system, the citizens of the country and legal immigrants. At the same time, the number of illegal immigrants is rising every year, with an estimated 11.5-12 million illegal immigrants living in the US alone1. These kind of numbers show that the rules on immigration need to come with tough sanctions to ensure that they are not exploited or broken in the future. Repatriation is necessary because it targets successful illegal immigrants and ensures a comprehensive immigration policy that aims to reduce illegal immigration. What this policy of repatriation will do, is that it firstly will reduce the number of illegal immigrants in the country, which will lead to a decline of harms caused by them. Secondly, it will act as a strong deterrence for future immigrants. Repatriation sends a message to potential illegal migrants that their presence in the country will not be tolerated and that any attempt to stay in the country illegally will be unsuccessful.
1 BBC News, "BBC guide on illegal immigration in the US", 2005, accessed 31 August 2011"
Candidate 5: "There are many alternatives to a repatriation policy that will more effectively target the problems caused by illegal immigration. Countries can toughen border controls and have better systems in place for granting asylum. Voluntary repatriation is unworkable, even if accompanied by financial assistance, because many illegal immigrants want to stay in the country. Involuntary repatriation is inhumane and harmful because it restricts the freedom of movement for people, and separates them from their family and friends, whilst they are forced to go back to potentially harmful situations. Repatriation will not stop the numbers of people coming to the country. Illegal immigration does not occur because a country is a 'soft touch': very few, if any, countries have no problems with illegal immigration. The reasons behind immigration are social, political and economic and have nothing to do with an individual country's policy on illegal immigration. Those who turn to illegal immigration are often desperate and will pay no attention to the immigration policies of a country."
Candidate 6: "Repatriation poses a danger for illegal immigrants
The system of repatriating illegal immigrants can be proven harmful for these immigrants on several levels. Some illegal immigrants, although they might not fall under the official category of refugees, have fled dangerous situations such as persecution, violation of human rights and severe poverty. In 2009, France and the UK sent back several migrants that had fled the Taliban to Afghanistan when the country was still at war1. To send these people back to their country of origin would be a severe attack on their liberty and security. Having a zero-tolerance policy on illegal immigration will also make it harder for those who are trafficked to escape from criminal gangs because if they contact the authorities they will be sent home. This gives the criminals behind people-trafficking more power over their victims and will lead to worse living/working conditions in illegal industries.
1 The Telegraph, "France deports illegal Afghan migrants on joint Franco-British flight", 22 October 2009,, accessed 31 August 2009"
Candidate 7: "Costs of illegal migrants and harm to labour market
Illegal immigrants cost the state in money, time and resources. It is difficult to give an accurate number on the cost of illegal immigrants for the rest of the population (the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) has come up with numbers as high as $1,183 per household in the state of California1), but they are likely to put a strain on resources by not paying taxes whilst demanding social services such as healthcare and education. As a result, they take taxpayer's money away from those who are lawfully entitled to use these services and put a burden on the state. Moreover, illegal immigrants undercut the labour market by accepting low wages and working under illegal conditions. This is harmful to lawful residents because it takes employment opportunities away from them and encourages employers to seek illegal labour in order to keep costs down. Removing the illegal workforce would increase the number of jobs available to lawful residents and force employers to pay fair wages and provide safe working conditions.
1 Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), "The Costs to Local Taxpayers for Illegal Aliens", 2006,, accessed 31 August 2011"
Candidate 8: "Loss of trust in the government
Failing to remove illegal immigrants undermines public confidence in the government and its migration policy. In the UK, opposition leader Ed Milliband has acknowledged that Labour had lost trust in the south by underestimating the number of illegal immigrants and the impact they would have on people's wages1. People believe that allowing those who have no right to remain in the country to stay on means the whole immigration system is broken. Legitimate migrants such as refugees, students and those with visas for work will be lumped together with illegal immigrants, and calls will grow for all forms of migration to be restricted. Populist feeling may also be inflamed against ethnic minorities, with increased social tensions.
1 BBC News, 2011, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13133544"
Candidate 9: "Repatriation is expensive and unrealistic
The repatriation of all illegal immigrants is impossible to realize, and this large-scale project would cost large sums of money. The Center for American Progress study released in March of 2010 concluded that a strategy aimed at deporting the US population of illegal immigrants would cost the government approximately $285 billion over five years. (A deportation-only policy would amount to $922 in new taxes for "every man, woman, and child in this country)."1 In separate research released in January, UCLA professor Raúl Hinojosa-Ojeda found that if undocumented immigrants were removed from the economy, it would reduce US GDP by $2.6 trillion over ten years.1
The impracticality of repatriation lies not only in the costs of the transportation and the help given to immigrants, but also in the time and effort of finding all illegal immigrants. A repatriation policy would be never-ending and a waste of time and money. It would be better to target only those illegal immigrants who pose a proven risk of harm to society.
1. Apsan, 2010 http://news.jornal.us/article-4716.Mass-Deportation-Of-illegal-Immigrant..."
Candidate 10: "Illegal immigration is facilitated by criminal networks
Repatriating illegal immigrants would lead to fewer opportunities for criminal networks to gain entry to the country. Illegal Immigration is linked to dangerous criminal activity such as people and drug trafficking, terrorism and the sex trade. An estimated 270 000 victims of human trafficking live in industrialized countries, of whom 43% are forced into commercial sexual exploitation, mostly women and girls1. This is both dangerous for those involved in illegal immigration but also increases the criminal activity in a country, putting lawful residents at risk. The state also has a duty to protect its citizens from the harms associated with illegal immigration. Illegal immigration fuels dangerous industries such as prostitution and the drug trade, repatriating illegal immigrants cuts off a vital source of labour for these industries and could contribute to the eradication of these industries.
1 UN.GIFT, "Human Trafficking: The Facts",, accessed 31 August 2011"
Candidate 11: "A repatriation policy will not effectively target this area of illegal immigration. Criminal networks will always find ways of smuggling people into a country and evading detection. All a repatriation policy will do is make these gangs more sophisticated when it comes to hiding illegal immigrants. This not only makes it more difficult to discover and undermine these networks, but also puts the illegal immigrants that are involved in these criminal activities at risk. If there is a standard repatriation policy for all illegal immigrants, vulnerable groups such as trafficked women are less likely to seek help, because not only is it likely that they will be repatriated, but they also put the lives of themselves and their families at risk by going through this procedure, rather than receiving anonymous help. As a result, illegal immigrants that are often at the bottom of criminal organisation will be worse off, while the criminal at the top will get more power over their victims."
Candidate 12: "It might be true that repatriation is a costly option, but so are other alternatives. Illegal immigrants are already putting a costly burden on the state by using its resources without giving much back. If this situation is left on its own, the long-term costs of keeping illegal immigrants might be higher than the relative short-term cost of repatriation. Alternatives, such as nationalisation of immigrants are also very costly and time-intensive, and would moreover encourages more potential migrants to come and obtain the country's nationality."
Candidate 13: "Although it might be true that immigrants might be harmed by repatriation in some cases, the majority of illegal immigration takes place because of economic reasons, and those people can return safely. The United High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) sets the conditions for voluntary repatriation on the grounds of legal (absence of discrimination, free from persecution), physical (freedom from attack, safe routes for return) and material (access to livelihoods) safety1. If this is not the case, these people should be given temporary asylum. Victims of trafficking are usually given special protection, as is the case with the EU, which also imposes tough rules on criminals involved2.
1 Refugee Council Online, "Definitions of voluntary returns", accessed 31 August 2011
2 European Commission, "Addressing irregular immigration", 30 June 2011, , accessed 31 August 2011"
Candidate 14: "The repatriation of all illegal immigrants is an impossible task to start with, so if this policy is adopted and fails in its execution, this will lead to a greater loss of trust in the government. If immigration policies focus more on the integration of illegal immigrants, this will have a more beneficial effect than criminalizing them. Marking illegal immigrants as criminals that have to leave the country as soon as possible will actually incite more conflict between migrants and populists."
Candidate 15: "Repatriation is immoral
The repatriation of illegal immigrants, even if it is not completely under coercion, is immoral. Even if the repatriation is 'voluntary', immigrants know they have no alternatives, and might agree to go back voluntary because the next step would be involuntary repatriation. This means that illegal immigrants are severely restricted in their freedom of movement. In the Western world, people can move around relatively easily, and this is seen as an inalienable right. To restrict this for people that do not come from this part of the world would be inhumane. Moreover, illegal immigrants have often built their lives in the country they reside in, having a family, sometimes children, work and a social circle. Often, children from illegal immigrants get citizenship because of their age, whilst their parents are repatriated. This forceful separation of children from their parents is a violation of their human rights, as article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that the family is the natural unit in society which is entitled to state protection1. Separating children from their mother can be seen as a violation of this right.
1 United Nations, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 10 December 1948,, accessed 31 August 2011"
| Repatriation is a more direct solution to the problem, and it is not sure whether these alternatives would work. Tougher border controls will only result in immigrants finding better ways to avoid them; improving economical conditions in poor countries is a slow and insecure progress, and the situation in many developing countries in unlikely to improve anytime soon. Giving illegal immigrants temporary working visas will not stop some immigrants from staying in their host country after their visas have expired if they prefer the living conditions. Even in the case where they do decide to go back to their country of origin, this means the money they have earned will be spent there, and not in the country they have worked. This means the states loses out on revenue.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments phrased as counters. | Argument: Government, like everyone else, should be able to profit from its work, that profit benefits its citizens rather than harming them
We generally accept the principle that people who create something deserve to benefit from that act of creation as they should own that work. [1] This is a principle that can be applied as easily to government, whether through works they are funding or works they are directly engaged in, as to anyone else. The owners of the work deserve to have the choice to benefit from their own endeavours through having copyright over that work. Sometimes this will mean the copyright will remain with the person who was paid to do the work but most of the time this will mean government ownership. Public funding does not change this fundamental ownership and the quixotic bargain state funding in exchange for mandatory creative commons licensing is a perversion of that ownership.
The Texas Emerging Technology Fund is an example of the use of state funding in the private sector to produce socially useful technologies without thieving the ownership of new technologies from their creators. [2] Moreover states clearly benefit from being able to use any profit from their funding. It would clearly be in taxpayers interest if the state is able to make a profit out of the investments that taxpayers funding creates as this would mean taxes could be lower.
[1] Greenberg, M. ‘Reason or Madness: A Defense of Copyright’s Growing Pains’. John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law. 2007. http://www.jmripl.com/Publications/Vol7/Issue1/Greenberg.pdf
[2] Office of the Governor. ‘Texas Emerging Technology Fund’. 2012, http://governor.state.tx.us/ecodev/etf/
Candidate 1: "The choice to release work into the viral market is a business decision creators should have the power to choose, not a mandated requirement for funding. Some may decide that they will profit and gain more recognition through releasing their work into the creative commons, others may not. It should be remembered that Ordinance Survey was originally mapping for military purposes rather than for the general public so it might very well have decided that there is no reason to have its data open to the public and it would pose no benefit to enable to public to use that data for modification."
Candidate 2: "The government should not be interested in the profit motive but what is best for its citizens which will usually mean creative commons licenses rather than the state making a profit. This is even more likely when developments are a joint project with a for profit operation; taxpayers will rightly ask why they should be paying the research costs only for a private business to reap the profit from that investment. The government already provides a leg up to businesses in the form of providing infrastructure, a stable business environment, education etc., it should not be paying for their R&D too."
Candidate 3: "Government is quite simply not ‘like everyone else’. If government acted like a profit maximising business it would clearly have the ability to turn itself into a monopoly on almost everything. This is why the role of government is not to make a profit but to ensure the welfare and freedoms of its citizens."
Candidate 4: "Is it really in the public interest that there should be a norm that government information should be shared? There are clearly some areas where we do not want our government to share information; most clearly in the realm of security, [1] but also where the government and through them taxpayers can make a profit out of the product that the government has created. If the government creates a new radar system for the navy does it not make sense that they should be able to sell it at a profit for use by other country’s shipping? Also, the abundance of piracy online is not a reason to submit to the pirates and give them free access to information they should not receive.
[1] See ‘ This House believes transparency is necessary for security ’"
Candidate 5: "There is a difference between the general public and the government. It is the government that bought the rights to the work not the people even if the people are the ones that originally provided the money to develop the work by paying their taxes. It can be considered to be analogous to a business. Consumers pay for the products they buy and the profits from this enable the business to make the next generation of products. But that the consumers provided the profit that enabled that development does not enable the consumers to either get an upgrade or for the product to be released with a creative commons license"
Candidate 6: "While there will be a few cases where it is undesirable that things that the government pays the funding for to be licensed through creative commons this should not stop creative commons from being the default choice. Creative commons is a good choice for the vast majority of what government does as weapons systems and other security related items are only a small part of government investment. Think of all the IT systems for government departments, it clearly makes sense that they should be creative commons so that they can be improved and adapted when it turns out they don’t work in quite the way they were designed. For example the UK government wasted £2,7billion on an IT project for the NHS, [1] in such a situation it would have made a lot of sense to have what was done open to others to pick up on and build upon if there was any of the software that could be of any use.
[1] Wright, Oliver, ‘NHS pulls the plug on its £11bn IT system’, The Independent, 3 August 2011, http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/nhs-pulls-the-plug-on-its-11bn-it-system-2330906.html"
| Government is quite simply not ‘like everyone else’. If government acted like a profit maximising business it would clearly have the ability to turn itself into a monopoly on almost everything. This is why the role of government is not to make a profit but to ensure the welfare and freedoms of its citizens.
|
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
The author presents a R based toolset for the analysis of ChIP-seq data in a GUI framework.
The construction of R based ChIP-seq analysis pipelines affords the potential for the use of wide range of tools from R and Bioconductor libraries while offering a low dependency piece of software.
ChIPdig uses QuasR, a wrapper for Bowtie, for the alignment of ChIP-seq data from a BSGenome object.
The Rbowtie2 and Rsubread packages are now both available on Windows, Mac and Linux systems and should be considered alongside Bowtie.
I believe they would offer significant speed and memory usage improvements over QuasR. Although these do not accept BSGenome objects, ChIPdig could easily generate the FASTA from these packages for use with indexing steps of both packages.
Blacklisted regions should be considered in this tool as they have been shown to have strong effects on the QC, fragment length estimation and between sample normalisation.
Inclusion of methods of blacklist filtering from known sources (such as Encode) or in software derived blacklists (using GreyListChIP) should be performed.
The output of BedGraph instead of BigWigs may cause some problems for users when working with larger genomes such as human or mouse.
BigWigs may not be able to be exported on Windows systems but users of Mac or linux should have this option available to them to make this feature worthwhile.
Peak calling is performed with BayesPeak.
It is unclear how this performs on the different types of epigenetic marks used in this study.
Some more options for peak calling could be included here to allow finer control of the stitching of peaks into larger peaks.
A simple bin based peak calling approach such as implemented in the CSAW user guide would be useful here.
How the identification of replicated peaks is not clear in text and could be expanded.
The example differential enrichment analysis compare H3k4me3 and H3K36me3 signals directly.
This is a strange example as most differential ChIP-seq analysis is performed within the same antibody.
An example comparing the change in one histone mark over different conditions/treatment/tissue types would be a more useful and relevant comparison.
This differential enrichment example does highlight a potential pitfall with this approach where the majority of sites change.
The user should be warned in these circumstances as conclusions are likely to be invalid.
Alternative normalisations such as to total mapped reads in peaks or total mapped reads to genome could be provided as options (as in Diffbind). | Structure
Recap
Recap
Recap
Todo
Other
Todo
Todo
Weakness
Other
Recap
Weakness
Todo
Todo
Todo
Recap
Weakness
Todo
Weakness
Todo
Todo |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Arts degrees limit opportunities for Universities to offer other courses
Universities have to provide a range of courses, some of which are going to be more financially viable than others, that fine. However, investment in one area inevitably means that there are resources not being focused elsewhere. It’s not a huge factor but some subjects – creative arts, Theology and a few others do represent a ‘back door’ into universities for those who didn’t get the grades to get onto more demanding courses.
Those students still need to sleep, study and socialize somewhere – in place of those who could have taken their places on Engineering, Medicine, Economics or similar courses had the space been available.
By keeping these courses, universities are turning away students for other disciplines and those studying the arts courses are learning in a way that may not be the most productive – as mentioned in the previous argument. It’s difficult to see who wins.
Candidate 1: "Opp’s case sounds excellent, and reasonable and sensible. And complete nonsense. Those countries that have changed their fee arrangements for students in recent years, such as the UK, have seen that students are very concerned with whether their degree is likely to cover the cost of taking it – now that they are expected to pay for it. When it is society at large footing the bill, unsurprisingly, they are less concerned. Of course the financial outcome of doing a degree is of paramount interest to both the student and wider society, suggesting otherwise is sophistry."
Candidate 2: "The notion that money is the best way of judging value is far more damaging to society than the Arts
If the value of a degree is judged purely on the likely salary at the end of it, then society has a very real problem. Even without rehearsing the fact that other disciplines would vanish by the wayside, it also ties into the myth that a degree is simply a vocational tool to increase the salary of the person taking it [i] .
The mindset that insists that everything can be reduced to the level of individual income has also brought us the obscenity of the bonus culture in high finance and, so far, five years of recession. The value of the arts is primarily non-monetary; it comes from the psychological benefit of well-designed buildings [ii] or the happiness and creativity stimulated by engaging with a work of art. [iii]
University fulfills a far wider societal role in terms of training the mind and socializing the individual. For the vast majority of students, it also provides a respite between the constrictions of the family home and those of the workplace.
It is also just possible that people select their degrees primarily because they are interested in them. That in itself is something that cannot be said of significant parts of the world of work.
The logic of this motion is that all members of society are employers – or at least wealth generators – first and last. Their role as voters, community members, parents, and plain human beings seems to be irrelevant to both the spirit and wording of the motion and the Proposition’s case.
[i] Edgar, David, ‘Why should we fund the arts?’ The Guardian, 5 January 2012. http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2012/jan/05/david-edgar-why-fund-the-arts
[ii] Steadman, Ian, ‘Study: school design can significantly affect a child’s grades’, Wired.co.uk, 3 January 2013, http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-01/03/school-design-influences-learning
[iii] Alleyne, Richard, ‘Viewing art gives same pleasure as being love’, The Telegraph, 8 May 2011, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/8501024/Viewing-art-gives-same-pleasure-as-being-in-love.html"
Candidate 3: "The Arts pay their way in film, heritage and design industries
The major film, theatrical, dance and other artistic ventures of any nation provide an enormous benefit in terms of reasons to visit as country, or travel within one. Going to the theatre, for example, has knock on benefits for the catering, transport, and retail sectors as well as crating employment in its own right for many who never went anywhere near a degree in the Arts [i] .
For many nations one or two key sectors of the arts are massive revenue generators – especially film, television and music. Theatres and galleries have considerably more pulling power than heavy industry or high finance for tourists [ii] – and Prop has been very quiet on the subject of architecture, without which the bankers and financiers they so admire would be homeless. The arts may not square up to banking in terms of the amount of money earned for the economy but they also have much less of a record of damaging the rest of the economy through sparking crises.
Even just focussing on the finances of the sector, the Arts justify their presence not only through their own revenue but also through those other sectors that benefit as a result but pay nothing towards their development [iii] .
[i] Lord, Clayton, ‘The Value of Arts is Not Going to be Found in Economics’, New Beans, 19 May 2011. http://www.artsjournal.com/newbeans/2011/05/the-value-of-arts-is-not-going-to-be-found-in-economics.html
[ii] The National Campaign for the Arts. Theatre: Contribution to the Economy. 2010. http://www.artscampaign.org.uk/index.php?option=com_quickfaq&view=items&cid=13:contribution-to-the-economy&id=76:theatre-contribution-to-the-economy&Itemid=152
[iii] National Endowment for the Arts. ‘Art and GDP.’, http://www.nea.gov/research/notes/104.pdf"
Candidate 4: "The Arts should be learnt on the job – it’s a craft
The idea that the best place to learn an artform is a classroom is fantastically modern. The idea of teaching them at all is fairly recent. If ever there were an example of ‘those who can, do; those who can’t, teach’, then it’s the arts. Novelists, poets, painters, dancers, composers, musicians and others have been learning from each other as they practiced their art for, quite literally, millennia.
Practitioners learning by doing has worked perfectly well for most of history and produced, for example, the extraordinary works of the renaissance or classical art mostly without the benefit of a university degree. All a degree in this area does is extend the period of delusion that an individual is good enough to cut it as a professional artist [i] .
[i] Goldman, Jeremy, ‘Actors dilemma: Theatre major vs. No theatre major’ USA Today, 25 June 2012. http://www.usatodayeducate.com/staging/index.php/campuslife/actors-dilemma-theater-major-vs-no-theater-major"
Candidate 5: "This isn’t an either/or discussion. Despite Prop’s efforts to suggest that there are masses of homeless, would-be engineering students roaming around university campuses, the reality is that universities pack their bankable courses just fine and ensure that they have the capacity to do so. The fact that universities do not just churn out an endless round of vocationally-focussed graduates is hugely to be welcomed. If nothing else, it ensures that the university experience itself is a well-rounded one.
The very fact that students continue to apply for these courses, and universities continue to meet that demand, suggests that applicants are interested in something more than money. Presumably the very students who are applying for such a degree – and will shoulder the repercussions of having one – form part of society and are quiet happy to ‘afford’ their degree."
Candidate 6: "The Arts provide huge benefits to society; easily comparable to humanities or theoretical science
It has already been mentioned that there are plenty of degrees where it is unlikely that graduates will ever use the knowledge they acquire, per se, in their later careers. Proposition has failed to give a reason – other than earning power – as to why the creative arts should be singled out on this ground [i] .
However, in terms of the general utility provided to wider society, it would be hard to point to a discipline that out performs the arts.
Every TV drama, theatre production, concert and so on is likely to include at least a smattering of participants who studied the subject. It is in the nature of the arts that its audience massively outnumbers those participating in its production. Beyond that the trickle down affect of knowledge into every area of public life from ideas and concepts initiated by artists is enormous.
However, if Prop’s entire case is that artists should be paid more for the enormous amount of good they do, we are quite happy to concede the point.
[i] McCarthy, Kevin F. et al., ‘Reframing the Debate About the Value of the Arts.’, The Rand Corporation, 2005, http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9106/index1.html"
Candidate 7: "This is a little like saying that the petroleum industry benefits from medicine because of the need for ambulances. People would still go out for dinner and still take holidays. More to the point, as has been suggested, they will still go the theatre or cinema, where people will still act. The issue here is that Universities are unnecessary in the process of training creative artists."
Candidate 8: "Creative arts graduates are rarely well rewarded
It is a simple fact that degrees in the Arts offer less earning potential than those in all other sectors (except Education and social work) [i] . As well as being an issue for the individual, this affects wider society, as those on lower incomes are more likely to become dependent on the state at some point in their life and are less well placed to stimulate other sectors of the economy through their own consumption.
The median earning figure across Arts degrees is, itself deceptive. The median in the US is $45,000 but this disguises the lower end of the scale, with 25% earning $30,000 a year or less.
Unlike education and social work which at least tend to have the consistency of a government salary, the Arts are also fantastically unreliable as an employment sector. Teachers and social workers may have comparatively low salaries but at least they can be assured of job security. The Arts offers low and unstable wages, frequently at an ongoing expense to the taxpayer, when the jobs exist at all.
As a result, encouraging the creative arts through university qualifications places both an initial and, potentially, ongoing cost on the rest of society. It also means that graduates are likely to be destined to long term financial instability because of a decision they made as a teenager.
It is difficult to see who benefits from such an arrangement.
[i] ‘Arts’, Georgetown University, http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/arts.pdf"
Candidate 9: "Opp makes an excellent case for further refining the role of Higher Education but not a very satisfactory one for keeping it structured as it currently is. The whole point here is that nobody benefits – not the graduate, not the Arts and not the society that is footing the bill. The benefit to society of art would remain if the arts were no longer taught as university degrees."
Candidate 10: "Very few go into the arts expecting a high income, they do so because they enjoy it. Likewise, the very fact that people pay for the arts – both through their own purchases and social funding, suggests that the pleasure that performance - and other creative arts – gives is recognised by wider society. The output of the Arts sector provides entertainment and pleasure to others in a way that really cannot be said of, for example, banking or derivatives brokerage.
By the by, it would also be interesting to see how any graduates in, say, the humanities are likely to match the earning potential of a movie star or an ‘it’ artist."
Candidate 11: "This argument is just specious. There have been plenty of times in history when medicine was ‘learnt on the job’, it didn’t make it a good idea. However, and medicine is an excellent example, we now realise that there is a huge benefit to having students acquire a theoretical underpinning of their discipline before going on to get some hands on experience. Of course there is some need for practical training but there is little reason why universities cannot offer this rather than individual artists."
| This isn’t an either/or discussion. Despite Prop’s efforts to suggest that there are masses of homeless, would-be engineering students roaming around university campuses, the reality is that universities pack their bankable courses just fine and ensure that they have the capacity to do so. The fact that universities do not just churn out an endless round of vocationally-focussed graduates is hugely to be welcomed. If nothing else, it ensures that the university experience itself is a well-rounded one.
The very fact that students continue to apply for these courses, and universities continue to meet that demand, suggests that applicants are interested in something more than money. Presumably the very students who are applying for such a degree – and will shoulder the repercussions of having one – form part of society and are quiet happy to ‘afford’ their degree.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: Legalizing abortion defies the principle of life affirmation
Every life presents an inherent value to society. Every individual has the potential to contribute in one way or another, and taking the child's life before it has even had a chance to experience and contribute to the world undermines that potential. Even more, the underlying philosophical claim behind abortion is that not every life is equally valued and if a life is 'unwanted' or 'accidental' it is not worth enough to live. That kind of thinking goes directly against the life-affirming policies and philosophies of most countries, and peoples themselves.
Candidate 1: "Women do not "want" abortions. They find themselves in a position in which abortion is the less bad between bad alternatives. This argument is important in explaining that abortion is not about a malicious desire to "kill babies" or even to express their right to choose; it is about allowing women to make the best choice."
Candidate 2: "Yes, our societies do strive to affirm life as much as possible, and to make the quality of life of our citizens as high as possible. Foetuses do not apply here because they:
a) are not lives, are not human until fairly late
b) if they are born as unwanted children, and the mother is effectively forced to give birth, the quality of life of both the child and the mother will be lowered, and that is what really goes against the principle of life affirmation."
Candidate 3: "The assertion that obtaining an abortion is always the result of irresponsible behaviour is disrespectful to every woman undergoing an abortion. Using birth control is a completely different decision from getting an abortion. Besides, contraception, though effective, is still not accepted, available or affordable for women in certain countries. Moreover, even when legalized, abortion will only be a last resort in the cases where the quality of life of the baby or mother or both will be in danger."
Candidate 4: "Are we really talking about a 'life?' At what point does a life begin? Is terminating a foetus, which can neither feel nor think and is not conscious of its own 'existence,' really commensurable with the killing of a 'person?' There rightly are restrictions on the time, within which a termination can take place, before a foetus does develop these defining, human characteristics. If you affirm that human life is a quality independent of, and prior to thought and feeling, then you leave yourself the awkward task of explaining what truly 'human' life is. A foetus is not a life until it fulfils certain criteria. Before 24 weeks, a foetus does not feel pain, is not conscious of itself or its surroundings. Until a fetus can survive on its own, it cannot be called a life, any more than the acorn can be called a tree."
| Yes, our societies do strive to affirm life as much as possible, and to make the quality of life of our citizens as high as possible. Foetuses do not apply here because they:
a) are not lives, are not human until fairly late
b) if they are born as unwanted children, and the mother is effectively forced to give birth, the quality of life of both the child and the mother will be lowered, and that is what really goes against the principle of life affirmation.
|
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Influence of large factories
Nowadays, whether to establish large factories nearby housing areas has become a controversial issue in our society. Out of the case of economic development, industrial buildings are a necessary part of modern society. However a vast number of people are against building a factory near their community because of pollution. From my point of view, the advantages of building a factory will outweigh its disadvantages, if we tackle the environmental problems brought by factories.
First of all, a large factory can stimulate local economic growth and reduce the unemployment rate. To manufacture goods, there must be the demand of laborers, from which the local residents can benefit. What is more, the factory is not isolated, other industries and business will be quickly established, resulting in economic growth of local area. For example, the estate industry will be boosted in order to satisfy the workers' accommodation need.
The main disadvantage is contamination. It is true that some area are suffering the dire consequences caused by overdeveloping the industry, such as water pollution, overcrowded traffic and medical problems. For instance, in some industrial cities, a large proportion of the workers are suffering various breathing problems, such as asthma which can be caused by waste ashes and certain chemical substances.
However, it is inevitable that there will be more factories built with the development of our society. Therefore, how to improve the disadvantages of building a factory would be more important than whether to build it. In fact most problems can be avoidable if the factories put in real and great effort to manage their waste well.
In conclusion, installation of manufacturing plant is a trend of industrialization for many countries. Its advantages will outweigh disadvantages as long as the factories dispose their waste and pollution in the correct way.
| the advantages of building a factory will outweigh its disadvantages, if we tackle the environmental problems brought by factories
a large factory can stimulate local economic growth and reduce the unemployment rate
To manufacture goods, there must be the demand of laborers, from which the local residents can benefit
the factory is not isolated, other industries and business will be quickly established, resulting in economic growth of local area
the estate industry will be boosted in order to satisfy the workers' accommodation need
It is true that some area are suffering the dire consequences caused by overdeveloping the industry, such as water pollution, overcrowded traffic and medical problems
in some industrial cities, a large proportion of the workers are suffering various breathing problems, such as asthma which can be caused by waste ashes and certain chemical substances
The main disadvantage is contamination
how to improve the disadvantages of building a factory would be more important than whether to build it
it is inevitable that there will be more factories built with the development of our society
most problems can be avoidable if the factories put in real and great effort to manage their waste well |
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: the organ trade hurts impoverished people; Topic: We should legalize organ trade | con |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: This ban constitutes serious governmental intrusion into parental responsibilities and private choices.
Parents, not politicians, should be responsible for guiding the choices their children make and the food they eat, especially when they pay for it with their own money. Parents may have other reasons for wanting their children to have the meal with a toy, for example the toy is a useful distraction for the child. Governments should not try to impose their own idea of what constitutes appropriate food choices for children on parents and on businesses. Governments may aim to promote and educate, but imposing bans on private businesses goes too far [1] .
[1] Martinez, Michael. “Mayor vetoes San Francisco ban on Happy Meals with toys.” CNN. November 13 2010. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/11/12/california.fast.food.ban/index.html
Candidate 1: "While McDonald’s may have found a way to circumvent the ban, the significant pressure that was applied to them in the process led the company to improve the quality of the Happy Meal, by providing clients with fresh fruit and healthier drink options. Therefore, the ban could be considered a success."
Candidate 2: "This is not exactly a ban on the sale of fast food to children. This ban does not affect the options of bad foods that parents can continue to feed to their young children if they choose to do so. They will even be able to continue buying happy meals – simply without the toy. It merely alters the incentives slightly toward promoting better, healthier choices by making fast food less appealing."
Candidate 3: "Of course there is no such thing as a silver bullet solution to a problem as complex as childhood obesity. This ban would need to be part of a bigger push to regulate the fast food industry’s marketing to children and to provide kids and parents with better choices and information. That doesn’t mean the ban has no merit or that it would not play a beneficial role in the fight against obesity."
| This is not exactly a ban on the sale of fast food to children. This ban does not affect the options of bad foods that parents can continue to feed to their young children if they choose to do so. They will even be able to continue buying happy meals – simply without the toy. It merely alters the incentives slightly toward promoting better, healthier choices by making fast food less appealing.
|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is attacking or respectful. -5 means strong attacking, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong respectful. | Topic: Healthcare
Quote: And you believed every word they fed you without a second thought. At least now we know whose line you're peddling. Please, cite your sources to start with in the future. It's not just a good idea, it's the rules. emoticonXAgree
Response: Actually, I had heard it several times on radio talk shows that normally do research before making claims. I then read it on several sites that cited the U.S. Census Records as their source. Since the radio shows and the websites all credited the U.S.Census, I perceived that they could not have made it up...since they all matched within acceptable tolerances. It does seem reasonable to you that such information could be gleaned from the census data...does it not?\nWill you agree that what they say is true? | 1.6 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is nasty or nice. -5 means strong nasty, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong nice. | Topic: Abortion
Quote: FLYNT: They have no direct knowledge that he \nknew about it, but they knew the women that we \ninterviewed that lived in the complex all admitted \nthat they had been told by this girl who was \npregnant and that George Bush was the father.
Response: This quote also shows that the supposed "friends" were women who lived in the same complex as the woman, not necessarily anything more than neighbors. Flynt also tried to get the media to pick up his story but instead they insisted as told by Ward:\n | 1.6 |
Are the two argumentative components below, taken from essays, linked? | Argumentative component 1: "cooperation is also an essential quality for children, no matter in school activities or in communities", argumentative component 2: "it would not help them much once they enter to society or company which required more about skill of team work" | No |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: High sum of money of modern artist
The amount of money people earning sometimes is unfair. In a field of art, modern artist may receive high salary for their masterpiece creation while labors should be break their bone for years to get similar amount of money. Although some people view that government should be take a responsibility for this unfair situation, critics against such view. I agree that in this occasion the government is not granted to hand in.
Proficiency brings perfectness in terms of art work. It is true while the modern artists who implement their creative thinking onto high value creation are paid with immense sum by the art collector. Also, the high sum which modern artists receive is related to the quality instead of the quantity and their rare talent. For example, a 15 centimeter Buddha temple made by hand is granted times in comparison with factory production. On the other hand, modern artists also devote themselves find a unique concept in which ordinary people cannot do, such making impossible become possible. Pieter Padang, Minion creator, has brilliant idea to alter part of song lyric "I swear" become "underwear" when the Minion sing in Despicable Me. He granted huge sums for such idea.
Striking contrast, labor working in the merchandise factory receive coin of dollar even they make a hundred of 15 cm Buddha temples a day. In any case, a musician playing "I swear" several times receives different earnings that Padang got because the musician re-plays the song without any creation. Moreover, government cannot equalize the price of creation of modern artist because there is no certain parameter to value it, art value is about taste.
Having said that the huge sums of modern artists receives related to their struggle in the field of art, while the term of struggle might different with other field of job. I agree that government cannot take steps to make the salary between modern artists and other job similar because art price is about taste. | in this occasion the government is not granted to hand in
government cannot take steps to make the salary between modern artists and other job similar
art price is about taste
the modern artists who implement their creative thinking onto high value creation are paid with immense sum by the art collector
the high sum which modern artists receive is related to the quality instead of the quantity and their rare talent
a 15 centimeter Buddha temple made by hand is granted times in comparison with factory production
modern artists also devote themselves find a unique concept in which ordinary people cannot do, such making impossible become possible
Pieter Padang, Minion creator, has brilliant idea to alter part of song lyric "I swear" become "underwear" when the Minion sing in Despicable Me
He granted huge sums for such idea
Proficiency brings perfectness in terms of art work
the musician re-plays the song without any creation
a musician playing "I swear" several times receives different earnings that Padang got
government cannot equalize the price of creation of modern artist
there is no certain parameter to value it
art value is about taste
labor working in the merchandise factory receive coin of dollar even they make a hundred of 15 cm Buddha temples a day
the huge sums of modern artists receives related to their struggle in the field of art, while the term of struggle might different with other field of job |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments phrased as counters. | Argument: Removing Tax Cuts for the Rich Promotes Equality.
The removal of tax cuts for the rich will help create greater equality in the U.S.
Firstly it can do this by direct means, taxing the rich to a greater extent than is currently done would mean, obviously that the rich have less money and are thus more equal to the poor in income. However, further to this, money gained from such tax cuts that is not being reserved for deficit reduction can be redistributed to the poor in order to allow them to progress further in society.
Income inequality within the U.S. is significantly worse than in most other Western liberal democracies. It often leads to problems of the poor feeling disenfranchised within a society where they feel that the rich have all the influence. Poverty can lead to crime, motivated either by want and pure physical need, or by a distorted sense of entitlement fostered by consumer culture. A lack of parity in an economic system may be interpreted as justifying participation in crimes with an economic component, such as drug dealing, fraud or involvement with organised crime. [1]
[1] Garofalo, Pat, “Stephen Moore Calls for raising taxes on the poor in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.” Think Progress. 08/07/2010. http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/07/08/106661/moore-taxes/
Candidate 1: "The American system is one that can be changed with a popular vote. Further, the competition between the two parties and the bid to be re-elected causes them to make decisions that are good for the country so that they are credited for that by the people.
Whilst the process does have flaws, it is illegitimate to call decisions made by the process unjust when the process is a clear process that can be accessed by everyone and can be changed if results are seen to be consistently unjust.
If the Republican voting base acts in the way that the proposition suggests it might simply be that the Republican voting base dislikes tax increases for reasons the proposition has not considered, such as a slippery slope effect where tax increases for the rich eventually make it more acceptable to increase taxes for the poor."
Candidate 2: "Firstly, the harm to small business from such tax cuts could easily be mitigated by providing some measure of exception for small business owners. The U.S. already provides subsidies for small businesses that show signs of innovation and as such it seems logical that another exception could be added to prevent harm to small businesses.
Further, less that 2% of tax returns citing small business revenue come from the top two tax brackets. Most small business owners simply aren’t part of the top income bracket and further most investors in the top income brackets do not rely on small business revenue as their primary source of income. The harm should this policy go through without exception is much smaller than portrayed by opposition.
Further, the focus on small business is also a result of a “supply side” economic policy that has failed. Whilst the Bush system focused mainly upon supporting the private sector in order to create jobs, it has emerged after eight years to have had almost no effect on the number of Americans being employed, with most changes coming from government hiring. Small business makes a contribution to the economy, but nowhere near the level that opposition need for the argument to hold water. [1]
[1] Gale, William, “Five Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts,” Washington Post, 01/08/2010 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/07/30/AR201007..."
Candidate 3: "As mentioned, tax cuts for the rich offer the least direct stimulus owing to the small percentage of their income that the wealthiest Americans spend on consumption. Often what is taxed is money that simply sits in bank accounts accruing interest. Given, then, that the super rich are a tiny portion of the population, despite their wealth, the immediate change the policy will have on the economy is fairly negligible.
Opposition may talk about investment in businesses, however the risks that businesses take and their benefits are only truly reflected in long term statistics, which are irrelevant in the case of recession prevention as in a few years it is likely that there will not be fears of another recession. [1]
[1] “A Real Debate On Taxes,” New York Times, 23/08/2010 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/opinion/24tue1.html"
Candidate 4: "As is mentioned in argument two of the opposition, if tax increases for the rich cause them to leave the country then it is entirely possible that this will lead to even less parity between those left behind and the poor who have to make do with even less tax revenue through redistribution.
Further, the rich are often the people who provide work for the poor through investments in enterprise and new products. Given that this is true, lower taxes for the rich often benefit the poor by allowing the rich to invest more and take more risks with their money. This often leads to innovations and the creation of new goods and services that often the poor may buy into and this allows them to improve the quality of their lives in the long run. [1]
[1] Ortman, Johnathan, “Tax Incentives for Entrepreneurship and Innovation.” Entrepeneurship.org http://www.entrepreneurship.org/en/policy-forum/tax-incentives-for-entre..."
Candidate 5: "Under current economic circumstances, the deficit is bad, and a downgrade of the credit rating has bad effects. However, stimulation of the economy during a recession is needed more.
If the economy is stimulated through lower taxes, it might cause it to recover faster and move into a boom period earlier. If this is the case, then even if the lower credit rating results in higher repayment costs, the economy returning to growth earlier will mean tax revenue is higher earlier. If that is true then it is possible that the government will recoup the cost of the tax cuts later on with higher growth.
Secondly, the extension of Bush tax cuts for a two year period is unlikely to have any lasting impact on such a large deficit. Whilst the rich have a lot of money, it is entirely within their power to use accountants and other means such as offshore bank accounts to ensure that they do not bear the full brunt of the change. Bush tax cuts caused more rich people to keep their money in the U.S. This meant that despite the lower taxes, the greater amount of money kept in the U.S. meant that overall there was a net profit from the change. [1]
[1] Twerkel, Amanda “Cantor Admits Extending Bush Tax Cuts Would “Dig The Hole Deeper on the Deficit – But He Doesn’t Care.”” Think Progress. 02/08/2010 http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2010/08/02/110994/cantor-bush-tax-cuts/"
Candidate 6: "There are a number of social ties that the rich have to the U.S.A. with many of them having inherited wealth or having families in the U.S.
Moving to another country is inconvenient as it leads to the removal of all of these social ties, further the actual cost of moving is often enough to prevent them from doing so.
Further, many rich Americans have an attachment to America itself, either as a land where their parents prospered or as a land where they managed to earn their own wealth. As such, there are emotional ties to the country. Many have political influence in the U.S. which they would be unable to take advantage of should they leave the country. [1]
Finally, it should be noted that states which routinely impose extremely low rates of personal income tax, or which refrain from taxing the bonuses paid to businesses’ senior managers obtain the majority of their state funding from natural resources revenues. Saudi Arabia is one of the largest and most active oil extractors and exporters in the world. It can make up for shortfalls in personal tax revenues by controlling the price and supply of the oil that it drills.
[1] Confessore, Nicholas, “Taxes Not Seen as Making Rich Flee New York,” New York Times, 18/03/2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/nyregion/19leave.html?_r=1"
| As is mentioned in argument two of the opposition, if tax increases for the rich cause them to leave the country then it is entirely possible that this will lead to even less parity between those left behind and the poor who have to make do with even less tax revenue through redistribution.
Further, the rich are often the people who provide work for the poor through investments in enterprise and new products. Given that this is true, lower taxes for the rich often benefit the poor by allowing the rich to invest more and take more risks with their money. This often leads to innovations and the creation of new goods and services that often the poor may buy into and this allows them to improve the quality of their lives in the long run. [1]
[1] Ortman, Johnathan, “Tax Incentives for Entrepreneurship and Innovation.” Entrepeneurship.org http://www.entrepreneurship.org/en/policy-forum/tax-incentives-for-entre...
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate with opposite stance are candidates. The task is to find the best among all on-topic counterarguments. | Argument: Hydroelectric dams increase methane emissions
Hydroelectric dams emit a lot of methane, which is an even more potent greenhouse gas then carbon dioxide. This happens when the plants and vegetation submerged in the reservoir start to rot under water: they then produce methane which bubbles up and is released into the atmosphere. On balance, some dams produce more greenhouse gasses than conventional power plants running on fossil fuel. [1]
[1] New Scientist, ‘Hydroelectric power's dirty secret revealed’, 2005
Candidate 1: "Hydroelectric dams provide cheap access to renewable energy
In 2010, about 1.4 billion people had no access to electricity. [1] Hydropower provides a source of energy that is cheaper even than conventional coal. [2] Large dams can last for over a hundred years [3] and are easy to switch on and off according to demand, making them very cost-effective. Given that having no access to electricity makes work and study nearly impossible, alleviating global poverty by giving access to electricity is an important step to take.
[1] IEA, Access to Electricity, 2010
[2] Wikipedia. Cost of electricity by source.
[3] WWF, Dam Right!, 2003"
Candidate 2: "Hydroelectric dams can mitigate methane emissions. Dams can capture the methane released from their reservoir and even use it to their benefit: an experimental project in Brazil showed that hydroelectric dams can capture the methane and burn it to produce even more energy, whilst at the same time preventing the methane from being released. [1]
[1] BBC News, Earthquake risk from dams, 2002"
Candidate 3: "Hydroelectric dams can mitigate the ecological impact. Hydroelectric dams can take steps to mitigate their environmental impact. For example, for salmon, dams these days have ‘fish ladders’, allowing them to reach their spawning grounds. For these and other sustainability measures, the International Hydropower Association developed several guidelines and protocols to minimize ecological impact as far as possible. [1]
[1] International Hydropower Association, Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol."
Candidate 4: "Hydro electric dams reduce carbon dioxide emissions
Hydroelectric dams burn no fossil fuels so emit no greenhouse gasses at all in producing energy. Suppose we replace all coal fired power stations with hydroelectric power stations. In 2010, over 42% of global electricity production was produced through coal, accounting for over 28% of global carbon dioxide emissions. [1] Since there is more than enough potential capacity for hydropower, [2] we could hypothetically completely replace coal and even other fossil fuels for electricity, thus helping cut down greenhouse gas emissions massively.
[1] IEA, Power generation from coal, 2010
[2] Energy Consumers Edge. Hydropower dams pros and cons."
Candidate 5: "Hydroelectric dams don’t destroy communities, governments do. Building dams only violates human rights if the governments building them do so. That’s why we never heard of large-scale human rights violations when the Hoover Dam in the United States was built. Moreover, responsible dam builders in the International Hydropower Association have taken steps to ensure they build dams with the utmost respect for human rights, through the guidelines mentioned above."
Candidate 6: "Hydroelectric dams can be used to provide flood control and irrigation
The large water reservoirs created by hydroelectric dams can provide facilities for water sports and can become tourist attractions themselves. The reservoirs can be used for irrigation to help farmers and can be a means for flood control. A prime example of this is the Tennessee Valley Authority, an organisation responsible for flood control, electricity generation, economic development and even fertilizer generation in the Tennessee Valley in the U.S., spanning parts of Alabama, Mississippi, Kentucky, Georgia, North Carolina and Virginia. [1]
[1] Tennessee Valley Authority, homepage."
| Hydroelectric dams can mitigate methane emissions. Dams can capture the methane released from their reservoir and even use it to their benefit: an experimental project in Brazil showed that hydroelectric dams can capture the methane and burn it to produce even more energy, whilst at the same time preventing the methane from being released. [1]
[1] BBC News, Earthquake risk from dams, 2002
|
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: if a father chooses to stay home, the mother should have to be employeed to support the family's choice.; Topic: We should subsidize stay-at-home dads | pro |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Study at school or get a job?
Many people believe that children should study at school to have more knowledge that prepare better for their future. Others, however, think that these children may disrupt their school work and should be allowed to leave school early to find a job. Personally, I tend to agree with the point of view that student have to be forced to study at school.
First of all, schools offer to students a good environment with experienced professors and high quality programs for studying. It creates the best conditions for students education and can force them to focus on their school work instead of wasting their time to do useless things. Second of all, schools provide lots of academic knowledge to students. Students may learn professional skills, expand their understandings and gain experiences. Therefore, they have more opprotunities to find a job and to be successful in the future. For example, as we know, employer always prefer to hire an employee of high degree who have professional skills.
Nevertheless, it is not unreasonable that some people think that children should interrupt their school work and get a job. Whether children can learn a lot at school, there are many subjects that will be of little value to them in the future. Furthermore, children can learn social skills when they have a job. They can get more experiences that can not be obtained at school. Working helps children be more independent and teach them to esteem and manage the money that they've earned.
Overall, I believe that students should study at school. Even though there are some advantages of leaving school to find a job, studying at school is always the best choice for children's future. There are many ways that can train children to learn independent and social skills instead of getting a job.
| student have to be forced to study at school
students should study at school
there are some advantages of leaving school to find a job
studying at school is always the best choice for children's future
There are many ways that can train children to learn independent and social skills instead of getting a job
they have more opprotunities to find a job and to be successful in the future
employer always prefer to hire an employee of high degree who have professional skills
schools offer to students a good environment with experienced professors and high quality programs for studying
schools provide lots of academic knowledge to students
Students may learn professional skills, expand their understandings and gain experiences
It creates the best conditions for students education and can force them to focus on their school work instead of wasting their time to do useless things
children should interrupt their school work and get a job
Whether children can learn a lot at school
there are many subjects that will be of little value to them in the future
children can learn social skills when they have a job
They can get more experiences that can not be obtained at school
Working helps children be more independent and teach them to esteem and manage the money that they've earned |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Fiona Bruce : No, Dale you make a good point we hear you
Proposition: look at the bigger picture, not just women | Agreeing |
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: multi-party systems cause the decision-making process to be slow and inefficient due to the clogging multiplicity of viewpoints.; Topic: We should adopt a multi-party system | con |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Some people believe that the Earth is being harmed by human
Whether human activity is making the Earth a better place to live or damaging it is a debatable issue. Some people advocate the idea that human activity is advantageously influencing to the Earth. However, I strongly believe that human activities are having a bad effect upon our planet, for human are polluting the Earth's environment, exhausting natural resource and threatening the living of other species.
People are corrupting their ecosphere. In recent decades, concurrently with the increase of human consume, the waste discarded by human also multiplies. These wastes including household waste and industrial waste are so big that a "new" continent is now being formed in the sea from garbage. Furthermore, the industrial exhaust gases are adulterating the air, causing the insalubrious phenomenon such as acid rain, global warming or climate change.
Besides, people are draining the Earth's natural resources. These resources such as oil, coal are vital for human activity, therefore nowadays, the exploitation activities of these resources are increasing dramatically to adapt to the infinite need of people. Researchers indicated that most of natural resources are un-recyclable and only several decades after, the Earth's natural resources are totally exhausted. At that time, human activity will be seriously affected due to the dependence on these resources.
Also, people are endangering other species' live. Hunting has been a fundamental activity of human for having food. Through million years of hunting, especially in recent centuries with the innovation of rifle and dynamite, people have killed many animals and even have made some kinds of them become extinct. Moreover, people, suffering from the population pressure, are expanding their living area; consequently, the living area of other species narrowed. This narrowing of living region is pushing many creatures to the brink of extinction.
All in all, from discussed reasons, we can conclude that human activity are gradually destroy the Earth since it is polluting the Earth environment, depleting the resource and imperiling other species' lives. | human activities are having a bad effect upon our planet
human are polluting the Earth's environment, exhausting natural resource and threatening the living of other species
People are corrupting their ecosphere
In recent decades, concurrently with the increase of human consume, the waste discarded by human also multiplies
These wastes including household waste and industrial waste are so big that a "new" continent is now being formed in the sea from garbage
the industrial exhaust gases are adulterating the air, causing the insalubrious phenomenon such as acid rain, global warming or climate change
people are draining the Earth's natural resources
These resources such as oil, coal are vital for human activity
nowadays, the exploitation activities of these resources are increasing dramatically to adapt to the infinite need of people
Researchers indicated that most of natural resources are un-recyclable and only several decades after, the Earth's natural resources are totally exhausted
At that time, human activity will be seriously affected due to the dependence on these resources
people are endangering other species' live
Hunting has been a fundamental activity of human for having food
Through million years of hunting, especially in recent centuries with the innovation of rifle and dynamite, people have killed many animals and even have made some kinds of them become extinct
people, suffering from the population pressure, are expanding their living area
the living area of other species narrowed
This narrowing of living region is pushing many creatures to the brink of extinction
human activity are gradually destroy the Earth
it is polluting the Earth environment, depleting the resource and imperiling other species' lives |
Generate an argument that follows the given topic, stance and argument aspect. | Topic: cloning
Stance: CON
Aspect: easily | I think the problem is that they are clones of each other , and if you do n't have a good one to make your own juice with then it 's very easy for them to take over . |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Keith Brown : No.
Proposition: XXX will have to be cut to find 600 million | Disagreeing |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Fiona Bruce : Yes
Proposition: 500,000 deaths were based on a computer model, completely false assumptions | Arguing |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, decide to what degree (between 0 and 100) the response is sarcastic. 0 means not sarcasic and 100 means very sarcastic. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: So with that, it\xe2\x80\x99s also pretty easy to imagine that there was no NEED for the human genome to mutate to accommodate a fruitless/vitaminC-less diet. Likewise, we also know that primates also consume a diet high in fruits, leaves and berries, thereby getting plenty of vitamin C. So like humans, primates would have no reason for their genomes to mutate if they ate fruits and leaves high in vitamin C from the beginning.
Response: Well yes, but thats not what DEFECTIVE GULO indicates. If one has external sources of vitamin C, GULO can mutate to be inactive without causing a problem, and once inactive the inactive gene can be inherited without causing problems so long as vitamin C intake is high enough. An inactive GULO indicates that the species has external sources of vitamin C which is essential to many metabolic processes.\n | 0.0 |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments. | Argument: Government only objects to online gambling because they dont benefit
Governments are hypocritical about gambling. They say they don’t like it but they often use it for their own purposes. Sometimes they only allow gambling in certain places in order to boost a local economy. Sometimes they profit themselves by running the only legal gambling business, such as a National Lottery [15] or public racecourse betting. This is bad for the public who want to gamble. Online gambling firms can break through government control by offering better odds and attractive new games.
Candidate 1: "Gambling is bad for you.
Gamblers may win money from time to time, but in the long run, the House always wins. Why should governments allow an activity that helps their citizens lose the money they have worked so hard to earn? The harm is not just the loss of money and possible bankruptcy; it causes depression, insomnia, and other stress related disorders [4]. The internet has made gambling so much easier to do and encouraged lots of new people to place bets so dramatically multiplying the harm."
Candidate 2: "Online gambling encourages crime
Human trafficking, forced prostitution and drugs provide $2.1 billion a year for the Mafia but they need some way through which to put this money into circulation. Online gambling is that way in. They put dirty money in and win clean money back [8]. Because it is so international and outside normal laws, it makes criminal cash hard to track. There is a whole array of other crime associated with online gambling; hacking, phishing, extortion, and identity fraud, all of which can occur on a large scale unconstrained by physical proximity [9]. Online gambling also encourages corruption in sport. By allowing huge sums of money to be bet internationally on the outcome of a game or race, it draws in criminals who can try to bribe or threaten sportsmen."
Candidate 3: "Governments have the power to ban online gambling in their own country. Even if citizens could use foreign websites, most will not choose to break the law. When the United States introduced its Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act in 2006 gambling among those of college-age fell from 5.8% to 1.5% [12]. Blocking the leading websites will also be effective, as it makes it very hard for them to build a trusted brand. And governments can stop their banks handling payments to foreign gambling companies, cutting off their business."
Candidate 4: "Cant enforce an online gambling ban
Governments can’t actually do anything to enforce a ban on the world wide web. Domestic laws can only stop internet companies using servers and offices in their own country. They cannot stop their citizens going online to gamble using sites based elsewhere. Governments can try to block sites they disapprove of, but new ones will keep springing up and their citizens will find ways around the ban. So practically there is little the government can do to stop people gambling online. Despite it being illegal the American Gambling Association has found that 4% of Americans already engage in online gambling [11]."
Candidate 5: "Every leisure industry attracts a few troubled individuals who take the activity to harmful extremes. For every thousand drinkers there are a few alcoholics. Similarly some sports fans are hooligans. Those who gamble enough to harm themselves would be those who would gamble in casinos if the internet option was not available."
Candidate 6: "Criminals will always try to exploit any system, but if governments allow legal online gambling they can regulate it. It is in the interest of gambling companies to build trustworthy brands and cooperate with the authorities on stopping any crime. Cheats in several sports have been caught because legal websites reported strange betting patterns. Betfair for example provides the authorities with an early warning system ‘BetMon’ to watch betting patterns."
Candidate 7: "Other forms of online gambling
What is the difference between gambling and playing the stock market? In each case people are putting money at risk in the hope of a particular outcome. Gambling on horse-racing or games involves knowledge and expertise that can improve your chances of success. In the same way, trading in bonds, shares, currency or derivatives is a bet that your understanding of the economy is better than that of other investors. Why should one kind of online risk-taking be legal and the other not?"
Candidate 8: "There is no evidence that gambling prevents people from caring for their family. The vast majority who gamble do so responsibly. It isn’t right to ban something that millions of people enjoy just because a few cause problems. And banning gambling, whether online or in the real world will not stop these problems. Sadly, even if it is illegal, people with problems will still find a way to hurt those around them – just look at drugs."
Candidate 9: "Personal freedom
Gambling is a leisure activity enjoyed by many millions of people. Governments should not tell people what they can do with their own money. Those who don’t like gambling should be free to buy adverts warning people against it, but they should not be able to use the law to impose their own beliefs. Online gambling has got rid of the rules that in the past made it hard to gamble for pleasure and allowed many more ordinary people to enjoy a bet from time to time. It provides the freedom to gamble, whenever and wherever and with whatever method the individual prefers."
Candidate 10: "Only regulation can mitigate harms
It is where the sites operate, not where they are set up that matters for regulation. It is in gambling sites interest to run a trustworthy, responsible business. Whatever they are looking for online, internet users choose trusted brands that have been around for a while. If a gambling site acts badly, for example by changing its odds unfairly, word will soon get around and no one will want to use it. Regulation will mean that sites will have to verify the age of their users and prevent problem gamblers from accessing their site. When there is regulation consumers will go to the sites that are verified by their government and are providing a legal, safe service [13]."
Candidate 11: "Unlike drugs, gambling is not physically or metabolically addictive. Most gamblers are not addicts, simply ordinary people who enjoy the excitement of a bet on a sporting event or card game. The large majority of people who gamble online keep to clear limits and stop when they reach them. The few people with a problem with being addicted will still find ways to gamble if gambling is illegal either through a casino, or else still online but in a black market that offers no help and that may use criminal violence to enforce payment."
Candidate 12: "People are not free to do whatever they want whenever they want. When their activities harm society it is the government’s role to step in to prevent that harm. Online gambling simply provides the freedom for more people to get into debt, not a freedom that should be encouraged."
Candidate 13: "It is only in the interests of big gambling sites that aim to create a long term business to go along with tough regulation. Online gambling sites can get around government regulations that limit the dangers of betting. Because they can be legally sited anywhere in the world, they can pick countries with no rules to protect customers. In the real world governments can ban bets being taken from children and drunks. They can make sure that the odds are not changed to suit the House. And they can check that people running betting operations don’t have criminal records. In online gambling on the other hand 50% of players believe that internet casino’s cheat [14]."
Candidate 14: "Because people will gamble anyway, the best that governments can do is make sure that their people gamble in safe circumstances. This means real world that casinos and other betting places that can easily be monitored.
The examples of government using gambling for their own purposes are really the government turning gambling into a benefit for the country. Physical casinos benefit the economy and encourage investment, and lotteries can be used to raise money for good causes. Online gambling undermines all this, as it can be sited anywhere in the world but can still compete with, and undercut organised national betting operations."
Candidate 15: "Online gambling affects families
A parent who gambles can quickly lose the money their family depends on for food and rent. It is a common cause of family break-up and homelessness, so governments should get involved to protect innocent children from getting hurt [5]. Each problem gambler harmfully impacts 10-15 other people [6]. The internet makes it easy for gamblers to bet secretly, without even leaving the house, so people become addicted to gambling without their families realising what is going on until too late."
Candidate 16: "Gambling is quite different from buying stocks and shares. With the stock market investors are buying a stake in an actual company. This share may rise or fall in value, but so can a house or artwork. In each case there is a real asset that is likely to hold its value in the long term, which isn’t the case with gambling. Company shares and bonds can even produce a regular income through dividend and interest payments. It is true that some forms of financial speculation are more like gambling – for example the derivatives market or short-selling, where the investor does not actually own the asset being traded. But these are not types of investment that ordinary people have much to do with. They are also the kinds of financial activity most to blame for the financial crisis, which suggests we need more government control, not less."
Candidate 17: "Gambling is addictive.
Humans get a buzz from taking a risk and the hope that this time their luck will be in, this is similar to drug addicts [7]. The more people bet, the more they want to bet, so they become hooked on gambling which can wreck their lives. Internet gambling is worse because it is not a social activity. Unlike a casino or race track, you don’t have to go anywhere to do it, which can put a brake on the activity. The websites never shut. There won’t be people around you to talk you out of risky bets. There is nothing to stop you gambling your savings away while drunk."
| Because people will gamble anyway, the best that governments can do is make sure that their people gamble in safe circumstances. This means real world that casinos and other betting places that can easily be monitored.
The examples of government using gambling for their own purposes are really the government turning gambling into a benefit for the country. Physical casinos benefit the economy and encourage investment, and lotteries can be used to raise money for good causes. Online gambling undermines all this, as it can be sited anywhere in the world but can still compete with, and undercut organised national betting operations.
|
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Educated high-school students with bright and independent mind
High school is the time when you decide your future career and particular field you want to concentrate and interested in. In my opinion high school should permit students to choose courses they want for several reasons which are freedom of choice, to have progress in students grades and knowledge as well as to help students explore their aptitude.
First of all, as I mentioned above students should have a right to choose what they want to study. Not allowing students their desired subjects to be chosen is a restriction of human rights. As children of independent country we should know our rights and opportunities we have in order to achieve our goals and dreams.
Next, students should choose their classes to have progress in their studies and grades. Also, we can avoid conflicts among students and teachers which can be enjoyable and productive for both instructor and students. For example, when I was taking art class everyone shared the same interests and it was easy to understand each other. Giving chance students to choose their interested fields of study is merit.
Lastly, the most important reason I support this idea is he or she can explore in an area she/he has an aptitude. When schools can give such kind of opportunity the students are likely do their best and succeed in their future lives which is one of the point most people get education. Furthermore, this type of opportunities can raise future geniuses.
In conclusion, as a young women I want my children to get knowledge they have desire to study in order to have distinguished achievement so it has advantage not only for him or her but for society as well. Having three reasons helps us to bring up students who are well-educated, with a bright and independent mind. | high school should permit students to choose courses they want for several reasons which are freedom of choice, to have progress in students grades and knowledge as well as to help students explore their aptitude
students should have a right to choose what they want to study
Not allowing students their desired subjects to be chosen is a restriction of human rights
As children of independent country we should know our rights and opportunities we have in order to achieve our goals and dreams
students should choose their classes to have progress in their studies and grades
we can avoid conflicts among students and teachers which can be enjoyable and productive for both instructor and students
when I was taking art class everyone shared the same interests and it was easy to understand each other
Giving chance students to choose their interested fields of study is merit
When schools can give such kind of opportunity the students are likely do their best and succeed in their future lives which is one of the point most people get education
this type of opportunities can raise future geniuses
he or she can explore in an area she/he has an aptitude
I want my children to get knowledge they have desire to study in order to have distinguished achievement
it has advantage not only for him or her but for society as well |
Detect the argumentative relations between the propositions identified and segmented in an argumentative dialogue. Such relations are: Default Inference (provide a reason to accept another proposition), Default Conflict (provide an incompatible alternative to another proposition), Default Reformulation (rephrase, restate or reformulate another proposition) and No Relation. | Proposition1: whether this pandemic has or has not been managed better by Nicola Sturgeon than by Boris Johnson is the right question
Proposition2: whether this pandemic has or has not been managed better by Nicola Sturgeon than by Boris Johnson is the wrong question | Default Conflict |
Generate an argument that follows the given topic, stance and argument aspect. | Topic: marijuana legalization
Stance: CON
Aspect: power | If he does n't support legalizing recreational use , he wo n't gain enough political capital to push through his agenda - which means no one else gets credit when he finally wins office ; meanwhile , Obama could do something about climate change while also making progress on other issues like income inequality and racial justice , both of which Bernie ca n't really talk about effectively due to the media circus surrounding him . |
Create a word-level extractive summary of the argument by “underlining” and/or “highlighting” the evidence in such a way to support the argument being made. | MA’RIB, Yemen – Two dozen boys sit quietly in a small classroom in crisp uniforms, their nation’s flag draped around their necks. Colorful drawings decorate the walls, yet a sense of deep darkness punctuates the air: These boys have been heavily traumatized by Yemen’s ongoing civil war, and almost all of the students were forcibly recruited as child soldiers. At least half of the child soldiers -- who all appear far smaller and younger than their 12 to 15 years -- are believed to have been victims of sexual assault while under control of the militia, experts say. “The most difficult thing is helping those who come from the battlefields having been sexually abused. It takes a long time to help,” Dr. Mahyob Almechlatky, a psychiatrist at the Rehabilitation of Children Recruited and Impacted by War in Yemen Project in Ma’rib, Yemen, told Fox News. “Sadly, it’s very common. A big amount of the students have faced this and we are trying to take away the shame.” The rehabilitation center, with a staff 25 health professionals, is now trying to heal those silent scars. Financed by the King Salman (KS) Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center, the project aims at rehabilitating the children and reintegrating them into society and back to school. The intensive approach to “get out the negative energy” includes everything from arts and crafts, to sports, counseling and hypnosis. “Sexual abuse is very common, maybe 50 to 60 percent,” said Mohammad Mobarak, the project manager for the school and the KS Relief Center. “This conflict has touched too many young lives, and we just want to give them the opportunity to be a child again. They did not choose to be a part of this.” This class, three days away from graduation, will soon be added to the list of some 180 boys who have already gone through the live-in, one-month rehabilitation program since its inception in August last year. 'If I was too slow, they beat me.' — Khalil, former child soldier in Yemen And every child has their own heart-wrenching story, each more tragic than the next. Khalil, 14, recalls how he was playing outside his Amran home with a friend when a man drove by and offered them a ride. They ended up at a Houthi militia base. For three months Khalil was ordered to perform various military tasks such as filling sandbags. “If I was too slow,” Khalil whispered, his face now lopsided, his mouth still swollen, “they beat me.” Omar Abdullah, 14, also was swept up from a playground outside his local Amran mosque last year and for two months was abused. If he refused to undertake the commander’s orders, he was pummeled with the barrel of an AK-47 and starved into submission. Around a year ago, one of the “Houthi supervisors” offered to sneak Omar out of the military center in exchange for the equivalent of $100. “They put me between the corpses, the dead fighters, and for ten hours I could not move,” Omar remembered, fleshing out that fearful drive with vivid detail. “Then when we arrived the supervisor said he would blow up my house if I did not give him the money. My family had no money, so I begged my neighbor who helped.” And for Ahmed, 15, who still speaks in staccato as his eyes stare far off into the distance, he too was offered a ride home while herding his goats on the outskirts of Ma’rib. Before he could interject, he was hurled inside and his four-month hell with a Houthi militia began. “They gave us the wrong information; they told us we were fighting ISIS,” Ahmed said. “But when we’re fighting, my friend, who was a child like me, was killed next to me and I panicked.” A local army unit attached to the Yemeni forces surrendered, and took him to the sheikh of his local tribe for safe passage home. Other children have been coerced into committing atrocities against their fellow child recruits -- such as stabbing them to death. The program also comprises a three month follow-up protocol to ensure the lost boys return to school, as well as a parental component. “We give courses to educate the parents on awareness and legal responsibilities to protect their children, to make sure they don’t end up with fighters and that once they graduate here they go back to school,” Mobarak explained. 'They can't scare me anymore.' — Ahmed, a former child soldier in Yemen The center’s expert staff say they don’t ask which militia or military outfit the boys were abducted into, but the large majority are thought to have been abducted by Houthi factions who have controlled the capital Sana’a since September 2014. In March 2015, this prompted a neighboring Saudi Arabia-led coalition to intervene with a deadly bombing campaign, spiraling the country into a protracted state of war. And since then, the United Nations has verified more than 2,000 cases of child soldier recruitment. At least 6,000 minors are still thought today to be fighting on both sides, with Houthis bearing most of the blame for violating this aspect of international law. Outside the center, the markings of mortar rounds mottle the walls, and charred glass surrounds a prominent dip in the earth. The rehab facility has been targeted by unknown actors three times since it started eleven months ago, with the most recent assault on the night of May 2. “They can’t scare me anymore,” Ahmed added. “I won’t let them scare me anymore.” | These boys have been heavily traumatized by Yemen’s ongoing civil war, and almost all of the students were forcibly recruited as child soldiers. At least half are believed to have been victims of sexual assault while under control of the militia The most difficult thing is helping those who come from the battlefields having been sexually abused. It takes a long time to help Sadly, it’s very common. The rehabilitation center, with a staff 25 health professionals, is now trying to heal those silent scars Financed by the King Salman (KS) Humanitarian Aid and Relief Center, the project aims at rehabilitating the children and reintegrating them into society and back to school Sexual abuse is very common, maybe 50 to 60 percent This conflict has touched too many young lives, and we just want to give them the opportunity to be a child again. They did not choose to be a part of this.” 'If I was too slow, they beat me. . “They put me between the corpses, the dead fighters, and for ten hours I could not move,” Omar remembered, fleshing out that fearful drive with vivid detail. “Then when we arrived the supervisor said he would blow up my house if I did not give him the money. My family had no money, so I begged my neighbor who helped.” “But when we’re fighting, my friend, who was a child like me, was killed next to me and I panicked A local army unit attached to the Yemeni forces surrendered, and took him to the sheikh of his local tribe for safe passage home. Other children have been coerced into committing atrocities against their fellow child recruits -- such as stabbing them to death We give courses to educate the parents on awareness and legal responsibilities to protect their children, to make sure they don’t end up with fighters and that once they graduate here they go back to school the United Nations has verified more than 2,000 cases of child soldier recruitment. At least 6,000 minors are still thought today to be fighting on both sides, with Houthis bearing most of the blame for violating this aspect of international law |
Create a word-level extractive summary of the argument by “underlining” and/or “highlighting” the evidence in such a way to support the argument being made. | Won’t the state just reemerge over time? Most of the examples cited in this book no longer exist, and some only lasted a few years. The stateless societies and social experiments were mostly conquered by imperialist powers or repressed by states. But history has also shown that revolution is possible, and that revolutionary struggle does not inevitably lead to authoritarianism. Authoritarian revolutionary ideas such as social democracy or Marxist-Leninism have been discredited the world over. While socialist political parties continue to be parasites sucking at the vital energies of social movements, predictably selling out their constituencies every time they come to power, a diverse mix of horizontalism, indigenism, autonomism, and anarchism have come to the foreground in all the exciting social rebellions of the last decade — the popular uprisings in Algeria, Argentina, Bolivia, and Mexico, the autonomen in Italy, Germany, and Denmark, the students and insurgents in Greece, the farmers’ struggle in Korea, and the antiglobalization movement that united countries around the world. These movements have a chance of abolishing the state and capitalism amidst the crises of the coming years. But some people fear that even if a global revolution did abolish the state and capitalism, these would inevitably reemerge over time. This is understandable, because statist education has indoctrinated us to believe the myths of progress and unilineal history — the idea that there is only one global narrative and it led inexorably to the ascendancy of Western civilization. In fact, no one knows exactly how the state developed, but it is certain that it was neither an inevitable nor irreversible process. Most societies never voluntarily developed states, and perhaps as many societies developed states and then abandoned them as have kept them. From the perspective of these societies, the state may appear to be a choice or an imposition rather than a natural development. The timeline we use also affects our perspective. For tens of thousands of years humanity had no use for states, and after there are no more states it will be clear that they were an aberration originating in a few parts of the world that temporarily controlled the destiny of everyone on the planet before being cast off again. Another misconception is that stateless societies are vulnerable to being hijacked by aggressive alpha males who appoint themselves leaders. On the contrary, it seems that the “Big [Person] Man” model of a society has never led to a state or even to a chiefdom. Societies that do allow a bossy, more talented or stronger man to have more influence typically ignore him or kill him if he becomes too authoritarian, and the Big Man [Person] is unable to extend his influence very far, geographically or temporally. The physical characteristics on which his [their] leadership is based are ephemeral, and he soon fades out or is replaced.[124] It seems that states developed gradually out of culturally accepted kinship systems that coupled gerontocracy with patriarchy — over a period of generations, older men were accorded more respect and given greater exclusivity as the mediators of disputes and the dispensers of gifts. Not until very late in this process did they possess anything resembling a power to enforce their will. We must remember that as people gradually surrendered more of their responsibilities and afforded certain members of the community more respect, they had no way of knowing the outcomes of their actions — no way of knowing just how bad hierarchical society could become. Once social elites obtained coercive powers, a new dialectic of social development emerged, and at this point the creation of the state was likely, though still not inevitable because the majority remained a social force with the power to dispossess the elite or stop the process. Modern societies with the collective memory of bureaucratic techniques could redevelop a state much more quickly, but we have the advantage of knowing where that path leads and being aware of the warning signs. After having fought hard to win their freedom people would have plenty of motivation to stop the reemergence of the state if it were occurring anywhere near them. Fortunately, an anarchist society is its own reward. Many stateless societies, after colonial contact, have had the opportunity to join a hierarchical society and yet continue to resist, such as !Kung who continue to live in the Kalihari desert despite the efforts of the Botswana government to “settle” them. There are also examples of long-lasting anti-authoritarian social experiments that thrive within statist society. In Gloucestershire, England, Tolstoyan anarchists founded the Whiteway Colony on 40 acres of land in 1898. After they bought the land, they burned the property deed on the end of a pitchfork. Accordingly, they had to build all their houses themselves since they could not obtain mortgages. Over a hundred years later, this pacifist-anarchist commune still exists, and some of the current inhabitants are descendants of the founders. They make decisions in a general assembly and share a number of communal facilities. At times, Whiteway has housed refugees and conscientious objectors. It has also housed a number of cooperative ventures such as a bakery and a handicrafts guild. Despite the external pressures of capitalism and the hierarchical relationships reproduced by statist society, Whiteway remains egalitarian and anti-authoritarian. Across the North Sea, in Appelscha, Friesland, an anarchist village celebrated its 75th year in 2008. Currently composed of caravans, campers, and a few permanent buildings, the Appelscha site has been active in the anarchist and anti-militarist movements since the priest Domela Nieuwenhuis left the church and began preaching atheism and anarchism. A group of workers began gathering there and soon acquired land, on which they have held yearly anarchist gatherings every Pentecost. Hearkening back to the socialist temperance movement, which recognized alcohol as a crippling plague on workers and a form of bondage to employers who sold liquor from company stores, the camp is still alcohol free. In 2008, 500 people from all over the Netherlands as well as Germany and Belgium attended the yearly anarchist gathering at Appelscha. They joined the anarchists who live there year-round for a weekend of workshops and discussions on subjects including pacifism, animal liberation, the anti-fascist struggle, sexism within the movement, mental health, and the campaign that kept the Olympics out of Amsterdam in 1992. There were children’s programs, presentations on the long history of the camp, communal meals, and enough enthusiasm in the air to promise another generation of anarchism in the region. Other anarchist projects can also survive a hundred years. Specific societies, communities, and organizations need not be set in stone — anarchists do not need to enact restrictive measures to preserve institutions at the expense of their participants. Sometimes the best thing a community or organization can do for its participants is permit them to move on. There are no hereditary privileges or Constitutions that must be handed down or imposed on the future. In allowing more fluidity and change, anarchist societies can last much longer. The majority of societies throughout human history have been communal and stateless, and many of them lasted for millennia until they were destroyed or conquered by Western civilization. The growth and power of Western civilization were not inevitable but rather the result of specific historic processes arguably dependent on geographic coincidence.[125] The military successes of our civilization might seem to prove its superiority, but even in the absence of resistance, problems endemic to our civilization such as deforestation and climate change may well bring about its demise, revealing it to be an utter failure in terms of sustainability. Other examples of unsustainable hierarchical societies, from Sumer to Easter Island, show how swiftly a society apparently at its pinnacle can collapse. The idea that the state will inevitably reemerge over time is another of these hopelessly eurocentric fantasies in which Western culture indoctrinates people. Dozens of indigenous societies around the world never developed states, they thrived for thousands of years, they have never surrendered, and when they finally triumph against colonialism they will cast off the impositions of white culture, which includes the state and capitalism, and revitalize their traditional cultures, which they still carry with them. Many indigenous groups have experience going back hundreds or even thousands of years of contact with the state, and at no point have they voluntarily surrendered to state authority. Western anarchists have much to learn from this persistence, and all people from Western society should take the hint: the state is not an inevitable adaptation, it is an imposition, and once we learn how to defeat it for good, we will not let it come back. | Won’t the state just reemerge over time? But history has also shown that revolution is possible, and that revolutionary struggle does not inevitably lead to authoritarianism. Authoritarian revolutionary ideas such as social democracy or Marxist-Leninism have been discredited the world over. While socialist political parties continue to be parasites sucking at the vital energies of social movements, predictably selling out their constituencies every time they come to power anarchism have come to the foreground in all the exciting social rebellions of the last decade — the popular uprisings in Algeria, Argentina, Bolivia, and Mexico, the autonomen in Italy, Germany, and Denmark, the students and insurgents in Greece, the farmers’ struggle in Korea, and the antiglobalization movement that united countries around the world. These movements have a chance of abolishing the state and capitalism amidst the crises of the coming years. some people fear that even if a global revolution did abolish the state and capitalism, these would inevitably reemerge over time statist education has indoctrinated us to believe the myths of progress and unilineal history the idea that there is only one global narrative and it led inexorably to the ascendancy of Western civilization no one knows exactly how the state developed, but it is certain that it was neither an inevitable nor irreversible process Most societies never voluntarily developed states, and perhaps as many societies developed states and then abandoned them as have kept them the state may appear to be a choice or an imposition rather than a natural development. The timeline we use also affects our perspective. For tens of thousands of years humanity had no use for states, and after there are no more states it will be clear that they were an aberration originating in a few parts of the world that temporarily controlled the destiny of everyone on the planet before being cast off again. Another misconception is that stateless societies are vulnerable to being hijacked by aggressive alpha males who appoint themselves leaders the “Big [Person] model of a society has never led to a state or even to a chiefdom Societies that do allow a bossy, more talented or stronger man to have more influence typically ignore him or kill him if he becomes too authoritarian, and the Big Person is unable to extend his influenc their] leadership is based are ephemeral, and he soon fades out or is replaced We must remember that as people gradually surrendered more of their responsibilities and afforded certain members of the community more respect, they had no way of knowing the outcomes of their actions — no way of knowing just how bad hierarchical society could become. Once social elites obtained coercive powers, a new dialectic of social development emerged, and at this point the creation of the state was likely, though still not inevitable because the majority remained a social force with the power to dispossess the elite or stop the process. we have the advantage of knowing where that path leads and being aware of the warning signs. After having fought hard to win their freedom people would have plenty of motivation to stop the reemergence of the state if it were occurring anywhere near them. , an anarchist society is its own reward There are also examples of long-lasting anti-authoritarian social experiments that thrive within statist society Other anarchist projects can also survive a hundred years. Specific societies, communities, and organizations need not be set in stone — anarchists do not need to enact restrictive measures to preserve institutions at the expense of their participants. Sometimes the best thing a community or organization can do for its participants is permit them to move on. There are no hereditary privileges or Constitutions that must be handed down or imposed on the future. In allowing more fluidity and change, anarchist societies can last much longer. The idea that the state will inevitably reemerge over time is another of these hopelessly eurocentric fantasies in which Western culture indoctrinates people. indigenous societies around the world never developed states, they thrived for thousands of years, they have never surrendered, and when they finally triumph against colonialism they will cast off the impositions of white culture, which includes the state and capitalism Western anarchists have much to learn from this persistence, and all people from Western society should take the hint: the state is not an inevitable adaptation, it is an imposition, and once we learn how to defeat it for good, we will not let it come back. |
Generate an informative conclusion for the given argumentative text. | Circumventing the law by building detention camps off of US soil makes a mockery of the very institutions America is trying to protect. | The Guantanamo bay detention camp harms the US image/reputation/institutions |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate with opposite stance are candidates. The task is to find the best among all on-topic counterarguments. | Argument: The blasphemy charge looks suspiciously convenient for Putin
There seems to be little doubt in any one’s mind that Putin and his regime were the focus of the protest. It is, equally, no secret that Putin has a fairly brutal attitude towards political dissent; he has expelled even allies in parliament for criticism [i] , uses force to crush unsanctioned protests, [ii] and locks up potential opponents. [iii] Locking up Pussy Riot in order to stop their opposition therefore fits in with Putin’s previous actions against his opposition and seems likely to be the desired result. In the light of that, it seems an extraordinary coincidence that what he would have wanted is exactly what happened. Putin himself said after they were sentenced "We have red lines beyond which starts the destruction of the moral foundations of our society… If people cross this line they should be made responsible in line with the law." [iv]
Putin’s record is not one that suggests that he is happy to step back and allow events to take their course in the hope that what he wants to happen just chances to come along – quite the reverse. Suggesting that this is a happy coincidence for Putin would be a little like suggesting that the decision to have term limits for the presidency, just not for Putin, was just the happy outcome of an impartial process. [v] If this was just the Church and the courts happening to favour the interests of an over-mighty president, then Putin must be the luckiest man alive.
[i] Vasilyeva, Nataliya, ‘Anti-Putin lawmaker ousted in Russia; who's next?’, guardian.co.uk, 14 September 2012
[ii] Heritage, Timothy, ‘Vladimir Putin using force to crush protests, Russian opposition fears’, National Post, 6 March 2012
[iii] Parfitt, Tom, ‘Mikhail Khodorkovsky sentenced to 14 years in prison’, The Guardian, 30 December 2010
[iv] Stott, Michael, ‘Pussy Riot got what they deserved: Putin’, Reuters, 25 October 2012
[v] Boudreaux, Richard, ‘Putin Accepts Term Limits in Principle, but Not for Him’, The Wall Street Journal, 11 April 2012
Candidate 1: "Their song may have gone on to discuss political themes but its basis was an appeal to Mary to rid Russia of Putin. All the rest was trappings after that initial statement – a sort of protracted “because”. It is quite routine for prayers to start with an appeal to diving authority before addressing secular themes just as this did; it was a mockery of a prayer and, therefore, profane."
Candidate 2: "What is extraordinary is that despite the liberal outrage of much of the Western press, the Russian court system has delivered an appropriate verdict. There can be little doubt that their actions showed a fantastic level of disrespect for the Church, this is the closest relevant charge. Rulings may be convenient or not for leaders of all political persuasions – neither proves bias within the courts."
Candidate 3: "Intention
Perhaps more damning than the fact that the protest did cause offence or the fact that it was always likely to was the fact that it was clearly intended to do. At no point can the members of Pussy Riot been under the illusion that no offence would be caused; quite the reverse, they were counting on it. Counting not only on the outcry in the domestic media but also on the impact that would have on the international media in an effort to give themselves some cover.
While the charge of ‘hooliganism’ might seem laughable this does meet the Russian definition “The flagrant violation of public order expressed by a clear disrespect for society.” [i] It is clear they did this in terms of their intrusion to areas reserved for priests, by manifestly contradicting common church rules, expressing their disrespect and using swear words, [ii] it is clear that profanity is a much greater offence within a church than outside even if it is a word used in ‘everyday speech’. [iii]
It is important to be clear that this is not Solzhenitsyn, because of the way this was staged it was intended from the outset to do nothing more than grab headlines. There is no denying that there are real political divisions in Moscow and that there are many people with very real issues with Putin’s style of leadership, it is difficult to see how this publicity grabbing stunt does anything to help that cause.
[i] Taylor, Adam, ‘Why Russian Punks Pussy Riot Aren't Heroes’, Business Insider, 16 August 2012
[ii] Whitmore, Brian, ‘Pussy Riot: The Punk Band That Isn't And The Concert That Wasn't’, Radio Free Europe, 30 July 2012
[iii] Fraser, Giles, ‘Pussy Riot's crime was violating the sacred. That's what got Jesus in court’, The Guardian, 10 August 2010"
Candidate 4: "It is not just the hierarchy of the Church that have objected to the bands actions. There have also been popular protests from regular churchgoers who have been offended by Pussy Riot’s actions. Strangely this fact rarely gets more than a line – and often not even that – in the Western press. [i] This is not therefore a case of the Church ‘propping up’ the state rather it is speaking out for the outrage that many of its members feel.
[i] BBC Website. Pussy Riot members jailed for two years for hooliganism. 17 August 2012"
Candidate 5: "If it was a purely political statement, then why stage it in a church?
There is no shortage of possible venues to stage a protest such as this one. A busy supermarket, a train station, a park, the middle of the street – all of them would have fulfilled the requirement for lots of people with attentions to be attracted. Since it was dubbed not a live concert the location would have been totally interchangeable. [i] Holding it in a church – in front of the high alter during mass – was calculated to cause maximum effect, maximum shock and maximum publicity. Causing intended offence during a religious ceremony is about as close to the definition of blasphemy as it would be possible to get.
Vladimir Putin has shrugged off challenges from much more serious critics than an attention-seeking group of musicians. This very act was calculated to cause the greatest possible offence to people of faith. Such a protest in St Peter’s in the same situation would have caused great offence even if the protest had been about Berlusconi. When British gay rights activist Peter Tatchell interrupted the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Easter service some years ago, he was widely thought of as having done his cause more harm than good because it offended so many and was subsequently convicted [ii] . This is no different, it was blasphemous and, under Russian law, there are punishments for blasphemy.
[i] Whitmore, Brian, ‘Pussy Riot: The Punk Band That Isn't And The Concert That Wasn't’, Radio Free Europe, 30 July 2012
[ii] BBC News Website. Tatchell fined £18.60 for pulpit protest."
Candidate 6: "Why use the form of a prayer and mention the Virgin in a political protest?
The members of Pussy Riot themselves seem to admit that the protest was at least in part religious, Sparrow, one of the members told the Guardian "It was just a prayer. A very special prayer”. [i] When combined with the setting in the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour shows the intent. It would, in theory, be possible to imagine a protest in such a setting that did not cause offence – or at least sought to minimise it. However, the religious overtones and references seem designed purely to inflame it. They served no purpose in making the case about Putin’s policies but seem calculated to offend the congregation and clergy and, given the setting, the Orthodox Church as a whole.
However, a quiet and dignified protest, while making the political point more powerfully and without offence would not have served the main purpose here; publicity through maximizing offence as a result of deliberate blasphemy.
To intend blasphemy, to commit blasphemy, in the full and wilful knowledge that it is blasphemous and then claim it is political dissent is offensive not only to the religious but to those who have genuinely suffered as a result of their political dissent [ii] .
[i] Cadwalladr, Carole, ‘Pussy Riot: will Vladimir Putin regret taking on Russia's cool women punks?’, The Observer, 29 July 2012
[ii] Daily Mail. Mark Dooley. “Am I the only person who thinks that pussy riot should have been jailed?” 24 August 2012."
| What is extraordinary is that despite the liberal outrage of much of the Western press, the Russian court system has delivered an appropriate verdict. There can be little doubt that their actions showed a fantastic level of disrespect for the Church, this is the closest relevant charge. Rulings may be convenient or not for leaders of all political persuasions – neither proves bias within the courts.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All arguments in the same debate with opposite stance are candidates. The task is to find the best among all on-topic counterarguments. | Argument: Lowering the age of consent will cause criminal dangers.
Lowering the age of consent (or worse, getting rid of it entirely) legalises, legitimises and brings above ground the many problems that we are fighting underground. It will provide an opportunity for paedophile networks to expand, by allowing them to target even younger children – now lawfully. The problem of paedophilia is already a rapidly growing one, made worse by its expansion into ‘related’ avenues such as child pornography. In addition to the obvious problem of paedophilia, the problem of the sexual predation of young children also encompasses the problem of youth prostitution (since prostitution is itself already legal in many countries), and the international traffic in boys and girls.
Candidate 1: "Liberalising age of consent laws will not encourage paedophilia or make sexual exploitation any easier. That is simply a false nightmare scenario propagated by scaremongers. Many countries have lowered the basic age of consent while strengthening their ‘plus elements’. For example, by making ‘sexual grooming’ an offence (to stop rings of internet paedophiles); by making it an offence to have sex with a young child if you are above a certain age or if the age differential between the partners is above a certain limit (to target adult paedophiles while allowing teens their sexual freedom); and by making it an offence to have sex with someone who is in a relationship of trust of dependency with you (to stop sexual exploitation)."
Candidate 2: "The censorship laws are a relic from the past.
The idea that young people should not be having sex is a leftover relic from the past: its justifications are anachronistic and have little place in modern times. Age of consent laws were the product of a ‘purity campaign’ in Britain in the 1800s, when it was believed that sex was a ‘male privilege’, that it led to the sexual ruin of young women, that it meant the loss of their virtue, which was a fate worse than death, and that it contributed to women’s second class citizenship. [1] In the UK the age of 16 was chosen and set in 1885, more than 100 years ago, and has remained ever since. [2] Today these ideas would offend both men and women.
[1] Harman, Lillian, ‘Understanding the Age of Consent in the Context of the 1800’s’, Liberty No. 235, pp.3-4 from Age Of Consent, http://www.ageofconsent.com/comments/numberten.htm
[2] Bullough, Vern L, ‘The Age of Consent’, Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality Volume 16, Issue 2-3, 2005"
Candidate 3: "Even if we can accept that children need protection from sex, is it right to use the full force of the criminal law – which includes the threat of criminal prosecution and the prospect of a criminal sentence – to do it? It is contrary to both justice and common sense for people who have merely had consensual sex with a teen who happens to be under-16 to be arrested, tried, branded with a criminal label (‘statutory rapist’, ‘sex offender’), thrown in prison, and thereby treated on the same footing as real (sometimes violent) rapists, arsonists and kidnappers.
The debate surrounding the age of consent raises the broader point of the role of the criminal law. The function of the criminal law is to preserve public order and decency, not to intervene in the lives of citizens, especially those who have mutually consented to taking part in a harmless activity in private. To accept otherwise would be to disregard the crucial notion of human autonomy and the free will of the individual, which are expressed, regardless of one’s age, each time a person presents his or her consent. This is why it is so important that the law recognises the sanctity of consent."
Candidate 4: "Age of consent laws prevent the most vulnerable receiving contraceptives.
Age of consent laws are in fact dangerous because they drive underground the very people who should be, and are in most need of, receiving contraceptives, advice on safe sex, and access to health and other educational services. This is true both of the ‘statutory rapist’ as well as the under-16 consenting ‘victim’, who may worry about having assisted in the commission of a crime. Both parties then become real victims as they are put at greater risk of contracting STDs or unwanted pregnancies."
Candidate 5: "We should defend children’s freedom of expression.
The freedom of sexual expression (and exploration) is not only a matter of choice which is fundamental to the individual – it is also particularly important to young people as they proceed through the stage of adolescence into young adulthood. Age of consent laws place artificial limits on this freedom. Sex is entirely natural and should be celebrated in the context of loving relationships, not criminalised and put under the prying eye of an authoritarian state. Violence, coercion and exploitation in sexual relationships should still be punished, but not consensual activity. Such restrictions go against the human rights to privacy and of freedom of expression.
The concept that young people do not know what they are doing is flawed, because every person who has gone through sexual development has learnt by doing. There is no process of suddenly coming into full knowledge without acting and exploration. Such exploration would be more safely done in an environment that doesn't criminalize it. Such criminalization can actaully lead to the very harm that the law ostensibly seeks to avoid, coercion and exploitation, for it is people who are naturally more inclined to coercion and exploitation that will disregard the law anyway. This feeds the lambs to the wolves."
Candidate 6: "Consent Laws are discriminatory.
Some countries have one age of consent for young females (say 16) and a different, higher age of consent for young males or for having anal sex (say 18). This means that a heterosexual adult male who wants to have sex with a 17-year-old female is free to do so, but a homosexual adult male cannot have intercourse with a young man who is 17. [1] Not only are such laws clearly discriminatory, they entrench and perpetuate the myths, stereotypes, and prejudices against homosexuals and homosexual sex. Age of consent laws, if we are to have them at all, should be equalised across the genders.
[1] HIV, AIDS and Young Gay Men, AVERT: Averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm , ‘Worldwide ages of Consent’, AVERT: averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm , HIV, AIDS and Young Gay Men, AVERT: Averting HIV & AIDS, http://www.avert.org/young-gay-men.htm"
Candidate 7: "Age of consent laws are also arbitrary as children become sexually and emotionally mature at very different rates, so any artificially imposed limit will be too high for many and too low for others."
| Liberalising age of consent laws will not encourage paedophilia or make sexual exploitation any easier. That is simply a false nightmare scenario propagated by scaremongers. Many countries have lowered the basic age of consent while strengthening their ‘plus elements’. For example, by making ‘sexual grooming’ an offence (to stop rings of internet paedophiles); by making it an offence to have sex with a young child if you are above a certain age or if the age differential between the partners is above a certain limit (to target adult paedophiles while allowing teens their sexual freedom); and by making it an offence to have sex with someone who is in a relationship of trust of dependency with you (to stop sexual exploitation).
|
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Using animals for the benefit of the human beings
With the rapid development of the standard of people's life, increasing numbers of animal experiments are done, new medicines and foods, for instance. Some opponents says that it is cruel to animals and nature, however, I believe that no sensible person will deny that it is a dramatically cruel activity to humanity if the latest foods or medicines are allowed to sold without testing on animals. In my essay, I will discuss this issue from twofold aspects.
First of all, as we all know, animals are friendly and vital for people, because if there are no animals in the world, the balance of nature will broke down, and we, human, will die out as well. The animal experiments accelerate the vanishing of some categories of animals. In other words, doing this various testing is a hazard of human's future and next generation.
Though animal experiments have negative impact on the natural balance, it is necessary to make sure that people can live a long life. To begin with, it is indisputable that every new kind food or pill may be noxious, and scientists must do something to insure that the new invention benefits people instead of making people ill or even dying. The new foods or medicines are invented to promote the quantity of human's life. Thus even if they are volunteers; they cannot take the place of animals to test the new foods or medicines. Furthermore, it also have potentially harm for human's health without any testing.
To sum up, I reaffirm that although there is some disadvantages of animals' profits, the merits of animal experiments still outweigh the demerits. | there is some disadvantages of animals' profits
the merits of animal experiments still outweigh the demerits
it is a dramatically cruel activity to humanity if the latest foods or medicines are allowed to sold without testing on animals
doing this various testing is a hazard of human's future and next generation
animals are friendly and vital for people
if there are no animals in the world, the balance of nature will broke down, and we, human, will die out as well
The animal experiments accelerate the vanishing of some categories of animals
animal experiments have negative impact on the natural balance
it is necessary to make sure that people can live a long life
it is indisputable that every new kind food or pill may be noxious, and scientists must do something to insure that the new invention benefits people instead of making people ill or even dying
The new foods or medicines are invented to promote the quantity of human's life
even if they are volunteers; they cannot take the place of animals to test the new foods or medicines
it also have potentially harm for human's health without any testing |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response agrees or disagrees with the quote. -5 means strong disagreement, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong agreement. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: But guess what...evolutionists call NS on the populational level random!
Response: Well, he can't continue getting things right for long...\n | -0.333333 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response agrees or disagrees with the quote. -5 means strong disagreement, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong agreement. | Topic: Abortion
Quote: BREAKING NEWS\nGeorge Tiller shot to death at Wichita church
Response: George Tiller shot to death at Wichita church | News Updates | Wichita Eagle\n | 2.8 |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Zoos should be built to protect rural animals
Preserving wild animals in zoos is an issue which frequently generates a great deal of heated debate, with supporters maintaining that wild life would be taken good care from professionals, while opponents claim that the animals are deprived of freedom as a result of staying in zoos. From my perspective, animals should live in natural habitats instead of zoos.
To begin with, it is the right of wild species to live in a environment away from human beings. Given the fact that human beings are responsible for the heavy pollution and severe damage to the natural habitats of many wild animals, it is our responsibility to create a natural and safe environment for animals to live in. Apparently, the limited space and the artificial trees and lakes can not fully compensate the animals for their loss. Moreover, if rural animals are captured in the zoo for a long period, it would have negative influences on both the physical and psychological status of the creatures. As a result, the wild species would suffer from isolation and depression. It seems that zoos are more likely to be a killer rather than a protector in protecting wild lives.
Nevertheless, supporters would argue that zoos, which are equipped with modern facilities and professionals, would provide better care for the animals inside. They further point out that the endangered species preserved in zoos would never die of illegal hunting. However, I would contend that the strict laws prohibiting poaching would provide a shelter for various kinds of animals in natural habitat. It seems that the growing number of natural habitat would be the ultimate solution of saving wild animals worldwide.
By way of conclusion, it is my belief that wild animals should be set free from zoos not only because they have the right to enjoy freedom but they also escape from isolation and depression.
| wild animals should be set free from zoos
animals should live in natural habitats instead of zoos
it is our responsibility to create a natural and safe environment for animals to live in
it is the right of wild species to live in a environment away from human beings
Given the fact that human beings are responsible for the heavy pollution and severe damage to the natural habitats of many wild animals
zoos are more likely to be a killer rather than a protector in protecting wild lives
the wild species would suffer from isolation and depression
if rural animals are captured in the zoo for a long period, it would have negative influences on both the physical and psychological status of the creatures
the limited space and the artificial trees and lakes can not fully compensate the animals for their loss
zoos, which are equipped with modern facilities and professionals, would provide better care for the animals inside
the endangered species preserved in zoos would never die of illegal hunting
the strict laws prohibiting poaching would provide a shelter for various kinds of animals in natural habitat
the growing number of natural habitat would be the ultimate solution of saving wild animals worldwide
they have the right to enjoy freedom but they also escape from isolation and depression |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is emotional or factual. -5 means strong emotional, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong factual. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: Darwin vs. Darwin: how he conceded that his theory was contradicted by known evidence (or lack thereof), though he hoped later findings would vindicate him -- which still hasn't happened after 150 years
Response: More lies. I mentioned genetics and observed instances of speciation, yes?\n | 2.0 |
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response is attacking or respectful. -5 means strong attacking, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong respectful. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: A bump of the topic.\nIt seems that any evolutionist with any knowledge of this topic has either quit this board or been banned. Yet there is no response by creationists. Why is that? Is it that Garioch is correct? Is it that creationists are making assertions without understanding what they are talking about?\nIf creationists are talking from a position of knowledge then there should be a creationist discussion of gastralia, their relative position to the sternum, the ossification of the sternum, the presence of a carina, and so forth.\nThe continued failure of creationists to respond with intelligent discussion demonstrates their ignorance of the topic. Therefore, any creationist assertions of the status of Archaeopteryx must be considered as unfounded.
Response: One shouldn't assume ignorance on the part of creationists. That is a mistake that too many evolutionists make.\nIn the real world, we have people willing to say things they already know isn't true. Why should creationists be any different? After all, they are people, too. But rather than accept that fact, evolutionists argue that creationists are ignorant of a subject when, in reality, they (creationists) were simply telling lies. | 2.2 |
How high is the likelihood (0 - 1) that you would recommend your friend to use the following argument as is in a speech supporting/contesting the topic, regardless of your personal opinion? | autonomous cars will take away jobs from drivers | 1.0 |
Detect illocutonary relations existing between locutions uttered in the dialogue and the argumentative propositions associated with them such as: Agreeing (share the opinion of the interlocutorn), Restating (rephrases a previous claim), Challenging (seeking the grounds for an opinion), Arguing (provides justification to a claim), Assertive Questioning (communicates information and at the same time asks for confirmation/rejection), Asserting (asserts information or communicates an opinion), Rhetorical Questioning (expressing an opinion in the form of an interrogative), Disagreeing (declares not to share the interlocutor’s opinion), Pure Questioning (s seeking information or asking for an opinion), Default Illocuting (captures an answer to a question) and No Relation | Locution: Sam Winter : No
Proposition: Sam Winter is or is not planning to go abroad | Disagreeing |
Given the following essay as context, and a list of argumentative components extracted from the essay. Label each argumentative component as "major claim", "claim", or "premise". | Essay: People are put too much focus on making wealth and progress in technology
The life today is totally different from half centuries before. Advances in technology do help humans to solve abundant of problems; however it also deprives of some things that we had. In my opinion, life in the old days brings more happiness to people than today for several reasons.
The first reason is life is simple in the past. Nowadays, all humans compete together. Since world population getting higher, competition is getting fierce. If you are not able to handle your jobs, then someone will replace you right away. People need to put much more effort to keep their living condition. Therefore, lives in the old days is easier than today.
Second, the environment today is serious damaged. Looking out the windows, what I see isn't sky, trees or mountains, but is coldly high buildings. Everyday, I walk on hard roads, breath in polluted air, and live in a limited space. What's worse, it has been proved that living in this kind of condition will result in some mental diseases. Thus, the environment our grandparents live is more comfortable than today.
The third reason is that the pace of life. Today, we are able to read the news all over the world, to chat with people through the Internet, or to travel around the world by planes; however, it also means that any thing happens in the world will affect our life. If we cannot react properly and immediately, then we will be in a vulnerable situation. We have no choice but have to live in a fast pace.
In conclusion, while there some people live in a pretty good condition, it is only a minority. People are put too much focus on making wealth and progress in technology; nevertheless, behind the glamorous facade of it, what we loss will never be returned.
Argumentative components: life in the old days brings more happiness to people than today for several reasons
People are put too much focus on making wealth and progress in technology
some people live in a pretty good condition, it is only a minority
life is simple in the past
lives in the old days is easier than today
Nowadays, all humans compete together
world population getting higher
competition is getting fierce
If you are not able to handle your jobs, then someone will replace you right away
People need to put much more effort to keep their living condition
the environment today is serious damaged
Looking out the windows, what I see isn't sky, trees or mountains, but is coldly high buildings
Everyday, I walk on hard roads, breath in polluted air, and live in a limited space
it has been proved that living in this kind of condition will result in some mental diseases
the environment our grandparents live is more comfortable than today
Today, we are able to read the news all over the world, to chat with people through the Internet, or to travel around the world by planes
it also means that any thing happens in the world will affect our life
The third reason is that the pace of life
If we cannot react properly and immediately, then we will be in a vulnerable situation
We have no choice but have to live in a fast pace | Major claims:
life in the old days brings more happiness to people than today for several reasons
People are put too much focus on making wealth and progress in technology
Claims:
life in the old days brings more happiness to people than today for several reasons
People are put too much focus on making wealth and progress in technology
some people live in a pretty good condition, it is only a minority
lives in the old days is easier than today
the environment our grandparents live is more comfortable than today
The third reason is that the pace of life
Premises:
life is simple in the past
Nowadays, all humans compete together
world population getting higher
competition is getting fierce
If you are not able to handle your jobs, then someone will replace you right away
People need to put much more effort to keep their living condition
the environment today is serious damaged
Looking out the windows, what I see isn't sky, trees or mountains, but is coldly high buildings
Everyday, I walk on hard roads, breath in polluted air, and live in a limited space
it has been proved that living in this kind of condition will result in some mental diseases
Today, we are able to read the news all over the world, to chat with people through the Internet, or to travel around the world by planes
it also means that any thing happens in the world will affect our life
If we cannot react properly and immediately, then we will be in a vulnerable situation
We have no choice but have to live in a fast pace |
How high is the likelihood (0 - 1) that you would recommend your friend to use the following argument as is in a speech supporting/contesting the topic, regardless of your personal opinion? | foster care does not provide stability something that children in the system so desperately need in order to become fully healthy and functional adults. | 0.887083661 |
Select the pragmatic category (the communicative purpose) for each sentence of the given peer review. The pragmatic categories are Recap (summarizes the content without evaluating it), Strength (express an explicit positive opinion), Weakness (express an explicit negative opinion), Todo (recommendations and questions), Other and Structure (labeling headers and other elements added by the review to structure the text). | Reviewer response for version 1
The paper is of interest.
The authors should give details of pupillary reactivity.
With herniation there is usually a change in pupillary size and reactivity before the ptosis.
Was this not the case here? | Structure
Strength
Todo
Other
Todo |
Create a word-level extractive summary of the argument by “underlining” and/or “highlighting” the evidence in such a way to support the argument being made. | The logic is misguided, but it is easy enough to grasp. Ukraine’s poorly equipped army cannot on its own inflict enough pain on the Russian-backed separatist insurgency to force an effective ceasefire that might lead to a negotiated truce. So America should help by sending defensive weapons, and some lethal ones too. Once body bags start arriving in Russian towns (the theory goes) President Vladimir Putin will relent, fearing a backlash from a public already unnerved by soaring inflation. This is the case made by a group of former senior US officials, and it is reportedly being discussed within the Obama administration. It is, however, deeply mistaken. Intended to help a stricken country, it could instead prolong Ukraine’s agony and distract it from the vital task of reconstruction. It is highly unlikely to knock Mr Putin off his destructive course. And it would bring the US a step closer to direct military confrontation with Russia. Russians support Mr Putin. The Kremlin has blamed the economic crisis on western sanctions, and it will blame military casualties on the west, too. There is nothing to suggest that Russians do not believe the Kremlin narrative. They are unlikely to abandon Mr Putin in his struggle against the west. There are practical questions, too. It is pointless to send weapons to troops not trained in their use. Will the US and its allies send trainers to eastern Ukraine? If they do, they will be sending Americans into a war zone with Russia as the enemy. It will be hard to pretend then that the US is not a party to the conflict. What, realistically, are the chances of making sure that only regular Ukrainian troops, and not private militias, have access to western-supplied weapons? If a western non-combatant in uniform is captured by the separatists, does the US try to rescue them? Mark Bowden’s Black Hawk Down chronicled the perils of such an operation in downtown Mogadishu. Imagine what could happen 10 miles from the Russian border, in an area controlled by Russian personnel. Finally, imagine the response. What do we do if Russia continues to escalate the conflict? Or if the Kremlin launches a cyber attack against an American financial institution, destroying data about asset ownership? Does America then inch closer towards war? It is not a kindness to kindle unrealistic hopes. Of course Ukraine is a victim of aggression. But, short of a campaign like that fought by the US and its allies in the Balkans in the 1990s — which no one now advocates — no amount of US or Nato assistance can alter the fact that Russia has the upper hand. In August, and again in January, Mr Putin chose to escalate rather than allow the separatists to be defeated. Ukraine will need help rebuilding its army, and the US should provide it. But it will take years, and cannot be done in the middle of a war with a more powerful neighbour. In contrast to this bold proposal to send arms to Ukraine, western economic assistance for the country has so far been timid. The US has promised $3bn in loan guarantees, a fraction of the tens of billions the country needs. In part, that is because Washington still suspects rampant corruption in Kiev. Will the military function better than the government it serves? Ukraine cannot win this conflict now. It must be frozen. Ukraine’s leaders should be told as much. It will deepen the tragedy if soldiers are sent to fight a hopeless battle. A free and independent Ukraine, a solid defence of the European order and a firm rebuff of Russian aggression are worthy goals. But they do not absolve us of our responsibility to consider the consequences of our actions. The current proposal to arm Ukraine does not meet that standard. | The logic is misguided, but it is easy enough to grasp America should help by sending defensive weapons, and some lethal ones too. Once body bags start arriving in Russian towns the theory goes) Putin will relent It is, deeply mistaken. Intended to help a stricken country, it could instead prolong Ukraine’s agony and distract it from the vital task of reconstruction It is highly unlikely to knock Putin off his destructive course it would bring the US a step closer to direct military confrontation with Russia Russians support Putin They are unlikely to abandon Putin in his struggle against the west It is pointless to send weapons to troops not trained in their use US trainers will be in a war zone with Russia as the enemy It will be hard to pretend then that the US is not a party to the conflict Black Hawk Down could happen 10 miles from the Russian border, in an area controlled by Russian personnel Of course Ukraine is a victim of aggression no amount of US assistance can alter the fact that Russia has the upper hand Ukraine cannot win this conflict now. It must be frozen It will deepen the tragedy if soldiers are sent to fight a hopeless battle. A free and independent Ukraine are worthy goals. But they do not absolve us of our responsibility to consider the consequences of our actions. The current proposal to arm Ukraine does not meet that standard |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate irrespective of their stance are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all on-topic arguments phrased as counters. | Argument: Abuse of information and power by intelligence agencies
Even when the government does not intend harm there are still cases where direct harms can occur as a result of surveillance. The most worrying are where the state abuses the information it holds. Abuse of power and of the information held by government is perhaps the main reason why it is difficult to trust in intelligence agencies. In one historical example from the 1950s FBI agents interviewed a Brooklyn liquor importer for repeating a rumor that the FBI Director J Edgar Hoover might be a “queer”. This clearly necessitated a reminder through questioning that Hoover’s “personal conduct is beyond reproach,” leading to the man quickly agreeing that “he thinks Mr. Hoover has done a wonderful job.” [1] Did this have anything to do with national security? No. Was it an abuse of power and surveillance? Yes. So far as we are aware the intelligence agencies don’t do things quite like this anymore but the revelations like PRISM, or the waterboarding a decade ago, show they are still happy to abuse their position from time to time. This is hardly a good way to build trust.
[1] Gage, Beverly, ‘It’s Not About Your Cat Photos’, Slate, 10 June 2013, http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/history/2013/06/nsa_prism_program_can_we_trust_the_government_with_our_secrets_no.html
Candidate 1: "Far from threatening democracy the intelligence agencies are using this information to protect democracy from terrorists who wish to overthrow the whole concept of democratic governance. Intelligence agencies are clearly under civilian control and have several layers of oversight to ensure that this kind of misuse does not take place. In the United States this means there is oversight from Congress and in the UK from Parliament. There is also judicial oversight in the form of the Interception of Communications Commissioner and Intelligence Services Commissioner in the UK [1] and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court in the US. [2]
[1] ‘Judicial Oversight’, Security Service MI5, https://www.mi5.gov.uk/home/about-us/how-mi5-is-governed/oversight/judicial-oversight.html
[2] ‘Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court’, Federal Judicial Center, http://www.fjc.gov/history/home.nsf/page/courts_special_fisc.html"
Candidate 2: "In the UK case this is not all it appears. The Intelligence Services Commissioner is comparatively toothless, and both it and the Interception of Communications Commissioner are immensely understaffed for monitoring all UK intelligence agencies. Some experts such as Professor Peter Sommer have even suggested “I am not sure that ministers or the ISC would know what questions to ask.” [1] Moreover this is trusting that ministers have the best interests of the people at heart, in the case of this conservative government which seems perfectly happy to introduce bills that erode freedoms such as the ‘snoopers charter’ this seems unlikely.
[1] Hopkins, Nick, ‘William Hague on spying scandal: what he said … and what he didn't say’, guardian.co.uk, 10 June 2013, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/10/william-hague-spying-scandal-nsa-statement"
Candidate 3: "Metadata and data-mining are not new they are simply becoming more frequent, and more accurate as a result of more information. In the past there have been other ways of collecting data; tax records, voter registration, reverse telephone directories. [1] At the same time government and the intelligence agencies are not even those who make most use of this, there are whole private companies devoted to sifting this data. [2] There is little reason why we should particularly worry about this being done by intelligence agencies.
[1] Gomez, David, ‘Hoovered’, Foreign Policy, 11 June 2013, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/06/11/fbi_hoover_nsa_prism_verizon_metadata
[2] See the debatabase debate ‘ This House would not allow companies to collect/sell the personal data of their clients ’."
Candidate 4: "Clearly if no one ever actually looked at any information provided by surveillance then there would be no point in conducting it. Even if it were true that no one looks at any of the data being watched is still an intrusion that affects behaviour. It will affect decisions that are perfectly lawful because there will always be the slight worry that someone who you don’t want to have that information because they will think differently of you will obtain it. When the information is out of your hands you can no longer be certain who will obtain it. [1] Since people have been arrested for the information that has been conducted, clearly sometimes the information is checked and used.
[1] Moore, Mica, and Stein, Bennett, ‘The Chilling Effects of License-Plate Location Tracking’, American Civil Liberties Union, 23 July 2013, http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology-and-liberty-national-security/chilling-effects-license-plate-location-tracking"
Candidate 5: "There have been wrongful arrests during the war against terror. Riwaan Sabir was wrongfully arrested under the terrorism act in 2008 for downloading an al-Qaida training manual despite the manual having been downloaded from a US government website and been for his master’s degree at the University of Nottingham. [1] Since the offence was online it is certainly possible that information from spying was a part of the cause for the arrest. It is true that we probably have less cause for concern when it is foreign governments doing the spying but this could still have consequences such as being denied entry if you wish to travel to or through the country.
[1] Townsend, Mark, ‘Police ‘made up’ evidence against Muslim student’, The Guardian, 14 July 2012, http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jul/14/police-evidence-muslim-student-rizwaan-sabir"
Candidate 6: "Physical risk is not the only risk that people worry about. Denying someone their liberties such as privacy or freedom of expression does not pose a physical risk to them but that act is still wrong and it is still worth worrying about. Citizens have the right to go about their own business without their government spying on them. They should not have to concern themselves with what information the government does or does not have."
Candidate 7: "The circumstances in the cold war were clearly different to today so this kind of abuse of power would be unlikely to happen. More broadly yes there is the potential for abuse in much the same way that there are people in banks who could steal large quantities of other people’s money. That there is a potential opportunity does not mean it is ever used. Abuse can never be totally avoided but if abuse is a concern then whether or not there is a program of surveillance is not the highest concern. Even if there were not wide ranging surveillance problems those in intelligence looking to abuse their position would be able to obtain the information because they have the technology to do so."
Candidate 8: "Is it really an invasion of privacy if no one else knows about it even if that information is added to some giant computer database? The information we wish to keep secret remains a secret, in the unlikely event that some analyst reads the information they are never going to broadcast it to others as keeping secrets is a part of what intelligence agencies do."
Candidate 9: "The intelligence agencies are not violating any right to privacy if they are not actually looking at the content of any emails, even less so as they in almost all cases won’t even be looking at the metadata. It is not possible for intelligence agencies to be asking the people before engaging in every surveillance policy as even knowing the broad outlines of what the surveillance involves could allow the targets of that surveillance to avoid that surveillance. While individual citizens are not asked this is where the people’s representatives should be trusted, it is ministers and members of parliament that allow surveillance and hold the agencies to account."
| The circumstances in the cold war were clearly different to today so this kind of abuse of power would be unlikely to happen. More broadly yes there is the potential for abuse in much the same way that there are people in banks who could steal large quantities of other people’s money. That there is a potential opportunity does not mean it is ever used. Abuse can never be totally avoided but if abuse is a concern then whether or not there is a program of surveillance is not the highest concern. Even if there were not wide ranging surveillance problems those in intelligence looking to abuse their position would be able to obtain the information because they have the technology to do so.
|
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: Pack labelling or taxation a better alternative
If it’s not enforceable, enforceable solutions ought to be used instead. It would be easier to enforce pack labelling and branding requirements, from larger and clearer health warnings to even brand-free packs. Of course, American-style lawsuits by governments against tobacco manufacturers could be tried, as suggested in Nigeria 1 .
1 IRIN, “NIGERIA: Govt hits tobacco companies with whopping law suit”, irinnews.org, 9 November 2007, http://www.irinnews.org/report/75239/nigeria-govt-hits-tobacco-companies-with-whopping-law-suit
Candidate 1: "Even if such a link were true – the campaign against the ban on smoking in public places in the UK accept that it’s unlikely that it is the primary cause of closures in the UK 1 – the public health benefits would make it worth it. Reductions on spending in some areas of the economy is likely to be balanced by increases elsewhere; of course there will be losses in some industries – particularly tabacco itself but those who stop smoking will have the money to spend elsewhere.
Moreover the economic effects are likely to be different in Africa; smoking outside in the UK, bearing in mind the infamous British weather, is a far less attractive proposition than smoking outdoors in many African countries.
1 'Why we want government to amend the smoking ban', Save Our Pubs & Clubs, http://www.amendthesmokingban.com/our_case"
Candidate 2: "It often doesn’t require enforcement – it changes attitudes itself, making people not do so. In Scotland, within three months 99% of locations abided by the ban, without the need for excess heavy handed enforcement 1 . This is because non-smokers will ask a smoker to stub it out if they are smoking where they are not allowed to. There seems little reason why this wont happen in Ghana or elsewhere in Africa just as in the west.
Even so, a lot of laws are not enforceable in all cases – that doesn’t mean that they will be complete failures.
1 The Scottish Government, 'Smoking ban gets seal of public approval', scotland.gov.uk, 26 June 2006, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2006/06/26080617"
Candidate 3: "Each has its own disadvantages. A growing form of tobacco sales in Africa – Nigeria in particular – is the “single stick” 1 . If retailers break packets of cigarettes apart, customers won’t see the packets containing health warnings or similar.
Cost increases can lead to increased use of rollups 2 , or even counterfeit cigarettes, 3 both of which have happened in South Africa as a result of taxation. At any rate, it’s not a zero sum game – more than one policy can be introduced at the same time.
1 Kluger, 2009, http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1911796,00.html
2 Olitola, Bukola, “The use of roll-your-own cigarettes in South Africa”, Public Health Association of South Africa, 26 February 2014, http://www.phasa.org.za/use-roll-cigarettes-south-africa/
3 Miti, Siya, “Tobacco tax hikes 'boost illegal traders'”, Dispatch Live, 28 February 2014, http://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/tobacco-tax-hikes-boost-illegal-traders/"
Candidate 4: "Personal autonomy arguments sound reasonable, but often ignore the wider consequences. Public health is a key issue – the state has a role in stopping people harming themselves – they may be harming themselves but the cost often falls on government through public healthcare, and therefore on all taxpayers. Moreover smoking also harms others through passive smoking, this is particularly true in public places that are enclosed."
| Each has its own disadvantages. A growing form of tobacco sales in Africa – Nigeria in particular – is the “single stick” 1 . If retailers break packets of cigarettes apart, customers won’t see the packets containing health warnings or similar.
Cost increases can lead to increased use of rollups 2 , or even counterfeit cigarettes, 3 both of which have happened in South Africa as a result of taxation. At any rate, it’s not a zero sum game – more than one policy can be introduced at the same time.
1 Kluger, 2009, http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1911796,00.html
2 Olitola, Bukola, “The use of roll-your-own cigarettes in South Africa”, Public Health Association of South Africa, 26 February 2014, http://www.phasa.org.za/use-roll-cigarettes-south-africa/
3 Miti, Siya, “Tobacco tax hikes 'boost illegal traders'”, Dispatch Live, 28 February 2014, http://www.dispatchlive.co.za/news/tobacco-tax-hikes-boost-illegal-traders/
|
Given a topic, a quote (a statement) and a response to the quote, on a scale from -5 to 5, decide to what extent the response agrees or disagrees with the quote. -5 means strong disagreement, 0 means neutral, and 5 means strong agreement. | Topic: Evolution
Quote: It's a result of Dr. Pepper, Cheetos, microwave popcorn, macaroni and cheese, hot dogs, pretzels, gum drops, high fructose corn syrup, flavors, colorings, transfats etc etc etc.......
Response: Make up your mind. Is it because of diet or is it because of evolution. It would be nice if you pick a horse and ride it.\n | -2.16667 |
Are the two argumentative components below, taken from essays, linked? | Argumentative component 1: "Without exaggeration, he directly went to the boss and told the boss that something wrong occurred on the meal--a fly concealed in it", argumentative component 2: "I realized that his facebook account was stolen" | No |
Are the two argumentative components below, taken from essays, linked? | Argumentative component 1: "Computers and modems bring works to home but these still have many things distract their mind", argumentative component 2: "all we know that the target can be reached fast thanks to working of many people" | No |
Given an argument, which of the candidates is the best counterargument to it? All counters in the same debate with stance opposite to the given argument are candidates. The task is to find the best counterargument among all counters to the argument’s stance. | Argument: Legalising ensures health care and safe sex.
Legalising sex work will enable regulation. Responsive laws can promote safe sex practices and enable access to health services [1] .
Firstly, sex workers fear asking for health assistance, and treatment in public services, due to the illegal and criminalised nature of sex work. WHO (2011) predicted 1 in 3 sex workers received adequate HIV prevention; and less are able to access additional health services. Access is limited due to the criminalised status, but also cost of treatment and transport, inconvenient opening hours, and humiliation [2] . Secondly, the illegal nature of sex work has been attached to safe-practice tools. In Namibia, where prostitution remains commonly practiced but illegal, the criminalisation of accessing condoms enhances vulnerabilities. Following stop and searches by the police 50% of sex workers reported their condoms were destroyed (OSF, 2012). Within the 50%, 75% subsequently had unprotected sex. Being defined as illegal puts workers at greater risk.
Through legalisation sex workers can access tests and openly seek treatment, care and support.
[1] ICASA, 2013, has argued national responses need to enable inclusive, and universal, access to health care treatment to combat HIV/AIDS.
[2] See further readings: Mtewwa et al, 2013.
Candidate 1: "The inclusion of youths and children misses out a crucial component - poverty. Busza (2006) identifies three forms of ‘sexual exchange’: sex work, transactional sex, and survival sex. Children are often recruited into the sex trade as a result of poverty, desires for consumption, and a lack of social support.
The ”sugar daddy” phenomenon across Africa is a case in point. Older men are able to entice young women, and children, through false promises and material products [1] .
Without providing key necessities, and alternatives to meet needs, practices will be driven further underground and youngsters placed at greater risk.
[1] For examples see: IRIN, 2013a; 2013b."
Candidate 2: "Legalising sex work means legalising the trading of bodies as a commodity. The practice is disempowering and undermining human rights, not vice-versa. It remains immoral that the state should grant such transactions and introduce prostitution as a career path. By legalising sex work to control HIV, the state becomes an active agent in illegitimate practices. Further, the state makes money while no gains are made for workers. Who really benefits from legalisation?"
Candidate 3: "Introducing new ‘good’ laws can drive sex work activities underground, and contradictorily reduce access to necessary health care services. Legislation does not ensure universal access: legalising sex work does not stop unequal politics.
First, the provision of HIV/AIDS treatment and care is dependent on the global-economy and influenced by investor faiths, ethics, and motives [1] . Therefore access to ART (Antiretroviral treatment) among sex workers is controlled by who is providing aid and distributing resources. Second, the most effective prevention strategy is believed to be ABC (Abstinence, Be faithful, and use a Condom). Such mottos exclude sex workers, and directly place the burden of HIV/AIDS to the individual. Such mottos are founded on strong Christian beliefs - legalising sex work cannot easily change traditional structures.
[1] A decline in global AID funding has been noted with the global economic downturn (World Bank, 2011). Further, the impact of faith-based institutions, and PEPFAR’s ‘anti-prostitution pledge’, on HIV/AIDS has been discussed (NSWP, 2011 Avert, 2013)."
Candidate 4: "Gender inequality, hierarchies and violence, will become legalised [1] . Across Africa, women account for a higher proportion of the population living with HIV - gender inequalities are a key driver of the epidemic. For example, patriarchal structures encourage polygamy in marriage; and women’s roles in the reproductive sphere forces them into the caregiver role when someone in the household gets HIV/AIDS.
The legalisation of sex work will ensure the epidemic continues to ‘feminise’. Women will become commodified, meeting male demands and desires, within a unequal gender society.
[1] Further readings on the debate of gender and sex work see: Richter, 2012."
Candidate 5: "The reality of a causal relation between legalising sex work and decriminalisation remains questionable. Accepting sex work within the legal framework does not ensure the practice is de-stigmatised or becomes regulated. Such contradictions indicate the depth of social stigmatisation towards sex work.
Taking the case of Senegal, where prostitution has been legalised, police abuse continues and sex workers actively choose to work in unregulated environments. In Senegal’s booming sex trade industry, prostitutes are required to register with the police and granted a identity card confirming health requirements have been met. However, their identification places sex workers open to discrimination by the police and social stigma [1] . Further, the legalisation of the industry in Senegal has attracted immigrants and refugees to work within the industry. They lack citizenship rights; therefore legal protection is limited and abused. Clandestine sex work remains prevalent. Sex workers represent around 18% of HIV prevalence, particularly higher amongst women (Aids Alliance, 2013).
Sex workers rights will only emerge once sex work is de-stigmatised, the act of selling sex is no longer taboo, and corrupt laws changed to provide sex workers with respect and protection beyond the law. The stigma of sex work is the basis of illegality and criminalisation.
[1] Senegal has a predominantly muslim population."
| Introducing new ‘good’ laws can drive sex work activities underground, and contradictorily reduce access to necessary health care services. Legislation does not ensure universal access: legalising sex work does not stop unequal politics.
First, the provision of HIV/AIDS treatment and care is dependent on the global-economy and influenced by investor faiths, ethics, and motives [1] . Therefore access to ART (Antiretroviral treatment) among sex workers is controlled by who is providing aid and distributing resources. Second, the most effective prevention strategy is believed to be ABC (Abstinence, Be faithful, and use a Condom). Such mottos exclude sex workers, and directly place the burden of HIV/AIDS to the individual. Such mottos are founded on strong Christian beliefs - legalising sex work cannot easily change traditional structures.
[1] A decline in global AID funding has been noted with the global economic downturn (World Bank, 2011). Further, the impact of faith-based institutions, and PEPFAR’s ‘anti-prostitution pledge’, on HIV/AIDS has been discussed (NSWP, 2011 Avert, 2013).
|
Mark the stance of the argument towards the topic as pro or con. | Argument: safe spaces create open discussion on important topics related to discrimination.; Topic: We should abolish safe spaces | con |
Create a word-level extractive summary of the argument by “underlining” and/or “highlighting” the evidence in such a way to support the argument being made. | The bilateral relationship is based on tangible, steadily increasing security and economic interests, not just shared values. At the final presidential debate of the 2012 campaign season, President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney mentioned Israel some 30 times, more than any other country except Iran. Both candidates called the Jewish state "a true friend," pledging to stand with it through thick and thin. Some political commentators criticized these effusive declarations of support as pandering, suggesting that the candidates were simply going after Jewish and pro-Israel votes. But if support for Israel is indeed such a political winner, then it's at least in part because the voters know best. The U.S.-Israeli alliance now contributes more than ever to American security, as bilateral cooperation to deal with both military and nonmilitary challenges has grown in recent years. The relationship may not be symmetrical; the United States has provided Israel with indispensable diplomatic, economic, and military support totaling more than $115 billion since 1949. But it is a two-way partnership whose benefits to the United States have been substantial. The other, less tangible costs of the U.S.-Israeli alliance -- mainly, damage to Washington's reputation in Arab and Muslim countries, a problem also caused by American interventions and decades of U.S. support for autocratic leaders in the Middle East -- pale in comparison with the economic, military, and political gains it affords Washington. U.S.-Israeli security cooperation dates back to heights of the Cold War, when the Jewish state came to be seen in Washington as a bulwark against Soviet influence in the Middle East and a counter to Arab nationalism. Although the world has changed since then, the strategic logic for the U.S.-Israeli alliance has not. Israel remains a counterweight against radical forces in the Middle East, including political Islam and violent extremism. It has also prevented the further proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in the region by thwarting Iraq and Syria's nuclear programs. Israel continues to help the United States deal with traditional security threats. The two countries share intelligence on terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and Middle Eastern politics. Israel's military experiences have shaped the United States' approach to counterterrorism and homeland security. The two governments work together to develop sophisticated military technology, such as the David's Sling counter-rocket and Arrow missile defense systems, which may soon be ready for export to other U.S. allies. Israel has also emerged as an important niche defense supplier to the U.S. military, with sales growing from $300 million per year before September 11 to $1.1 billion in 2006, due to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Israel's military research and development complex has pioneered many cutting-edge technologies that are transforming the face of modern war, including cyberweapons, unmanned vehicles (such as land robots and aerial drones), sensors and electronic warfare systems, and advanced defenses for military vehicles. The U.S.-Israeli alliance has paved the way for the countries to cooperate on far more than just traditional security issues. In part because of the long-standing political and security relationship between the United States and Israel, most Israelis know the United States and harbor positive feelings toward it. Israeli companies looking for a global market for their products have often viewed their American counterparts as partners of choice. So today, Israeli civilian technological innovations are helping the United States maintain its economic competitiveness, promote sustainable development, and address a range of non-military security challenges. Dozens of leading U.S. companies have set up technology incubators in Israel to take advantage of the country's penchant for new ideas, which is why Bill Gates observed in 2006 that the "innovation going on in Israel is critical to the future of the technology business." Likewise, Israeli high-tech firms often turn to U.S. companies as partners for joint production and marketing opportunities in the United States and elsewhere, creating tens of thousands of American jobs. And although Israelis make up just three percent of the population of the Middle East, in 2011 Israel was the destination of 25 percent of all U.S. exports to the region, having recently eclipsed Saudi Arabia as the top market there for American products. U.S. companies' substantial cooperation with Israel on information technology has been crucial to Silicon Valley's success. At Intel's research and development centers in Israel, engineers have designed many of the company's most successful microprocessors, accounting for some 40 percent of the firm's revenues last year. If you've made a secure financial transaction on the Internet, sent an instant message, or bought something using PayPal, you can thank Israeli IT researchers. | The bilateral relationship is based on tangible, steadily increasing security and economic interests, not just shared values. The U.S.-Israeli alliance now contributes more than ever to American security, as bilateral cooperation to deal with both military and nonmilitary challenges has grown in recent years it is a two-way partnership whose benefits to the United States have been substantial. damage to Washington's reputation in Arab and Muslim countries, a problem also caused by American interventions and decades of U.S. support for autocratic leaders in the Middle East -- pale in comparison with the economic, military, and political gains it affords Washington Israeli companies looking for a global market for their products have often viewed their American counterparts as partners of choice , Israeli civilian technological innovations are helping the United States maintain its economic competitiveness, promote sustainable development, and address a range of non-military security challenges of leading U.S. companies have set up technology incubators in Israel to take advantage of the country's penchant for new ideas "innovation going on in Israel is critical to the future of the technology business. And although Israelis make up just three percent of the population of the Middle East, in 2011 Israel was the destination of 25 percent of all U.S. exports to the region, U.S. companies' substantial cooperation with Israel on information technology has been crucial to Silicon Valley's success in Israel, engineers have designed many of the company's most successful microprocessors, |
Identify all argumentative text spans in the following essay. | Essay: Serious or entertaining movies
I prefer the serious movies which are simple, touching and powerful. Here are my reasons.
First, most serious movies have a wide variety of content. Entertaining movies are created to amuse people. However, most entertaining movies are empty and nonsensical. Compared with the entertainment film, the serious film may be more worthwhile and meaningful. Serious movies usually designed to express one or more thinking about love, humaneness; moreover, it may point out the dark sides of the society.
Second, not all of serious movies are boring. "Click" is a very interesting comedy, with a serious approach about the importance of having a balanced life between family and work businesses. The movie is humorous and satiric,which leads us to think what is the most valuable of our lives, and it reminds us how important our families are. Thus, the hidden meanings of serious movies are usually beyond words and images which make us think about ourselves.
Moreover, some of serious movies try to make you think about the dark sides of the world. "Blood diamond", an adaptation of a real story in South Africa, focuses on the link between diamonds and conflict. After watching the movie, we may learn a lesson between jewels and death. Diamonds are not rare or a sign of true love; indeed, the hidden meaning of a diamond is a cruel reality. As a result, serious movie tell you how to see the world in a different way.
For the above reasons, I prefer to see those serious movies which make people have deep thoughts toward their real lives. | I prefer the serious movies which are simple, touching and powerful
most serious movies have a wide variety of content
Entertaining movies are created to amuse people
most entertaining movies are empty and nonsensical
Compared with the entertainment film, the serious film may be more worthwhile and meaningful
the hidden meanings of serious movies are usually beyond words and images which make us think about ourselves
Click is a very interesting comedy, with a serious approach about the importance of having a balanced life between family and work businesses
The movie is humorous and satiric,which leads us to think what is the most valuable of our lives, and it reminds us how important our families are
Serious movies usually designed to express one or more thinking about love, humaneness
it may point out the dark sides of the society
some of serious movies try to make you think about the dark sides of the world
Blood diamond, an adaptation of a real story in South Africa, focuses on the link between diamonds and conflict
After watching the movie, we may learn a lesson between jewels and death
Diamonds are not rare or a sign of true love; indeed, the hidden meaning of a diamond is a cruel reality
serious movie tell you how to see the world in a different way
I prefer to see those serious movies which make people have deep thoughts toward their real lives |
Subsets and Splits