I update questions and answers about OPIc. This is a work of fiction. The characters, incidents and locations portrayed and the names herein are fictitious and any similarity to or identification with the location, name, character or history of any person, product or entity is entirely coincidental and unintentional.
OPIc Q&A 51~75
- Talk about a particular goal you have had in your life and what you have done to meet this goal. Use details and examples in your response.
- How important are extra-curricular activities?
- Is it good to make decisions quick?
- What do you think will your role be in the development of your nation?
- How can you contribute to the world?
- How important is it for students to get access to the latest technologies?
- Should teens be provided full access to the internet?
- What kind of games do you usually play? When and where do you play the games? What is the rule?
- How frequently do you go to concerts? Who do you usually go with?
- Who has been the kindest to you in your life?
- Is there any message that you’d like to leave for your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, or for future generations yet to come?
- If you could interview anyone from your life, living or dead, but not a celebrity, who would it be and why?
- Where will you be in 10 years? 20 years?
- Is animal testing justified?
- Is the death penalty appropriate? Or should it be banned?
- Should cell phones be used during class?
- Should laptops be allowed in classrooms?
- Is euthanasia justified?
- Are video games containing violence appropriate for children?
- Are single-sex schools more effective than co-ed schools?
- Have you ever been discriminated against?
- Have you ever been in a disaster?
- Are you afraid of death?
- I would like to know how you learned to use a certain skill or technology. Who was it that taught you? How did you learn it? Tell me all the things you had to do to learn how to use that skill or technology.
- Do you believe in ghosts? (Would you mind walking through a graveyard at night?)
Talk about a particular goal you have had in your life and what you have done to meet this goal. Use details and examples in your response.
A particular goal I have had in my life was TOEFL. I wanted to take more than 100 points, and there were two reasons why I wanted to take TOEFL.
First, TOEFL was one of the conditions to graduate from university.
Second, I wanted to improve my whole English skills, especially listening and writing.
Third, I need to get 100 scores to enter graduate school in the U.S.
To attain these purposes, I analyzed the content of TOEFL, memorized English words, and practiced a lot. To go straight to the bottom line(To come to the point, Let me get straight to the point, I’m getting straight to the point.), I could not get 100 points and could meet the standard line to graduate from university and improve my English skills drastically. I got 85 points, but I want to take more than 100 points someday.
How important are extra-curricular activities?
It depends on an individual whether extra-curricular activities are important or not. There are some positive and negative points about this issue. I am going to tell positive points and negative points in order.
First, extra-curricular activities are important to make real friends.
Second, extra-curricular activities can provide skills or knowledge in(with) regard to the activities.
Third, extra-curricular activities can give an opportunity to be aware of your talent you never realized.
If extra-curricular activities work positively, you can get benefits a lot. But, if there are some negative factors(variable), such as negative human-relationship, poor environment to do activities, you might get negative influences from the activities.
First, you might have a distrust of people. I mean, you can be misanthropy.
Second, you might waste your precious time if the extra-curricular activities are not interesting for you.
Third, you might lose your money too. But, this is only restricted(limited) to the conditions you have to pay money for extra-curricular activities.
There are both positive and negative points you might face in the activities.
Is it good to make decisions quick?
There are both positive and negative aspects with(in) regard to this topic. So, I can not say which is better or worse, like dualism. I am going to enumerate both positive and negative points in order.
First, it can be effective to make a decision fast rather than considering a lot.
Second, making a quick decision saves time.
Third, you do not have to think a lot, so you can save your energy.
Next is negative points.
First, without contemplating, you might get negative feedback if you make a decision quickly.
Second, if the decision came from an instinct or a feeling, you have to be careful a lot because it is not specific and has an unknowable variable. I mean, it can make a success and disaster.
Third, you might lose your trust if you did make a decision quickly and failed splendidly.
It really depends on both internal and external variables. Internal variables mean like personality or disposition(propensity). External variables mean an environment or a surrounding. So, we have to examine(scrutinize) closely before making a decision which is better, quick decision or not.
What do you think will your role be in the development of your nation?
This question is not appropriate because we are always in the role that grows our own nation up. Whenever you work in your country, you are in charge of the role. I will explain the reasons.
I think almost native people work in own country. Japanese work in Japan, Korean work in Korea fundamentally. You work, then you will be paid, and if you ever saw a payslip (pay statement), you will notice(realize, recognize, be aware of, figure, sense, know) your payment is deducted(taken away, docked, subtracted) by taxes. It means you pay money to the nation to develop automatically and systematically.
Some people might claim my payment are not taken away because I earned money by stock or virtual currency(virtual money). Actually, their payment is not substracted, but they have to spend money to sustain their lives. They buy foods, products. The funds will go to the nation after all(ultimately, in the end, eventually, at last).
So, these are the reasons we are always in the role that grows our own nation up.
How can you contribute to the world?
There are immeasurable ways to contribute to the world. You can donate money to poor countries through charity organizations such as UNICEF. You can educate your skills and knowledge after you get knowledge and hone(cultivate) your skills, such as teaching languages, cooking. You can be friendly and become familiar with people whom you do not know well. You can be employed and contribute to the world by working for a company.
As you can see, contributions have to be positive for people. Well, it isn’t easy to define what is positive because it depends on how people perceive and evaluate the behavior or the conclusion. But, if someone can feel positive for what you do, it means you can think you contributed to the world.
I listed ways to contribute to the world. There are numerous ways to help people and contribute to the world. But, the above lists are for humans.
I think the world contains animals and plants. So, we can do something for them, for example, do not destroy and disturb the natural ecosystem too much to yield monetary profit. We can plant trees to restore nature that human-being destroy and to prevent desertification.
In a nutshell, we should pay attention and help people and should not intervene(interfere) with the ecosystem, but help nature to restore to contribute to the world.
How important is it for students to get access to the latest technologies?
It is really crucial for students to follow the latest technologies. There are some reasons why it is important.
The latest technology can foster the improvement of learning efficiency. Actually, this phenomenon happened, and the effects are significant. According to research, students in developed countries are smarter than those in developing countries. There are some variables to explain this result. The main factors why this gap(difference) was the educational environment and the latest technological facilities.
The latest technology does not lead only positive results but, negative ones.
We can see electrical devices and the services among the latest technologies. The development of communicational devices and services improved (raised, enriched) one’s standard of living. We can communicate with everyone on the internet. It is convenient, but resulted in loneliness compared to the past. This phenomenon also could be applied to students. Recent students do not play in parks with friends but play a game on the internet. This promoted isolation from offline and resulted in solitude.
The latest technologies brought about many benefits. But it could turn out to be drawbacks(disadvantages). We can control the result, I mean, it depends whether we make the latest technology positive or negative. Influences in the age of students are significant. So, adults have to know about the latest technology and need to utilize the technology for students.
Should teens be provided full access to the internet?
Teens should not be full access to the internet. I want to say the internet is a means to do and learn something. I will explain the detail.
It is good to utilize the internet to learn something compared to paper media such as books or new paper because the internet includes vast information. We can learn a lot from the internet, and especially it is more efficient to watch movies to learn how to cook or how to pronounce R and L compared to a book.
We can obtain almost all information from the internet, but cannot provide sensory information. For example, the internet cannot provide information concerning smell. Moreover, the internet never provides the sense of touch. If you want to know the feel of dolphins’ skin, you have to go to the zoo. What I want to say is that the internet is not a perfect information sender; there are things that we cannot learn from the internet. So, we should learn something through natural in some cases(at times).
I agree that teens should use the internet because there are a lot of positive points in learning something, but when the internet cannot provide information or experience, teens should utilize other ways like getting in touch with nature.
What kind of games do you usually play? When and where do you play the games? What is the rule?
I do not play video games but play a card games. One of the card games I played was called Japanese Uno(Richman and Asshole, President, Career Poker). The rule is complicated, but I try to explain.
I am going to tell you how to win the game. To go straight to the bottom line(To come to the point), you lose all cards, then you would win. So, this is a game we should use all of the cards you have. The strongest card is 2, the weakest card is 3. Every single card has an effect. For example, 5 has the effect of skipping a person. 6 has the effect of changing rotation. 7 has the effect of giving a card beside you.
There are other rules when you put cards. For example, when you put the card of 7 below the card of 6, the next person has to put 8 on the card I put. After the person puts 8, the next person has to put 9. It should be in numeric order.
The effect of revolution is a game-changer. The effect of the revolution is that the strongest card would be 3, and the weakest card would be 2. The revolution changed the order of strength. But, if you want to activate the revolution, you have to prepare four same numbers and symbols. For example, you have to prepare 7 of spade, heart, clover, diamond.
Other rules which I did not explain exist, and you can make rules by yourself. I also have made my own rules. Playing Career Poker for the first time is difficult, but it is fun if you get accustomed to the rules.
How frequently do you go to concerts? Who do you usually go with?
I seldom go to concerts. My father brought me to concerts forcibly when I was a child. I mean, I was forced to go together to concerts with my father even though I did not want to go.
There are some reasons why my father took me to concerts.
First, my father forced me to go to concerts to expand my sense of values. I mean, as an education.
Second, my father was a chicken. I mean, he did not dare to go alone to concerts. So, he sacrificed my time and achieved his desire.
Third, he did not have a specific hobby he wanted to do. But, because he was one of the members of the band, he has an interest in music. So, he spent time going to concerts.
Actually, it did not help my life at all. But, it was helpful for me because I can tell a story to respond to this question.
Who has been the kindest to you in your life?
The kindest person to me in my life is my mother. Let me explain the reasons and the story.
I am half Japanese and Korean. It means my mother is Japanese, and my father is Korean. If we are in the same boat; we can see international couples or families have conflicts between them owing to(an account of, due to, by reason of) cultural differences.
There are many events that my mother tried to divorce. But she did not. She educated and grew me until now while complaining about my father. What I respect for my mother was that she did not divorce. Once, I asked why she did not divorce? The reason was me. She did not want to deal with it like that. My father also did not want to divorce because his family divorced, and he spent his life lonely until he met my mother. She was so kind, of course, my father was kind, but my mother was more kind than my father.
I do not understand why she did not divorce because I would absolutely divorce if I were my mother. I guess there are some variables, for example, by reason of anatomical factors, or maybe a belief and faith of her religion, or her personality. I do not comprehend the reason. Hence, I paid respect to her because she was so kind and grew me up even when she was in row spirit to do something.
Is there any message that you’d like to leave for your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, or for future generations yet to come?
I have a lot of things that I want to leave messages for descendants. So, I picked up just three messages.
First, do not trust people and information if you do not have any resources(basis, foundation, base, source, support, background). I do not say you do not trust all people and information. I want to say for my children. Humans are ignorant and talk about something without any logical background and premise, such as statistics, research that provides objectivity. I do not say talking about something subjectively is bad. I want to say information that came from the experiential rule of thumbs does entail objectivity. I emphasized objectivity because it can be an indicator(standard) to trust the information. Objectivity is not a perfect evaluation criterion because we cannot recognize the information correctly and consider something objectively. In summary, you have to be careful with all information because it could have a bias. Even there is no bias, and you would turn information into a bias which is a logical fallacy.
Second, do what you want to do and do not regret not doing it. This is a simple message, isn’t it? You have and live your life. But, I want to remind you that if you have an interest in something or someone whom you like, go get it. Have your life without regret. Regret teaches you a lot, but you cannot fix the regret unless the time machine is invented.
Third, trust yourself and your people. You will think this message seems to contradict the first message. Trust is the beginning of everything. If you do not trust anything, your life will be hard. I do not trust something basically without knowledge and conviction because I believe this way is the most logical and trustworthy to defend myself from people. But, I cannot prove this pattern of thought can be reliable enough. I mean, this belief can be a fallacy. In contrast, trusting someone or information can be the most logical and trustworthy to defend yourself. It depends on the situation whether you should believe in or doubt. So, you have to be thoughtful to make a decision if the person or information is reliable.
I do not explain enough to cover my message, but the above things are the message that I want to say for my descendants.
If you could interview anyone from your life, living or dead, but not a celebrity, who would it be and why?
I want to meet my maternal father. There are three reasons why I want to meet him.
First, he died before I was born. So, I never met him and knew the voice. If I can meet him, I want to talk with him about something.
Second, I want to listen about world war two because he experienced the war and engaged as a soldier. I want to listen about how the battlefield was and the situation at the time.
Third, I want to listen to an impression of my father because he is Korean. My maternal father is Japanese but, did not have anti-thought about Korea, according to the information my mother provided. The majority of Japanese at the time had anti-feelings to Korea, so my father was rare in some way(in a way, in a sense). So, I want to listen to what kind of thoughts and feelings he would come up with when he listens to that his daughter got married to a Korean.
These are the reasons why I want to meet my maternal father.
Where will you be in 10 years? 20 years?
I cannot imagine where I will be in 10 years and 20 years. Guess from my ability and job which I will have, I will be in the U.S or a country where the mother or second tongue is English.
I am good at English quite and can speak Japanese and Korean. But, I have a desire to work in the U.S. I am thinking of working as a data scientist. A data scientist is a kind of professional data analyst, such as processing data and making artificial intelligence based on the processed data to yield profits for companies. A data scientist is told it is the hottest work in the world. I am learning data science to be a data scientist.
So, from the ability which I can handle English pretty well and will have the hottest job, I will be in the U.S or a country where the mother or second tongue is English.
Is animal testing justified?
I must say this issue is really complicated and sensitive because this is one of the ethnic problems that we have to consider. So, I cannot say animal testing should be justified or not. It is not like the dualism issue. An ethnic problem like this always entails a question of what humanity is because if we do something inhumane, we will lose our identity as human-being.
Why it is hard for me to say animal testing should not be justified is that we receive benefits from the result of the animal testings. For example, we can see a benefit from formulating a vaccine for coronavirus. Thanks to the vaccine, a lot of people are being saved. Considerable time passed to be able to provide the vaccine for people because the result had to be confirmed secure for humans. It is not using humans to verify the effect, but mouses an account of the genetic similarity between humans and mouses. A lot of experiments were conducted with a focus on mouses, monkeys, chimpanzees. The result of their sacrifices helped and improved our life. For example, it is applied to medicine, cosmetics, foods, space explanation, physic experiments, etc.
We should say the animal testings must not be justified. We know this reason because animals also are organisms and feel pain as same as humans do. We would say animal testing does not have to be supported if the position shifts because animal testings are the same meaning as torture. We feel pain and avoid it. But, since we are not selected as a subject, medicine or foods that are verified by clinical trial that uses animals go out into the world(start in(out) life) and become famous and yield profits. This circulation promotes(provoke/incite/spur) to repeat this unstoppable chain because this product or service results in positive effects for consumers and companies even though there are no benefits for sacrificed animals.
We have been dealing with this topic, and it is sad that I have to answer this question to get better points. I hope we discuss fast for animals and reach a conclusion as the top existence of the ecosystem.
Is the death penalty appropriate? Or should it be banned?
It is hard to say the death penalty should be appropriate or banned because I understand both agreement and disagreement. So, it is hard to say which is right or not. I mean, this is not a dualism problem.
Advocators who mention the death penalty should be appropriate claim that the death penalty suppresses the act of crime and maintain security. Anyone who knows the death penalty would be able to pass by a specific act does not try to commit a crime so easily because there is a possibility to be pronounced a death sentence if the person did something too much. Some people also insist that murders(killers, homicide) have to be punished as same as they did like Eye for eye, tooth for tooth. It means murders deserve to be killed by law.
On the other hand, some people who allege that the death penalty should be banned state that God does not allow the act. This is from a religious notion, and you might say it does not make sense. However, there are some countries where the law consists of the bible, and the death sentence is not permitted. Besides, there are some rational explanations about the ban of death sentences. A lot of innocent people who did not commit a crime were passed the death sentence, and executed. So, the death penalty has to be banned not to produce unnecessary sacrifice. Furthermore, some scholars said, “social construct itself is the reason murders are produced. Consequently, the government has to be responsible for the family or people who sacrificed.”
I fully understand both statements. However, it is really a complex and intricate problem to say which is right. So, what we can do is that we consider the death penalty and make an effort to achieve an ideal world that crimes seldom occur.
Should cell phones be used during class?
This has been discussed in Japan. I think there are both positive and negative aspects of using cell phones during class. I am going to talk about the positives and negative points in the right order.
Using cell phones could help to increase the efficiency of learning. For example, when teachers illustrate intricate notions and students cannot get the whole picture, then they can look up the notion on the internet immediately. This will foster understanding of the content that the teacher talks about and improve the process of learning curriculum. This will help teachers too. When the teacher cannot explain the details or when the theory is too abstract and complicated, they can search up the information and educate students on the core outline without spending too much time.
I comprehend the opposite of the opinion that we should not use cell phones during class. Using cell phones will bother to concentrate on the subjects and decrease the efficiency of education. Teachers can notice what they are doing on the surface, but it is difficult to identify what they are doing really. I mean, they could search up the information they need to get to understand the subjects. However, they also could browse unrelated sites or chat with some friends. If this happens, the purpose of education in school would be lost because they spend time on other things, not for educational uses.
Using cell phone makes students easy to facilitate the process of learning, but if they use a cell phone in a different direction, we should say using a cell phone have to be banned because cell phone takes their time to learn subjects they should focus on. So, considering the positive and negative points of using cell phones, I disagree with using cell phones for students but agree with the only teacher.
I think we should utilize the latest technology if we can do that. The purpose of education is to teach subjects for the student to build their future based on what they learn. So, it is better for the student to understand the contents easily. But, in the process of the class, they will get the question about the subjects if they do not get the issue. The teacher can explain by saying, but can use monitor or movies by showing cell phone. This will lead to the improvement of comprehending because it is easy to figure out by watching videos rather than reading books. So, I think it is good for education that only teachers can use cell phones for educational purposes.
Should laptops be allowed in classrooms?
There are both positive and negative parts concerning this issue. I am going to develop these ideas in order.
The advantage that laptops should be allowed in the classroom is that it helps to aid to enhance the efficiency of learning. For example, when students who do not get the whole picture of content can search for the information they did not understand. Laptops have a potential increase in the effectiveness of learning.
However, on the other hand, laptops can cause negative impacts on the class. For example, noise that was formed by typing could bother the class and cause losing concentration for students. Furthermore, teachers cannot see what students are doing. They could utilize laptops for educational reasons such as looking up the knowledge they do not know exactly but could browse irrelevant sites or chat with friends on the internet.
Considering above both the advantage and the disadvantages, I do not think which opinion is better because it depends on how we deal with it. When we use laptops for the educational objective, then it brings about positive feedback and vice versa. So, when introducing laptops in the class, teachers should be careful of how students use laptops.
Is euthanasia justified?
This problem is highly sensitive to talk about and is complex to answer this question. Some people say euthanasia should be justified or not. This is because there are different opinions on this topic because we have different values that were acquired based on our own land. Therefore, this topic should not be discussed by dualism like good or bad, but scrutinize the details that both pros and cons say.
People who state euthanasia should be justified say that humans have a right to end their own life. For example, suppose that there is a patient who is in the terminal stage and keeps his/her life by hitting painkillers. Some countries are allowed to enforce euthanasia to release from the pain, but some of the countries are not. If the patient was in a country where supports euthanasia, the patient can end his/her life with their own will. But in case of that, the country does not permit euthanasia, the patient will continue feeling unbearable pain.
In the contract, people who say euthanasia should not be justified protest that we are not allowed to kill ourselves because god gave life for us, and it is not permitted according to the Bible. This claim came from a religion that believes suicide is the heaviest sin among the rule of God. The other opinion is that the availability of euthanasia could produce a potential death. I mean, even though diseases could be cured, the patient could choose to take euthanasia as a means because they have the option to select and want to be free from the sustainable pain. This might foster to lower the value of the life. Individualism has been popular, and they assert they have a right to choose to end their own’s life from the egocentric notion. This conception can foster to make light of life.
Choosing euthanasia is not necessarily bad. However, it depends on the situation. For example, it might be good for patients who are in the last stage to select euthanasia to release from the pain. But, if we abuse the use of euthanasia, we might cause negative feedback, for example, lowering the whole life or resulting in crimes by misusing euthanasia. So, we should discuss this issue so strictly and carefully and reach a conclusion someday.
Are video games containing violence appropriate for children?
To go straight to the bottom line(To come to the point), it is appropriate to say I do not know because there are both experimental(laboratory) data that video games containing violence have a negative impact on the development of the child or some research shows that there is no significant reason to support the theory.
I am going to explain the outline of an empirical result that supports this topic. It was an experiment that let children watch a video of that an adult was beating a stuffed toy. After that, the experimenter gave a stuffed doll to the child who watched the video and saw how they would treat it. It turned out that the child started to beat it as an adult did. What we can see from this experiment is that children learn behavior from adults by imitating the action and doing the action semi-permanently. So, this study concluded that video games containing violence plant(imbed, embed) violence and expedite aggression.
The opposite of results came from psychological experiments. The experimental objects were over 12 years old. Children who attended above of the result about acquiring aggression were between 5 to 12. We can learn other things that acquiring aggressiveness can be controlled somehow when parents or other factors intervene (interfered). There are many variables except parental one. So, researchers mention we cannot predicate(posit) that content containing violence could foster aggression. There is another study that when the aggression of releasing is not processed properly, the degree of aggressiveness increase adversely.
From these results, I cannot say that video games, containing violence, are appropriate for children because there was a correlation between factors, but it is not causation that explains the reason and the mechanism perfectly.
Are single-sex schools more effective than co-ed schools?
It depends on the situation whether the effectivity is displayed or not. So, I am going to consider the situation and enumerate it.
Single-sex schools could be effective than co-ed schools for some students, such as girls who have androphobia (male phobia). This is a rare case, but girls who have a phobia of men cannot be with men because of the fear. So, they would be able to concentrate on the subjects if they were in single-sex schools compared to co-ed schools. Another thing is that single-sex schools can be effective because students do not have to pay attention to a different gender(the opposite gender). So, they might focus on learning without intervening in female thought, but only for school work.
On the other hand, the effectiveness can be displayed only in the case of co-ed schools. For example, we can see it when they communicate. It is not compulsory for students to attend a school because there are students who do not want to go to school for some reason. While communication technology and educational curriculum developed, students who learn at home can be regarded as the same as students who attend a school if they meet the conditions(requirements). So, the school is not a place anymore where learn studies. But, the school provides a place where can meet the same generation and communicate with them, and form friendships. This activity is really important because when students work, the experiences will help to make positive companionships. Companionships are said that it is a vital factor to have a successful work-life, and it enhances the effectiveness of working.
As I describe, there are both advantages, and it depends on the situation in which the school system works for students. So, students choose the school system as they want to.
Have you ever been discriminated against?
I was discriminated against by reason of that I have a Korean father. I am half Japanese and Korean and live in Japan. I do not hear racial discrimination recently, but I was one of the victims when I was a child. Racial discrimination should not be justified because it creates conflicts and frictions between nations and even could cause the worst scenario, war.
The history of humans is the repeat of discrimination, such as gender, classism, ethnocentrism, and so on. This discrimination inflicted tragedy and people were killed without any specific reason. But, this could be natural when seeing the natural world. Even animals and insects discriminate against their species, according to some researches. So, discrimination itself can be spontaneous in the physical world where we live. There is a logical explanation for this. Some researchers said that discrimination makes the hierarchy. This hierarchy makes the law and could dominate people somehow and sustain the society. This process forms the culture. So, we think discrimination is a negative phenomenon, but we should accept the history of discrimination that makes the culture. The minority suffer from discrimination, but society is sustained and developed. Therefore, I cannot say that discrimination is necessarily evil and has to be eradicated since it could contribute to the development of the culture.
Have you ever been in a disaster?
I have not ever been in a disaster directly, but indirectly, the Great East Japan earthquake. It happened in 2011 and took more than 10.000 people’s life. I was a junior high student at the time and received physics. Then, the earthquake happened suddenly and shook a classroom where is located on three floors. I was afraid of death when I was in there because I had never experienced it. When I got my home, and was surprised that the same advertisement was broadcast over and over. I still remember the ad, and it lets remind the experience of the fear every time I watch the ad.
Japanese people were terrified and suffered from tidal waves rather than the earthquake because the tsunami took people’s life away actually. A few people died due to the earthquake. Some countries supported Japan by furnishing some supplies and materials. Japanese people were saved by the commodities, and I felt harmonious relationships with foreign countries are really crucial. There are a lot of benefits when there is trustful diplomacy between nations. I learned that from the incident and hoped this kind of natural disaster never happen. But, I guess we cannot stop natural disasters. So, we should prepare some guidelines against tragedies to stop expanding the damage and minimize the scale of harm beforehand.
Are you afraid of death?
I am not afraid of death mentally but could feel a fear biologically when I face death. It is straightforward that humans will die someday, and it is a universal phenomenon as an organism. We cannot choose to be born but, there is a kind of belief that we should live because we were born. Some people state that humans have a right to live or end their own life.
However, there are a lot of reasons why we should not kill ourselves even though we will die someday after all. We live for death. This is the truism that we know. I do not understand we should live because death is our goal. Suppose when you go back to your home and can select two ways. Root one takes an hour to get back home, but root two takes 30 minutes. Which ways do you choose? I think the majority would select the latter unless you want to detour.
So, my question is that why we do not choose these shortcuts. I mean, why we do not live for death. The final result of life is obvious, and all organisms follow the same path. I do not figure out the reason, and I guess there are no responsibilities of missions like religions assert. Even though we have them, we can decide whether we achieve them or not. So, I am not afraid of death.
I would like to know how you learned to use a certain skill or technology. Who was it that taught you? How did you learn it? Tell me all the things you had to do to learn how to use that skill or technology.
I have learned Python on the internet. I have an interest in artificial intelligence and want to be a data scientist. So, I needed to learn Python to work as a data scientist because Python is considered as a tool for inventing AI.
I have learned Python from Youtube and got knowledge related to skills or technological information on the internet recently. I have read some books, but I utilized informational materials than paper mediums. I cannot say who taught me these skills because I do not know the name of the persons and they are not famous. But, I watched many videos and learned a lot.
Do you believe in ghosts? (Would you mind walking through a graveyard at night?)
I want to believe in ghosts, but it is tough to prove their presence. Therefore, I cannot walk through a graveyard at night.
I watched ghosts in the movie, articles, even the real world. But, some adults who deny ghosts assume that ghosts are created by prominent human imagination. It can be valid, and I understand the cognitive process and mechanism that creates ghosts. However, we know only human reaction and mechanism produces the presence of spirits. So, we cannot conclude that there is no ghost because the explanation cannot explain what kind of factors and stimulation are needed to call the human reaction.
There are many theories that posit ghosts do not exist. Researchers want to reveal the mechanism and draw a conclusion. But, it is also challenging to prove there are no ghosts because it is invisible and an abstract notion. But, ghosts are a universal notion that has been confirmed in any era. We know behind the mechanism, but still consider the presence of ghosts, whether they exist or are delusions that are created by human imagination.