Libraries should be shut down as better alternatives are available. To what extent do you agree or disagree? v.2

For the time being, boundless development in technology has led to emergence of enormous alternatives instead of customary way of approaching things including libraries. It has always been a controversial issue amongst people whether to keep the traditional libraries or replace all of them. Although lots of rational reasons, which some will be further mentioned, have been introduced in favour of newly proposed options taking place of libraries, I highly believe we need to stick to the long-established perspective towards this issue indicating that having libraries is vital. Firstly, it is argued that publishing books in order to sell and keep some at the libraries will be harmful to environment in the long term as there is no other way in producing paper but cutting trees. While this may be true, we cannot set fire to existing libraries and close them down since some signed editions are kept in libraries, which needs to be referred to in some cases. Therefore, it is vital that the books in libraries are accessible to the ones who are fond of reading books and investigating our history. Secondly, some believe that through some technological advances you are in a position to have access to all sources at once conveniently. Others, however, are of the opinion that having access to anything, anytime may lead to some crucial problems in all aspects; for instance, killing enthusiasm, creativity, and most importantly enhancing some academic erroneous attitudes as plagiarism. Furthermore, individuals congregate in a rather scholastic environment, which does not appear to be disadvantageous. In conclusion, I absolutely disagree that all the libraries have to be shut down. While, as is mentioned above, the proponents of this idea are rightful in some particular situations, it is impossible to refuse the indispensable role of libraries in the society.