Recently, the phenomenon of " some people say that people are defined by the place where they grow up, but some argue that the environment only has little effect" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that the environment might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that the place can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the culture standpoint, defining people by the place where they grow up can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that the motherland and being a patriot are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the effects of the homeland on the people's attitude. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both loving the hometown and cultural events distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of psychology, without the slightest doubt, the little effect of the environment on people might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of the individuals' self-esteem. Moreover, fundamental aspects of the environmental effects can relate to the reality that the demerits of growing in a bad environment can pertain to the absence of an appropriate family. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of the environment were correlated positively with the place, the local authorities would ultimately address improving the happiness index. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of celebrities' opinions.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of defining people by the place far outweigh its downsides.
Recently, the phenomenon of
"
;
some
people
say that
people
are defined
by the
place
where they grow up,
but
some
argue that the
environment
only
has
little
effect"
; and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas
many
people
are debating the proposition that the
environment
might be
remarkably
fruitful, such issue
is regarded
thoroughly
both constructive and
positive
by a remarkable number of individuals. I
am inclined
to believe that the
place
can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the culture standpoint, defining
people
by the
place
where they grow up can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that the motherland and being a patriot are
inextricably
bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the effects of the homeland on the
people
's attitude.
Thus
, invaluable ramifications of both loving the hometown and cultural
events
distinctly
can
be observed
.
Within the realm of psychology, without the slightest doubt, the
little
effect
of the
environment
on
people
might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of the individuals' self-esteem.
Moreover
, fundamental aspects of the environmental effects can relate to the reality that the demerits of growing in a
bad
environment
can pertain to the absence of an appropriate family. As a tangible example,
some
scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of the
environment
were correlated
positively
with the
place
, the local authorities would
ultimately
address improving the happiness index.
Hence
, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of celebrities' opinions.
To conclude
, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to
vigorously
support the
idea
that the merits of defining
people
by the
place
far outweigh its downsides.