• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Agree or Disagree (2.0)

I'm not sure if I should say agree or disagree considering it's two options, but I kinda believe that the second one might be the most likely. Sure, we can solve the problems of today, but every generation has its own problems that we as a society need to overcome in order to progress. It's also not that hard to imagine a scenario in which the world ends whilst either a conflict is being resolved or it ends because of that conflict.

Spanking/hitting/physically abusing a child is probably going to cause more problems to them in the long term than it's going to solve them in the moment.
 
Agree. Violence begets violence is what they say. If you teach your child that violence is an option it will even more tend to teach it to the next generation. Trauma is not a good way to create healthy relationships, either.

People should read books more often.
 
Agreed.... stares at pile of books and manga he never gets around to... =\

Physical stores, aside from essential ones like for example Supermarkets, will eventually disappear.
 
Well, books still persist even though there's digital ones. But in the far future? I feel like people will still want to physically go into a store to shop, still. I'm trying to think of something people did in the past that is now only history as an example of this... I mean, if people no longer need to make purchases because there's a better system in place, but that may be in the far future? I'll just say I agree, in the distant future stores will just be a simulation for entertaining what it was like to be in the past, while they aren't actually needed physically.

Doing something positive that has already been done before is okay, because you can't help but add your own twist to it, making it by definition, new.
 
I could potentially see something good coming from it if the one lobbying is trying to fix something that's wrong with current legislation.... like for example if say abortion is illegal there.
... but knowing humanity the ones lobbying would probably usually not fall in that category and it would most likely be for personal gain.

I can't fully agree.... but due to human nature am leaning more towards that direction.

The Mass Effect games should've stayed a trilogy.
 
Haven't played Mass Effect, the series didn't interest me.
I tried Mass Effect 1 but didn't play for more than 15 minutes because I felt I had to look for a guide to not lock some dateable characters...
But apparently Mass Effect Andromeda didn't meet success, so I'll trust the community and agree by proxy.

ChatGPT is less impressive if you know how it works.
 
In my opinion, cooking can be an art, but it is mostly a science. The primary reason you cook is to heat food so that all the harmful particles and bacteria can be removed from the food. Our human stomachs simply can't handle the stuff that most animals can. To stay healthy, it is required for us to wash our food and cook it. That's pretty much science. However, a creative aspect does exist to how you prepare your dishes. "Art" means expressing creativity and coming up with different meals and your own spin requires some creativity. Therefore, cooking can be considered an art sometimes. In addition, cooking certain things is straight up art. For instance, being able to bake a cake with so many complex designs isn't much different to art similar to drawing or painting a picture.

Summer is much better than winter!
 
When you live in a place where every day is over 100F? No way! Disagree.

Crows are the best birds.
 
Well it's better for the environment. No nuclear waste you have to store and which will outlast your own lifespan ten times over while barely decaying.
It's also very unreliable though as no wind = no energy, so nuclear energy wins there.
As far as damage goes, in the event of something going wrong, a wind turbine being damaged and keeling over would cause some damage, but a nuclear meltdown would do far worse.
Agreed I guess.

Politicians rarely keep their election promises.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top