The mobile phone do more good than harm.

Greetings opponent. I could see the effort you put in for the argument. It is dramatic enough for one to believe that mobile phone do more harm. However, I would like to keep the excitement going. It is indeed true that internet is accessible via many devices like computer, Ipad etc. I would like to highlight a point that opponent overlooked, the screen size and usage. I broke down the devices into three category namely, laptop, tablets and mobile phones which I wanted to compare a few key stats on each device. If one boarded the bus any random day and looked around his/her surroundings, it won"t be a surprise to find that half or maybe more of the commuters are using phones. Of course, it is also fair to say that some use tablets and few use laptops. While one might rethink about why most of the commuters use phone instead of other devices, I think it is safe to say that mobile phone are actually easier to carry around and they can make phone calls. It may not be their main use any more but most of us still want to be able to speak to our friends and family when out of the house. It is also true to say that some commuters prefer to watch movies and thus a tablet might be a better choice to them, however it normally won"t be the first choice for most people. For the second point, I find it rather interesting to compare digital dictionary and dictionary application in the phone. It would be less pleasing to reiterate the differences between hard copy dictionary and dictionary application again. I believe not many would fancy flipping the pages to find the matching alphabet. Now going back to the point, I believe it does cost money to buy a digital dictionary. If one looked in app store in one"s phone, online dictionaries namely Dictionary.com , Oxford, Merriam-Webster etc; those dictionary applications are all free. I therefore come to the conclusion that if both dictionaries give the same information or an explanation for a particular word by just typing a few alphabets, it is understanding enough to say the online dictionary is more considerable. Thirdly, I do agree with what the opponent mentioned regarding about the issue regarding pupils using mobile phones in school. Debates are going on in figure out whether students are allowed to use mobile/cell phones in school. One of the example, from (http://www.debate.org...) .Although this includes a little of integrity and helps from teachers, situations like this needs a relatively long period of time to resolve. I looked through what opponent had pointed out regarding about addictions. I did some research and would like to share this research report (http://www.researchgate.net...) carried out 6 years ago. As the opponent suggested that "reliable sources" including Wikipedia might be giving the false information , I want to point out that this website contains reliable resources. It contains results carried out from experiments about addictions of problematic phone users, the causes and effects. Although this report does not directly link to how I want to go against my opponent"s view, one could have more idea about the issue of addiction. It is clear that this might be one of the harm mobile phones carried and had been seen as a problem as far as researches had proven. From http://www.webmd.com...... that opponent had highlighted out respecting to the issue of checking phone regularly, it is understood that it could be a habit that might be harmful to the users. However, suggestions made from (http://thenextweb.com...) that might help to get rid of this habit. Now, one could argue back that not a lot of people will follow the suggestions and led a better lifestyles. However, if that one among ten people would want to change for the better , I believe it"s an improvement that is worth being glad about. While what the opponent suggested might be true, it would be better to suggest a few examples to go against my point. In my view, I think it is safe to say that having a soft copy or a hard copy is fine. However I believe most shoppers prefer soft copy when out for a shopping spree. It would be rather difficult to carry a piece of paper written with a list of stuffs we wanted, however mobile phone could play a more significant part in this situation. If one argue back regarding about efficiency and the price, I would like to stress that jotting down notes do waste papers and pen ink. Thus mobile phone has indeed became a great part of our daily lives due to its usefulness. On the next point, I would like to ask my opponent a question. If you are suggesting that not many students will actually follow the teacher's instruction, how many will? I believe not everyone are addicted to mobile phone like its drugs or smoking, but what percentage of pupils will improve on their usage of phone after the speech or lecture? If there is after all an improvement made after the speech, I do believe one might spend their life more wisely. Now, does it really matter how many students would follow the instructions? Of course after admitting that you use a phone, how sure are you that only a few people out there use mobile devices wisely? And if we considered mobile phone as a multi-purpose device, why are we classifying entertainment as something that will harm us? If one argue that mobile phone could only be used for educational purposes then it should be for sure that mobile phone should not even exist in the first place. People should continue to use hard copy dictionary and spend time reading books for evidences. While it seem to most people phone has been used for entertainment and is pretty much of waste of time. From the source: (https://www.psychologytoday.com...). Sure, it's easy to make fun of fans and celebrities and Americans riveted to their televisions watching obese people exercising and getting weighed, but who says people have to engage in serious activities all the time? If we look at what most people have been doing most of the time throughout human history, it's probably not discussing moral philosophy and inventing calculus. And part of the reason for that is that people need rest and recovery time and enjoyable activities: without some sort of stress relief we would self-destruct. While it seems like the amount of time spent in front of the mobile screen is increasing, it is also obvious that mobile devices are becoming a great part of our life. It is possible to infer that people seem more happy with mobile phone and this might reduce stress. Interactions via phone might be important, urgent or compulsory during some situations and could help save many lives. From the source my opponent had given, (searchenginewatch.com) it is however not very convincing as it is stated that it researched on 2March2013, about 2 years behind the present. I would like to restate that I'm not only stressing about inspiration quotes in this case but also other positive entertainment resource that would make one's day. Touching on the topic of cyber bullying, from what the source provided, it is sure that parents are informed about situations like this. They were also taking part in this survey that supports my opponent's statement. Like I said earlier in my argument, parents should indeed get informed about this situation. It is however understood that children are still being cyber bullied now and the only way to reduce it is to prevent it. From source:(http://www.stopbullying.gov...) both parents and children could play a small part in this prevention. I shall not be disappointed because it indeed need people who are educated and well-taught. This need plenty of time and maybe generations after generations so that people will fully understand what their actions or words could do to one individual. I would like to skip the topic of Amanda Todd because it is disrespectful to touch on this topic in the form of debate. I apologies and may she rest in peace. It is a little irony from what you had suggested regarding about the resource. If 90% of the internet resources are not true, are you indirectly suggesting that whatever people had been researching for might not even be half true? If you are suggesting 90% of the internet resources are not true, where the evidence(s)? Are you absolutely sure that the evidence(s) you are going to support lately might be true too? Or is it(them) among the 90% which is untrue. As such, you might gotten misinformed and potentially 'dumb down'. For my last point, it is true that internet do has negative influence. While it contain negativity, it also contain positive vibes. One of the negative examples might be Amos Yee, but it is understood that no all are like him. Not everyone carries the negative mindset around and upset others. There are indeed plenty of human beings out there who left a mark in this world. I should end here due to my tight schedule. It is indeed very enjoyable to have such a tough debate with you, my opponent. Hope to hear from you soon.