Prompt: Some people believe that it is good to share as much information as possible in scientific research, business and the academic world. Others believe that some information is too important or too valuable to be shared freely. Ċ Discuss both views and give your own opinion.

The opinion is divided as to whether or not important pieces of information in various fields be circulated without limitations. Although, some argue that there should not be any restriction of data sharing from the latest discoveries, businesses and education, however, I believe otherwise. This essay will discuss both views in detail followed by a reasoned conclusion thereafter. Ċ To begin with, circulating knowledge is regarded as a means of bringing awareness to the public. As a result, it is vital for individuals in various disciplines to gain the latest and conventional understanding in order to impact themselves and society positively. For instance, through recent scientific studies scientists have been able to associate the spread of COVID-19 to overcrowding and poor personal hygiene. Hence the authorities were able to sensitize citizens on the importance of face masks and hand washing which markedly reduced the spread of the virus. Ċ On the contrary, there are greater benefits of limiting knowledge to the public despite the argument above. Firstly, it is of national security not to divulge some pieces of information especially regarding scientific biological warfare and nuclear weapons. For example, describing the knowledge of how to manufacture poisonous gases, atomic bombs and pandemics disease can become detrimental if such data finds its way to terrorist groups. Thus keeping that information away from the public is safer for everybody. Moreover, breakthroughs in the field of academics like literature need recognition and prize awards. Therefore, restricting access will help to reward the effort of the owner. Ċ In conclusion, while some are of the view that having unlimited access to ideas is important in awareness, I believe that reducing access is more beneficial in terms of safety for the country and rewarding of hard work by the discoverer.