Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be

Every society or country have encountered with many scandals during its history. But whether the scandals have been beneficial or moral for a society is a debatable topic. Some people would argue that scandals could not be influential for a society in any way, while other group opine that some problems would be decipher just by the presence of scandals; in other words, there is no way to recognize that special disaster. So scandals could be considered as a significant factor for a society. After weighing both groups it is clear that the scandals are beneficial factors in a society to illustrating some problems which are not probable to be declared by a reformer.

Those people who state that scandals could not be influential for the society in any case might point to the fatal effects of the scandals for that society. Some effects which are caused by scandals might have moral results for a country which is not going to be amended during a decade. A president might cause some scandals in a society which will be caused of high rate of catastrophe for its society and country which is not going to be negate the wrecked affects for some decades, so it will hurt the society and consequently its members. How can a suitable president being distinguishable from an improper one if people do not be familiar with scandals that are going to be engendered by his/her naiveness?

Now consider the group who opine that scandals could be so beneficial to finding about some serious event which is so probable to be engendered in every country, but the speakers or reformers are unable to transmit its moral effects to people. Mostly always historical events have been considered as an experimental patterns for the exist one. In this case scandals would be so threatening for that society because of its moral effects. So the scandals will lead to pursue people to survey on its causes of occurrence not to re-conduct that habit, which will create some disasters. For example, a clerk of a bank; who is mostly moved to commit a crime because of the extended situation, might motive to commit a crime, by presence of huge range of money and jewelry, but why they are so honest in their field? One of the reason is scandals which release inspiration of the crimes. In this case people always remember the result of their crime, and this will reduce the criminal activity to an extended amount.

Like the experimental effect of the scandals, it has also introduction functions. In other words, it can be defined as a proper definition of candid or justified person; the person who have never caused some scandals in his life. If people do not be informed about the exact meaning of the scandals could not find about the worthiness of an honest person, and will consider his honesties as a pedestrian duty, which is not even competence of praise. For example, a manager of an office would appreciate his loyal staff by finding about some scandals that are revealed from some dishonest clerks.

All in all, it is clear that scandals are beneficial to illustrating some problems which are unlikely to be declared in their exact meaning by some speakers. The examples of president and clerks where would demonstrate this claim. Scandals could be considered as a punishment for people to prevent them from committing that crimes by remembering about the effects of the scandals.