»
»
»

English essays

A few short essays about English language, happiness, abortion, science, global warming, public transport and smoking.

English language

A short essay: "To what extent is the English language a necessary instrument of globalisation?"

First, we can notice that the English language is already necessary for almost all jobs, in every country: thus, nowadays, you need to speak English in order to communicate, travel and trade with other countries, but also in your country, to understand the installation guide of most of the electronic devices or to be able to get some help for any technology, thanks to the Internet.

Because of globalisation, the majority of publications are now in English, especially in the sciences, because it's much more convenient for scientists to communicate using a single language: modern communication channels allow researchers to publish their articles quickly and, as they don't want to wait for translations, they use English.

Moreover, American culture is widely spreading in Europe across many fields such as cinema, music, TV series and, of course, food, fashion and lifestyles, so more and more people feel connected to this culture and want to visit the United States, read American literature or watch films (in cinemas or at home) in their original language.

Concerning the industry, it is quite obvious that the English language is really useful: as a consequence of globalisation, nearly every product, from jeans and T-shirts to computers and airplanes needs components made by several countries and coming from different parts of the world. For this reason, a common language is absolutely necessary because in this case, good communication is essential.

To conclude, I would say that nowadays, the English language is necessary in all domains: sciences, industry, culture... because it is necessary for globalisation and makes it possible.

Happiness

A short essay about my conception of happiness.

The idea of happiness is a very personal and variable subject. Though, a few elements are quite constant and can be explained.

The first point is about the present. In my opinion, the best way to be happy now is to live the present moment to the full. That's why one of my favorite Latin maxims is "carpe diem". Furthermore, I think a very important consequence is, for each thing you do, to take all the time it needs. Indeed, for me, being happy means enjoying each moment, each action even if it's unpleasant (for example doing your homework). As a matter of fact, it allows you to calm down and relieve your stress. So, even if I have a lot of homework, I try not to rush through it, knowing I'll take all the time I need to do it well.

The second point concerns the future. Of course, I think my future is a very important subject that ought not to be underestimated. But it mustn't occupy all my mind to the detriment of the present. The best ways I found to "focus on the present" are breathing fresh morning air or immersing myself in a piece of music, when you hear nothing more or less than each note of a melody you love. But there are many other ways to find happiness: using problems to learn, taking advantage of change, not worrying unnecessarily (when receiving bad news, trying to put things into perspective), or doing theater to avoid taking oneself too seriously... But for me, the most beautiful way to be happy is to make another person happy, someone you love...

To conclude, I'd say each person has to find his own way to be happy.

Abortion

An English speech against abortion, written like a poem.

I say it to you today, my friends,
That despite all the horrors we can see in the world,
I still believe in Love. I still believe in Life.

You say embryos and fetuses are not human beings.
Really? Is an embryo a cat? Is he a dog?
Were we cats or dogs before birth?

You say you were not alive before birth.
And that's right. But you were viable!
Why isn't killing a viable being considered a crime?

You say everybody can make mistakes.
And that's right. But you should take responsibility for them!
Don't you see you rectify your mistake by another?

You say a young woman can't cope with both a baby and her studies.
And that's right. But she isn't alone!
Aren't men responsible for their acts too?

You say you can't do anything to prevent a woman from aborting.
And that's right. But you can sing!
"Didn't I forget to say to your mum 'Thank you: I'm alive!'?"

You say abortion is a right.
And that's false: I thought killing was forbidden!
Isn't Life a right?

So, don't say abortion is good,
So, don't say Life is a mistake,
So, believe in Love,
So, make love your aim.

And, help these human beings,
And, protect these human beings,
And, respect these human beings,
And, Love these human beings.

Trust in Life.

The truth about abortion

• Video 1
• Video 2

March for Life in Paris

Science, risk and progress

Science and progress

Explain why "progress" is ambivalent.

The word "progress" is deeply ambivalent. Thus, we can notice that there are two ways to understand the term:

On the one hand, it is quite obvious that since the 18th century, many devices or machines that make work and daily life easier have been created in every domain: housekeeping, transport, entertainment, communications, living standards and food quality have been transformed by several revolutions such as those that occurred in energy, materials and prices.

On the other hand, those inventions transformed daily life and, consequently, changed societies and mankind. We are increasingly prone to fearing the future and believing that science is dangerous: every finding seems risky since technology evolves faster and faster without giving us time to understand it. Moreover, we are so used to relying on those technologies that we feel lost when our mobile phone doesn't work or when there is no microwave oven.

To conclude, to call "progress" an innovation, this one has to serve life and not only technological improvement.

What about the link between science and progress?

To me, science can help to control the risks linked to progress.

First, science is increasingly able to measure the consequences of human actions. Thus, scientific studies and climate modeling are currently helping to predict how the climate will evolve over the next decades and what the effects of potential measures would be.

Moreover, experiments are necessary to decide whether a chemical substance is harmful or not to human beings and the environment. For example, regarding CFC gases, scientists discovered the hole in the ozone layer, identified its cause and warned the world about the risks. Since then, substantial efforts have been made to find substitute substances that do not alter the atmosphere. So, science is able to denounce the excesses of technological developments that can have harmful consequences.

Yet, progress is necessary to invent new energy sources or more efficient materials that are less polluting or decrease fuel consumption. Thanks to science and technological advances, natural resources—forests for example—are much better looked after than they were two centuries ago.

To conclude, progress and science have to work together in order to use and help each other.

Global warming

Do you think that global warming is mankind's responsibility?
Describe the possible actions to solve this issue.

I'm convinced global warming is mankind's responsibility: our species is responsible for many major changes on our planet, because we transform landscapes, divert rivers and cut down forests. Since the beginning of the Industrial Age, we have been burning fossil fuels in our factories which, like cars or planes, release large amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, intensifying the greenhouse effect. Moreover, the use of CFC gases caused a depletion in the ozone layer that filters solar radiation. It will take decades to recover.

To my mind, it's high time we reacted: global warming has already begun and the climate is becoming increasingly erratic. Thus, summers are hotter and extreme weather events are more frequent and violent than in the past. Furthermore, many species are endangered due to the melting of the ice caps and deforestation. I can see two scenarios for action:

• The first one is a sudden revolution in our habits and lifestyles: everybody would abruptly stop using cars, produce less packaging waste and reuse consumer goods. People would travel by train, bicycle and public transport, and plant more trees in their gardens. I don't expect this scenario to happen: it is practically impossible and our economy would collapse, yet drastic changes will become unavoidable once oil runs out if we do not act beforehand.
• The second scenario is a progressive transition: relying on scientific research to discover technological innovations that make current technologies less polluting, for instance developing hydrogen-powered vehicles. In this way, we would gradually build a new economy based on renewable energy sources that do not emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (hydroelectric, solar or wind power). Moreover, nuclear fusion could eventually produce electricity with vastly reduced radioactive waste compared to nuclear fission, using hydrogen isotopes rather than uranium.

To conclude, I'd say that to tackle the problem of global warming, we have to change our sources of energy (and so our habits) and that if we don't, it will do nothing but get worse.

Public transport

Reflection about the use of public transport.

It is obvious that cars are a burden for our society: the pollution and noise they generate cause illnesses, and road accidents claim thousands of lives every year. Most careless drivers aren't even aware of how dangerous they are when speeding.
Moreover, in many towns, car parking has become a severe issue: illegal parking obstructs traffic for other road users and endangers pedestrians.

Therefore, promoting public transport is essential: while networks exist in large cities, major investments are still required to connect underserved rural and suburban areas. Another crucial aspect is public awareness: people need to realize that public transport is safer, reduces stress and encourages walking, which is good for personal health.
Another compelling argument is financial: owning a private car is a major expense when accounting for purchasing cost, fuel, maintenance, parking and insurance fees, without guaranteeing full reliability.

Trains provide an excellent alternative for intercity travel: they are fast, comfortable, and allow passengers to work or rest during the journey. Online ticketing has also made booking seamless.

Finally, public transport and cycling should be actively promoted to curb air pollution, noise and chronic traffic congestion in urban areas.

Economy and the future

Reflection about the future of our economy.

A few decades ago, post-war European societies were discovering mass consumption. Economic prospects were broad, living standards were rising steadily, and neither structural unemployment nor ecological crises were prominent concerns.

Yet, the situation has fundamentally changed. While immense progress has been made in technology and medicine, our economies now face major headwinds: intense international competition, rising energy costs and resource scarcity.

Thus, European nations must take proactive policy decisions to steer these changes rather than simply enduring them. To preserve our democratic models, we must adapt our economic paradigms and become far more respectful of our environment and finite resources.

The two guiding principles for our future will ultimately be "lucidity"—recognizing environmental and economic realities—and "solidarity", as global challenges cannot be resolved by leaving vulnerable populations behind.

Images

Here are some illustrations related to science, technology, energy and transports.

Smoking in public places

About the law

A short essay about the French legislation banning smoking in public places.

The French government introduced legislation banning smoking in all enclosed public spaces and workplaces.

Although this public health measure is designed to prevent thousands of premature deaths each year, some critics initially viewed it as an infringement on personal liberty, arguing that education and persuasion should be favored over state prohibitions.

Public health experts, however, point out that awareness campaigns alone are insufficient to overcome chemical addiction and protect non-smokers. Second-hand smoke represents a proven health hazard, and clear legal regulations are essential to establish healthy public environments.

About education

Do you think that education is a good solution to prevent people from smoking?

Even if education seems to be a good solution to avoid excesses, I think that it's not sufficient.

On the one hand, regarding smoking, education can encourage people not to smoke around others, thereby reducing passive smoking. However, because addiction imposes heavy costs on public healthcare systems, society as a whole remains concerned by health consequences. While regulations primarily govern public spaces, education must continue to inform individuals about personal health risks.

On the other hand, awareness does not automatically translate into behavioral change, especially where addictive substances are involved. Both high and low income demographics can be vulnerable to nicotine addiction for different social and psychological reasons.

To conclude, education and legislation are complementary: legal frameworks provide necessary boundaries to protect public health, while education fosters long-term responsibility and prevention.

Resources

Here are listed some resources in English language:

Page dédiée : Australia

A document about Australia, its history and its fauna and flora; an audio version is available.

Page dédiée : United States

Some general information about the USA, especially Arizona, California, Louisiana, New Mexico and Texas.

Page dédiée : Great Britain

A guide book about several trips I made to Great Britain: London, Cambridge, Hastings and Canterbury.

Cette page en anglais a été créée par Peter à partir d'un exposé scolaire, 15 juin 2004 et modifiée pour la dernière fois 1 septembre 2026. Son avancement est noté 2/3.

Chargement

Veuillez patienter

Cliquez pour fermer la fenêtre.