Pizza Hut at the Pyramids
It seems counterintuitive that a historical site shares the same location as fast food restaurants. People don’t usually pair historical landmarks and restaurants together. By having these modern restaurants near a historical site it may strip the area of its importance.
When one thinks of Egypt they may think of Egyptians, the Sphinxes and of course the Great Pyramids; I know I certainly do. These things prove true. However, one may be surprised to learn that the Great Pyramids of Giza share commonality with fast food restaurants in terms of location. A Pizza Hut and a KFC stands not even a mile away from one of the seven wonders of the world. A single YouTube video provides evidence that this development has been around since early 2007 and probably sooner.
It’s hard to picture countries with so much historical significance to also be so modern. The great pyramids and sphinx have been around for thousands of years. On the other hand, restaurants, such as Pizza Hut and KFC are newer establishments. Countries are meant and are expected to develop. However, globalization may have taken a step too far. As much as Egypt should and could evolve they need to pay attention and protect their history. Even people in the comments section of the video were astonished and disappointed. Some even went far enough to say “what a shame” and or “that’s depressing”. Perhaps a solution to preserve the history could be keeping modern developments separate or at least farther away from archaeological areas.
Paper or Plastic?
It seems counterintuitive that to help the environment we may need to destroy it. Popular since the 21st century began, recycling has been encouraged as a way to better the environment/earth. However, that may no longer be the answer.
Trees are known to isolate carbon dioxide in them whether in their natural form or in others, such as paper. In fact, millions of tons of carbon have already been cut off in wood products, especially paper. So if cutting down more trees is a solution we should do more of it. By using more paper the more carbon is eradicated. Plus, “wasting” paper also has other positives. Other countries can use our wasted paper. For example, China has taken our wasted paper and turned them into recycled cardboard to use as packaging.
It may seem like using more paper is a positive option. However, there is controversy that surrounds the killing of trees. From what I’ve known all my life trees give us fresh air and oxygen. So it raises the issue and idea that by helping the environment we are also harming ourselves. Another thought is maybe it all coincides. The paper that does get truly wasted ends up in landfills. It is then broken down as methane, which just releases more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere. Therefore, tearing down trees does more harm than good. All in all, we need to pay attention to what is affecting our world and our one planet earth.
Improve Doctor Accountability
It seems counterintuitive that the people who are supposed to help us may be the ones harming us. We all go to doctor when we’re in pain, but it may be that doctors put us in more danger. It sparks the idea of why some people fear going to professionals for help.
It’s no secret that people make mistakes, even health care workers. However, when the life of another becomes involved it becomes more serious. Since the 20th century there has been strategies put into place to decrease preventable medical errors that cause death. However, even now in the 21st century these mistakes are still being made and continues to be a problem. These issues also have decreased in significance because of the lack of attention. People are dying when they don’t need to be. In fact, millions of people have been harmed in hospitals every year just from infections due to surgical mistakes.
There is reason why it is referred to as doctors practice medicine, not master it. They are constantly learning and improving their skills. We are quick to judge and blame an individual/the doctor for the mistake, and yes, it is partially their fault. However, as much as health care workers need to improve we, the public and the said patients, need to shed light and bring awareness to these problems or we might as well be the next victim.
alwaystired247
AnonymousStudent
azntaco
beforeverge
BigBabyBaller
bitagaming
breakingbad1820
Caravan
cinderella1013
davidbdale
Yankeelover18
fatboy489zt
giantsfan224
glacierfreeze21
gobirds17
green0728
gymrat230
Gir
jerseymikes1106
jesusisking1738
jetsfan806
Kenneth Alex Krug
manipulator66
mercythyhealer14
McCormick Karner
mochaatrain
oni
powerranger
peanut2348
pinkcottoncandy4
princess01430
redbird1123
rubes1256
shxrkbait
sillyinternetperson
soulpond47240
spatel8267
stingingcrib5
tacotyphoon
thepersonindisguise
usmnt23
worldofjuice999
xephos1
Counterintuitive Fall 2022 
Just a quick note to acknowledge I’ve seen your Summaries. Insufferable feedback to follow.
Your pieces are simply full of lovely and thoughtful observations, Wanda. You’ll let me help you with organization and phrasing, I hope, but clearly you don’t need to be taught to think.
Wanda, I find the best way to proceed with feedback on these 3-part posts is to do a very detailed response to the first of the three entries and give you a chance to incorporate my advice into revisions for all three. I hope that works to your advantage and that you’ll take the opportunity to revise. I warn you in advance, I can be REALLY picky (because the details can sink your persuasiveness; you know this). Here goes.
Pizza Hut at the Pyramids
—Maybe, but I’m not sure why. Is it counterintuitive that the same geography could be a location for both? Or is it counterintuitive that someone with an appreciation for antiquity would “defile it” with a KFC on “sacred ground”? Or is it just incongruous that the mysterious ancient Sphinx after centuries of gazing into the mystical beyond should now be looking at the menu board for Kentucky
Fried Chicken? 🙂
—Agreed. Logically, nothing would result in people pairing landmarks and restaurants. But, does this sentence say anything that your first sentence didn’t say? It’s not the landmarks and the restaurants, is it, that seems incongruous. It’s the disparity between the timelessness of eternal mysteries and the trivial choice between two kinds of dipping sauce that seems so jarring.
—Grammar Note. Get rid of any “By blanking” construction you’re tempted to write, Wanda. They’re catastrophic. Here’s what you mean: “Having these modern restaurants near a historical site may strip the area of its importance.” The “by” phrase and the “it” are worse than useless. Even the improved sentence is wordy. What you REALLY mean is, “The proximity of modern restaurants to historical sites strips them of their importance.”
—We don’t know what you’re getting at here, Wanda, but it sounds like throat-clearing.
—Here we get impatient. You told us in the first sentence that the Pyramids shared a geogrphical space with a KFC. This is just repetition.
—Another repetition.
—A video shows us what you’ve told us.
—This, I think, is the heart of your position. We know the world is besotted with gimme-now-I’m-hungry commercialism, but we thought, naively, that MAYBE there were a few “unspoiled” spots on earth where we could experience (or at least VIEW) something long-lasting if not eternal.
—Are they? We accept that they do, but are they MEANT TO?
—Interesting. You’re making an ethical claim here. Any time we use the word SHOULD we’re doing so. This is an ethical recommendation (a true mark of a PURPOSEFUL Summary. You have a PURPOSE!).
—Your Purposeful Summary actually begins here where you suggest that, while Egypt certainly COULD permit franchise restaurants to be visible from the Sphinx, maybe they SHOULDN’T.
I hope that was helpful, Wanda
This is a conversation.
If I don’t receive a response to this feedback, and especially if you don’t revise your Summaries, I’ll conclude that feedback is not valuable to you.
Talk to you soon, I hope! 🙂
Hello,
Thank you for your feedback. I will definitely work on revisions for the Pizza hut summary. I do see how there was a lot of repetition. I’m not quite sure what you meant by “it sounds like throat-clearing” though. Was it that that sentence didn’t fit/wasn’t relevant? I think I had the mindset that writing more was better when that isn’t always the case. Anyways I just needed some clarification. I’m also curious if my other summaries needed work and or revisions? Thanks again and revisions will be coming soon 🙂
You’re welcome, Wanda. I’m glad you’re receptive to feedback.
“Throat-clearing” is what a speaker does at the microphone before beginning her prepared remarks. It’s not meant for broadcast. If you do it on paper, readers get impatient for you to “get on with it.”
No doubt your other summaries could also use revision. EVERYBODY’S first drafts could ALWAYS use revision. I bear down on one of three summaries as an example, hoping you’ll apply a similar critical technique on your others. To quote myself: “Wanda, I find the best way to proceed with feedback on these 3-part posts is to do a very detailed response to the first of the three entries and give you a chance to incorporate my advice into revisions for all three.”
You should pop this post back into the Feedback Please category when you’ve revised all your summaries.