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.

It is considered by some that researchers and scientists should provide unlimited access to

information

they expose in their

studying

Replace the word

studies

show examples

to the public.

However

, other people believe that

such

kind of knowledge is crucially precious to disseminate it through the crowd. I am personally of the

first

opinion.

This

essay will give reasons why.

To begin

with, to my mind, hiding

information

from society is unfair in terms of human rights.

That is

why each of us deserves to acquire new knowledge with no obstacles.

Moreover

, those of us who truly desire to be into science can bring use to researchers complementing experiments with extra

information

.

For example

, it is commonly known that self-taught tend to observe a lot more locations while surfing animals and their habitats,

in particular

. Thereby, they collect way

to

Correct your spelling

too

show examples

more

Correct quantifier usage

much

show examples

information

than real scientists could do by themselves. Not rarely do the formers share their notions with the letters and never receive feedback. I see that situation as way beyond unfair. Despite all the given proofs abort necessity of spreading the knowledge , one might mention that the disposable sharing could lead the threat for safety and stability since some spheres of studying can provoke criminals to use it against the law.They say ,

for instance

, that scientific findings in nuclear physics which are unlimited for each internet user can be easily adapted to creating an extremely dangerous weapon.

Consequently

, cancelling the spreading of

information

is for the best. Even so, in my view, crime and science do not have a common thing since offenders are the responsibility of the police. They are not an excuse to deprive other populations of breakthroughs. In conclusion, I would say that limiting people from studying is not a solution for preventing criminality and there is no need to establish barriers between society and science. I hope individuals who are of the opposite opinion will reconsider their views in the future.