Some people prefer to spend their lives doing the same things and avoiding change. Others, however, think that change is always a good thing. Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.

In a universe where everything vicissitudes at a stunning pace, some people prefer to change their lifestyle

however

,

this

notion that avoiding alteration in the manner of life despite alterations in the world has its own advocators. In the following, I am going to discuss both points of view comprehensively, and present my own opinion.

To begin

with, on the one hand, change makes us break the everyday routine and think out of the box to discover something new.

Moreover

, the internal alteration can make you a better person; someone who is more capable of achieving his/her goals in life.

On the other hand

, changing is not always beneficial

for example

, it can cause culture and traditions to fade off, or if you have a good personality and way of living why you should alter it during the alterations of time?

This

question reminds me of Macaulay Culkin, the beautiful and naughty kid who played a role in the Home Alone movie. Notwithstanding, he became an addict in his adulthood, and lost his situation in cinema. Regarding the advantages of not changing in fields of attitude and manner of living, one of the best examples is Jack Ma who tried ten times to be accepted by Harvard University, but he was rejected in all of his applications.

However

, today he is one the most successful people in business, and the above-mentioned university begs him to go there for teaching. In my opinion, vicissitude is a good deed as it can bring more opportunities to improve our quality of life, and the way we live, while sometimes it is better to stand on your ground, and not lose it. To sum up, regarding alter or do not change, both notions have their advantages and disadvantages as mentioned above.

Therefore

, I think both of them are proper and applicable deeds depending on disparate living conditions.