Introduction Where people choose to live has a significant impact on their lifestyle and happiness. Some prefer the fast pace and convenience of city life, while others are drawn to the peace and simplicity of the...
Faglig kvalitetssikret av lærere og toppstudenter · Følger læreplanen (LK20) · Sist oppdatert 2026-09-06
When an exam task asks you to discuss both views and give your opinion on whether it is better to live in the city or the countryside, you must present a balanced, well-structured argument. This guide deepens the provided essay, showing you how to move from simple statements to a nuanced analysis that earns top grades.
The "Discuss both views and give your opinion" format is a cornerstone of English writing exams in upper secondary school, as well as standardized tests like IELTS and TOEFL. It directly tests several competence aims from the LK20 curriculum, particularly the ability to "write formal texts with a logical structure" and "use subject knowledge and sources in a critical and verifiable way". In a final exam, you might encounter a task like: "Some argue that urbanisation is the key to progress, while others claim it destroys local communities and the environment. Discuss both perspectives and present your own reasoned conclusion." This task type requires you to demonstrate intellectual maturity by weighing conflicting ideas before forming a judgement, a key skill for higher education.
Excelling at this format shows an examiner that you can do more than just list points; you can synthesise information, construct a coherent argument, and use sophisticated language to express complex ideas. It is not simply a test of your opinion, but a test of your ability to engage critically with a debate.
Where people choose to live has a significant impact on their lifestyle and happiness. Some prefer the fast pace and convenience of city life, while others are drawn to the peace and simplicity of the countryside. Both environments offer distinct advantages and disadvantages. This essay will explore these contrasting lifestyles, examining the economic, social, and environmental factors at play. In my opinion, although life in the countryside provides a healthier and calmer atmosphere, cities offer better opportunities for education, work, and social development—making them more suitable for most people today.
Cities are centers of opportunity, offering unparalleled access to education, healthcare, and employment. Urban areas typically have a wide range of schools, universities, and hospitals, providing residents with better chances for personal and professional growth. For instance, a student aspiring to study medicine has access to world-class universities and teaching hospitals in cities like London or Boston, which are simply unavailable in rural settings. In addition, cities are cultural hubs, offering a rich tapestry of entertainment, restaurants, shopping centers, and social events that enrich daily life. Think of the museums of New York, the theatres of London's West End, or the diverse culinary scenes in cities like Tokyo. The infrastructure in cities—such as public transportation, modern technology, and business networks—also makes life more convenient and connected. This creates an 'agglomeration effect', where the concentration of talent and industry fosters innovation. For example, young professionals in tech or finance often move to cities to advance their careers, network with industry leaders, and experience a dynamic social life that the countryside cannot easily provide.
However, living in cities also comes with significant challenges. Urban areas are often overcrowded, noisy, and polluted, which can negatively affect mental and physical health. The constant sensory overload from traffic, construction, and sirens can contribute to chronic stress, while air pollution from vehicle emissions is a known factor in respiratory illnesses. The cost of living is typically higher, with exorbitant housing prices and daily expenses forcing many into a relentless cycle of long work hours, stressful commutes, and a highly competitive environment. Moreover, city dwellers sometimes suffer from a phenomenon known as urban anomie—a form of social isolation despite being surrounded by millions of people—as the fast-paced lifestyle leaves little time for building genuine, supportive relationships. These factors contribute to high rates of anxiety and burnout, making some individuals long for a simpler and more peaceful life away from the urban grind. The question of wellbeing in such environments relates directly to debates over whether public health is a governmental or individual responsibility, as urban planning can either mitigate or exacerbate these health issues.
In contrast, the countryside offers tranquility, fresh air, and a closer connection to nature. People who live in rural areas often enjoy a slower pace of life, stronger community ties, and lower living costs. The environment promotes physical health through outdoor activities like hiking and cycling, and offers mental relaxation far from the perpetual stress of urban life. Scientific studies on 'ecotherapy' confirm the psychological benefits of spending time in green spaces, showing reduced cortisol levels and improved mood. For instance, families raising children in the countryside often appreciate the safety, open spaces, and cleaner surroundings, where children can play freely. Furthermore, rural living can encourage self-sufficiency and sustainability through practices like home gardening, keeping small livestock, or installing renewable energy sources like solar panels. These strong community bonds, where neighbours know and support each other, stand in stark contrast to the anonymity often found in large cities.
Despite its beauty and calm, the countryside has significant limitations, particularly regarding education, healthcare, and job opportunities. This structural issue is often called 'rural depopulation'. Access to specialized medical care or higher education institutions may be limited, forcing residents to travel long distances, which can be critical in an emergency or prohibitive for daily commuting. Moreover, younger people often leave rural areas in a 'brain drain' to seek better career prospects in cities, leading to an aging population and reduced local economic development. A balanced solution, however, may be emerging with the rise of “smart villages” — rural communities that adopt technology and infrastructure improvements to combine the best of both worlds. Government investment in public services, such as high-speed fibre optic internet and improved transport links, becomes crucial here. It's a similar debate to whether governments should fund arts or public services, as both are vital for a community's health. With remote work becoming more common, living in the countryside while maintaining a city-level career and connectivity is increasingly possible, potentially reversing the decades-long trend of urban migration.
In conclusion, both city and countryside living have unique and compelling strengths and weaknesses. Cities provide unparalleled access to education, culture, and career growth but can also bring profound stress, pollution, and social disconnection. The countryside offers peace, health, and a strong sense of community but may lack the professional and educational opportunities that define modern life. Personally, I believe the ideal lifestyle depends entirely on an individual’s priorities, age, and career. However, in our increasingly networked world, the traditional dichotomy is blurring. As technology enables more flexible work arrangements, the possibility of combining the efficiency of city life with the tranquility of rural living may offer the most fulfilling balance for the future. The rise of digital tools means that face-to-face interaction is changing, but it does not have to disappear, allowing us to maintain connections regardless of geography.
Using precise vocabulary shows the examiner that you have a deep understanding of the topic. Here are some key terms: …