4() inish dentify the facts the author uses for his arguments. (b) Defend Split our group into two halves. Each half should use the applicable facts to defend or criticize the statement "It would be worse for the Sherpa way of life to shu don erest tourism than to continue as things are now." Present your used to defend your position.

To analyze the statement “It would be worse for the Sherpa way of life to shut down interest tourism than to continue as things are now,” you may want to consider the following structured approach:

(a) Identify the Facts Used by the Author

When discussing the impact of tourism on the Sherpa way of life, you may identify several key facts commonly presented in arguments:

1. Economic Dependency: The Sherpa community often relies heavily on the income generated from tourism, including trekking fees, guides, and hospitality services. This economic benefit can be pivotal in maintaining their livelihoods.

2. Cultural Exchange: Tourism can lead to enhanced cultural exchange and awareness, allowing Sherpas to share their traditions and way of life with visitors.

3. Environmental Impact: Increased tourism can lead to environmental degradation in the Everest region, impacting the natural resources that Sherpas rely on for traditional practices.

4. Changing Lifestyles: While tourism brings economic opportunities, it may also lead to a shift in traditional lifestyles, where younger generations may prefer urban living or other jobs over their ancestral practices.

5. Community Development: The revenue from tourism can be reinvested into community infrastructure, such as schools, healthcare, and sanitation, thus improving overall living conditions.

(b) Defend or Criticize the Statement

Position: It Would be Worse for the Sherpa Way of Life to Shut Down Tourism

Arguments for the Defense:

1. Economic Stability: Shutting down tourism would lead to significant economic hardship for the Sherpa community. Many families depend on earnings from tourism, and a sudden halt would result in increased poverty levels.

2. Community Benefits: Funds generated from tourism have been used to improve local infrastructure and health care, further enhancing the quality of life for the Sherpa people. Without tourism revenue, such developments would stall.

3. Cultural Preservation Through Interaction: Continuation of tourism allows for cultural exchange, which can help preserve and promote Sherpa culture on a global scale. Rather than diminishing their culture, interaction with tourists can foster pride and interest in traditional practices.

4. Sustainable Practices: By regulating and managing tourism rather than shutting it down, the Sherpa community could implement sustainable tourism practices that mitigate environmental impacts while still benefiting economically.

Counterarguments (Position: It Would be Worse to Continue as Things Are):

1. Environmental Degradation: The continued rise in tourism threatens the fragile ecosystem of the Himalayas. Unsustainable practices can destroy local habitats, which ultimately impacts the Sherpa way of life.

2. Cultural Erosion: The influence of external cultures through tourism can lead to the erosion of traditional Sherpa values, practices, and social structures, particularly among younger generations.

3. Over-reliance on Tourism: Economic dependency on tourism could lead to vulnerability. A shift in global tourism trends (e.g., due to pandemics or travel bans) could severely impact the economy, suggesting the need for diversification.

Conclusion

This approach allows for a balanced discussion based on facts that emphasize the complex relationship between tourism and the Sherpa way of life. Each half of your group can use these points to build a case around the implications of shutting down or continuing tourism. Engaging in thoughtful discussion about the nuances and potential consequences will provide a comprehensive view of the topic.