ChaseDream
标题: 狗子的作文贴。。还有10天考G求狠拍……11-1更新 [打印本页]
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-20 18:08
标题: 狗子的作文贴。。还有10天考G求狠拍……11-1更新
Issue 112
Requiring university students to take a variety of courses outside their major fields of study is the best way to ensure that students become truly educated.
Have you ever seen students who can compose heart-touching articles feel so stressed as they lose their science subjects and spend most of their time on their weakest subject of mathematics and physics and barely have time to write and read more? Have you ever seen students tough feel reluctant to learn anything about art apprehension and music are forced to learn those courses as universities think they are “useful”? Have you ever talked with professors who complain that half of the students fall a sound sleep in the classroom because of lack of interest in that compulsory or required course? Thus, I think forcing university students to dabble courses beyond their majors would pose more problems, though merits exist.
First, the speaker implies taking more courses of a larger variety is the very best way to make students more learnt. I concede that students may know more about historical, philosophical and scientific facts than before, yet this is far from giving the ultimate decision of whether a person is educated, or rather, intellectual enough. However, as pointed out by Socrates, an outstanding philosopher in ancient Greek, God has grown a spark in man’s heart. One, and only he/her can, kindle it to a frame. If this is the case, then the essence of education is not about to teach, but to inspire. Thus, it is the students that should take the responsibility to choose different woods or even petrol to keep their flame burning. Imposing and regulating courses out of students’ major then seem ridiculous. As students are given the right to choose their major, they, instead of the university, should have the ability and freedom to choose to whether learn courses in other fields. Forcing students to learn certain subjects because they are useful is like forcing lamb to eat meat as meat is delicious and nutrient.
Additionally, courses irrelevant to their major may not be always considered useful for their careers, most of the time, they are not. Therefore, students may spend much more time studying one subject that not only they are not good at, but turn out to be less useful. For example, as a student majoring in Literature Studies, I as well as many of my classmates find mathematics, one of the compulsory courses we studied for a whole year in Year one, totally useless as normally none of us will take up a job related to mathematics. Even though it is almost useless, we have to spend much time discussing it, as it takes up six credits out of thirty for each semester.
I can not deny this result can result from the inefficiency of curriculum in our university; however, it is impossible for faculties to arrange a curriculum suiting the needs for each and every student, even some of them share the same major. Those who are more capable or curious can choose to learn more diversity of courses, while whose who are more determined can choose to stick to their own major.
To sum up, it may seem to be reasonable for universities set certain requirements and urge students to learn some courses unrelated to their major; students, nevertheless, can learn more effectively and freely if they are given the freedom to choose whether to do this or not.
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-20 21:48
revised version
Requiring university students to take a variety of courses outside their major fields of study is the best way to ensure that students become truly educated. 1:06H
Have you ever seen students who can compose heart-touching articles feel so stressed as they lose their science subjects and spend most of their time on their weakest subject of mathematics and physics and barely have time to write and read more? Have you ever seen students tough feel reluctant to learn anything about art apprehension and music are forced to learn those courses as universities think they are “useful”? Have you ever talked with professors who complain that half of the students fall a sound sleep in the classroom because of lack of interest in that compulsory or required course? Thus, I think forcing university students to dabble courses beyond their majors would pose more problems, though merits exist.
Admittedly, students can broaden their horizon and may even benefit a lot insofar they have an enormous interest and take an active part in those courses beyond their present fields. Bacon, the great philosopher, once mentioned, “Abeunt Stadia mores”. It is never unfavorable to learn something more. Moreover, the thoughts students have learnt in a minor subject may be able to be applied to their majors. For example, students majoring in biology may have a deeper understanding of nature after reading poems and articles written in the Romantic period, when all poets express their awe and respect to the mother-nature.
Additionally, sometimes those so-called free electives can provide students a brand-new perspective, which not only enables them to examine their original majors differently, but changes their focus sometimes. A handbook for freshman published by Harvard University gave out a plenty of examples of this case. One student shifted her dream as being a social worker to a lawyer after learning how much colored people suffer under racial discrimination in a history class, and set up her idea to endeavor give those people equal rights and opportunities. In light of this, it seems university should provide students access to courses offered by other apartments or even faculties.
Nevertheless, great the merits are, the speaker urges that university students should be required, rather than encouraged, to take a part. There are basically three compelling arguments which may weaken the speaker’s assertion.
First, the speaker implies taking more courses of a larger variety is the very best way to make students more learnt. However, those merits only happen when students themselves choose to take those courses autonomously. As pointed out by Socrates, an outstanding philosopher in ancient Greek, God has grown a spark in man’s heart. One, and only he/her can, kindle it to a frame. If this is the case, then the essence of education is not about to teach, or impose, but to inspire. Thus, it is the students that should take the responsibility to choose different woods or even petrol to keep their flame burning. Imposing and regulating courses out of students’ major then seem ridiculous. As students are given the right to choose their major, they, instead of the university, should have the ability and freedom to choose to whether to learn courses in other fields or not. Forcing students who are only interested in their own major to learn a larger range of subjects is like forcing lamb to eat meat as meat is delicious and nutrient.
Additionally, most of the times courses of different majors are a part of core curriculum and students have nothing else to choose but to enroll them. Nevertheless, those courses irrelevant to their major may not be always considered useful for their careers, most of the time, they are not. Therefore, students may spend much more time studying one subject which not only they are not good at, but turns out to be less useful. For example, as a student majoring in Literature Studies, I as well as many of my classmates find mathematics, one of the compulsory courses we studied for a whole year in Year one, totally useless as normally none of us will take up a job related to mathematics. Even though it is almost useless, we have to spend much time calculating and drawing charts and praying to get a B at the end of the year.
I can not deny this can result from the inefficiency of curriculum in our university; however, it is impossible for faculties to arrange a curriculum suiting the needs for each and every student, even some of them share the same major. Those who are more capable or curious can choose amore diversified curriculum, while whose who are more determined can choose to stick to their own major. Free Trade is efficient in economy, so are free choices for students when enroll courses. In light of this, it is better to give students the privilege to decide what they would like to learn at the present, which lead to the life they lead in the future.
To sum up, it may seem to be reasonable for universities to set certain requirements and urge students to learn some courses unrelated to their major; students, nevertheless, can learn more effectively and freely if they are given the freedom to choose whether to do this or not.
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-20 22:02
读LZ这篇美文压力很大，这么长的文章相信考试半小时的时间是没法写出来的，所以我觉得LZ如果考虑到考试实际情况，找到一个属于自己的合理的文章篇幅很重要，这样所有的题目都有差不多的篇幅，考试也不影响。
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-20 23:16
恩~说的对……T-T 谢谢！！！
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-21 23:18
ISSUE 131 1H
每篇都是一小时……真心担心到时候写不完了…………
Claim: Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate, practical application. Reason: It is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty.
Generally agree
+: most facts about science that are not practical at first tend out to be extremely beneficial John Gurdon.
Immediate, practical ? are all fields that have been relatively exploited and researched
ractical? economical, for people’s basic living.. arts
-: governments’ budget
Reason: not right. Perpetual motion engine
A combination of both
The speaker believes that researches should be carried out with out regarding of their instant outcomes, as the benefit of a research can be hardly estimated. I generally agree with this statement, though there may be some exceptions and the reason leading to it may need further examination.
First, myriads of results of researches which may not be able to be applied to practical application instantly, bring about extraordinary beneficial after a while, or not a while, especially when it comes to scientific facts. For example, John Burdon found out all cells in human beings’ body have exactly the same genes, indicating the possibility to derive one cell from another as early as nineteenth century. This discovery by all means serves as a milestone for genetic study, biology, as well as medical treatment, and Burdon has been awarded the Nobel Prize because of this. Though it has not been widely used today, there is no denying that many diseases can be cured and important organs and cells can be cloned in light of this finding.
Far from being profitable, some of the research outcomes are even regarded as heresy when first coming into being. History has witnessed myriads of cases like this. William Harvey, who established the blood circulation system, was blamed as a charlatan .Copernican insisted heliocentric theory even when facing the pressure and threat from the churches. The view that the earth is spherical was laughed and regarded as merely a fantasy by earth-platters. However, if not for those researches who had chosen to stick to their idea without regarding an immediate profit, these truths might have been undermined till today. In light of this, what has been regarded as impractical or even heretical in the past are of great use today; what about finding that can not be put into use immediately, or understood by average people today?
Though enormous merits those researches enjoy, they may be impeded as budgets should be applied to other more urgent uses, such as natural disasters or wars. Additionally, the assertion that the outcome of research can never be predicted is far from accurate. Some studies can be regarded as meaningless at the very first sight, such as the attempt of perpetual motion engine. Other, however, can not be instantly valued. Government therefore should take measures to inspect and stop experiments which are highly likely to be meaningless.
To sum up, researchers should not abandon one study simply because of its lack of instant profit, as a great number of those results may turn out of great use later. However, sometimes budget and energy should be applied to other domains as well, and thus the government and researchers may seek to find a harmonious balance between efficiency and effect.
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-23 00:28
ISSUE132 Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another.
23:15-49
Does the development of technology provide more immediate and convenient ways, or rather impede the communication and connection between people? In my view, people are provided with better ways to communicate in the information age insofar that we use them properly.
One compelling argument is the enormous development of transportation means-including cars, motor trains, as well as air-planes-enable us to cover distance within hours or days which may take ancient people months or years to travel. There is a poetic term in Chinese which can be literally translated as “a farewell involving life and death” which means the only chance for departing ancient people seeing each other again may be afterlife or next life, indicating the point to which the inconvenience of transportation severely impeded communication. Today, even I stayed in a university in Southern China and my parents in Northern, an air travel of two hours can enable me to see them immediately. The size of China has never changed-it is the development of transportation through improvement of technology that has made such cases possible.
Another compelling argument for the technology has to do with the fact that how communicating devices like mobile phones and computers facilitate us to communicate with anyone at any time on this planet. Many young couples in last generation in China broke up, as one went to universities in other cities while the other had to stay at home due to the rare opportunities available for education at that time. They soon lost contact as letters were the only way to communicate. When one got the letter from the other, it had already been one or two month later. Today, however, long-distant relationship is not a miracle any more due to the invention of mobile phones and computers. Couples and friends can text, call, or even web-cam each other whenever they feel like. How could one argue opportunities of communication have been undermined considering these?
Additionally, communication, in one way, should not just limited to one-to-one or face-to-face conversation with our friends, relatives, bosses or co-workers, it can also involve interacting with someone unfamiliar- in other words, changing ideas and communicating through books, videos or even films. In light of the digital age, there is no need for people to go to a bookstore, as most of the books are available on the Internet. Therefore, the communication with writers, filmmakers, actors is also enhanced.
Admittedly, the fast increasing mess-media, especially the Internet, has led to the decrease of communication to a certain extent, comparing today’s young people’s addiction to the Internet. A book called “the Dumbest Generation” published in 1998 blamed the stupidity and lack of communication of young adults to the Internet, especially those social sites. However, this does not mean the development of technology force us to do so. Technology has provided us with a golden age full of new and great means to get access to our relatives, celebrities or even the whole world, and it is us who are left to make a choice whether to make good use of them.
To sum up, the development of technology, especially the new transportation and communication means have provided people with chances for a far better communication, people, instead of staying at home and drown in social net work site, should learn to utilize those merits to the largest extent.
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-24 10:32
ISSUE 131 1H
每篇都是一小时……真心担心到时候写不完了…………
Claim: Researchers should not limit their investigations to only those areas in which they expect to discover something that has an immediate, practical application. Reason: It is impossible to predict the outcome of a line of research with any certainty.
Generally agree
+: most facts about science that are not practical at first tend out to be extremely beneficial John Gurdon.
Immediate, practical ? are all fields that have been relatively exploited and researched
ractical? economical, for people’s basic living.. arts
-: governments’ budget
Reason: not right. Perpetual motion engine
A combination of both
The speaker believes that researches should be carried out with out regarding of their instant outcomes, as the benefit of a research can be hardly estimated. I generally agree with this statement, though there may be some exceptions and the reason leading to it may need further examination.
First, myriads of results of researches which may not be able to be applied to practical application instantly, bring about extraordinary beneficial after a while, or not a while, especially when it comes to scientific facts. For example, John Burdon found out all cells in human beings’ body have exactly the same genes, indicating the possibility to derive one cell from another as early as nineteenth century. This discovery by all means serves as a milestone for genetic study, biology, as well as medical treatment, and Burdon has been awarded the Nobel Prize because of this. Though it has not been widely used today, there is no denying that many diseases can be cured and important organs and cells can be cloned in light of this finding.
Far from being profitable, some of the research outcomes are even regarded as heresy when first coming into being. History has witnessed myriads of cases like this. William Harvey, who established the blood circulation system, was blamed as a charlatan .Copernican insisted heliocentric theory even when facing the pressure and threat from the churches. The view that the earth is spherical was laughed and regarded as merely a fantasy by earth-platters. However, if not for those researches who had chosen to stick to their idea without regarding an immediate profit, these truths might have been undermined till today. In light of this, what has been regarded as impractical or even heretical in the past are of great use today; what about finding that can not be put into use immediately, or understood by average people today?
Though enormous merits those researches enjoy, they may be impeded as budgets should be applied to other more urgent uses, such as natural disasters or wars. Additionally, the assertion that the outcome of research can never be predicted is far from accurate. Some studies can be regarded as meaningless at the very first sight, such as the attempt of perpetual motion engine. Other, however, can not be instantly valued. Government therefore should take measures to inspect and stop experiments which are highly likely to be meaningless.
To sum up, researchers should not abandon one study simply because of its lack of instant profit, as a great number of those results may turn out of great use later. However, sometimes budget and energy should be applied to other domains as well, and thus the government and researchers may seek to find a harmonious balance between efficiency and effect.
-- by 会员 d0gzi (2012/10/21 23:18:29)
你的语言很好，用的很准确，加油
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-24 10:53
ISSUE132 Some people believe that our ever-increasing use of technology significantly reduces our opportunities for human interaction. Other people believe that technology provides us with new and better ways to communicate and connect with one another.
23:15-49
Does the development of technology provide more immediate and convenient ways, or rather impede the communication and connection between people? In my view, people are provided with better ways to communicate in the information age insofar that we use them properly.
One compelling argument is the enormous development of transportation means-including cars, motor trains, as well as air-planes-enable us to cover distance within hours or days which may take ancient people months or years to travel. There is a poetic term in Chinese which can be literally translated as “a farewell involving life and death” which means the only chance for departing ancient people seeing each other again may be afterlife or next life, indicating the point to which the inconvenience of transportation severely impeded communication. Today, even I stayed in a university in Southern China and my parents in Northern, an air travel of two hours can enable me to see them immediately. The size of China has never changed-it is the development of transportation through improvement of technology that has made such cases possible.
Another compelling argument for the technology has to do with the fact that how communicating devices like mobile phones and computers facilitate us to communicate with anyone at any time on this planet. Many young couples in last generation in China broke up, as one went to universities in other cities while the other had to stay at home due to the rare opportunities available for education at that time. They soon lost contact as letters were the only way to communicate. When one got the letter from the other, it had already been one or two month later. Today, however, long-distant relationship is not a miracle any more due to the invention of mobile phones and computers. Couples and friends can text, call, or even web-cam each other whenever they feel like. How could one argue opportunities of communication have been undermined considering these?
Additionally, communication, in one way, should not just limited to one-to-one or face-to-face conversation with our friends, relatives, bosses or co-workers, it can also involve interacting with someone unfamiliar- in other words, changing ideas and communicating through books, videos or even films. In light of the digital age, there is no need for people to go to a bookstore, as most of the books are available on the Internet. Therefore, the communication with writers, filmmakers, actors is also enhanced.
Admittedly, the fast increasing mess-media, especially the Internet, has led to the decrease of communication to a certain extent, comparing today’s young people’s addiction to the Internet. A book called “the Dumbest Generation” published in 1998 blamed the stupidity and lack of communication of young adults to the Internet, especially those social sites. However, this does not mean the development of technology force us to do so. Technology has provided us with a golden age full of new and great means to get access to our relatives, celebrities or even the whole world, and it is us who are left to make a choice whether to make good use of them.
To sum up, the development of technology, especially the new transportation and communication means have provided people with chances for a far better communication, people, instead of staying at home and drown in social net work site, should learn to utilize those merits to the largest extent.
-- by 会员 d0gzi (2012/10/23 0:28:44)
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-26 01:57
谢谢谢谢您！！！！！！！！1> <!!!
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-26 01:58
又超时了……
People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences.
20:53-21:49
The speaker contends that risky actions should not be taken unless their potential outcomes have been examined and considered carefully. Although this argument seems to be plausible and can eliminate some possible disastrous results, it, however, is not in line with common sense we hold in everyday life for that it distorts the nature of “risk”.
Admittedly, pre-consideration has a lot of merits as it allows people to plan and consider all the possible consequences, including good ones and bad ones, and thus a conclusion can be drawn upon which actions whose results are not likely to be beneficial may be undermined before they are actually carried out. Consider an example of a father in poverty who is not able to feed his five-year-old daughter. He may attempt to employ illegal means, such as robbery, fraud and forgery, to obtain some money when his daughter really needs some money for her primary education. By considering the possible consequences of that illegal risky action, the father may not take such a huge risk-even if he gets rid of the police and may be able to support her daughter financially; he can never be a father as great and clean as before. By considering those potential outcomes thoroughly, the father may quit considering this idea. In fact, many of us have some unrealistic or even harmful ideas, it is considering the possible results of those risky actions, no matter consciously or not, impedes, or promotes our actions.
However, the speaker begs the nature of the problem in that he seems to assume most of the time possible results can be estimated even before those actions are taken, which is counter to our everyday common sense. No matter how plausible Murphy’s Law or Maya’s prediction of the 2012 disaster, no one is able to predict what will happen until it has happened. There are myriads of chemical researches which are primarily in line with the call of “chemistry for better life” end up with exacerbating the already delicate plant. Consider the atomic energy which is simply considered an alternative energy enhancing our efficiency and yield in industry is employed mainly in war to kill hundreds of millions of innocent human beings. Who can say the scientists have not considered the possible outcomes? They have, of course; yet it is still not possible to draw an accurate conclusion of what will happen in the future—for our conclusion is based on the current experience and observation which may not be accurate at all for circumstances in the future.
Furthermore, if we examine the word “risky”, we may find it slippery and difficult to define. For me, everything whose results can not be determined can be regarded as risky, including scientific research mentioned above, the apply of new policies and laws, revolution, career choosing, or even everyday activities like driving, working or even drinking. No one can really predict what will happen, and thus everything happening around us can be defined as “risky actions”. Then should we consider whether to eat an apple or not before eating it? Should we versus the possibility of chocking or a worm appearing to all the nutrition and great pleasure an apple can bring? The case of the revolution is similar. If Abraham Lincoln had kept considering all the people that would be involved and get injured in the Civil War and missed the perfect moment to start the war, people of color in the United States may not have gained their equal rights.
To sum up, considering beforehand for risky actions can be beneficial. However, it is not necessary to consider each and every risky action, as most of the time it is not only difficult to define “risk”, or to predict it.
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-26 19:33
it, however, 我总觉得在句中这么加个however读起来很难受，毕竟前面你已经有了although
No matter how plausible Murphy’s Law or Maya’s prediction of the 2012 disaster, no one is able to predict what will happen until it has happened. There are myriads of chemical researches which are primarily in line with the call of “chemistry for better life” end up with exacerbating the already delicate plant. Consider the atomic energy which is simply considered an alternative energy enhancing our efficiency and yield in industry is employed mainly in war to kill hundreds of millions of innocent human beings.不宜堆叠例子，一个足以，重在你的reasoning。
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-26 19:39
又超时了……
People should undertake risky action only after they have carefully considered its consequences.
20:53-21:49
The speaker contends that risky actions should not be taken unless their potential outcomes have been examined and considered carefully. Although this argument seems to be plausible and can eliminate some possible disastrous results, it, however, is not in line with common sense we hold in everyday life for that it distorts the nature of “risk”.
Admittedly, pre-consideration has a lot of merits as it allows people to plan and consider all the possible consequences, including good ones and bad ones, and thus a conclusion can be drawn upon which actions whose results are not likely to be beneficial may be undermined before they are actually carried out. Consider an example of a father in poverty who is not able to feed his five-year-old daughter. He may attempt to employ illegal means, such as robbery, fraud and forgery, to obtain some money when his daughter really needs some money for her primary education. By considering the possible consequences of that illegal risky action, the father may not take such a huge risk-even if he gets rid of the police and may be able to support her daughter financially; he can never be a father as great and clean as before. By considering those potential outcomes thoroughly, the father may quit considering this idea. In fact, many of us have some unrealistic or even harmful ideas, it is considering the possible results of those risky actions, no matter consciously or not, impedes, or promotes our actions.
However, the speaker begs the nature of the problem in that he seems to assume most of the time possible results can be estimated even before those actions are taken, which is counter to our everyday common sense. No matter how plausible Murphy’s Law or Maya’s prediction of the 2012 disaster, no one is able to predict what will happen until it has happened. There are myriads of chemical researches which are primarily in line with the call of “chemistry for better life” end up with exacerbating the already delicate plant. Consider the atomic energy which is simply considered an alternative energy enhancing our efficiency and yield in industry is employed mainly in war to kill hundreds of millions of innocent human beings. Who can say the scientists have not considered the possible outcomes? They have, of course; yet it is still not possible to draw an accurate conclusion of what will happen in the future—for our conclusion is based on the current experience and observation which may not be accurate at all for circumstances in the future.
Furthermore, if we examine the word “risky”, we may find it slippery and difficult to define. For me, everything whose results can not be determined can be regarded as risky, including scientific research mentioned above, the apply of new policies and laws, revolution, career choosing, or even everyday activities like driving, working or even drinking. No one can really predict what will happen, and thus everything happening around us can be defined as “risky actions”. Then should we consider whether to eat an apple or not before eating it? Should we versus the possibility of chocking or a worm appearing to all the nutrition and great pleasure an apple can bring? The case of the revolution is similar. If Abraham Lincoln had kept considering all the people that would be involved and get injured in the Civil War and missed the perfect moment to start the war, people of color in the United States may not have gained their equal rights.
To sum up, considering beforehand for risky actions can be beneficial. However, it is not necessary to consider each and every risky action, as most of the time it is not only difficult to define “risk”, or to predict it.
-- by 会员 d0gzi (2012/10/26 1:58:16)
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-26 23:02
谢谢您每天帮我改作文！！！！！T-T
虽然到现在ISSUE还是乱七八糟ARGUMENT还没准备……T-T
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-29 23:41
Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.
22:52-35
I agree with the speaker that most of the times the politicians should be committed to common and reasonable consensus as that is the primary mission and one of the most essential standard to evaluate a politician-whether he has helped the people to come nearer, or even fulfill their basic demands. Nevertheless, there may be some exceptional circumstances under which the politician should choose to fight for the ideals rather than common ideas.
It is reasonable for politicians to take measures according to the general benefit of the general public, considering both our empirical and normative experiences. That is why politicians are being selected-not to govern people, but to lead, help, or even serve them to live a better life. Politicians who fail this mission will always be criticized by the people and may even experience a fall-down. History is replete with such examples. Qinshi Huangdi, the first emperor in China, commanded to burn books of Hundreds of Schools and bury scholars to achieve his ultimate dream- a society without any dispute. That emperor only lasted for few decades and Qinshi Huangdi is always refered to by historians as a despotic tyrant.
Another compelling example demonstrating the drawbacks of commitment to extreme idealism involves the Great Leaps Forward in China. During that period, Chairman Mao, the most influential politician in China at that time, urged people to melt their own pans and pots to produce more metal and thus improve the national GDP. Every and each person was then given a job and asked to eat together in a communal canteen. This action, though embodied the ultimate goal of economical development and absolute equality, failed at last, for that it was merely a dream without considering a common consensus.
However, sometimes elusive ideals can also be beneficial; it serves as a goal for the whole society to strike towards. If were not for a dream and desire for pure equality, peace, happiness, love and care between neighbors and citizens, why should the politicians struggle to find and try out different policies which enhances the stability and prosperity of the whole society? Moreover, the speaker may indicate politicians should follow opinions of most people in opinions by using words like “common” and “consensus”. However, under some special circumstances, it should be the politician who have been selected and voted by the public for his/her insight and sagacity to make decisions based on the ideals and ultimate goals of the whole society. Consider the example of China’s economic reform. Deng Xiaoping, the governor who was in office at that time, insisted the shift from planed economy to socialist market economy though it touched interests of many people and were fiercely opposed to. The main reason for his stubborn commitment lies in his thoroughly understanding of the ultimate goal for that period- to drug the people out of the mire of poverty. Time has proven the insight of his decision as China has ranked among one of the most rapidly developing countries ever since then.
To sum up, the speaker is reasonable when emphasizing the importance of common ground and reasonable consensus, as that is the very foundation why the politician is elected. Yet sometimes it is necessary for a politician to suspense those consensus for a while, or find an alternative yet more beneficial way.
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-31 18:41
mark，上课回来再改。前天没看到，抱歉
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-31 21:44
第一篇ARGUMENT....后天考G真是想死= =
Two years ago, radio station WCQP in Rockville decided to increase the number of call-in advice programs that it broadcast; since that time, its share of the radio audience in the Rockville listening area has increased significantly. Given WCQP's recent success with call-in advice programming, and citing a nationwide survey indicating that many radio listeners are quite interested in such programs, the station manager of KICK in Medway recommends that KICK include more call-in advice programs in an attempt to gain a larger audience share in its listening area.
21:01-41
The author recommends that KICK should include more call-in advice programs to attract a larger number of audiences in Medway. S/he cites the sharply increase of audiences of WCQP radio station who enhances a similar call-in advice as well as a survey which implies many listeners are in favor of such programs. Though seems to be plausible at the first sight, the argument is logically unconvincing in several aspects.
First, the author assumes attributes the success of WCQP absolutely to a measure to enhance advice programs, which was taken two years ago. Yet the author fails to consider other possibilities which may lead to the increasing number of audiences. Perhaps during those two years, WCQP also employed better broadcasters, more amusing other program, better ways to manage the radio station, which are the real factors leading to its success. Without considering and ruling out all these possibilities, the author can not convince me that advice program itself can make the radio station more popular.
Second, the argument also fails to provide statistics about how significant the number of audiences have increased and is. It is entirely possible that the number of audiences of WCQP is still not as great as KICK even after their enhancing of advice programming. If this is the case, then it may not be wise to follow WCQP’s step. Even if WCQP has more audiences than KICK , it still not necessarily indicates such a change will be similarly beneficial, as taste of audiences in Rockville may differ from audiences in Medway.
Third, the argument unfairly assumes that the nation-wide survey of radio listeners’ interests towards call-in services necessarily indicate the preferences of people in this region. However, the author does not provide enough evidence to support his/her idea. It is entirely possible that people in Medway have a preference different from nation-wide taste. Additionally, the credibility of the survey is also a problem. What is the percentage of people who are in favor of call-in programming? Whether there are any other programs that are more popular than call-in ones? Were participants given enough options to choose or did the questions on the survey misleading? Therefore, it is very likely that there are better alternatives other than call-in programs.
In conclusion, the argument is not well-supported. To convince me that an increased call-in program is a good choice to attract more audiences, the author should not only rule out other possibilities of the success of WCQP, give out statistical evidence to support audiences in Medway share the interests and tastes of those in Rockville, but prove the adaptability of the nation-wide survey to Medway.
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-10-31 21:44
谢谢版主！！！！111T-T
ORZ!!!!
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-31 22:37
Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.
22:52-35
I agree with the speaker that most of the times the politicians should be committed to common and reasonable consensus as that is the primary mission and one of the most essential standard to evaluate a politician-whether he has helped the people to come nearer, or even fulfill their basic demands. Nevertheless, there may be some exceptional circumstances under which the politician should choose to fight for the ideals rather than common ideas.
It is reasonable for politicians to take measures according to the general benefit of the general public, considering both our empirical and normative experiences. That is why politicians are being selected-not to govern people, but to lead, help, or even serve them to live a better life. Politicians who fail this mission will always be criticized by the people and may even experience a fall-down. History is replete with such examples. Qinshi Huangdi, the first emperor in China, commanded to burn books of Hundreds of Schools and bury scholars to achieve his ultimate dream- a society without any dispute. That emperor only lasted for few decades and Qinshi Huangdi is always refered to by historians as a despotic tyrant.
Another compelling example demonstrating the drawbacks of commitment to extreme idealism involves the Great Leaps Forward in China. During that period, Chairman Mao, the most influential politician in China at that time, urged people to melt their own pans and pots to produce more metal and thus improve the national GDP. Every and each person was then given a job and asked to eat together in a communal canteen. This action, though embodied the ultimate goal of economical development and absolute equality, failed at last, for that it was merely a dream without considering a common consensus.
However, sometimes elusive ideals can also be beneficial; it serves as a goal for the whole society to strike towards. If were not for a dream and desire for pure equality, peace, happiness, love and care between neighbors and citizens, why should the politicians struggle to find and try out different policies which enhances the stability and prosperity of the whole society? Moreover, the speaker may indicate politicians should follow opinions of most people in opinions by using words like “common” and “consensus”. However, under some special circumstances, it should be the politician who have been selected and voted by the public for his/her insight and sagacity to make decisions based on the ideals and ultimate goals of the whole society. Consider the example of China’s economic reform. Deng Xiaoping, the governor who was in office at that time, insisted the shift from planed economy to socialist market economy though it touched interests of many people and were fiercely opposed to. The main reason for his stubborn commitment lies in his thoroughly understanding of the ultimate goal for that period- to drug the people out of the mire of poverty. Time has proven the insight of his decision as China has ranked among one of the most rapidly developing countries ever since then.
To sum up, the speaker is reasonable when emphasizing the importance of common ground and reasonable consensus, as that is the very foundation why the politician is elected. Yet sometimes it is necessary for a politician to suspense those consensus for a while, or find an alternative yet more beneficial way.
-- by 会员 d0gzi (2012/10/29 23:41:47)
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-31 22:42
S/he ？
Though seems to be ？
the author assumes attributes the？
the argument also fails to provide statistics about how significant the number of audiences have increased and is像这种结论写出来之前，你肯定有个分析，题目的结论需要什么样的依据或者信息什么的，才可以得到，然后再出来，否则就显得很突兀，每段里面不急于说出自己的结论，重在自己的那个分析推理过程。
作者: 竹林中人 时间: 2012-10-31 22:44
其他两点类似，另外这篇作文ＬＺ写的可能有些匆忙，一些小语法错误没改过来，考试加油，尽力就好
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-11-1 00:28
恩……感觉总是不是很会写……估计这次杀G又要死翘翘了……谢谢版主！
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-11-1 01:36
True success can be measured primarily in terms of the goals one sets for oneself.
The speaker contents that it is goals one sets for himself that matters for true success, rather than other factors. I generally agree with this statement, as it is the ideal condition that every man pursues- to be oneself and fight for and uphold one’s dream and virtue. Yet, sometimes human beings, as the product of the interdependent society, have to yield to the values and goals set by the society to a certain extent.
First, individuals can not be fully motivated by the values and goals set by the society alone. Even when they have achieved what the whole society may acknowledge as great or outstanding, they can merely feel satisfied or even feel more stressed if their own concept of success has been greatly undermined. Consider the high suicide rate of movie stars, who are regarded as successful people due to their wealth, beauty and impacts on the general public, still always feel unfulfilled as they have to adjust every and each action and emotion to satisfy the general public and the mass media. This kind of example also lies in scientific realm. Einstein devoted twenty years of his life to reconcile the relativity theory and quantum theory and never felt relieved because of his failing in this, after he had already been ranked among the most greatest people in modern society. In this way, life is not about how much praises others give you, but how much applaud you give to yourself.
Additionally, it is important for one to stick to his/her dream and goals, as sometimes the society, whose goals tend to be more pragmatic and thus less ideal, may fail to appreciate individual goals, especially goals and perspectives of prodigies. Consider Van Gogh, who is now regarded as one of the most intellectual painters in human history, devoted his whole life, heart, and soul to painting until he could not even pick up a pencil. He, however, only managed to sell one painting throughout his life. Yet who, in this modern society, can diminish the insight and greatness of Van Gogh? Who can argue Van Gogh is a loser as his goal contradicts with the society in his age?
Admittedly, the standard set by the society to evaluate success has its own merits as well. The society can not hardly prosper or make any progress if every and each individual pursues what they dreams, as no one, if given the chance, is interested in working hard and become slaves of power and money. Moreover, goals of individuals and society are not necessarily mutually exclusive, such as goals for peace, equality, morality, love among neighbors and relatives. Therefore it is possible for people to evaluate their success upon both standards.
To sum up, I generally agree with the speaker that goal of oneself is more effective to evaluate whether one is successful or not, yet goals between society and individuals can be reconciled and over-emphasis on individualism may do harm to the progress of the society.
作者: d0gzi 时间: 2012-11-2 10:36
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of Parson City's local newspaper.
"In our region of Trillura, the majority of money spent on the schools that most students attend—the city-run public schools—comes from taxes that each city government collects. The region's cities differ, however, in the budgetary 预算的priority they give to public education. For example, both as a proportion of its overall tax revenues and in absolute terms, Parson City has recently spent almost twice as much per year as Blue City has for its public schools—even though both cities have about the same number of residents. Clearly, Parson City residents place a higher value on providing a good education in public schools than Blue City residents do."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
1. twice,same residents
2. collect from … government
3. schools that
This argument is well-presented yet ill-conceived. The author assumes that Parson City residents pay more attention to good education as they place the budgetary priority on education. Though this argument seems to be plausible at the first sight, there are several flaws preventing it from being logically convincing.
To begin with, a problem arises when the author assumes that government in P City spends more on education as it has been put a greater budgetary priority. Although it is entirely possible, the author fails to offer sufficient evidence about the real circumstances to back his idea. Therefore, it is also likely that the government finally fails to do so and the real amount of money applied to education in P City is less.
In the second place, the arguer assumes that schools in P City receives more money as recently education system in P City receives twice as much as that in C city. Nevertheless, this is not necessarily the case, as the arguer does not offer enough evidence to bolster his idea. A proper alternative is not far to seek. The author fails to provide how long the time period is, thus maybe he is comparing the amount of money which schools receives in two years with those C city receives in a year. Or perhaps this is just aberration; in other time C city has always support its education system with much more money. We just do not know. Only through providing more evidence could the arguer convince me that schools in P City have always been receiving much more money.
Finally, even if the author has provided evidence for the foregoing assumptions, one crucial problem still remains when he/she suggests that schools in P city and C city need the similar amount of money. It is also highly possible that C city does not have as many school as P city does. Even through there are similar amount of residents in P and C city, the number of students who need to attend school might be quite different. Moreover, it is also highly possible there are only one big public school in C city and many private schools of good quality that the government need to support, while in P city the government has to spend more as there are much more public schools. Additionally, even if all these are true, we simply can not judge the merit of a education system from the amount of money its government supplies, as these cities differ in the purchase abilities of residents, salaries of their teachers and different prices for teaching instruments and tools. Thus, to bolster his assumption, the author will need to explain why none of other alternatives are able to sustain.
To sum up, the author jumps to a hasty conclusion that P city enjoys a great education based on a chain of problematic assumptions. To support those assumptions, the author must offer more persuasive evidences and take every possibility into consideration.
可怜自己之前太懒。。。模板弄的太晚了。。所以填起来感觉好费劲= = 。。。在纠结要不要到时候先打模板再填。。。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |