ISSUE 求二拍 已经修改了

pswpswpsw

ISSUE: Scientists and other researchers should focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree   with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.


  Should scientists and other researchers focus their research on areas that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people?It might be true in some fields, however I consider that they should also pay their attention to other fields which are not likely to benefit the greatest number people right now.  

 Admittedly, it is true that everyone should pay attention to the field that benefits the most people in the world. Because as living creatures on the planet, we should focus our attention on the fields that will make the world a better place, not only considering our own profit. So scientists should also focus on that goal. Otherwise,if scientists pay little attention to the field that perhaps could bring our life to doom such as nuclear research,  it would probably lead to a potential disaster to this planet. All in all, The goal of scientists is to use their knowledge of law of nature to change the world. For example, in agriculture, a Chinese Researcher named Yuan Longping, who spent many years researching hybrid-grain , won the Prize of Chinese Excellent Contribution Scientists. His super grain not only contributed to the produce of Chinese agriculture, but also saved many lives in Africa. What he did benefited a international wide people and even qualifed him to get a tenure of Professor in Harvard. His not only benefit himself but also have a positive effect on human being on the planet as a whole.

 However, there is a lot of important questions need to be asked about the recommendation: what is exactly the field that are likely to benefit the greatest number of people? What if the field will has such a effect on the greatest number of people but is not apparent at present?Then it would naturally follows that the field is going to become oblivion according to the logical conclusion from the issue? Of course, we should not only focus on the only type of  field, there other field is also worthwhile in the future even it is not obvious as it seems right now. For instance, when Bell first invented a telephoneand displayed it in a worldwide exhibition ,a high-class woman came to asked, which was also a lot of people's confusion,about what kind of job was the machine going to work. At that time, people only need to use mail to connect each other through post office.So does that mean Bell should give up his invention? Of course not. It proved to be useful after a few years later and became a new scientific field, and even resulting a more worldwide significant effect than it used to. Hence, it would be unwise to follow the suggestion of the issue to only focus on the field that seems to benefit the most majority of people. Because it is always impossible to predict a effect of a novel invention when it first come to birth. And perhaps it would lead to a huge loss on the whole happiness of human society if we abandon a field due to its present unpromising condition.

 In conclusion, although it is true that scientist and researchers should shoulder the responsibility of harnessing their knowledge to make the world better ,  we cannot only put our resource on such a seemingly most beneficial field without careful inspection and evaluation the outcome of a field in the future.

竹林中人

行，表达很清晰，继续加油

lukebrehm

1. It might be true in some field(s),
2. which is (are) not likely to benefit the greatest number people only for now (replace ONLY FOR NOW with RIGHT NOW).
3. the most people of (in) the world.
4. we should pay (focus) our attention to (on) the field(s) that could (will) make
5. not only considering our own profit.  -not-  not only considering the profit of ourselves.
6. to the field that perhaps the one (omit, THE ONE) would (could) bring our life to doom such as nuclear research,
7. lead to a potential disaster to >this< planet.
8. The goal of the (omit, THE) scientist(s) is to use
9. knowledge of law of (and) nature to change the world.
10. spent a lot (replace A LOT with MANY) of (omit, OF) years researching the (omit, THE) hybrid-grain,
11. with (omit, WITH) his super grain not only contribute(d) to the output (produce) of Chinese agriculture in total (omit, IN TOTAL), but also saved a lot (replace A LOT with MANY) of (omit, OF) life (lives) in Africa.
12. What he did benefited people internationally and even qualified him to get a tenure of Professor in Harvard, his research not only benefited himself but also had a positive effect on human beings on the planet as a whole.  -not-  What he did benefit a international wide people and even made him the qualification to get a tenure of Professor in Harvard, which not only benefit himself but also have a positive effect on the whole human being on the planet.

pswpswpsw

1. It might be true in some field(s),
2. which is (are) not likely to benefit the greatest number people only for now (replace ONLY FOR NOW with RIGHT NOW).
3. the most people of (in) the world.
4. we should pay (focus) our attention to (on) the field(s) that could (will) make
5. not only considering our own profit.  -not-  not only considering the profit of ourselves.
6. to the field that perhaps the one (omit, THE ONE) would (could) bring our life to doom such as nuclear research,
7. lead to a potential disaster to >this< planet.
8. The goal of the (omit, THE) scientist(s) is to use
9. knowledge of law of (and) nature to change the world.
10. spent a lot (replace A LOT with MANY) of (omit, OF) years researching the (omit, THE) hybrid-grain,
11. with (omit, WITH) his super grain not only contribute(d) to the output (produce) of Chinese agriculture in total (omit, IN TOTAL), but also saved a lot (replace A LOT with MANY) of (omit, OF) life (lives) in Africa.
12. What he did benefited people internationally and even qualified him to get a tenure of Professor in Harvard, his research not only benefited himself but also had a positive effect on human beings on the planet as a whole.  -not-  What he did benefit a international wide people and even made him the qualification to get a tenure of Professor in Harvard, which not only benefit himself but also have a positive effect on the whole human being on the planet.

-- by 会员 lukebrehm (2012/2/9 9:12:43)

已修改。
麻烦看看逻辑结构有没有问题，我的要不求NATIVE ENGLISH WRITING . JUST CLEAR STRUCTURE WITH PERSUASIVE REASONING.

lukebrehm

You have to understand that how persuasive you are is something that you either have or don't have, what you need to learn is how to express your self correctly. You can't skip these important steps, perhaps you can be very persuasive but a native English teacher (who has to score your essay) might not understand you clearly and would therefore give you a very low grade. I think you are smart enough to be persuasive on your own but you just need to make sure people can understand you.

pswpswpsw

You have to understand that how persuasive you are is something that you either have or don't have, what you need to learn is how to express your self correctly. You can't skip these important steps, perhaps you can be very persuasive but a native English teacher (who has to score your essay) might not understand you clearly and would therefore give you a very low grade. I think you are smart enough to be persuasive on your own but you just need to make sure people can understand you.

-- by 会员 lukebrehm (2012/2/11 13:55:45)

I am very appreciated about you advice .