72. Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
With the explosive development of science and technology, scientific research is playing a more and more important role in the promotion of the national strength. In such a situation, government should attach great attention to the consequence of the research. However, government should not stop funding because of the unclear consequence.
Admittedly, it is necessary for the government to take a prudential attitude to the consequences of the scientific research. Government should consider the benefit of all the people in the nation and irrational fund of scientific research would have an great harmful influence on people. Research activities with medical and ethic risks, such as the clone, must be careful to conduct. In some situations, the products of clone would cure the lesions of organs while others would lead to ethic problems. If the government has no direction to these research, it would have a tremendous impact on the society, even a turmoil.
However, governments should not quit funding because of the unclear consequences. The abandonment of risks also means giving up all the possible benefits coming with the risks. The information we human could get is so limited that we cannot have a clear anticipation for all scientific research. If we abandon all the noncommittal research, the nation wouldn’t have any innovative achievements and the civilization would come to a standstill. Such as playing poker, if you intend to know all the cards of the adversary, then you have known the results of the game and it make no sense for playing poker.
Actually, when it comes to research with unclear consequences, governments ought to consider how to reduce the risks and have less harmful influence on the society, but not whether the research should be funded or not. For instance, the research of nuclear energy would inevitably produce the nuclear radiation, so building nuclear power plant has an unclear consequence. However, the energy produced by the nuclear fission is enormous, supporting the human life and production. What governments should do is to seek new and reliable ways to reduce the negative impact of nuclear power plant instead of abandoning it.
In summary, to some extent I agree with the policy that governments should take prudential attitude to the noncommittal research, but not quit funding for the research. What urge governments is to minimize the risk of the research so as to have less harmful effect on the society.
With the explosive development of science and technology, scientific research is playing a more and more important role in the promotion of the national strength.（我建议你可以换换句式，越来越重要，用with great importance，还有就是用现在完成时更好一些，贴切一些，你觉得呢） In such a situation, government should attach great attention to the consequence of the research. However, government should not stop funding because of the unclear consequence.( Admittedly, it is necessary for the government to take a prudential attitude to the consequences of the scientific research.(这里不要犹抱琵琶半遮面啊，一定要写出原因，老外的思维是直接说出自己的想法，直接写出为什么是必须的呢？) Government should consider the benefit of all the people in the nation and irrational fund of scientific research would have an great harmful influence on people. Research activities with medical and ethic risks, such as the clone, must be careful to conduct. In some situations, the products of clone would cure the lesions of organs while others would lead to ethic problems. If the government has no direction to these research, it would have a tremendous impact on the society, even a turmoil. (这段句子和句子直接的连接词呢？没有linking words句式也单一，加油吧) However, governments should not quit funding because of the unclear consequences. The abandonment of risks also means giving up all the possible benefits coming with the risks. The information we human could get is so limited that we cannot have a clear anticipation for all scientific research. If we abandon all the noncommittal research, the nation wouldn’t have any innovative achievements and the civilization would come to a standstill. Such as playing poker, if you intend to know all the cards of the adversary, then you have known the results of the game and it make no sense for playing poker. Actually, when it comes to research with unclear consequences, governments ought to consider how to reduce the risks and have less harmful influence on the society, but not whether the research should be funded or not. For instance, the research of nuclear energy would inevitably produce the nuclear radiation, so building nuclear power plant has an unclear consequence. However, the energy produced by the nuclear fission is enormous, supporting the human life and production. What governments should do is to seek new and reliable ways to reduce the negative impact of nuclear power plant instead of abandoning it. In summary, to some extent I agree with the policy that governments should take prudential attitude to the noncommittal research, but not quit funding for the research. What urge governments is to minimize the risk of the research so as to have less harmful effect on the society.
I think your ariticle is very good. I like your first para.
One suggestion
"Actually, when it comes to research with unclear consequences, governments ought to consider how to reduce the risks and have less harmful influence on the society, but not whether the research should be funded or not"
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-5-7 18:59:23
收藏
收藏
楼主
