gaoxing的作文——互改小组第一期

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-21 22:24:13

69. As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate.

The statement suggests that with the development of technology, people become more and more rely on technologies to solve problems, and thus the ability of humans to think for themselves will deteriorate. It is true that people who live in modern society are apt to use all kinds of technologies to solve problems. However, this trend does not necessarily cause the deteriorating of the ability of humans to think.

Admittedly, technologies provide us a convenient way to solve certain problems and now, people can be freed from some onerous works which can be worked out by some tools instead. For example, when a company should make a big decision, technology such as data mining which can analyze a large quantity of data and then presents some useful information can be used by leaders of the company. With this kind of tools, business pattern or trend of the company or the whole economy can be conveniently presented and easily understood by the people who have little professional knowledge. Thus, this kind of technology would be useful for making more accurate decision and saving much time for the leader of a company.

However, the development of technology is not the cause of the deteriorating of the ability of humans to think. In contrast, technologies could catalyze the ability of thinking. Without some help of some tools, human may stuck in some tedious works which need little thinking such as collecting materials for research. With the aid of some tools, people can focus on the core area of their job and leave some trivial chore to the tools to handle. For example, at most time, scientists had to go to the library to look up some information in books before Internet have been widely used. It would waste a lot of time to do so and very inefficient. And now, people just need search in Google and they will found what they need in the most time. It will save a lot of time, and scientists can use the saved time to think about their studying area and for further research. So, technology could provide people a better way to think other than deteriorate the ability of it.

Moreover, the development of technology strongly depends on the activities of thinking. If the ability of thinking deteriorates eventually, it is totally possible that the technology would end its development at last. Without thinking about the possibility of flying, human could not invent plane; without thinking about how to make more money, financial tools would not be created. So, thinking would keep its role as a key factor for developing of technologies all the time.

In sum, technology cannot develop without thinking of people, and technology would stimulate the activities of thinking. Although technologies provide tools for human beings to do their jobs easily, it cannot conclude that the ability of humans to thinking will deteriorate.

字数：481
时间：90分钟左右

zkh1991 · 发表于 2012-11-21 23:54:13

The statement suggests that with thedevelopment of technology, people become more and more rely （relying另外我觉得一个more就够了） ontechnologies to solve problems, and thus the ability of humans to think forthemselves will deteriorate. It is true that people who live in modern societyare apt to use all kinds of technologies to solve problems. However, this trenddoes not necessarily cause the deteriorating of the ability of humans to think.

Admittedly, technologies provide us a convenient way to solvecertain problems and now, people can be freed from some onerous works which canbe worked out by some tools instead. For example, when a company should make abig decision, technology such as data mining which can analyze a large quantityof data and then presents some useful information can be used by leaders of thecompany. With this kind of tools, business pattern or trend of the company orthe whole economy can be conveniently presented and easily understood by thepeople who have little professional knowledge. Thus, this kind of technologywould be useful for making more accurate decision and saving much time for theleader of a company.

However, the development of technology is not the cause of thedeteriorating of the ability of humans to think. In contrast, technologiescould catalyze the ability of thinking. Without some help of some tools, humanmay stuck in some tedious works workwhich needs (话说我不确定的时候往前加个might) littlethinking such as collecting materials for research. With the aid of some tools,people can focus on the core area of their job and leave some trivial chore tothe tools to handle. For example, at most time, scientists had to go to thelibrary to look up some information in books before Internet have hasbeen widely used. It would waste a lot of time to do so and （could be）very inefficient. And now,people just need search （为保险我觉得还是加个to吧） in Google and they will foundfind what theyneed in the most time. It will save a lot of time, and scientists can use thesaved time to think about their studying area and for further research. So,technology could provide people a better way to think other than deterioratethe ability of it.

Moreover, the development of technology strongly depends on theactivities of thinking. If the ability of thinking deteriorates eventually,it is totally possible that the technology would end its development at last.（这句话感觉意思不太明确。。。）Withoutthinking about the possibility of flying, human could not invent plane; withoutthinking about how to make more money, financial tools would not be created.So, thinking would keep its role as a key factor for developing of technologiesall the time.

In sum, technology cannot develop without thethinking of people, and technology would stimulate the activities of thinking. Although technologies provide tools for humanbeings to do their jobs easily, it cannot conclude that the ability of humansto thinking think willdeteriorate.

开头结尾和我差不多。。。基本直来直去重复再重复 不知道这样好不好。。。
论点找的很好tech反而可以促进thinking就是对issue最有力的反驳了。。。我一开始看题怎么就没想到呢

我还想能想到的就是如何定义thinkfor themselves。。。因为tech 本身就是对自己着想 感觉这个推理就是不成立的嘛

但是如果反驳thinkby themselves了 会不会偏题？（如果考试的时候看到我估计就可能往这方面写了 因为由理由推出think for themselves的能力下降本身就不太合理吧）

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-23 06:54:14

10 Governments must ensure that their majorcities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive, because itprimarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved andgenerated.

The statement asserts that governmentsshould guarantee that major cities in a country are received the financialsupport just because these cities are preserving and generating a nation's culturaltraditions. It is true that in most time, major cities are the center ofculture in a country and they present the highest level of culture there. And theyare in possession of high standard facilities, brilliant people who work forthe field of culture. However, the conclusion that financial support should be investedto these cities is not well supported.

Firstly, although big cities possesses alot of high standard cultural facilities such theaters, museums and so on, manyof these cities are influenced by the culture from other countries, and somecultures of their own are lost in the process of combination of differentcultures. We've always heard complaint from people around us that the day oftraditional festival we have celebrated for thousands years have become not soimportant right now and some festival originated from other countries have beenincreasingly prevalent recently. Incontrast, many of traditional cultures are preserved integrally in countryside.People who live there may still maintain the lifestyles which have lasted forthousands years. For example, Dragon Boat Festival is a traditional holidayoriginating in China. According to tradition, Chinese people would race Dragonboat in that day. In countryside or many small towns of southern China, peoplewho live there keep this tradition every year. In those big cities, however,this activity of racing dragon boat has been abandoned for many years justbecause residents of those cities are too busy to organize such games, ormerely because it is not profitable to do this. Moreover, a nation's culturesare may composed of diverse traditions. They may be different from one place toanother and major cities can only present a small part of that nation. TakeChina as an example, Tibetan culture, a kind of minority group' culture inChina, is preserved and generated in southwest China where no big cities exist.And it is also a very important part of China's cultural traditions. So, the assertion that a nation's culturaltraditions are preserved and generated in cities is not reliable.

Even though major cities can represent awhole country's culture, it is still not a right choice to invest money inthose cities in order to support their development and ignore other parts ofthat country. Government should balance the development of all over the country.Otherwise, the gap between the poor and the rich would be widening and this is notconducive to the development of the whole country's economy. For example, Chinais now facing a problem that should change the way of economic development forman export and investment driven economy to a more sustainable consumptiondriven economy. Some measures have been taken. However, the effect is verylimited. Some research about the reason why it is hard to spur consumptionsuggests that large wealth gap in China inhibits the boosting of consumptionbecause the poor have not much money to spend and even the daily basic demandof the poor people cannot be met and the rich people are already spending whatthey need, and pocketing most of the rest. So, investing money only in themajor cities would lead to inequality of region development and residents'income which would make this policy become a bad decision for the wholecountry.

In sum, the statement that the major citiesare preserving and generating nation's cultural tradition is not convincing andeven though it is the case, we cannot then conclude that governments shouldinvest money in major cities.
字数：612
时间：未统计

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-25 18:54:53

8 Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.

Whether political leaders should withhold or release information depends on the situation a country has been through. In the most time, the leaders should release information of what they have got to the public. In some emergencies, however, governments should withhold information from the public in order to protect the safety of civilian or the country.

To some extent, withholding information from the public violates the basic principle of democracy society. If the leaders are granted to control information, it is entirely possible that they would use this right to manipulate public opinion in order to maintain the rule of the regime and even establish autocratic society, becoming dictators. Thus, we can see that almost in every autocratic country all over the world, propaganda departments or something like that have been established to control information. They can determine which news can be broadcasted and even only allow state-run media operating in that country. This is what we should avoid in modern society.

In most time, government should release information not only just because this is a basic right granted by laws but also because preventing information from being known by the public may lead to disastrous consequence. Take SARS as an example. SARS, a kind of epidemic diseases, originated from Hong Kong in 2003 and soon spread to mainland of China. However, concerning about this disease would lead to panic in the public and endanger the stability of society, Chinese government deny the existence of such disease in mainland instead of informing populace and making plans to prevent SARS from spreading out widely. Such unconscionable measures made SARS out of control in a long time.

However, in some special situation, the governments have to prevent information from being spread out in order to keep the safety of the country and citizens. For example, when a country is threatened by terrorist, some information about plans of attack from terrorist has been gotten by the government. At that time, this information should not be released. Otherwise, the terrorists would change their plans and the government's plan which is against the activity of the terrorist would become useless. Take world war two as another example. If some important military plans had been acquired by enemy, the enemy would utilize this information to make battle strategies more effectively and this information even could be a key factor to win a battle.

In sum, we cannot get the answer about whether the leaders of governments should withhold information or release it directly. It depends on the specific situation a country has been through. As a citizen in a country, people have right to know information conferred by laws. However, at some time, in order to protect the safety of the whole country, the leaders should have right to keep some information from being known.

字数：469
时间：未统计

zkh1991 · 发表于 2012-11-25 21:57:39

论述的比较充分~点也写的很清晰就是开头结尾几乎是一样的。。。最好深化一下
或者开头换种说法不要把话都说完了

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-26 01:34:58

论述的比较充分~点也写的很清晰就是开头结尾几乎是一样的。。。最好深化一下
或者开头换种说法不要把话都说完了

-- by 会员 zkh1991 (2012/11/25 21:57:39)

谢谢，确实是这样的。。

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-29 14:37:09

38 It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves.

Everyone has his/her own social circles. To a great extent, I agree that through our identification with social groups we can define ourselves. However, we still cannot ignore some other important factors that would affect one's interest, behavior or something could be used to define a person and such factors are outside the social circles.

Human beings would involve in different social groups since they were born and they would be affected by such social circles. Their hobbies, behaviors or other things could be used as factors defining people would change with the groups they live. For example, when we were young, parents or other relatives were around us all day long and we would imitate what they said and they did. Parents would educate us what is right and what is wrong. Our basic values of the world were formed in that time. As we grow, the thinking and personality of people become more and more complex and they would participate in different clubs, parties or groups like that, meeting different people and influenced by them. People living in different culture circles and different political circumstances would be obviously different. Those Buddhists who are taught to treat every creature in the world equally would be more modest than ordinary person. Members of left wing party would concern more about the lives and rights of workers. At the same time, people would take part in different social groups according to their interests, personality or social status. For example, people who care about the pollution of circumstance would participate in the organization launched in order to protect environment and those people who interest in software programing will apply to a member of programmer club. So, we can define humans from what social groups they have taken part in.
Those social groups are very important indicators which can differentiate one person from the others. However, we cannot ignore other factors which also could be very important indicators to define people. Some inborn abilities of people sometimes may be hard to or even cannot be identified by the groups they have participated in. For example, some people are genius of art and the people who in the same social circles with him/her may be just ordinary in the field of art. So, it is hard to identify this guy from the social groups he/she live in. Take personality as another example, social groups might be involved with all kinds of people with totally different personality and in most time, it is almost impossible or difficult to identify such characteristics of person from them. Besides the inborn factors, natural environment which people reside is another factor which could affect people and the influence is hard to identify from social groups. For example, people who once lived in areas lacking water may more cherish water than ordinary person. If we do not know the natural environment they resided, it is totally possible that we can hardly figure out why they would be so prudent in using water. Moreover, we can conclude that it is high possible that the people who live along with water would be skillful with swimming.

In sum, we can not only identify one person from the social groups they take part in but also identify he/her from other factors such as inborn abilities, living environment. Only if incorporate all these factors, we can identify people correctly and integrally.

字数：567

时间：50分钟

noboundaries · 发表于 2012-11-29 22:46:25

Everyone has his/her own social circles. To a great extent, I agree that through our identification with social groups we can define ourselves. However, we still cannot ignore some other important factors that would affect one's interest, behavior or something could be used to define a person and such factors are outside the social circles.

Human beings would involve in different social groups since they were born and they would be affected by such social circles. Their hobbies, behaviors or other things could be used as factors defining people would change with the groups they live. For example, when we were young, parents or other relatives were around us all day long and we would imitate what they said and they did. Parents would educate us what is right and what is wrong. Our basic values of the world were formed in that time. As we grow, the thinking and personality of people become more and more complex and they would participate in different clubs, parties or groups like that, meeting different people and influenced by them. People living in different culture circles and different political circumstances would be obviously different. Those Buddhists who are taught to treat every creature in the world equally would be more modest than ordinary person. Members of left wing party would concern more about the lives and rights of workers. At the same time, people would take part in different social groups according to their interests, personality or social status. For example, people who care about the pollution of circumstance would participate in the organization launched in order to protect environment and those ~~people~~ who interest in software programing will apply to be a member of programmer club. So, we can define humans from what social groups they have taken part in.
Those social groups are very important indicators which can differentiate one person from the others. However, we cannot ignore other factors which also could be very important（使用important太过频繁，建议换些词）indicators to define people. Some inborn abilities（这个方向偏不偏？） of people sometimes may be hard to or even cannot be identified by the groups they have participated in. For example, some people are genius of art and the people who in the same social circles with him/her may be just ordinary in the field of art. So, it is hard to identify this guy from the social groups he/she live in. Take personality as another example, social groups might be involved with all kinds of people with totally different personality and in most time, it is almost impossible or difficult to identify such characteristics of person from them. Besides the inborn factors, natural environment which people reside is another factor which could affect people and the influence is hard to identify from social groups. For example, people who once lived in areas lacking water may more cherish water than (cherish…more than) ordinary person. If we do not know the natural environment they resided, it is totally possible(chinglish了一点，resonable,tenable…)that we can hardly figure out why they would be so prudent in using water. Moreover, we can conclude that it is highly possible that the people who live along with water would be more skillful with swimming.

In sum, we can not only identify one person from the social groups they take part in but also identify he/her from other factors such as inborn abilities, living environment. Only if incorporate all these factors, we can identify people correctly and integrally.

50min 写560多字很不错了，整片文章很饱满。
词汇要更丰富一点，灵活一点。
还有就是整片文章的出发点值得探讨一下：说的是 define ourselves，即确认自我，认识自身，但你通篇在说define people，这个还是有说区别的吧。
方向可能不太适当。

gaoxing · 发表于 2012-11-30 02:53:05

Everyone has his/her own social circles. To a great extent, I agree that through our identification with social groups we can define ourselves. However, we still cannot ignore some other important factors that would affect one's interest, behavior or something could be used to define a person and such factors are outside the social circles.

Human beings would involve in different social groups since they were born and they would be affected by such social circles. Their hobbies, behaviors or other things could be used as factors defining people would change with the groups they live. For example, when we were young, parents or other relatives were around us all day long and we would imitate what they said and they did. Parents would educate us what is right and what is wrong. Our basic values of the world were formed in that time. As we grow, the thinking and personality of people become more and more complex and they would participate in different clubs, parties or groups like that, meeting different people and influenced by them. People living in different culture circles and different political circumstances would be obviously different. Those Buddhists who are taught to treat every creature in the world equally would be more modest than ordinary person. Members of left wing party would concern more about the lives and rights of workers. At the same time, people would take part in different social groups according to their interests, personality or social status. For example, people who care about the pollution of circumstance would participate in the organization launched in order to protect environment and those ~~people~~ who interest in software programing will apply to be a member of programmer club. So, we can define humans from what social groups they have taken part in.
Those social groups are very important indicators which can differentiate one person from the others. However, we cannot ignore other factors which also could be very important（使用important太过频繁，建议换些词）indicators to define people. Some inborn abilities（这个方向偏不偏？） of people sometimes may be hard to or even cannot be identified by the groups they have participated in. For example, some people are genius of art and the people who in the same social circles with him/her may be just ordinary in the field of art. So, it is hard to identify this guy from the social groups he/she live in. Take personality as another example, social groups might be involved with all kinds of people with totally different personality and in most time, it is almost impossible or difficult to identify such characteristics of person from them. Besides the inborn factors, natural environment which people reside is another factor which could affect people and the influence is hard to identify from social groups. For example, people who once lived in areas lacking water may more cherish water than (cherish…more than) ordinary person. If we do not know the natural environment they resided, it is totally possible(chinglish了一点，resonable,tenable…)that we can hardly figure out why they would be so prudent in using water. Moreover, we can conclude that it is highly possible that the people who live along with water would be more skillful with swimming.

In sum, we can not only identify one person from the social groups they take part in but also identify he/her from other factors such as inborn abilities, living environment. Only if incorporate all these factors, we can identify people correctly and integrally.

50min 写560多字很不错了，整片文章很饱满。
词汇要更丰富一点，灵活一点。
还有就是整片文章的出发点值得探讨一下：说的是 define ourselves，即确认自我，认识自身，但你通篇在说define people，这个还是有说区别的吧。
方向可能不太适当。

-- by 会员 noboundaries (2012/11/29 22:46:25)

确实好像走题了。。。。悲剧。。。。

[作文互改] gaoxing的作文——互改小组第一期

本帖子中包含更多资源

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块