Issue28求拍，第一次写，求大神看看能的多少分，还一个月考

jiaojiao3333

The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

正文：
The statement presented above emphasizes that it is a nation's general welfare of its people that shows how great the nation is, other than the achievements of the nation's rulers, artists, or scientists. It maybe rational to some extent. However, with further meditation, we'll find that the author failed to realize the complexity of reality so that he\she made a quite simple conclusion dogmatically.

In my opinion, A real great nation must be a nation possessing strong enough comprehensive national power which rendered by not only the achievement of its rulers, artists and scientists, but the average level of its citizen's welfare. Only all of these make a combination, a powerful nation can be well coalesced and developed.

However, before the appearance of modern society, the relationship between the government and most of people is not as equal as that of this era. The present nation and institutions often play an important role in providing service for citizens, while the antecedent taking it for granted that they should be ruled by persons in power. Qinshihuang, for instance, the first emperor of China who defeated quite a few tribes and finally reunified China, was so tyrannical that buried hundreds of thousands of scholars who believed in Confucius's theory. No one would enjoy living in a so called powerful country with a booming of art and science but even cannot ensure the right of human security and academic freedom.Although Qin built up a powerful empire, it doesn't mean he will concern with the welfare of people. Compared with the achievements on general sense and the welfare, it is apparently at that time, the military accomplishments and combat gains of the lord as well as the achievements made by the artists and scholars who attached to the lord that matters.

But today, the certain thing goes different. The general welfare of its people seems possess a more significant position than ever. The general welfare of a nation's people actually can , to some extent, reflect some aspects of the whole power a nation possessed. Unfortunately, beyond that, we cannot ignore the facts that some countries, especially some developed countries in Europe, keep a shocking high level of welfare at the cost of financial deficits. To be worst, some of them even acclaimed their bankrupt in a row. In that case, how can we say these countries are prosperous and strong.

From the empire owned by a certain family to a modern society focused on equality and freedom, this change shows that our nation and society have paid more and more attention on individuals. In modern sense, whether a country is a powerful one depends on how greatly can the citizens in it feel the happiness. That is, the general happiness of people matters much on the nation. The official institutions should endeavor themselves to guarantee that individuals can enjoy as much as possible happiness in their limited lives.


提纲：
1、一个真正强大的国家必然拥有强大的综合国力，而强大的综合国力不仅体现为统治者、艺术家或者科学家的成就，还必须体现为人民的整体福利水平。如此，一个国家才称得上是真正的强大。
2、但是，在现代意义的国家和政府出现之前，国家和政府与百姓的关系并不是现在这种对等、服务型关系，而是统治与被统治，主宰与被主宰的关系。那时，一个强大的帝国未必能为百姓谋福利，而多表现为君主的武功和战机以及依附于帝王将相的艺术家和其他文人的成就，他们也都为人类创造了灿烂的文明。如秦始皇。。。
3、同时，一个国家人民的整体福利水平虽然能够在一定程度上反映一个国家的实力，但是这并不是说国民福利水平与国家实力有必然的因果关系。今天，有些发达国家，国民福利水平非常高，实现了从摇篮到坟墓的全方位保证，但这种高福利确实建立在年年经济赤字，收支失衡的基础上的，由此可见，高水平的国民福利并不能保证一个国家的强盛。
4、一个国家是否真正强盛，应该取决于一国之民之幸福感，一国之民之自由与权益是否得到保障。

普渡哥

第二点，我觉得有点不完全。唐朝时候的李白，杜甫，和一帮诗人文学家，是唐朝昌盛的不可缺少的一个重要部分。

jiaojiao3333

谢谢普渡哥，我也觉得我的例子和表述之间有点牵强，那您觉得语言方面会不会问题很大，我从小写作文就各种语言问题，但是我自己都看不太出来……麻烦您给看一下，谢谢！

竹林中人

为体现你对这个话题复杂性的认识，我建议你说说精英人物的成就和民众福利相互的关系，是否两个就是没关系的，对立的，他们的共同作用对伟大国家或者社会的象征作用

The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

正文：
The statement presented above emphasizes that it is a nation's general welfare of its people that shows how great the nation is, other than the achievements of the nation's rulers, artists, or scientists. It maybe rational to some extent. However, with further meditation, we'll find that the author failed to realize the complexity of reality so that he\she made a quite simple conclusion dogmatically.

In my opinion, A real great nation must be a nation possessing strong enough comprehensive national power which rendered by not only the achievement of its rulers, artists and scientists, but the average level of its citizen's welfare. Only all of these make a combination, a powerful nation can be well coalesced and developed.

However, before the appearance of modern society, the relationship between the government and most of people is not as equal as that of this era. The present nation and institutions often play an important role in providing service for citizens, while the antecedent taking it for granted that they should be ruled by persons in power. Qinshihuang, for instance, the first emperor of China who defeated quite a few tribes and finally reunified China, was so tyrannical that buried hundreds of thousands of scholars who believed in Confucius's theory. No one would enjoy living in a so called powerful country with a booming of art and science but even cannot ensure the right of human security and academic freedom.Although Qin built up a powerful empire, it doesn't mean he will concern with the welfare of people. Compared with the achievements on general sense and the welfare, it is apparently at that time, the military accomplishments and combat gains of the lord as well as the achievements made by the artists and scholars who attached to the lord that matters.

But today, the certain thing goes different. The general welfare of its people seems possess a more significant position than ever. The general welfare of a nation's people actually can , to some extent, reflect some aspects of the whole power a nation possessed. Unfortunately, beyond that, we cannot ignore the facts that some countries, especially some developed countries in Europe, keep a shocking high level of welfare at the cost of financial deficits. To be worst, some of them even acclaimed their bankrupt in a row. In that case, how can we say these countries are prosperous and strong.

From the empire owned by a certain family to a modern society focused on equality and freedom, this change shows that our nation and society have paid more and more attention on individuals. In modern sense, whether a country is a powerful one depends on how greatly can the citizens in it feel the happiness. That is, the general happiness of people matters much on the nation. The official institutions should endeavor themselves to guarantee that individuals can enjoy as much as possible happiness in their limited lives.


提纲：
1、一个真正强大的国家必然拥有强大的综合国力，而强大的综合国力不仅体现为统治者、艺术家或者科学家的成就，还必须体现为人民的整体福利水平。如此，一个国家才称得上是真正的强大。
2、但是，在现代意义的国家和政府出现之前，国家和政府与百姓的关系并不是现在这种对等、服务型关系，而是统治与被统治，主宰与被主宰的关系。那时，一个强大的帝国未必能为百姓谋福利，而多表现为君主的武功和战机以及依附于帝王将相的艺术家和其他文人的成就，他们也都为人类创造了灿烂的文明。如秦始皇。。。
3、同时，一个国家人民的整体福利水平虽然能够在一定程度上反映一个国家的实力，但是这并不是说国民福利水平与国家实力有必然的因果关系。今天，有些发达国家，国民福利水平非常高，实现了从摇篮到坟墓的全方位保证，但这种高福利确实建立在年年经济赤字，收支失衡的基础上的，由此可见，高水平的国民福利并不能保证一个国家的强盛。
4、一个国家是否真正强盛，应该取决于一国之民之幸福感，一国之民之自由与权益是否得到保障。

-- by 会员 jiaojiao3333 (2012/11/13 9:04:49)