战战兢兢第3篇 issue 36

sohiechan

36) Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
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.



The speaker suggests that governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear. From some points, this recommendation seems reasonable. But considering a fact about the nature of scientific researches and a significant role acted by our governments in scientific researches, it is just injudicious to suggest governments not to fund these scientific researches.

After all, economy of governments is infinite and in large measure limits their ability to cover all social issues. So they should budget reasonably and fairly to make every coin into full use. If a scientific research has unclear consequence, it may become a good reason for governments to refuse supporting for it. Firstly, since we are uncertain about results, it is entirely possible that scientific researches might result in some damages or even disasters for our society and it would take us more sources to address these detrimental effects. Moreover, sometimes they would be nearly redeemable. Thus, funding these scientific researches just serves to jeopardize our society. Secondly, governments need to confront variety of problems. Weighing funding some urgent and basic problems, such as poverty and natural calamities, against supporting for a scientific research whose result is unclear, we can easily come into a conclusion that the former should be preemptive. Therefore, it may be justifiable for governments not to fund a scientific research with unclear results.



However, common sense informs me that no scientific researches’ consequences can be predictable accurately since by carrying out these researches, our scientists aim at detecting some areas which have not been exposed to humans’ world. In other word, we would never assure any scientific researches’ consequences unless they have been conducted. Thus, it is inappropriate to make a criteria to decide if a scientific is worthy of fund based on whether its result is clear or not.



Meanwhile, if governments accept the speaker’s recommendation and stop funding these scientific researches, we might miss numbers of great inventions and discoveries, because funds from governments play crucial roles in scientific researches, especially some whose results have no economic effects, such as discoveries in history and astronomy, or some researches that are so large that they cannot go ahead without governments’ support. Take the Human Genome Project as an example. The Human Genome Project is one of the greatest scientific researches in 21th and involves overall human beings. No one and no single organization can accomplish it by their own financial support. And funds from American government and many other governments play a key role in the completion of this project.



To sum up, there are certain reasons for governments to refuse funding scientific researches whose results are unclear. However, we should never make the very uncertain nature of scientific researches becomes one of these excuses. It would be wiser for governments to scrutinize and evaluate a scientific research from various aspects and then make a justifiable decision.

普渡哥

最后一段，to refuse funding严重的语法问题和歧义。