Issue 31 习作
本帖最后由 Basilisk 于 2012-8-30 09:49 编辑感觉写的不爽。不知道为什么，觉得论述不够deep.
另，刚上传好附件鸟。
Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
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.
-----
We should save endangered species if the benefit outweighs the cost.
Generally, there is considerable value in saving species. We can think about the diversity of species as a kind of un-renewable resource. The creation and evolution of species are extremely slow and during the period of modern society, there is no record of species creation. If a species is destroyed, it can be gone permanently. Rather, species are disappearing quickly and we may be left with only dogs, cats, chickens and cattle in the end. There is definitely a great need to protect species.
Specifically, species that extinct due to human activity should be saved since the cost of doing so is low in this case. Unlike extinction due to natural selection, which is permissible, extinction due to human activity doesn’t mean the species is against natural law and they have the potential to be saved without much cost. For example, sharks and whales are dying out mainly due to over-fishing by human. Saving them is easy if governments pass law to prohibit over-fishing of them. The cost is only slight loss of food diversity on the table, which is not a big concern relatively. Similarly, land animals endangered by human activity can be protected in national parks. There are already a great number of national parks all over the world and nationals parks can generate revenue, so species endangered by over-killing and deforestation can be saved with low cost, and we are doing so right now. With the implementation of limited fishing and establishment of national parks, part of the endangered species can be saved as a consequence.
On the other hand, we should not be too radical in protecting species. Species facing extinction due to natural climate or geographical change will disappear inevitably as part of natural selection and human intervention can be costly and ineffective. Panda is just such a case. Chinese government has spent millions of dollars in studying and feeding them but there is no clear sign that pandas can prosper in the wilderness. At the same time, there are a huge number of people starving in China and they also need government aid. Certainly, eliminating poverty and promoting welfare is on the very top of government mission and the Chinese government should budget the fund carefully. Moreover, as technology advances, we may have a chance to revive dead animals from their remains, so in the future the cost of not saving certain species may not be so dire after all and the government can spend more money on its citizen now.
本帖最后由 Basilisk 于 2012-8-30 09:50 编辑
卖糕的，写issue 113花鸟1个小时。果然是不能花时间想啊。贴在下面了。。。
附件在这里。
Claim: The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists.Reason: The surest indicator of a great nation is actually the welfare of all its people.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
--------
The indicator of a great nation is the social welfare of its citizens and is measured by concrete values like GDP and the degree of inequality.
The social welfare indicates the greatness of a nation. There are many reasons why nation arises and there are many theories about the relation with its people. To fix ideas, consider the nation as a Social Contract between the people. It is not a tool for the emperor or king to rule or enslave its subject. The nation is owned by the people and serves the people. It is the people, rather than a small group of elites, that decides the fate of a nation. If the people are not happy with the government, they can “vote by feet” and leave the country or they can rise up, deposing the rulers. Either way, the country will likely lose its previous glory or new country may replace it.
The contribution of rulers, scientists and artists can be important for the greatness of a nation if it benefits the welfare. Such contribution doesn’t have any objective or intrinsic value in itself, unless it serves the people. As an example, scientists nowadays complete numerous academic papers and provide countless thoughtful understanding. However, unless their contribution is recognized by the society and turn into innovations, it has no true value as abstract notion on a piece of paper. A concrete example concerns the option pricing formula. Louis Bachelier developed option pricing in 1900 but France then has no need for such tool since there is no massive trade of option and his work is buried in dust. Later in 1970s Black and Scholes basically reinvented the formula. This time, it quickly became famous and saw wide application since option trading become common in Chicago Board Option Exchange then. The Black-Scholes formula leads to several Nobel Prizes and is highly renowned around the world.
Admittedly, the social welfare is hard to measure and the greatness of a nation is actually represented by concrete measured by GDP and Gini coefficient. GDP is the most salient measure of the social welfare. GDP measures the output of a country. The more the output is, the more people can “eat”. Higher GDP typically means higher consumption, higher saving and overall better every life. Inequality is commonly measured by the Gini coefficient. Lower Gini coefficient means that national wealth tends to be shared among the people, rather than seized by a small club of the wealthy. High Gini coefficient and social inequality leads to the reduction of living standard of the majority of people, increasing social dissent and the need to redistribute.
up
页:
[1]