3.15哈尔滨机井+教训~
本帖最后由 irvine666 于 2010-1-30 15:38 编辑127 48
57
我想这篇文章应该作为我的那个315日记的结尾吧，呵呵~~
我的survey 上写的和前面的人的差不多，都是讲专业课写得很高，而其他课程写得很惨。而且是计算机系的结果却是这样的题目。想了想还是写了那个历史的。写得太多了，根据再pp2上的经验，大概是650-700，错误一定很多，因为没有检查完，我检查很慢…………，比较郁闷的是阿狗，写得很不爽。发现了n个语法错误，却没有时间检查，时间就到了，非常地郁闷~~~。
所以出来的时候一点天蓝蓝的感觉都没有…………，寒~~~。
现在站在自己的坟墓上，读一下自己的墓志铭，回顾一下整个备考的过程~~，厚厚，希望xdjm们不要走相同的弯路就好。
整个复习过程都要感谢雪夭，她帮助我克制了自己的懒惰。在新东方能够与她相识是我一大幸运。在此一定要深深的感激她。~~，当时看作文没有任何感觉。她劝我一定要自己写文章，才能发现问题。果然，呵呵，不动笔不知道呀~~，第一次写都是很痛苦地，当然，也开始对自己有了清晰的认识。在北京垃圾场的日子过得很快，我主要是了解了如何备考的过程~~，而且认识到了许多人的勤奋你是要服气地~~，比如雪夭……嘻嘻（我特别佩服~~）。然后，2月6回到了学校。
大概开始的时候每天写一个~~，但是，现在看来，时间抓的不紧是我的一个致命弱点。而且，没有背托福单词和比较好的文章导致我的作文到了也许思想不算跑题但是不能被人看懂的凄惨境界。也许就是传说中的600字的作文能得3分的~~（如果不跑题）
后来看了一个大牛的文章，认识到了pp2的重要性，开始每天都坚持模考一套。这个还算可以吧，但是，因为很少参与别人的作文评改（在此提醒大家，不要以为别人帮你改作文是无聊，自己帮别人是吃饱了才干地，）评改作文，可以从他人处吸收思路和写法。非常的有效。而且可以引发一大堆过瘾的水贴来讨论，来加深某些论题的认识。这个是我的另外一个教训。呵呵~~
还有就是例子的挖掘，一方面例子有很多的角度。不一定要求太多的例子，但是这些例子最好能从很多角度来反映问题。~~~这样，你的论述才会有深度。~~~而且也不用背太多的人名，我睡觉前一天都在想罗斯福的拼写，寒~~~
在此真心感谢这一个多月来支持我的朋友，亲人。尤其是我爸爸~~，居然在考前晚上2点钟醒来时看到老爸的短信~~，“一定要强迫自己睡觉……”便又晕死过去了……呵呵。
感谢雪夭，一个勤奋和乐于助人的g友，没有你，我还不知道要走多少弯路呀~~~还有，xiongxiong,虽然我考g你会郁闷，但你却最忠实最竭尽全力的支持我。~~~
还有这个板子上面的所有支持过我的人，尤其是那些无私的版主……，使这个版面真正象个家的人~~~
虽然也许作文会很惨，但是我还是会加油。不为别的，只为一个结果~~
还有，刚才看到一个兄弟考试看了别人一眼，就被写record了，我也很害怕~~，我好像犯了更大的错误，我走了n次，另两个pp的哈尔滨姐姐无限郁闷。~~希望他们不要写我的record呀~~，不过我走的时候好像没有说什么。可能是不是因为我是在考完作文才跑出来的原因~~？看也没有用，厚厚~~，大家还是小心为妙吧~~，可以她没有说什么时候才能让我出来呀？！`~所以我写完作文，以为出来添学校呢，结果就跑出来了……汗~
最后介绍一个相当强大的网站，www.wikipedia.org一个百科全书网站，这个网站上的东西很新，而且很全面，举个例子先：有个题目是scandals的，大家的例子都不多，来来回回也就是watergate,而这个网站上能够查到一系列的scandals社会的各个方面，政治的好多，不说了，经济的很多，而且有综述，适合背诵。还有很多体育方面的，多的令人发指，嘻嘻。大家去狂找吧，肯定会有很多收获地~~。
还有哦，对clothes的论述堪称精彩，可以用在appearance vs core moral身上。~~以及，clothes vs political faith上。 不知不觉都考完了，恭喜恭喜！
你提到的几个例子帮大家转一下过来，单开一个帖子好吗？:) 感谢，祝愿取得好成绩！ 恭喜楼主！
你是在工大考的吧？能说说考场情况吗？听说最多一天只有8人参加考试？我是工大的 偶不是工大的~~，欧是长春地。15日只有两个人考~~，考场的姐姐很温柔，键盘是hp的仿笔记本的键盘，我看了很亲切，和和。~~在机械楼的3楼3001里面。别的？嗯~~，好像没有什么了 ~~，椅子可以任意调节~~。一切都很舒服~~ 在这里对不起imong了，因为当时整理出来了，打印出来了，好像删了。不过还有一部分，我贴出……，希望imong不要生我的气哈~我比较喜欢搜集定义，来加深对题目的理解……
Research is an active, diligent and systematic process of inquiry in order to discover, interpret or revise facts, events, behaviors, or theories, or to make practical applications with the help of such facts, laws or theories. The term “research” is also used to describe the collection of information about a particular subject. Generally, one can distinguish between basic research and applied research.
Applied Research is done to solve specific, practical questions; its primary aim is not to gain knowledge for its own sake. It can be exploratory but often it is not. It is almost always done on the basis of basic research. The general public uses the word theory to refer to ideas that have no firm proof or support; in contrast, scientists usually use this word to refer only to ideas that have repeatedly withstood test. Thus, when scientists refer to the theories of biological evolution, electromagnetism, and relativity, they are referring to ideas that have survived considerable experimental testing. Especially fruitful theories that have withstood the test of time are considered to be "proven" in the scientific sense-- that it is true and factual but of course can still be falsified. This includes many theories, such as universally accepted once such as heliocentric theory and controversial ones such as evolution, which are backed by many observations and experimental data. Theories are always open to revision if new evidence is provided or directly contradicts predictions or other evidence. As scientists do not claim absolute knowledge, even the most basic and fundamental theories may turn out to be incorrect if new data and observations contradict older ones. Newton's law of gravitation is a famous example of a law falsified by experiments regarding motions at high speeds and in close proximity to strong gravitational fields. Outside of those conditions, Newton's Laws remain excellent accounts of motion and gravity. Because general relativity accounts for all of the phenomena that Newton's Laws do, and more, General Relativity is currently regarded as our best account of gravitation. As the astrologer works with the ancient symbology giving it interpretation more suitable to this age, it becomes an active entering-into, a deep participation with those symbols and the personality/Self of the . . . When that participation is achieved there is a breakthrough. The astrologer can be taken . . . inward to realization. Like a lightning flash that reveals a whole landscape formerly in darkness, insight suddenly illuminates the horoscope giving pattern and meaning to what as hitherto just a collection of symbols . . . A door opens to communication with the Inner Self, whether your own or that of the person whose horoscope is being studied.
In short, such views hold that spirits are the real basis of astrology, and that planetary ‘energies’ are really spirit energies, whatever that means. Spirits might of course be psi in disguise, which would make them open to the same objections, for example the absence of criteria for deciding whether psi is present or absent (Alcock, 1987, 1990), and the severe incompatibility of psi with the findings of neuroscience (Beyerstein, 1987; Kirkland, 2000). In effect they replace
one mystery with another and thus make the situation worse for astrology rather
than better. Goals of science Despite popular impressions of science, it is not the goal of science to answer all questions, only those that pertain to physical reality (measurable empirical experience). Science does not and can not produce absolute and unquestionable truth. Rather, science consistently tests the currently best hypothesis about some aspect of the physical world, and when necessary revises or replaces it in light of new observations or data.
Science is not a source of subjective value judgments, though it can certainly speak to matters of ethics and public policy by pointing to the likely consequences of actions. However, science can't tell us which of those consequences to desire or which is 'best'. What one projects from the currently most reasonable scientific hypothesis onto other realms of interest is not a scientific issue, and the scientific method offers no assistance for those who wish to do so. Scientific justification (or refutation) for many things is, nevertheless, often claimed.
five reasons why it is so important for the public！！
可以用来论证science与其他专业的学生的关系，我觉得角度很奇特……
(or read that non-science majors) to understand science.
Science isn't something arcane, intended only for the few. Everyone of us - whether a poet, janitor, or nuclear physicist - has to be able to think scientifically, and to understand some science, to get through with our lives. Every day we face decisions that hinge on science, such as whether to smoke, what to eat, with whom to have sex, and what protection to use (if any). Even for decisions that don't depend on specific scientific facts, science remains the proven set of best methods for acquiring accurate information about the world. Some of you will end up as policy-makers in government or business. Individuals such as these make decisions that fundamentally affect the well-being of everyone, and most of them know no more about science than does the rest of the general public. Yet they are called upon to decide what to do about (and how much money to spend on) nuclear reactors, global warming, environmental toxins, expensive space programs, biomedical research, and applications of biotechnology. It's nonscientists, not scientists, who have the last word on whether the milk we drink can safely come from cows treated with hormones. To make such decisions wisely, the decision makers have to be drawn from a scientifically educated public.
five reasons why we study science
1.As voters, we all bear the ultimate responsibility for those decisions, because we are the ones who decide which candidates and which ballot measures will prevail. We need enough sense about science to select the decision makers who will make good choices when faced with scientific questions.
Even if science were irrelevant to the lives of ordinary Americans, a strong scientific enterprise is essential to our economy, educational system, and society. That requires lots of young people to become excited enough by science that they resolve to become professional scientists. This requires, to some extent, the nurturing support and understanding of the general public.
Scientists are not always able to communicate their findings in an easy to understand manner. Although the scientific community should do a better job of explaining what they have discovered, members of the general public have to expend some energy in making an attempt to understand what is being said. Familiarity with the vernacular of science, knowledge of some of the basic principles, and confidence in one's ability to fit the new findings into one's ever-expanding lode of scientific knowledge are valuable qualities of an informed citizen.
Eventually, the current explanatory theory fails to explain some phenomenon, and someone proposes a replacement or redefinition of the theory. This is what Kuhn calls a paradigm shift, which ushers in a new period of revolutionary science; all scientific fields go through paradigm shifts multiple times as new theories supplant the old.
One well-known Kuhnian example involves Copernicus' suggestion that the Earth revolves around the Sun, rather than the Ptolemaic suggestion that the Sun (and the other planets and stars) revolves around the Earth. The Ptolemaic theory used an elaborate set of epicycles (circles on top of circles) which were used to predict the movements of the heavenly bodies. Ptolemy's original epicyclic combinations were, by the Middle Ages, becoming noticeably less adequate, and fixes by later astronomers were more and more elaborate. Copernicus offered a return to an alternative view (suggested by many in antiquity) but with rather better data to support it; this new account decreased the complexity of theory necessary to account for the available observations. Once Copernicus' theory was accepted by other astronomers, it ushered in a new period of normal science. Refinements added by Kepler and Newton adhered to the new paradigm. Kuhn attributes the success of science to the way in which scientists are able to work within a paradigm, removing the need to repeatedly work from first principles.
Other more recent examples are the acceptance of Einstein's general relativity to replace Newton's account of gravity in the 1920s and 1930s and of Suess and Wegener's plate tectonics in the 1960s by geologists. 呵呵，人少好！省得紧张！，我还有24天就考试了，最近听说还要去大庆实习，真是郁闷。楼主加油啊，希望你后面的考试也能取得好成绩。谢谢你的建议！ 嗯，收到！
谢谢你！ ,刚才试了一下，校园网，代理不好使，暂时上不去那个网站，那个有关clothes 的社会关系的例子比较经典的就是Gandhi,甘地，穿这贫民的服装，来体现他的humanity.大家去找一下更具体的吧，实在抱歉了…… 呵呵~~~
GOOD LUCK！
能透漏一下搂主的联系方式吗？
能否单独想您请教？ 谢谢！祝有好成绩！呵呵 Thanks for sharing and good luck! 感谢感谢！真是好人
页:
[1]