4. It has been said, "Not everything that is learned is contained in books." Compare and contrast knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. In your opinion, which source is more important? Why?
Books and experience are the two main resoures of knowledge, and obviously both of which are important in one’s life. However, as far as I am concerned, despite the fact that people can learn much more from book, experience is a more important source of knowledge, for the following three reasons.
Admittedly, people can gain a lot of knowledge in a short time through reading books, but isthose knowledge actually learned by people or just remembered by people? For example, "hard work would eventually paid off" is a famous saying that almost everyone reads when he/she is young. But certainly few will suddenly be industrious by once remembering the saying, while most people will become diligent after experiencing failure caused by being lazy. Thus it is clear that knowledge from experience are better grasped and would actually helps in our daily life, which is the first reason to support my point. Futhermore, the knowledge we gained from experience is much more practical. Take the knowledge of how to dealing with people for example. In books, one can only learns some basic principles, such as to smile more, to care more, to consider more, and so on, which is somehow doctrinaire. In contrast, by forcing oneself to make contact with many different kinds of people, even the stupid one can learn the practical skill of dealing with people by his/her own experience. The main reasons lies on the difference that books is sold to everyone and have to be general while experience is gained by oneself and is much more specific.
An equally important reason to judge that experience is a more important resoure is that there is much knowledge that we can't learn by reading. Swimming is a suitable instance to illustrate this point. No one can learn how to swim by simply reading a book without actually enter into water. On the contrary, most people learn the skill of swimming by trying in swimming pool. On the other hand, most knowledge we need in our life can be gained though experience.
In summary, since knowledge from experice is better grasped, more practical, and with a broader range, experience is a more important source. But of cause knowledege gained from book can never be ignored since it is a necessary supplement to that gained from experience.作者: mpromanus 时间: 2010-2-25 00:14:47
Books and experience are the two main resources of knowledge, and obviously both of which are important in one’s life. However, as far as I am concerned, despite the fact that people can learn much more from books, experience is a more important source of knowledge, for the following three reasons.
Admittedly, people can gain a lot of knowledge in a short time through reading books, but is that knowledge actually learned by people or just remembered by people? For example, "hard work would eventually pay off" is a famous saying that almost everyone reads (I'm not sure about that..I would think they probably hear about it from their parents first.) when he/she is young. But certainly few will suddenly be industrious by once remembering? (What's the meaning of 'once' here? Do you mean 'immediately' or 'one time'?) the saying, while most people will become diligent after experiencing failures caused by being lazy. Thus it is clear that knowledge from experience are is better grasped and would actually helps in our daily life (Yes, but that needs to relate back to 'importance'.), which is the first reason to support my point.(Your example is good, but an industrious reader like me would immediately question if there's an inherent shortcoming in this particular example - that this particular piece of knowledge is, in fact, about experience, and is 'experience-able'. What about other kinds of knowledge that you CANNOT physically or socially experience, for example, the Planck-Einstein equation E=hv, in quantum physics? Would you call that equation 'unimportant', particularly if you're a student of physics? Think about it.)
Futhermore, the knowledge we gained from experience is much more practical. Take the knowledge of how to dealing with people for example. In books, one can only learns some basic principles, such as to smile more, to care more, to consider more, and so on, which is are somehow doctrinaire. In contrast, by forcing oneself to make contact with many different kinds of people, even the stupid one? (It's not something that many Chinese students are used to but the American people are very sensitive to discriminating language. 'Stupid' is considered one of the more 'harmful' words that may rouse negative emotions. The American tradition is to say that someone is 'intellectually challenged' rather than 'stupid'.) can learn the practical skills of dealing with people by his/her own experience. The main reasons lies on the difference that books is are sold to everyone all and have to be general, while experience is gained by oneself and is much more specific. (I thought your main point for this paragraph is 'practical'. Now you end the paragraph on 'specific'. I don't see any obvious connection between these two ideas. You need to complete the circle here.)(Again, your example is good but it shows the same shortcoming - that not all knowledge is 'practical-able', and to determine the importance of knowledge upon 'practical-ity' would be pretty much nonsense for 'non-practical' knowledge.)
An equally important reason to judge that experience is a more important resource is that there is much knowledge that we can't learn by reading. Swimming is a suitable instance to illustrate this point. No one can learn how to swim by simply reading a book without actually entering into the water. On the contrary, most people learn the skills of swimming by trying in swimming pools. On the other hand? (Why do you use this expression? I don't see anything that you need to 'on the other hand' upon.), most knowledge we need in our life can be gained though experience. (And yet again, that same shortcoming - swimming is a practical activity in itself, so it follows naturally that practical experience is more important in learning it.)
(The catch here is that you don't seem to acknowledge in the first place that there are different kinds of 'knowledge', but your arguments seem to actually pertain to the 'practical' kind of 'knowledge' more. These arguments are partial. They are very valid for this particular kind of knowledge, and they are well made, but they are partial. There's a larger picture here: the keyword 'knowledge' in the question has myriad aspects, and 'knowledge from books'/'knowledge from experience' may encompass different kinds of knowledge, and within this one particular kind of knowledge, the 'practical' kind, you can draw arguments about such, such and such.
The question actually hints you about this - 'compare' and 'contrast' knowledge gained from experience with knowledge gained from books. But this you never did. You only answered the second part of the question with regard to a narrower domain of 'knowledge'.)
In summary, since knowledge from experience is better grasped, more practical, and with a broader range, experience is a more important source. But of cause knowledege gained from books can never be ignored since it is a necessary supplement to that gained from experience.
总结：
语法上要注意一下单复数，其余的从用语到论证方面都很好。重要的问题，就是我在倒数第二段之后的评语中所说的，你的例子和论述都很好，但有一个最基本的题目的东西你没有做 - 就是compare and contrast的部分。你举的论点和例子都是本身就是关于实践生活的东西，所以当然实践经验得来的知识更重要，也就是说你的讨论实际上是有一条边线的，但是你没有意识到你画了这条线，也没解释为什么你可以画这条线。如果你有做compare and contrast，这个讨论边界的设定就会比较自然，所以其实题目本身其实有意在帮助领导你的思考过程。。
比如这篇的话就是说你做了compare and contrast之后就可以说，那么书本的长处在theory类知识，在实践类的知识方面experience比book好，相比起来实践的知识比theory的知识更重要所以我认为experience作为知识来源比book重要，然后你开始做论证证明，这样就是说你一开始就清楚地让读者知道你的一边倒不是随便乱倒的，就可以了。