1. (147) "Tradition and modernization are incompatible. One must choose between them."
The speaker contends that the tradition is inconsistent with modernization and suggests that we have to make a choice between them. With this point of view, I strongly disagree, for there are many connections between them. For one thing, tradition serves as a foundation for the modernization; meanwhile, tradition can be improved in modern society. In fact, these two aspects, which seemingly contradict each other, are mutually beneficial.
First, tradition is an indispensable factor for the improvement of modernization. Just like buildings cannot be built on no foundation, modernization has actually developed from the traditional state rather than originated from itself. For example, the brand-new form of movies—3D, is derived from the former ordinary one. The effective communication conveniences such as cellular phone, the Internet, and so forth, have contributed a lot to social information transfer, which almost evolved from the traditional ways of connection—telephone, newspaper, letter in manuscript, and etc. Therefore, it is evident that tradition plays a very vital role by placing a solid base for the modernization.
Moreover, another obvious and understandable fact is that numerous traditional elements have been enhanced to a higher level in modern society. Inevitably, when tradition and modernization coexist along with the societal progress, they will have influence on each other. A supporting example could be concerning with some traditional festivals like Chinese Spring Festival. Several decades ago, people would choose to watch TV, eat jiaozi, and set off fireworks on that day, in contrast, today, modern elements have been brought into this festival in that people can go to a theatre or enjoy pleasant time in a reunion party. Whatever changes about tradition have occurred, it is apparent that modernization has in reality taken a considerable effect on the tradition.
In another sense, we can see that modernization can also benefit from the tradition. When we take a close notice to the development of society and cogitate profoundly, it is not difficult to find that the contribution of tradition to modernization is huge and thus undeniable. For instance, although having experienced development for several hundreds of years, one of the most important values which American people always cherish is the spirit of exploring, independence and innovation. Undoubtedly, without such spirit handed down from one generation to another, most achievements, whatever they are about science and technology, education, or society as a whole, would not be accomplished.
To sum, without tradition as a base, the so-called modernization would come from nowhere; alternatively, without modernization, society would cease progressing and tradition could not be well preserved and greatly improved. Both of aspects are equally important, therefore, equal emphasis should be placed on them. Constructively, we should make a balance between them rather than choose one of them while denying another one.
2. (130) "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."
In this statement, the speaker contends that on the one hand, the extent of children socialization is the decisive factor of the destiny of society; on the other hand, it is unfortunate that we have not learned to raise children who are expected to bring about a better society. Although it is admitted that children socialization plays an important role in constructing society, the speaker unfairly treats it as the factor which determines society destiny, because there are many other elements which are very crucial for societal progress and thus influence the social direction. Besides, it is not true that people are not capable of cultivating their children to make society better.
Admittedly, in the process of socialization, children can develop various qualities which allow them to have further improvements. Understandably, socialized children are more likely to interact effectively with others, thus the ability of cooperation can be greatly enhanced--a kind of quality which often makes a person more powerful and realize the shared information. Apart from this, socialization can help children build reasonable views of life through rationally analyzing comprehensive information. In this sense, how children are socialized really matters in societal progress.
However, it should be recognized that some qualities which the speaker fails to mention should be placed more emphasis than socialization. Such qualities can be independent thinking, innovation, courage and commitment to some certain career. Consider the example of Watt, a mechanic engineer, if he had not made crucial improvements to steam engine at that time, it is safe to conclude that the use of engine would not be such widespread and the industrial revolution would come later, which means some years of lag to human society. Essentially, Watt's contribution cannot be achieved without his independent thinking or innovation. In another perspective, people who possess the quality of commitment to a career also greatly propel the development of society. For instance, Mandela, the leader of South Africa, has devoted himself to human rights and racial equality. Although imprisoned for over 25 years, he did not stop making great efforts in antiracism and antiapartheid. We have to acknowledge that it is conviction which makes Mandela keep on his career with great determination.
When it comes to the author's another aspect of view, I argue, in modern society, people have been spending more and more time and energy to educate the younger generation and they have accomplished considerably. Not only do we teach children to learn more useful and beneficial knowledge to prepare for building a better society, but we are beginning to focus on their growth in psychology more than ever before. Instead of mechanically emphasizing the importance of learning knowledge, we help children to develop mature and rational ways of thinking and analyzing. For example, parents would like to teach their children to treat this society as objectively as possible and try to be optimistic. This evidently demonstrates that our methods of educating are becoming more and more reasonable and farsighted.
In sum, although the importance of the children socialization to a society is considerable, without cultivating other key qualities such as innovation, independent thinking, and courageousness, a child can hardly grow up as a real useful person to society. And, not like what the speaker contends, modern people have been performing better and better in educating their children to improve and beautify society.
3. (50)"In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach."
Should the faculty in college or university spend their time in working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach in order to improve instruction quality as the speaker contends? Basically I agree with this statement, for there are many obvious benefits by doing so. However, such a practice should be limited reasonably, and other approaches to enhance the level of instruction should not be neglected.
One of the benefits lies at teacher's applying the theory to the practice, which will be considerably helpful in teaching. Understandably, the ultimate goal we set in learning knowledge is to test the theory and guide the practice. As the update of the knowledge is so fast, only by placing oneself in the practice can a teacher keep paces with the latest and most advanced techniques. For example, in some universities, many graduates complain that some courses they have learned in school is already out-of-date, the fact which they find when they are going to looking for jobs. Some useful software courses are not included in the teaching scheme, while the corporations usually expect such ability of using such software. If the teachers are not limited in their academic world and try to obtain the information what techniques are really acquired, the above situation can be avoided or at least greatly alleviated.
Another benefit can be to facilitate the understanding and absorbing of knowledge. If students just learn mechanically, the efficacy will be poor, while a teacher proficient in practice can usually combine abstract and possibly boring concepts with its real application. By doing this, it will not only make the arid knowledge vivid, but also spark the students' interest and thus propel the comprehension of knowledge. Consequently, it is undoubted that the quality of instruction will be enhanced.
In another sense, I argue that overemphasis on teacher's working outside the academic world will be potentially harmful. Because a teacher might not have enough time and energy to spend on the 'outside' professions; and other alternatives to better the teaching quality are greatly worth attempting. For example, faculty should focus on the improvement of their teaching method. Without developing reasonable and effective ways of instruction, even a teacher with profound knowledge resources will fail to impart his or her views clearly, as a result, we are not certain that students will learn the essence. Besides, the facilities of teaching also influence the instruction quality; therefore, university or college is suggested to pay more attention to improve them.
To sum up, it is feasible and generally effective for faculty to improve the instruction level through working outside the academic environment in professions related to some certain courses. In another perspective, when it comes to the issue of instruction quality, college or university should also try to apply various methods such as improving the way of teaching, and supplement the infrastructure of teaching.
4. (48) "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
I agree that the study of history has paid too much attention on the famous few, as the speaker contends. However, when it comes to the trends and significant events in history, in my view, the problem is so complex that it must be determined on a case-by-case basis and would not come to an ‘either…or’ solution. In political or social realm, the role of the famous few has experienced a gradually weakening process from the past till today; meanwhile, the function of groups of people to history has become more and more influential. While in science history, distinguished individuals have been playing more important role than groups of people.
To begin with, I concede that the historians or others who study the history place more emphasis on individuals rather than groups of ordinary people in spite of superficially pointing out that the power of the masses should not be neglected. The supporting reasons for this opinion can be elaborated in three aspects as follows: Firstly, the history itself is composed of a series of individuals and events launched or impelled primarily by these people. Secondly, when a historian is engaged in studying history, more often than not, he or she chooses to start the work from one or several famous historical persons and then spread to a wider scope, because such method of studying history is practical and favorable for beginning the work immediately. Finally, people, whoever they are historians or ordinary people, are inclined to focus on the famous few more than on groups of people.--It is understandable.
Speaking of the second aspect of author's view, I argue that the role of individuals to history should be analyzed in at least two respects--political or societal field and scientific field. In political or social area, celebrated persons in the past usually had more powerful influence on the trends of history than do famous individuals today. Consider the example of Lincoln who defended the union of America and abolished the slavery by signing the Emancipation Proclamation; or Martin Luther King, Gandhi--both of them had devoted themselves to the antiracism and antiapartheid. To some extent, such people all made more crucial contributions than do famous individuals in modern society. Because our societies have evolved into relative maturity and social systems have become more and more reasonable, on the one hand, famous political individual, say, the president of one country, might not be imposed as heavy responsibility as in the past; on the other hand, the power of president is also limited today.
Relatively, the power of the masses has been increasing through the history of politics and society. As society develops toward the direction of being open and democratic, along with the enhancement of the public’s awareness of getting involved in politics, it is safe to conclude that influence of the public to trends of history will, also hopefully, become more obvious.
In another field--scientific area, the contribution of influencing the tendency of history should be at large attributed to those distinctive individuals. The distinct nature of scientific field generally determines that groups of common people cannot participate greatly in the development of science and technology either in the past or today. To retrospect, most of the accomplishments have been achieved by excellent individuals not common people--for example, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, and etc. Every single step of science is explored by such individuals. It is hard to imagine that a group of common people invent the telescope or find the laws of falling bodies or discover the universal gravitation.
To sum up, for the reasons of nature of people and the research methods, study of history admittedly spills much ink on the individuals rather than groups of people. So, which of them is more determinative to the tendency and events of history? Some political figures made great contributions to history in the past, while the political figures in modern society cannot have such impressive achievements as those in the past. At the same time, influence from the public will be more significant to history of politics. In contrast, the history of science has been propelled more by individuals than by groups of people.
5. (208) "The way people look, dress, and act reveals their attitudes and interests. You can tell much about a society's ideas and values by observing the appearance and behavior of its people."
The speaker claims that people's attitudes and interests can be revealed by examining the way they look, dress, and act; and that if we observe the appearance and behavior of people, we can know a lot about ideas and values of their society. With the first claim, which appealing at first sight, under some qualifications, I partly agree. However, I argue that in most cases, people's appearance or behavior cannot demonstrate their attitudes and interests or at least cannot be counted as clear indicator of people’s inner ideas. Of course, I also find the second claim less supported by empirical evidence.
Admittedly, in some circumstances, we can understand people's attitudes or interests from their appearance, clothing, and behavior. For instance, Muslim women often wear veil and robe to represent their respect to purity and chasteness as well as belief in Islam. Another example can be based on the differences in clothing preference between West and East. Western people are advocating the beauty of body and emphasizing the expression of individual difference, so they are likely to wear some clothes showing sexy elements. In contrast, Eastern people often choose baggy clothes to cover their body curves in that they express a kind of implicitness. However, also worthy to be emphasized, in the cases such as discussed above, one still needs broad knowledge and insightful consideration; otherwise, he or she can see no more than superficial phenomenon instead of contents at a deep level.
In fact, more often than not, it is ineffective to conclude on people's inner mind solely depending on such superficial elements. People's behavior, choice of clothing, or appearance can be influenced by many external factors so that such indicators fail to expose their true ideas. For example, such factor can be geography or climate. In some areas in the Middle East, people living in extremely hot and arid climate have to wrap themselves tightly using broad white cloth to prevent heat radiation. Or the Tibetans, living in severe cold district, who often wear thick robe and at the same time bear right arm as a convenience to whip while grazing. Such choice of clothing is far more of the result of climate than willingness to express their inner mind. So, how can we know these people’s mind and interest on the basis of their clothing?
Similarly, when we examine the issue on social scale, that is the speakers' second assertion, we still find it unsubstantiated and thus problematic. The complex nature of society determines that we cannot find a set of comprehensive and perfect indicators for examining, thereby giving the precise answer of a society's ideas or values. If we really insist that there are something which can tell a society's prevailing values and ideas, I prefer to 'recommend' people's attitudes towards some immediate and existing social problems rather than their appearance or behavior. For example, if most people think that we should take great efforts to help the poor, we can, possibly, tell that this society may be advocating charity and equality. Or, if the majority of people would not or dare not prosecute official corruption, it might demonstrate that this society is less democratic, or that citizens here lack awareness of defending themselves by means of law.
In sum, I believe that the speaker makes an over-statement at best by overestimating the indicative role of external behavior to inner activity. Moreover, complex and intricate as the society's ideas and values are, it is hasty and ungrounded to make judgment only depending on appearance and behavior of its people. Alternatively, most people's attitudes towards some crucial social problems--such as unemployment, poverty, official corruption, and etc--usually reveal the core ideas and values hold in a society.
In this statement, the speaker contends that on the one hand, the extent of children socialization is the decisive factor of the destiny of society; on the other hand, it is unfortunate that we have not learned( how) to raise children who are expected to bring about a better society. Although it is admitted that children socialization plays an important role in constructing society, the speaker unfairly treats it as the factor which determines society destiny(要不要加冠词，我不太确定), because there are many other elements which are very crucial for societal progress and thus influence the social direction. Besides, it is not true that people are not capable of cultivating their children to make society better.
Admittedly, in the process of socialization, children can develop various qualities which allow them to have further improvements. Understandably, socialized children are more likely to interact effectively with others, thus the ability of cooperation can be greatly enhanced--a kind of quality which often makes a person more powerful and realize the shared information. Apart from this, socialization can help children build reasonable views of life through rationally analyzing comprehensive information. In this sense, how children are socialized really matters in societal progress.
However, it should be recognized that some qualities which the speaker fails to mention should be placed more emphasis than socialization. Such qualities can be independent thinking, innovation, courage and commitment to some certain career. Consider the example of Watt, a mechanic engineer, if he had not made crucial improvements to steam engine at that time, it is safe to conclude that the use of engine would not be such widespread and the industrial revolution would come later, which means some years of lag to human society. Essentially, Watt's contribution cannot be achieved without his independent thinking or innovation. In another perspective, people who possess the quality of commitment to a career also greatly propel the development of society. For instance, Mandela, the leader of South Africa, has devoted himself to human rights and racial equality. Although imprisoned for over 25 years, he did not stop making great efforts in antiracism and antiapartheid. We have to acknowledge that it is conviction which makes Mandela keep on his career with great determination.
When it comes to the author's another aspect of view, I argue, in modern society, people have been spending more and more time and energy to educate the younger generation and they have accomplished considerably. Not only do we teach children to learn more useful and beneficial knowledge to prepare for building a better society, but we are beginning to focus on their growth in psychology more than ever before. Instead of mechanically emphasizing the importance of learning knowledge, we help children to develop mature and rational ways of thinking and analyzing. For example, parents would like to teach their children to treat this society as objectively as possible and try to be optimistic. This evidently demonstrates that our methods of educating are becoming more and more reasonable and farsighted.
In sum, although the importance of the children socialization to a society is considerable, without cultivating other key qualities such as innovation, independent thinking, and courageousness(这里是不是可以把上面提得的commitment to some certain career，这样前后一致), a child can hardly grow up as a real useful person to society. And, not like what the speaker contends, modern people have been performing better and better in educating their children to improve and beautify society.作者: donkeywto 时间: 2010-3-12 09:16:24
1. (147) "Tradition and modernization are incompatible. One must choose between them."
The speaker contends that the tradition is inconsistent with modernization and suggests that we have to make a choice between them. With this point of view, I strongly disagree, for there are many connections between them. For one thing, tradition serves as a foundation for the modernization; meanwhile, tradition can be improved in modern society. In fact, these two aspects, which seemingly contradict each other, are mutually beneficial.
First, tradition is an indispensable factor for the improvement of modernization. Just like buildings cannot be built on no foundation, modernization has actually developed from the traditional state rather than originated from itself. For example, the brand-new form of movies—3D, is derived from the former ordinary one. The effective communication conveniences such as cellular phone, the Internet, and so forth, have contributed a lot to social information transfer, which almost evolved from the traditional ways of connection—telephone, newspaper, letter in manuscript, and etc. Therefore, it is evident that tradition plays a very vital role by placing a solid base for the modernization.
Moreover, another obvious and understandable fact is that numerous traditional elements have been enhanced to a higher level in modern society. Inevitably, when tradition and modernization coexist along with the societal progress, they will have influence on each other. A supporting example could be concerning with some traditional festivals like Chinese Spring Festival. Several decades ago, people would choose to watch TV, eat jiaozi, and set off fireworks on that day, in contrast, today, modern elements have been brought into this festival in that people can go to a theatre or enjoy pleasant time in a reunion party. Whatever changes about tradition have occurred, it is apparent that modernization has in reality taken a considerable effect on the tradition.
In another sense, we can see that modernization can also benefit from the tradition. When we take a close notice to the development of society and cogitate profoundly, it is not difficult to find that the contribution of tradition to modernization is huge and thus undeniable. For instance, although having experienced development for several hundreds of years, one of the most important values which American people always cherish is the spirit of exploring, independence and innovation. Undoubtedly, without such spirit handed down from one generation to another, most achievements, whatever they are about science and technology, education, or society as a whole, would not be accomplished.
To sum, without tradition as a base, the so-called modernization would come from nowhere; alternatively, without modernization, society would cease progressing and tradition could not be well preserved and greatly improved. Both of aspects are equally important, therefore, equal emphasis should be placed on them. Constructively, we should make a balance between them rather than choose one of them while denying another one.