寄托天下
楼主: ieyangj08
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[感想日志] 1006G 备考日记 by ieyangj08——行胜于言 [复制链接]

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

181
发表于 2010-2-1 16:03:35 |显示全部楼层
issue 22 “Many people believe that a few individuals or small groups (family, friends, teachers, celebrities, for example) have caused them to think and behave in the way they do. Yet it is always society as a whole that defines us and our attitudes, not a few individuals.”

很多人认为自己的思维和行为模式是受一些个人或小群体(例如家庭、朋友、老师、名人)的影响而形成的。但其实并非某些个体,而是社会作为一个整体,塑造了我们的身份和状态。

1一个人的思维和行动模式是如何形成的?这和哪些因素有关?列举并说明。

2一个人的思维和行动模式会发生大的变化吗?如果能,什么有可能引发这样的变化?列举并说明。

3怎样理解“个体、群体、整体”的概念?

4“小群体”的概念描述准确吗?不准确,为什么?准确,其范围如何界定?举例说明。

5群体和社会这两个概念和属性对等吗?社会是一个整体概念,还是一个群体概念?分别如何定义?举例说明。

6分别思考个体与小群体的关系、小群体和社会的关系、个体与社会的关系,并举例说明你的观点。

7社会作为一个整体和小群体是如何分别作用于个人的?各自影响个体的哪些方面?列举并举例。

8社会和小群体可以同时作用于个人吗?不会,为什么?会,举例。

9在不同性质的社会或群体的共同作用下,会对个人造成哪些好的或者坏的影响?举例说明为什么。

10个人会对小群体或社会产生反作用和影响吗?举例。

11如果脱离了群体或社会的的影响,个人还能形成自己的思维和行为模式吗?为什么?举例说明。

12此论题的描述恰当准确吗?那些人会支持此论题的观点?为什么?


Who decide our think and behave way, small groups or the whole society?

To answer this question, firstly we should know how we form our think and behave way and which factors are important in this process.In my analysis, one's think and behave way is highly related to one's environment, experience and genes. We all know the fact that a child grown in a government official' s family is tend to think in a macro way, while a child grown in a merchant's family is tend to think in an acute way. The above examples sufficiently proved that the environment plays an important role in the process of forming one's think and behave way. As the role of experience in the process, we can give the following examples. A student who has learned mathmatics for many years is more toward to think and behave in an accurate way. Besides, the gens also influence one's think and behave ways. You know in a same family the two sons' thinking and behavior patterns are often difference, and it's because their  genes are different.

Next we should know if one's thinking and behavior patterns can change greatly. The answer is definitely yes. But another question raised, which can cause this change? In my analysis, an special person or impressively thing can cause this change. For example, when a care-free boy fall in love with a girl, he might become more considerate. A wasteful man who has experienced big earthquake might change to cherish everything.

From above, we know that one's thinking and behavior pattern can change, but which will play an more important role in this process, the small groups or the whole society?

To answer this question, also we should clarify the following words. Firstly, "individual" means just one person here in our question.Secondly, "group" means more than two people who have the same goal. Finally,"the whole society" means the whole country including its history and culture.

In the issue the author cites the word "small group", however, I think it is not accurate in here.At least, he/she has never given a scope of the word "small group".In my view, the small group could be given the definition as a group of people who can influence the behave and think way of the individual.We all know that family, friends and teachers are all the close people who can influence the individual.Celebrities are a group of famous people and they often have greatly public influence, so they also be included in our "small group".

Additionally, the author has made a logical error. He/she trys to compare the two word which are in different levels.In our above analysis, we know "group" means a group of people, while "the whole society" is more tend to be explained as the history and culture of the country.Thus,these two word can't be compared at all.

Small group can influence the individual's thinking and behavior pattern, the examples of  a child grown in a government official' s family or a merchant's family we uesd above can explain this point well. However, both the individual and small group are all influenced by the whole society in their think and behave way.The related examples are easy to give.The westen people in the world are more like to show themselves,while the eastern people are more modest.We can't deny that the country we live have already branded a deep imprint in our thinking and behavior pattern while we grew up.

However, the influence from the society and small group are not the same. The influence from the society are often deep and not easy to be removed.However, the influence from the small group are more superficial and relatively easy to be changed.Everytime when our whole family move from one place to another place, it might bring some changes in our think and behave way.We might become more quick in thinking,for we have a new mathmatical teacher.We might change to be more open, because we have made a new good friend.But,have you had the experience of livng in a totally unfamiliar country for a period of time? If your answer is yes, you will certainly know the difficulty you try to fit in the new circumstance, but it is really hard.Yes,it's the influence of the whole society,and it is really difficuly to be removed.

Although the influence of small group and the whole society are not the same, they often play on an individual at the same time.Just as you live in one country, you will be influenced by it's history and culture. This process is natural.At the same time, your nearby small group will also play a role in your forming of think and behave way. For example,if you grown up in the western of America,you will be both roughness and loving freedom.

If the influence of the whole society and the small group are opposite for an individual, what will happen? Such as the friends of one are criminals, and they will influence he/she not to abide the law, which is opposite to the whole society.In this case, we can tell which influence is good and which is bad, so the result is the good overcome the bad finally.If the bad one overcome the good one in the individual, such as the above individual try to not abide the law and can't get out of the evil himself/herself, finally they will be coercively corrected by the whole society,such as he/she be educated by the prison. Additionally, in this circumstance, the whole society is often the right one, for it is formed in a long time and the wrong things can't be reseverd for a long long time.

On the side, the individual will influence the small group and even the whole society, and this is often caused by one greatly excellent individual.Such as the companies often use the celebrities to advertise their product, which is a good example of this point.Also, the great leader of the country can influence many people in their think and behave way,such as the famous "Not ask what your country can do for you, just ask what you can do for your country.", which made numerous Americans more diligent.  

If one leaves the influece of the small group and the whole society, can he/she forms his/her thinking and behavior pattern? It is difficulty to answer this question,for we haven't seen such an individual,besides Robinson,a role in one novel,who had lived in an island many years by himself.How can the first person in the world formed his/she thinking and behavior pattern? And there is no other one or society can influence he/she. So from this point of view, it seems we could say yes to the above question.

In conclusion, the statement in the title is not right completely. Both the small group and the whole society will influence our thinking and behavior.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

182
发表于 2010-2-2 13:57:39 |显示全部楼层
作业7

issue70 "In any profession—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

I partially agree with the author that leadership should have duration in any profession. However, the period length is not necessarily five years.

To begin with, long-term leadership, let alone permanent leadership, might cause absolutism and dictator. This is easy to elucidate and I will give two main explanations here. In one aspect, pursuing unhindered rein can lead to autocracy leadership. One of person’s greatest desires is to get rid of constraints; rulers are no exception. Just image the alluring world: your future planning will be implemented without any balk, and your decision about a critical matter will be carried out unrestricted. Almost no one can refuse the chance if they have the right to choose. In another aspect, achieving personal interests is also a major incentive for the promotion of authoritarian. As mentioned above, autocratic leadership would realize anything indiscriminately as they wish, including their own desires. The world famous Pyramids of Egypt is a suitable convincing example.

Additionally, power with duration would bring competition and also democracy. Time limited tenure does not mean the old leadership will definitely step down and the new ruling class will certainly replace the old. At the end of each office term, two sides shall compete with each other, and the winner will have the power no matter which side they are. With this leadership mechanism, those in power would consider the next election, thus will restrict their own behavior; those currently without power also have a chance to be elected at the next election, which reflects the so called democracy and liberty. The quadrennial U.S. government election is a proper example here. During every election, the ruling party and the opposition party have the same opportunity to be elected, and finally this mechanism makes a huge contribution to the United States.  

Nevertheless, the reasonable tenure lengths are varied according different areas, and it is not definitely five years. In politics and business areas, five years leading period might be apposite, however, in other areas it may be unreasonable, such as education and scientific research, which need a longer tenure period. Since experience plays a vital role in these areas, which need a long time to form, long tenure periods will do more benefits than the short ones. In the sea of science, there are ample examples of this. Prigogine is one representative, who proposed Theorem of minimum entropy production in 1945, one major cornerstone of Thermodynamics, and maintained the leading position in this research area until he got the Noble Prize in Chemistry in 1977, due to the famous Dissipative Structure Theory.
   
In sum, the leading tenure should have a time limit in any profession, whereas the period length should vary according the areas.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

183
发表于 2010-2-2 13:58:28 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-2 14:02 编辑

前辈们的同主题优秀习作

pippo1983

I disagree with this claim because it is too assertive to say in any profession leaders should step down after five years. The conclusion should vary in different cases.

In political field, it is necessary to change leaders after a certain period such as five years, because absolute power leads to
dictatorship or despotism. People's desire always expands with their power and authority. A country governed by a leader will become a despotic country which will finally bring the country chaos and depression. Chairman Mao, the leader of new China, dragged the country into chaos of Cultural Revolution during which many people were purged or killed. Although at that time, many people tried to prevent the revolution because they thought it as crazy and irrational, they failed to stop the break-out because the power was hold on Mao's hands and no one could oppose against him. If the leader can maintain his power for a long period, the destiny of the whole country will be dependent on his or her own intellect and decision, which is extremely dangerous because no one can always be right. Once the leader makes some mistakes, the entire country will suffer. Therefore to change the leadership from time to time is sensible and better for enhancing democracy.

In the commercial area, the regular change of leadership is not necessary. The only reason for changing a leader in an enterprise is that he or she can not improve the benefits and profits of the enterprise.
Carleton Fiorina, the CEO of HP company who was only in charge of the company for around six years, was fired because of her failure in creating profits. In contrast, Bill Gates has been the top leader of Microsoft for about 20 years before he retired from the throne. The difference is that Bill kept creating more wealth and profits for his enterprise. If he was replaced just after five years after he established the company, maybe we will never see the birth of Windows which has brought the revolution in the Information Age, and no doubt the Microsoft will lose a lot or might come into death without his leadership. Therefore, to set a certain period for leaders in commercial area is inappropriate and useless. Profits and performance is the only criteria for change of the leadership.

In the educational field, it is even detrimental to set such a
rigid period for leaders, especially for these professors, because the experience and knowledge are essential for a good leader in education, both of which need to be accumulated in a much longer  period than just five years. A lecturer needs to learn how to teach student at the start, and by doing more researches and studies will he or she become a professor who is more qualified to cultivate senior students. The process often takes decades to accomplish. If we simply replace the professor after only five years, then all his or her knowledge and experience obtained during the last decades could be wasted as a result. Even if he or she can hold a lower position to continue to teach students, his or her morale and confidence will indisputably be impaired or even damaged because the lack of respect for the efforts and accumulation he or she has spent. To maintain a persistent position for their leadership is to honor them for their contribution and efforts. Therefore, it will be too hasty or even cruel to change the leaders in the academic area after a certain time, especially a short period such as five years.

In sum, the change of leadership in every profession seems not always to be a good deed. The conclusion should be varied according to certain realms. In some realms such as politics we should take the suggestion to benefit the society while in other areas we should consider the benefits and disadvantages of the suggestion before we make the decision to replace our leaders.


最后的使徒

提纲:
1, 领导者会感到疲劳, 并在工作中失去自己的判断力 +
2, 领导者会失去创造力 +
3, 5年过于绝对, 应依据情况而定 -
4, 经验和传统的持续性很中 -

Modern democratic nations have mostly built authority systems which change their leaders in several years and limit any one from holding his power for long. I think this is quit correct and effectively since those who are in power may be tired and cannot bring new things after staying in a consistently stable position. However, the limiting time is too extreme to be defined as five years. For revitalizing an enterprise, changes of its leaders and other powerful positions should consider about special situations.

Commonsense tells us that there is no one who is perfect and always full of passion. Even the most intelligent leader may feel tired and out of control one day, though in many situations he cannot feel it--therefore holding on power and make wrong decisions. A striking example involves our nation's first chairman,
Mao Zedong, who is considered as very outstanding and powerful. During his early years, Mao won the wars against Japanese and other enemies. Then he built an effective economical system from the establishment of PRC to 1950s. But after a long-time office, Mao became overpowered and lacked of sufficient consideration, resulted in several manmade disasters from which China suffered a lot. I think this is because a person's vitalization is limited that he cannot stand on an effective way to rule with limpid views. After several years' work, he may become tired and easily influenced by those who work besides him, with little rational choice.

Another advantage for enterprises to change their powerful members is that such a way can bring new thoughts and policy to the enterprises, which are possibly beneficial for them. Since a person's thoughts are limited, we may easily turn to others, after his intellects are all tapped. A person, no matter how hard he studies and learns new knowledge from media, is likely to run out of creation and be restricted in his own sight. During this period, it is necessary for others to join in. For instance, the famous Japanese architect,
Taoda Ando, had designed many creative buildings in last century. However, he failed in several competitions in some recent projects, since he only maintained his way to analyze and design, but lacked of creative ideas. As claimed in his new book, Ando benefited a lot from his assistants, who are mostly students and new members in his group, and then managed to design with a totally new form which is diversified from those he designed in past. This design won him a project of a museum in the United States in 2003. It seems to me that people can only change their perspectives fundamentally when consider about others. And for enterprises, leaders and managers can change their unreasonable old thoughts by cooperating with those who are new in it, since they can see the situation originally with a by standing view.

Nevertheless, it is stated that five years should be a limited time, which seems to extreme for me. As we know, the voting period of the president of the United States is four years, and a president cannot hold on his position for more than 8 years. But in many business enterprises, leaders may take longer time to realize his plan, therefore making them take longer time in office. Bill Gates, for instance, had taken part as the CEO of Microsoft for almost twenty years, during which time the company grew from a small one to one of the world's biggest companies. If Gates had not worked for so long in Microsoft, it would have been hard for him to develop so many operating systems, including DOS, Windows 3.0 and so forth, which brought Microsoft what it has today. A consistent ideal for an enterprise is important and can be effectively maintained when one or several people in power keep on. Smaller enterprises, like schools, companies and so forth, are not placing so much pressure so that their leaders can hold on longer.

To sum up, since individuals are often limited in their spirits, and may be restricted by their formed thoughts, it is important for any enterprise to keep an open mind to all competitive members for its positions in power. As long as the enterprises are willful to obtain
revitalization, and as long as they properly maintain an effective tradition and their members' experiences, they will grow fast and help the society with more property and happiness.


xinxiaogang

The speaker asserts that the surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership and the leader who is in power should step down after five years. I agree with this assertion insofar as new leadership is needed in order to maintain strength and energy in some areas, such as politics and business. When it comes to education and science, however, I think both new energy and experiences are crucial to that enterprise.

To begin with, I want to discuss the reason for the speaker to make such an assertion. I think two main reasons can contribute to this assertion. First, a leader might easily be left behind by the ever-increasing advanced technology and advanced management methods after several years in power. Especially for those leaders who are elected to position in their old age. Second, when a leader has hold power for a long period of time, it is more possible about the risk that he would use his power to do some individual things and make benefits for himself. To prevent these two defects, the speaker asserts that through new leadership we can surest path to success.

In some areas, such as politics and business, in my view, new leadership after several years of one leader is needed and vital to a country and a business. Because these enterprises need new idea to be survive and thrive. And it is more important to prevent about the second risk that leader would use his power in some individual desire. In politics, for example, some countries are under the control of a king who would in power until his death. History informs us that the king would become luxurious and consider nothing about his country after several years in power, especially in his old time. Nowadays, most countries have abandoned the
monarch system and adopted the system of election, in which leader should be reelected after 4 or 5 years. Also in business, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of a company should be reelected after his execution for several years in order to maintain the company's energy. Admittedly, to reelect does not mean the younger will sure substitute the elder but to provide a fair competition environment, in which the best leader can be elected to make benefit to that enterprise. To reelect can also inspire the motivation of the old leader and prevent the risk of egotism.

On the other hand, in education and science, in which experiences are more crucial, there is no need to change leader after years. In such areas, more experiences and knowledge are requisite in order to make directions and strategies more effectively and efficiently. For example, in every country there is a scientific institution, and almost every academician of it is over 50 years old, not to mention the leader of the institution. In science, admittedly, originality and challenging to old knowledge are the stepping stone to the progress of science. However, due to today's complex and deep knowledge system, if one can not hold the whole system of scientific knowledge and can grasp the clear direction correctly, leadership would not appropriate to him. This is just like a skyscraper which stands for the amount of knowledge today, and which should have strong foundation to endure the rain and wind in future. Also in education, we always say we can get more from the elder. Only elder can give us more experience of life and perspective of questions which is more crucial in education for the purpose of make out true individual. Yet, these do not mean a leader can keep in power for ever, in some cases, especially when the leader lose his energy and can not keep in pace with the development, we should reelect other leader to substitute him.

In sum, we can not say a leader should leave his position after 5 years in power in general. The answer to this question depends on different areas and cases. In the areas that need more newly ideas and prevention of the risk of abuse of power, such as politics and business, I agree that leadership should be reelected after several years. While in other areas that experience is more crucial to the enterprise, we should decide whether to reelect or continue the leadership with different cases.


lyra339

It is true that revitalization through new leadership is one of the ways for enterprises to success. But the statement that in any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years, which ignores the actual conditions, is too arbitrary. Admittedly, when leaders have no fear of losing their power, some of them may tend to abuse their power. Besides, a new leadership usually has greater initiative and would bring in new ideas. Most nations now days such as the USA and the China elect new leadership every four or five years.

However, we can also see many entrepreneurs are in charge of some companies for a considerably long time and their companies keep a rapid pace of progress always. We can’t deny that some old leadership are keeping on improving themselves at all time to be fit for the society. Moreover, the old leaderships are superior to the new ones in some aspects.

First of all, the precious wealth for the old leaderships is
experience. Patrick Henry, an American statesman, once said: “I have but one lamp wait which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past.” In fact, a leader in any profession, no matter business or politics, should face various conditions, some of which are familiar to them but most are never experienced. Making a decision as soon as possible and as correctly as possible is the duty for them. According to a survey of some top executives, they said that they use intuition, in most circumstances, which mainly based on experience rather than knowledge, to judge and solve problems. It may be difficult to see the difference between new leaderships and old leaderships in common condition, however, abundant experience accumulated for ages would make old leaderships much more calm and clear-headed when facing unexpected conditions.

Second, Old leadership has an obvious superiority in
personal connection-a factor that can never be ignored by any leadership who are longing for success. The influence of personal connection is particularly significant in business. As we know, a leader in certain company often keeps close relationship with several underlings who are friends rather than underlings for them. They experience many difficulties together and trust each other always. In their everyday work, they cooperate with a tacit agreement and hence must be efficient. What’ more, some leaders have their regular customers and prefer believing in each other to switching to other companies. Once the leadership is changed, it is high probability that the old leader would bring some talented underling and regular customers away together. We can’t deny that the new leaders will recreate new personal connection and customer nets, but at least it will take some time.

Finally, a relatively stable condition is crucial to any profession to make further progress; however, changing the leadership too frequently would result in unstable condition. When a new leadership begin to take charge, there would be more change happened correspondingly such as new officials, new policies. It may take a long time for the new official to be familiar with the condition or for new policies to be accepted by populace. Besides, some new leaderships would abolish policies established by former leaderships which can not make benefit in a short time. All those may lead to some unexpected factors that may harm countries’ or companies’ interests.

Changing leaderships every certain year is indeed a way to success, but may not be suitable for any profession, any company, or any department. What we should do is carry out different policy according to different condition.


使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

184
发表于 2010-2-2 14:03:22 |显示全部楼层
Issue 221 "The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."

Indeed, people’s living environment today can’t be exactly the same as some years ago. However, when learning history we would be surprised to find history is repeated in certain things, thus we could learn some experience form history to deal with things in the moment.

Definitely, our survival environment is hugely changed, and the main impetus is the scientific and technological progress achieved these years. One case in point is the widespread use of computers and Internet, which brings numerous changes in our life style. Traditionally, when we away from our relatives and friends, we would write a letter personally to express our thoughts and concerns, then put the letter into an envelope with a stamp, and throw the envelope into a green metal mailbox. Now with Internet, all have changed simple. We only need to stoke the keyboard for several minutes and then click mouse to email the electronic version letter. Recent days, Apple Incorporation’s new published production, ipad, would continue change our Internet life. We will not need keyboard and mouse any more, and the new touch-screen will more conveniently complete the man-machine dialogue function.

Nevertheless, when study history, one will be astonished to find history is ample of replications. Marie Curie, an outstanding women scientist of the last century, won the Noble Prize in Physics at her 36, for her research on natural radium radioactivity. Eight years later, she once again won the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for her continued study on radium’s chemical properties. Her constant diligence on scientific research made her award-winning scene repeated again. In social field, there are numerous examples too. At the end of the slave society, the landlord class who master the use of iron and represent then advanced productive forces overthrew the rule of slave owners. A number of years later, history repeated again: the capitalist class mastering the use of machines, the representative of advanced productivity at that time, overthrew the landlords’ rule.

As history’s this repeat feature, nowadays when we encounter some difficult issues we could learn from similar incidents in history. Now the eruption of A H1N1 influenza, a large-scale epidemics and may cause patients fever, cough, headache, chills, fatigue, etc, is similar to SARS pandemic in 2003. Thus we could use that time’s experience for reference, such as isolating the affected populations, and vaccinating the non-infected populations. Another proper example here is the last year’s Sub-prime Crisis caused by the real estate bubble, whose solution could also refer to the experience of numerous financial crises in history.

The old words ‘history is full of repeat’ are justified at certain extent, and remember to find solutions in related historical events when meeting intractable situations.

字数,字数,我的字数太少了

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

185
发表于 2010-2-2 14:03:55 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-2 14:05 编辑

前辈们的同主题

aggie_agatha

History, defined as recording and explaining past events, illuminates our sight to the world that has fleeted from currency, telling us what happened, and, briefly, why. So consider the darkness that might be caused by absence of studying history, we may deduce the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people from other time. And when the issue comes to what the illusion will bring, I agree with the statement that the chief benefit of the study of history is to break down such an illusion.

Fundamental to my point of supporting this issue is what the study of history can show us. Events only happen as aftermath of certain reasons, which are the aims of history studying. Meanwhile, grounded on the whole human chronology, history can summarize these reasons and drawn to certain conclusions, which will help us understand the human nature, social trends and objective rules operating our progression. For instance, the history of the United States is a history of freedom and democracy. As Thomas Jefferson defined freedom as human nature in Manifesto of Independence, this dogma led the country to step over 200 years struggling for its citizens' equal rights. Slavery abolitionism, feminism and other movements were committed by those adherent to the claim of freedom and gain more and more feats.  Such a chronological record, as well as the metaphysical principles behind it, can tell us the aim of individual development and thus give us direction for our society. In this sense, American history seems like a beacon, while histories in other nations can also tell us similar things.

So now focus on the illusion. When the study of history is eliminated, we lose the illuminations on human consistency, and just see separate temporal montage of past story. Due to diversified environments, ethos, technologies and religions, the past will give out a impalpable image for current people. This can be analogous to a situation that some cultivated explorers step into an ancient tribe, in which people live on hunting and gathering. "Why don't they plant crops?" "Why haven't they got medicines?" Questions can be intrigued by strange appearance, and they can never be answered if the explorers have no sense of history development. By contrast, if they are equipped by understanding the necessary progression of generating cultivation, they will be able to explain that tribe members are trapped by their technologies, experiences and other objective conditions that restrict their life level. So far, the cause of the illusion and the method to break it are connected as concurrent elements with the study of history: no study, illusion; study, no illusion.

Concerning this correlation, the study of history and its benefits seems striking. But some may easily point out that the former has far more benefits than just breaking an illusion, such as telling us what is right and what is wrong, predicting certain outcomes of certain premise, etc, hence refuting this benefit as its chief one. However, for my point, all such other benefits are standing on the illusion breaking down.

Just as mentioned above, to realize people from different periods are consistent, we summarize their common features by studying the history. On the other hand, only when we draw such features, can we tell the virtues of human beings, predict future and utilize the study of history. We know the importance of freedom and therefore differentiate good and evil in World War II; we know the economic sophistication and therefore predict outcomes of financial crisis; we know the humans' yearning for beauty and therefore establish aesthetic standards. In other words, breaking illusion comes first, then the benefits of the study of history.

To sum up, the study of history is a much more complex issue than such a simple statement, while under many circumstances, it may have other benefits that seem more important. But according to me, the definition of "chief" is more likely "basic" or "fundamental", since this happens as premise and necessity. So stating breaking down the illusion assuming people of different time distinct as the chief benefit of the study of history is somehow convincing. However, when it comes to practice, as long as we are aware on precise studying of history, and as long as we participate actively in this field, the history will tell us more than the truth of an illusion, coming a long way toward helping us establish a better future.

iq28

Generally speaking, the significance of study of history can hardly be concluded in a few words. Thus, seeing from this angle mentioned above, although it may be a little naive and narrow to just limit the primary functions of history study merely within 'break down the illusion', I acknowledge fundamentally that during the process of history study, people will realize that they actually share much in common with their ancestors gradually, in spite of various superficial differences. Intricate as the topic is, following explanations are necessary.

Before acknowledging that history study can indeed break down such an illusion, it is human nature for anyone to first wonder that why we may consider that people living in one period of time are different from those who lived in another. We may feel normal to find Count Thibault of Malfete was totally astonished and confused by the enormous gap between his descendant and himself after he was suddenly conveyed from his own time to hundreds of years later, because that, we know the aristocrat has not experienced or even witnessed the long span of time he just passed within one second, during which numerous changes actually have taken place; similarly, if a person lacks basic knowledge or awareness of the evolution of history between other people and himself, he will undoubtedly feel strange of those who beyond his own time when confronting with them on TV programs, magazines or other mediums. Therefore, the answer to the question at the beginning of the paragraph seems clear, that is, the illusion is caused by the lack of the adequate edification of history.

However, after the first problem has been solved, another one rises. If we admit the illusion as a product of the ignorance of history, we must also admit that the history is changing at the same time. Then, ironically, will the 'illusion' still be an illusion? Or it just turns out to be the truth?

To answer this question it is inevitable to scrutinize the essential points of history. There is no denying that, history never appears as a stasis, but the changing process is accumulative and slow rather than reconstructive and radical. Therefore, although history cannot repeat thoroughly today, the overall trend stays the same during the human history. More or less, modern theories, technologies or conceptions cannot avoid being influenced by their predecessors, and, consequently, they revise the dross, inherit merits, establish themselves finally. Accordingly, it is not exaggerate to suggest that every new form of event related with human beings is similar with its foregoing counterpart; or at least, the difference is not as significant as many people think.

Furthermore, besides the external forms of changes mentioned above, the consistency of human history relies much more on the inner spirits of human race in fact. Sword, rifle, atom bomb, from the first to the latest, the shape differs apparently, and the power multiplies dramatically, due to the development of technology. But human beings use them only for one purpose--- that is to war; moreover, although the weapons used in the war are different, the origin of the war also remains the same, that is greed and lust, both of which belong to the Seven. On the contrary, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, although their doctrines are incompatible, the spirit of pursuing the truth has passed down from one to another. Aside from those two particular examples, the more careful you delve into the history, the deeper you will be convinced that some inner characters of human beings are permanent, either good or evil. But, be noticed, only through in-depth study of history can you get the conclusion mentioned above, otherwise you will probably be puzzled by various covers on the inherent similarities of human beings.

Insofar, the foregoing discussions all support the assertion of the author; admittedly the meaning of studying history is much wider than contrasting people in different times. From the standpoints of individuals, it can provide entertainments, meet the curiosities and so forth; seeing from a higher position, it can raise the ethos of a nation, guide the decisions of the leaders, etc. However, it is unreasonable to demand one assertion is perfect in every side, and we just need to absorb the merits of this assertion, that is, thorough studying history, we may know more about our ancestors, and thus, know more about ourselves.

tianrushui

Through the study of history, people could find that the life styles of people vary from one period from the other. However, some basic human nature remains the same. Meanwhile, the study of history prevents us from repeating the same grave mistakes as our predecessor did.

In terms of life styles, people in one period have significant differences from people who lived at any other time in history. The development of technology contributes to such changes. Internet, telephone, television, automobile, which are the main methods for us to communicate with others, get information and transport to other places, appear with the advancement of technology. Yet, in the past periods, people mainly dependent on letters to correspondent with others. And the main access for them to obtain information is books. Horses are their first choice when they visit other places. Life styles are not limited in these aspects. In fact, the family structure has also changed a lot. In the previous periods, people lived in a large family, which contained several generations. On the contrary, people today live in nuclear family-- father, mother and children (or sometimes without children). As technology develops, people's life styles would be more and more different from their predecessors'.

However, no matter in which period, some values and merits are still appreciated by human beings. The characteristics which people highly praise are nearly the same from past to nowadays. No matter how many changes our society has experiences, bravery, self-discipline, righteousness, fidelity to friends, family and nations, spirit of never giving up, altruism are still praised by people.  Meanwhile, people's pursuit for truth and beauty remains the same. Perhaps, the contents of people's researches are quite different. The main purpose to do such researches has few changes. They are all aimed to come closer to truth. Similarly, people may use different art forms to express their feelings. However, the essence behind forms is the same-- longing for beauty. From this perspective, it is reasonable to conclude that people in one period of time are of few differences from people who lived at any other time in history.

Finally, the study of history benefits people the most in the way that they help us avoid the same mistakes as our predecessors did. Some mistakes caused by our ancestors were disastrous to our society and even result in the recession of history. In order to ensure that our society keeps moving forward, it is necessary for us to avoid the same mistakes. The study of the Second World War is beneficial for us to avoid wars, one of the most serious disasters to our world. By learning the origination of the Second World War, we could learn how to prevent wars from the beginning. Meanwhile, environment problems also puzzle people a lot. By finding out past behaviors of people which result in current serious pollutions, people could establish laws to abandon such behaviors and prevent pollutions from being more serious. In fact, we could learn from history from many other aspects, not only in prevention of wars and pollutions. Deep understanding about mistakes people made in history would benefit current people significantly.

To sum up, from the perspective of life styles, people in one period of time are significantly different from people in other periods. From the perspective of faith and values, people in any period of time are quite the same. And the most important benefit of the study of history is to avoid historic mistakes made by people in the previous period of time.

xqmelissa

With the development of society, people have more and more comfortable living conditions and mature ideologies, which are different from people living in other times in history. Although the nature of human is unchanged and many rules continue to use till now, people living in different periods are different even through the study of history.

People living in different societies and periods have different social conditions, which is one cause that they could not be similar. As we know, the living conditions have changed immensely comparing ancient times with nowadays. People, living in remote antiquities, wore spins of animals, fed on wild animals and plants, and lived in caverns. At that time, people can never imagine the life in modern times, when people wear various textures of clothes, feed on foods from farms, and live in buildings. Since attentions that people paid transmit from how to live to how to live better, it is not reasonable to say people in different periods are same. Industrial Revolutionary, for instance, an important milestone in the history, brought on immense changes in people’s daily life by more and more advanced technologies. The invention of the spinning machine let people have the capability to produce high quality and various styles of clothes, bringing more satisfaction for ordinary lives. The invention of the electric light let people come into a bright world even in the night, bringing more complex lives. The invention of the steam engine let people replace burdensome handworks by using machines, bringing more leisure time. As a consequence, people living in the times before and after Industry Revolutionary changed a lot.

People living in different societies and periods have different religions, which is another cause that they could not be similar. The influence of religion is so heavy that it could govern people’s understanding of the world which is the basis of social culture. Take Renaissance, happened from fourteen century to seventeen century in Europe, as an example. As we know, the belief that people were governed by God was an adamantine view before this transitional movement. It is Renaissance that accelerates the idea to a new one that people is the focus in the world. The consequence of this movement is let people gradually recognize the importance of themselves and begin to alter their densities through making great efforts to govern the world. Therefore, the religion before and after Renaissance has been overwhelmed along with altering of recognition of the world. The result of this change induces people to have significant differences.

The conclusions drawn from the research of history are not as objective as an event itself, inducing conclusions suspicious. Therefore, it is impossible to obtain fully correct viewpoints from the study of history which is more like a story rather than a reliable reflection of past events. Information that scholars adopted is not as genuine as we think since many regulators living in that period had motivations to alter historical archives in order to reveal their achievements and conceal their defects, whose consequence is people living in contemporary time always being deceived and falsely believing some incorrect documents. In addition, what the depiction of a same historical affair will be discrepant in different studies is histories written by historians often with their creative imagination. As a result, people always are confused when they read many studies of history, since they are not sure which one is true. Therefore, the study of history, as a premise, is not as creditable as people imaging and conclusions drawn from these studies are also dubitable.

To sum up, due to transition of living conditions and religions, people living in different periods are different. Although some studies of history show that people in different periods are similar, the illusion is not fully creditable.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

186
发表于 2010-2-2 14:11:46 |显示全部楼层
2.2
         思考大于写作。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

187
发表于 2010-2-2 17:59:54 |显示全部楼层
Argument 150 The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.

"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."

我的思路
1 仅用一个公园内两栖动物的减少不能说明全球两栖动物的减少。其他地区可能增加。公园两栖动物的品种有限。
2 全球两栖动物数量减少不能说明全球水和大气的污染。过渡捕捞、气候变暖。
3 公园内两栖动物的减少可能由于其他原因。饲养方式、当地气候变化。

Citing the two studies results of amphibians in Yosemite National Park, the author comes to the conclusion that the descent in the numbers of world’s amphibians indicates global water and air are polluted. However, this argument is based on a series of unproven assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

One such assumption is that the world’s amphibians are declining. Even though the survey data in a certain park shows a downward trend, the author ignores the number of amphibians in other places of the world. It is totally possible that those numbers show an upward trend, and the gross number of the amphibians in the world is actually increasing. Unless the author could provide exact data to demonstrate the amphibians in other places are also gradually disappearing, his assumption is dubious.

The author’s claim that the decline in global amphibians indicates the world’s water and air are polluted is open to doubt. On the one hand, over hunting might be blamed for these declines, which greatly undermined the ecological balance. On the other hand, the augment in world’s population number might influence the living circumstance of amphibians, thus reduce their numbers by degrees. In short, without providing solid evidences that other reasons are all irrational, the author’s proposal is unpersuasive.

Finally, the decrease in quantity of amphibians in Yosemite National Park might be due to other explanations. For example, trout really eat overdue amphibians’ eggs, and amphibians can’t reproduce regularly. Or perhaps, the park has adopted new rearing methods recent years, and unfortunately they are inappropriate with the park environment, therefore the number of amphibians is dropping. If either of the cases is true, the global amphibians’ decline couldn’t indicate the global air and water pollution.

All in all, this argument relies on certain unwarranted assumptions and therefore specious at best. To convince readers to accept his/her conclusion that reduction of global amphibians indicates the world’s air and water pollution, the author should provide information on trend of amphibians  numbers in other places of the world, and other causes that might affect amphibians in a global scale or within the park.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

188
发表于 2010-2-2 18:00:20 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-2 19:32 编辑

前辈们的同主题


无名

In this argument, the author claims that the global pollution of water and air is the reason for the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide. The author cites the results of two studies, and exclude another possible reason to ensure us of its rationality. However, a close scrutiny of the supporting evidences reveals that this argument suffers from several flaws, which render it unpersuasive.

In the first place, the argument is based on the assumption that the numbers of amphibians are declining In the park. However, the author fails to provide any persuasive evidence. Though the author cites the results of two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California, the data of the two studies cannot serve to substantiate his/her assumption. The author does not provide us with any information about the process of the survey. So we cannot make it sure that whether the situation observed by the survey conductor can reflect the true situation of the park. It is quite possible that some of the amphibians in the park has changed their habitats, so the observers have not find them in 1922. Or perhaps the two study had used different method, so it is meaningless to compare the result of them. Any of these scenarios, if true, may serves to undermine the assumption.
两栖动物未必在公园下降

In the second place, the argument is based on the assumption that the numbers of amphibians are declining world widely. However, the author fails to provide us with any information to prove it, such as statistic results of worldwide surveys or worldwide phenomenon which can
reflect the trend. Even assuming that amphibians are declining in the park, the situation in a park cannot represent the situation worldwide. It is quite possible that the decline only happens in Yosemite National Park, and the numbers of amphibians in other places have note declined or even increased. If the author cannot exclude this possibility, he/she cannot make us to believe that the numbers of amphibians is declining world widely.
两栖动物未必在全球下降

In the third place, by exclude the possibility that the decline of the amphibians is caused by the introduction of trout, the author implies that there is no other possibilities. However, there is no evidence to support this assertion. It is quite possible that though the introduction of amphibians is not the reason, the declining of the numbers of amphibians is caused by other reasons, rather than pollution of water and air. For example, perhaps it is the excessive hunting that has caused the decline. Or perhaps the rising global temperature should be blame. If the author cannot exclude these and other possibilities, he/she cannot persuasive us that the pollution is the reason.

In sum, the argument suffers from several flaws which render it logically unpersuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, further investigation and analysis should are needed. If so, it will be more thorough and adequate.

文章论证展开充分。段落中心句很有特点,说明假设,否定假设。若能替换段落开头的in the second place 效果将会更好。论证推理上的逻辑问题质疑论据本身的真实可靠更符合ETS的希望。用两个段落来攻击真实与否,对这个公园和世界范围视为同一的问题置之不理,有一点避重就轻的感觉。全球两栖动物减少这一事实,说明全球水和空气被污染了!这个应该是论证的重点。


williamnemo

This letter begins with a claim that the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Then the letter cites two studies of amphibians showing the decline of both the number of species and the number of each species from 1915 to 1992 in Yosemite National Park in California and points out that this is not due to the introduction of trout, a fish known to eat amphibian eggs, into the park’s waters in 1920. The argument seems logical, but it suffers from several reasoning errors.

The major blunder involves that the comparison of the two studies is incomplete and suspect. First, which season do the two studies carried out? What if the figures of the study in 1915 are collected in spring or summer while the latter in winter when, as is known to everyone, amphibians spend most of their time in sleeping? Second, who did these two studies? It is entirely possible that the two studies are carried out by two different groups with different standards. One group may be some college students of bioscience, the other group may be some pupils doing the study for interest. So without further information about the two studies, the figures quoted from them are doubtful and may lead to unsound conclusion.

Moreover, even if the studies are reliable, can we safely come to the assertion that the global pollution of water and air? Can we eliminate the trout easily without careful consideration? It is true that water and air pollution can cause the death of amphibians, but there are also other alternatives, such as the exploiture of the land where amphibians inhabit and the degeneration of the adaptation of amphibians themselves. On the other hand, the introduction of trout may be another alternative as well. It is universally acknowledged that trout can bring about large profit for the fishers and in current market, trout is introduced greatly over the world, not only in Yosemite National Park. Thus, these and other factors that may be attributed to the decline of amphibians need analyzing carefully, especially the factor of trout.

Besides, based on the slim information of amphibians’ decline in Yosemite National Park, we can never know the numbers of them are worldwide declining too. To solidity the assumption, the author of the letter should provide more evidence or statistics concerning the situation of amphibians all over the world.

In summary, the flaws discussed above seriously weaken the credibility and validity of the analysis. Unless the author does more work to lend strong support to his conclusion, the argument hardly deserves believing.


chic

Based on the decline in the number of amphibians worldwide, the argument concluded that global air and water are being polluted. To bolster the conclusion, the author points out that to contrast the two studies in the same park, the decline in the numbers and species of the amphibians there has indicated the global pollution clearly. It seems that the evidence is sufficient, and consequently the conclusion is convincing. However, a careful examination of this argument would reveal how ridiculous the conclusion is.

First of all, the author asserts that the decline in the number and species of the amphibians in the park reflects the effect of pollution. However, he has neglected that things rarely remain the same over extended periods of time. As time goes on, it is inevitable for things to change more or less. It is natural that three species and part of the species left have moved out and inhabit somewhere else; therefore, it would lead to decline in whatever of number or species. The author failed to provide direct and cogent evidence to support his conclusion that the main reason the numbers and species of amphibians have declined is pollution. His assumption based on some plausible but in fact unreasonable evidence looks unacceptable.

Moreover, the fact that trout, which are known to eat amphibian eggs, have been introduced into the park’s waters would, inevitably, lead to deduct the numbers of the amphibians there. The arguer alleged that this point is not the real reason for decline in the park just because this local research can not explain the worldwide decline. It is unacceptable that the author attributes a characteristic of an individual member of a group to the group as a whole. Obviously, the introduction of trout is the very possible reason that causes the decline of the amphibians in the park since 1920 whatever it is an indicator of the decline worldwide.

In conclusion, the argument is not acceptable because the author fails to tell the connection between the fact and the data he cited. To strengthen it the author should provide some concise and crucial proof to support his conclusion that the main reason for decline in numbers of amphibians is global pollution of water and air. Without such cogent evidence, the claim sounds unreasonable and arbitrative.


Liuna

The arguer draws the conclusion that the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. The evidence is cited as the comparison bewteen the two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California, one is 1915 the other is 1992, about the number of species and individual quantity. On the surface, it may seem a sound suggestion, but careful weighing on closer analysis, we find that the it is not convincing enough.

The arguer fails to set up a casual relationship between the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide and the global pollution of water and air. One may attribute the decline of the amphibians' population to the pollution of water and air there, but it is not by itself an adequate explanation for the worldwide contamination since it may be just a temporary local fertilizer misapplication. Furthermore, other multitude of factors could account for the decline in becoming warmer and warmer climate, or the food supplying, or certain desease, and so on.

The arguer also does not rule out the possibility of the influence of the introduction of trout on the decline of the number of amphibians in Yosemite National Park. Commen sense tells us that the trout feed on amphibian eggs. Obviously, it could be a potential factor to the decline of the number of amphibians. However, the arguer fails to give any evidence that indicates the trout do not jeopardize the propagation of the amphibians and therefore are not a main element of decreasing the quantity of amphibians.

In a word, it is very likely that the conclusion about the relationship of the decline in the numbers of amphibians and the global pollution of water and air are not creditable unless the arguer gives reliable proof that shows the relastionship between both more demonstrably and the introducation of trout do not impact the cutback of the amount of amphibians.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

189
发表于 2010-2-2 20:37:19 |显示全部楼层
Argument 137 The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.

"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."

我的思路:
1不从事水上活动可能由于其他原因。不安全,其他新兴娱乐设施。
2新计划不一定能净化水域,没有给出详细计划。
3提高公有土地?可能需要保留。扩展海岸线,增加相应娱乐设施。

While the author establishes his/her conclusion on the basis of a river clean up plan announced by the related agency, the argument, however, to me seems a wholly ramshackle one needs to be further scrutinized.

To begin with, the less entertainment use of Mason River by Mason City residents might be due to other explanations, and not necessary to blame the river’s unclear water. For example, residents of the MC might reduce using the MR for it is unsafe, after all every summer there are numerous accident reports caused by water recreational activities. Or perhaps, some new entertaining facilities have been built recent years in MC, which attract more customers than the MR. If either of the causes is true, the polluted river water can’t be blamed for the less recreational use of MR.     

Additionally, the conclusion is based on the unproven assumption that the agency’s plan will clean up the MR definitely. Even though the program is scientific and rational, the author ignores the actual pollution of the river. It is totally possible that river pollution has reached the point of ungovernable, and any rescue plan is futile. Unless the author could provide detail information to demonstrate the actual pollution of the MR, his assumption is dubious.

Finally, even though the river water will be re-purified, the author’s claim that the need of publicly owned lands along the MR will increase is open to doubt. On the one hand, the current lands along the river might be ample to future use, and extra expansion is unnecessary. On the other hand, the rude landscape might need to be well protected for tourism, let alone exploit them. In short, without providing solid evidences that other assumptions are all impossible, the author’s proposal is unpersuasive.

In conclusion, the suggestion in the argument is fallacious due to lack of valid evidence and justifiable deduction. To enhance the assertion, more detailed information concerning other reasons for the less use of MR, actual pollution of the river, and current lands along the river should be provided.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

190
发表于 2010-2-2 20:38:07 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-2 20:42 编辑

前辈们同主题

无名1

In this argument, the author drew the conclusion about the increase of recreational use of the Mason River, after his/her seemingly convincing procedure of reasoning, and suggested the City council to increase the budget for the improvement of lands along Mason River. As far as I see it, this argument omits some substential information, and therefore suffers some logical fallacies. 首段简要概括文章,作者目的、支持,表明有逻辑错误

To begin with, the author falsely established a causal relationship between the complaint about the quality of the water and the seldom using of the nearby River for recreational activity. Although the two things happened simultaneously, but there are probably many other reasons for seldom using of the water, too. For example, in the city there is a swimming pool, which supplies a good service and has new infrastructure. So the residents prefer going there to siwm in the river. Like swimming pool, other places, such as park and artificial lack, will attract people as well. Without providing us the information about other places in the city, the author's assumption is invalid.

In addition, can the announcement about cleaning up Mason River by the agency make the use of river increased? Even assuming that the residents seldom use the River, because they worried the quality of the water, a promise about cleaning up cannot make the river really clean at a short time. The environmental restore will take a relative long time, as we know. Moreover, the author did not tell us the detail of the cleaning plan. When does begin it, and how does the agency put it into practice? So the author's conclusion about a increase of use of the water lacks credibility.
疑问句作中心句

Last but not least, the author's suggestion is also doubtful. Even if the river can be cleaned up, it is not clear that why the council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the lands along the Mason River.  Can this plan represent the residents' real will? It is entirely possible that a majority of residents want to keep these lands wild as before, so that they can get a real relax in the nature. The author did not show the opinion of the residents, therefore the final suggestion may be not proper.

To sum up, in this argument, the evidence is not enough to support
what the author maintained. To strengthen, more information, such as an
introduction of the city, a detailed plan about cleaning up the river and a poll about the improvement of lands, are necessary.

段落中心句非常值得学习。支持原因和例子也很好。唯一缺点是拼写错误较多,和少量语法错误。

文中 棕色为句式上很好的地方 绿色为举例上很好的地方 浅蓝色 为错误(已修正)下划线 为加强

无名2

In this argument, the author claims that the Mason City need to improve the publicly owned lands along the Mason River, because after the river is cleaned up, more and more people will use the river for recreational activities. Close scrutiny shows that the evidences lend little support to the conclusion. 文中未提清理干净,是否推理不当?

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the residents of Mason City need to use Mason River for recreation. In this argument, the author cites that residents of Mason City are fond of water sports. If it is true, there must be many good places in Mason City for swimming, fishing, and boating. The gyms in this city must all have swimming pools because swimming is popular. There maybe several parks in the city where people can go for fishing or boating. If not, how can the residents consistently rank water sports as their favorite? For that matter, people will not eager to use Mason River as another place for water sports. Therefore, it is not necessary to improve the public lands along the river.
城中还有其他玩水设施,未必增加M河的使用

What is more, the author fails to consider other possible reasons for the seldom using of Mason River. No evidence shows that the quality of the water is the most important reason which prevent people to use Mason River for recreation. It is entirely possible that Mason River is too terrantial to be used for swimming or boating regardless how clean the water it is. Or perhaps there is a chemical factory nearby the river so that eating fish in the river is not healthy. The location of Mason River is also important, is it near the residential area? Without ruling out other possible reasons, the author can not convince me that residents will go to Mason River for recreation after the water is cleaned up. M
河使用较少的其他原因

The author also unfairly assumes that the Mason River will be definitely cleaned up. Although the agency has announced plans to clean up Mason River, it can not guarantee that the plans will be effective. Announcement is one thing, operation the cleaning plan is anoher thing. No evidence shows that the agency is responsible enough. If the agency is responsible and efficient, why there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river? If they keep the quality of the water well, there would be no need to clean up it. It would be better to disscuss the budget after the river is truely cleaned up.
计划未必能实现

Even if we accept all the assumptions, it does not necessarily means the Mason City council need to add budget for improvements to the public lands along the river. Nothing is mentioned the condition of the public lands, and we can not conclude that the lands can not meet residents needs. Does people need to use the public lands when they do water sports? In addtion, increasing budget will add the tax of residents, does that worth the cost?
未必需要扩大公用土地

To sum up, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To substantiate it, the author need to do some detailed suverys about why people seldom use Mason River for water sports, and cite more evidence show that the agency will clean up the river. Furthermore, more datas are needed in order to bolster the plan for improving the public lands along the river.

文章中规中矩,仍有较大提升空间。推理有待加强。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

191
发表于 2010-2-3 13:40:19 |显示全部楼层
Issue136 The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare.

Could you remember the choice questions we did in our elementary school tests, a question with two or more options which you can choose discretionarily? As gradually grow up, we found that life is like an examinations with ample those choice questions, you often have the opportunity to choose, however, the scope is given in advance.  

Microscopically, this is often the case in terms of individual level. When at the tail of our college life, we shall do such a choice question, to continue doing research in university campus, or to hunt a job in community? However, this is not a single choice question but a sequence of choices. Assume chose the former, the road to academic, then you shall need to find a suitable university. Remain in the original school, or apply a better one? If your answer is the latter, then determine which one, Harvard, MIT, Yale, or others? While choosing to hunt a community job, your situation is almost the same, a continuous series of choices. If you don’t resonate with the above description, you will clearly remember the scene of your painful selection process for a satisfying leisure before every annual leaves, to see the desert in Africa, to go shopping in France, or to go home accompanied by your parents. Maybe your idea is already open, and could image more similar scenes in your own life than my shriveled description.

Macroscopically, it is constantly abundant with selections in the national perspective. A case in point is last year’s Sub-prime Crisis caused by the real estate bubble, whose solution process is also like doing a choice question in nature. Specifically, for Obama government the options are: to promulgate several related laws and policies to stimulate the economy, to allocate a large number of money for saving the market, or others. Another proper example here is coping with A H1N1 influenza recently; the corresponding options for the government are isolating the affected populations, vaccinating the non-infected populations, or others. Although the nature of our office’ jobs are similar with our primary school’s choice questions, the former is much more thorny than the latter.

Nevertheless, the choice processes in our life are always bounded, and they already have their own selection scopes as the choice questions in our tests. For example, due to the limit of current science and technology, a doctor can’t choose to let the dying patient renascence, yet a boy can’t choose to be an invisible person like the descriptions in the fiction. Moral and legal constraints also couldn’t be broken when we do our life selections, as abortion is not allowed in some countries, as well as polygamy.

In sum, we could freely do our life choice, while our selection scope is limited by some factors.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

192
发表于 2010-2-3 13:53:04 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-4 13:19 编辑

同主题

pooh

disagree
1。开头
2.让步:专制国家是的 e.g. Hitler统治下的jewish, black people before emancipation
3过渡:民主国家是有选择的e.g. prectitioner, customers, students, 但是为什么还有人说无选择呢,分析如下
4一种情况是只有最有选择或可行选择 e.g学生期末考试
5一种是没有最满意的选择,但是仍可以有选择,不过不是最优的。e.g.election
6 总结,分为专制国家和民主国家来看。

According to our daily experience, we confront choices every day from the smallest things such as making a choice on what to do after we get up ,what to eat as daily meals to much more important like deciding to invest in which business or companies. Nevertheless/whereas people living in centraliztion countries may encounter many mandatory orders or restrained to laws which make them feel no choices. I contend that as long as the society that we live in is democratic, actually the circumstance of no choices is rare. 日常例子做铺垫引出主题,很新颖

First of all, I admit that in a centralized countries like Germany ruled by Hitler, ancient china, North Korea, and racial discrimination countries, populace sometimes lapse into no choice but to be obedient. The rulers or tyrants are prone to make his or her will to act as a standard of the whole society through the means of laws , other regulations. Though the forms of court, military, and legislations seem exist in every democratic countries, those of contralized countries are only at the service of the ruler or tyrants to limit the latitude of common people, sometimes even presumptuously arrest someone and throw into prison. Maybe the most obvious example that could help us understand the hardship of those who living under such circumstance is the Germany  during the period ruled by Hitler. At that time Jewish people were massacred, in another word, if they went on stay within the boundary of Germany, their fate is to be killed and be deprived of the first and most important choice--to live. Another good example is the society of America before the emancipation of black people. Have they got choice to not be born as a slave ? No. From the day of they were born, they were sentenced to be subordinate to the white. I just exemplify two instant to indicate that in such countries which has no democracy , peoples choices are few and constrained, so they may now and then face no choices.

However, when it comes to democratic countries like the nowdays America, common people could enjoy their rights entitled by constitutions and laws, among which are the the rights of free religion, speech, exercise, assembly, petition , legislated and ensured by the Amendment 1-10--which makes the absence of choices very rare. People are facing choices everyday and they decide their lives up to themselves: practitioners starts their new business ,chooses a partner; customers have to decide which goods they will buy and which service they'll accept; students can study what they are insterested in. Even though, we still are able to hear someone complaint that they have no choice but to do something. Is that the case that they really have no way out? After further examination one could understand that even who claim they have no choice still have choices .

One case that people feel no other choice but to do something is the fact that they are in front of several options but there is only one that will benefit them most or only one is feasible while others either have disadvantages or infeasible. Consider, a student may say he or she has no choice but to work hard for the approaching exams. Nevertheless, the fact is that to preparing and be diligent is the best way out and will benefit him or her most ,at least heself or herself thinks so; otherwise, say, igoring the advent of exam will make him or her feel regretful after the unsatisfying result comes out. In this case, he or she does makes chocies, and there are at least two, to study or give up study, but there may be only a benefical one and feasible one.

Another situation is when there is no best choice , so that people are forced to pick an option from the available ones, but still they have choices. For instance, an electorate could find it hard to make a choice when all the candidates are satisfying, that is there is no such one that could completely represent his or her will. If he insist on his right to vote, the only way out is to vote for a candidate who's plan and action seem better than others. After all, he or she makes a decision among several choices though there is no best choice but a better one. Therefore, after the analysis, it is quite clear that even when people allege they have no chice there do are some choices in a democratic country.

To sum up, it is true that in some extreme cases like centrailized countries, people are sometimes forced to act out the will of the rulers. However, in a country of democarcy, most often choices are available in front of us. Though when confronting few cases people have a feeling of no chice, the reality is they've already made a decision.

文章构思新颖,展开详实。日常例子做铺垫引出第一大分类独裁和民主国家,继而解释民主国家没有选择的两种情况,短小篇幅内如此有致的结构很值得学习。全文832字,中间4段,逻辑严谨、例子恰当、语言流畅

Lyon_Tony

Nowadays, people often complain that their circumstances and surrounding events provide them with little choice which renders them harder to survive. However, in my point of view, the absence of choice is a circumstance that is very rare. 常人认为,我与之相反,我的观点。

Our life experience is that we make choices and decisions every day. Common sense tell me that people have free will which is different from person to person, and therefore the diverse wills lead to diverse choices. In our personal lives, people choose their life styles, values, and environments. People of different personality prefers to different life styles. Solitary people prefer to a kind of tranquil life, social people prefer to an active life. In order to satisfy different people with different personality, the public provide us with different abiding places. The pre-requisition of winning a business is to investigate the people’s need and finally satisfy them. The society also provides nearly full-scale choices on some trivial commodities. When you walk into a supermarket, you are faced with hundreds of kinds of commodities in one class, such as beverage or chocolate. The competing businesses and the companies provide people a full-scale choice for the sake of running and prosperity. In academic fields, people can choose their interests diversely. It should be point out that nearly all kind of academic researches and studies are provided by our society or our education system. For instance, the podiatry, taxonomy, and orthodontics are so peculiar disciplines that many people had not heard of. However, still some people choose these disciplines as their professional choice. One exception which is less in choice must be listed out is the people in prison or people with mental or physical deficiency.  社会为我们提供了很多选择机会,该段略有偏题,可调整一下

The phenomenon of “no choice” is not due to the scarce alternatives but the punctilio of the thinking. One may feel to be trapped in job, nevertheless, the reality provide us numerous choices, it is just because they deem some choices are not attractive or even not feasible. A graduated student may be indecisive and vacillate in the employment market even if there are many vacancies, the only reason for this is that he or she excludes many choices for the sake of hunting a decent pay. A guest in a supermarket also indecisive for choosing a suit since he or she wants to pick out one low in price but high in quality. This phenomenon should be defined as “absence of decision” but not “absence of choice”. In an era of pragmatism, people should be agile but not hasty in choosing their careers and others. 无法决策而非没有选择,观点新颖

Only if the society gives enough respect to every one’s reasonable choice, the society is truly democratic. The society, especially the government should not secretly manipulate and prohibit any choice for their vested interests. Besides, the claim that we do not have free choice-serves seems to undermine the notions of moral accountability and human equality, which is the prerequisite of the survival of any democratic society. The society should provide enough choices and regard the public choices seriously. In this way, we can triumphantly march on the road of democracy. 政府不应限制任何合理的选择,这样才能真正民主

In the final analysis, despite the fact that we all experience occasional feelings of being trapped and having no choice, the statement of the speaker is fundamentally correct. I trust my conclusion that free will is an essential part of human beings, and, human are responsible for their choices.

观点很新颖,但总觉得有些偏,文章结构是否还可以再调整?

imong

On arguing that the absence of choice is an extremely rare circumstance, the author’s seduction has been on its half way to success. However, sophistication in the term “choice” does not help validate his wrongful assertion; hardly will anyone with a clear understanding in “choice” be persuaded by such misleading illusion.  好牛的开头

It seems reasonable to conclude that choice abounds if one turns to the cliché saying “we are making choices everyday”: it is common sense that one can choose being stuffed or starved in the morning before going to work, or similarly, to get dressed in this or that way. On seeing such circumstances (but no the nature of choice) some people fervently contends that choice almost exists everywhere, as the author does. After all, aren’t we making choices, to some extent, almost anywhere, anytime?

Nonetheless, underlying such inference is the assumption, or rather, the superficial definition of choice, indicating that choice simply means “one or others”. No one will miss to cast doubt on this shallow description: are such choices choices?

Far beyond the cursory portrait the author has taken for granted, choice in essence means to perform to one’s free will, which is fundamentally different from to perform by oneself. The real choice is so idealistic that it is seldom achieved. We make our own choices, to eat or to fast for instance, but not necessarily to our free wills (do we really want to do so or are we coerced?). The key point lies here. I encountered such a circumstance last year. Junior students in my department was told that they are going to take a variety of optional courses but it turned out that one student must pick seven out of only eight available in order to save minimal credits in optional courses to graduate! Does anyone consider seven out of eight a kind of choice on seeing that free will was nearly eradicated? This is a case to extreme, and less dramatic circumstances are so widespread and commonplace that our daily life becomes a documentary recording how our free wills are humiliated.

The absence of “making choices by oneself” is a circumstance that is very, very rare, while the absence of “making choices to one’s free will” is a circumstance that is extraordinarily prevalent. People are always in a situation just like a pile of paper to be stapled: they may choose, at most, the permutation as well as their position in the row, but no one can escape being bound up ------ regardless of whether they want to be so. More often than not, free will for escape is stifled in this way.

Thus, one can immediately recognize how naïve it is to propose a non-existent omnipresence of choice, or rather, how naïve it is to devaluate choice by saying so. Please stop saying that people are enjoying extensive choices when they are still coerced to choose. Those choices are never of real choices; real choices are very rare.

能实现人自由意志的选择才是真正的选择。文章思维深刻、句式熟练、表意流畅、精确。

吭哧吭哧啃啃

I agree with the speaker's claim that the circumstance of lacking choice is very rare. Sometimes, what we lack is the willing to find some other alternatives. Moreover, we, human beings, can appeal to the development of advanced science and technology when we are really in the dilemma of absence of another choice.

Admittedly, there are some circumstances that we cannot make any choice -- that is nobody can do anything other than accept the facts. We would never go very far to find the examples. The parents we go along with and the family we lived in is determined at the moment that we were born. It is impossible for us to choose the economy status of the family, the city and the country, developing or developed. However, just like the speaker claimed, the circumstances are very, very rare, compared with amounts of choice we have to make after we have consciousness and ability to choose what are benefit us. For example, we can freely choose the breakfast, the clothes at the most extent.

We always hear the phrase "I have no choice but to do". Is there really no choice existing in that circumstance? I concede that an available or easy choice may out of the catch of the complainer; however, I do not agree with that he or she is at the edge of absence of choice, especially for the people who waiting the opportunity falling down and the choice provided to him or her straightly. A student may fail his or her matriculation and get an offer dissatisfactory so that he or she may complain that there is no choice but to go to that school. Nevertheless, actually it is a gap between reality and his or her expectation that prevents him or her finding another choice. If he or she does the utmost to try and find, more choices will rise on the surface.  

Moreover, people can have more choice than before because of the technology and science. For example, last century ago, living in the earth is the absolute unique choice for mankind because of the restriction of the nature laws. Nowadays, people can escape the gravity of earth after the discovery of gravity law by Newton and the technology of spacecraft. Therefore, it is reasonable to believe that mankind in the future will have more choices, such as living in the moon, eating space food and travel to other planets, and so on, all of which is unimagined 100 years ago. And from these changes, we can safely draw a conclusion that the range of choosing will enlarge with the development of science and technology.

In sum, the absence of choice is very, very rare. Sometimes what we should do is to try to find alternatives when we in the circumstance of lack of choice. And technology is an available way to enhance the chances of more choice to us.

syd

The daily activities that an individual participated in are actually made up of a series of choices. In other words, in order to keep alive, one must make his or her choice in the societal matters he or she confronted everyday. However, these choice, according to my consideration, is under most situations limited, that is to say, an individual actually have no choice, or little choice in his or her everyday life.

The first point I am trying to make is that people are frequently forced to make their choice. In Freud’s perspective, the ego of an individual is not positive but destructive, but in a institutionalized society, its residents have no choice but to conform to the law and the customs. Or, they will go into trouble. In addition, to maintain one's existence and to survive, one must conform to numerous restrictions.  In the great Asian economic depression the last century, many companies had to lay off employees, and the employees were unpleasant at their lowered pay. However, no one would choose to leave the companies, as they knew they had no choice but stay, or they will die of hunger. This illustrates that if an individual wants to survive the challenges and hardships of the society, their choice, and the only choice is to conform, which actually prevent them from the real process of choosing.

Secondly, human beings are easily got into their habit. Consequently, when people are given a variety of options, the final judgment and choice is quite dependent on their habits. Sometimes it seems that there are many choice for an individual to choose from, however, the final choice is the one that best corresponds to his or her habit. This habit, in fact, prevents people from the real process of making choice. As the habit, as well as one's way of thinking is formulated by the society and government in their early days, most of which are influenced by their education and their surroundings, their choices tend to be the same one that best cater for the society and best identify the perspective of the majority. It is common that when people are given alternative choice and their usual choice, they tend to choose the latter, thus making the former in vain, and their choices are absent. J.P.Satre, the great French philosopher, the pioneer of Existentialism, pointed out in his famous essay-"Existentialism is Humanism", that people should refrain from the habits formed by their daily life and choose freely from a variety of options. He said that conforming to one's habit is conforming to the customs and restrictions that formed the habit, and to seek freedom, an individual should give away his or her habit and make the choice objectively. However, few people can understand him, the majority still prefer their habits and formed way of thinking.

To sum up, as stated above, the absence of choice is a circumstance that is very common because of human beings' conformity to the restrictions posed by the society and their formed way of thinking. In contrast, the existence of a variety of choices is very, very rare, as only a few people, such as Satre, know how to make their own choices which are independent of the society and customs.

happyman2000

I fundamentally disagree with the speaker on the argument that the absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare. When people make their choices, what they should take into consideration is not simply their free will, but also all kinds of objective constraints and conditions that can greatly affect their decisions and behaviors.

In the first place, people are subject to the constraints of all kinds of material conditions when they make individual choices. Obviously, one must firstly consider whether the economy and the science in his/her time can afford what he/she desires for. No one can choose, for example, to make a private tour in the moon, no matter how wealthy and powerful he/she may be. Moreover, people differ greatly in their knowledge, intelligence, private wealth and other personal conditions, which determine that they must take all these personal distinctions into their consideration when making choices. Anyone who earns only two thousand dollars per month is certain to have no possibility to purchase some highly expensive luxuries; likewise, a student with comparatively poor intelligence and academic performance, of course, will be refused by some famous universities such as the Stanford, even if this student vehemently aspires to attend these universities. Last but not least, the degree of development in their nation can also impact a massive influence on individual choices. When the America can freely choose something that be viewed as the innate rights and possibilities of any individual, all of us are inclined to ignore such a shocking fact that most people in some backward developing countries are suffering from the serious shortage of food, medicines and other indispensable requisites. Therefore, it is completely ungrounded to utter that it is a very rare circumstance without choice.        

Not only material conditions but also the state of democracy can play a significant role in determining people's choice. When people make their decision and determine to take actions, they must examine whether their thoughts and behaviors are consistent with the requirement of laws and other compulsory social norms in their nation. In this sense, any personal choice is bound to be scrutinized by the democratic environment in the society. The more advanced the democracy, the more possibility individuals would obtain to free choice. In some wealthy but totalitarian countries, although people can freely purchase the commodities that they want, they have no right to express their personal views about governments, political leaders and other public issues. Obviously, a democratic and tolerant social environment that results from the development of democracy is another prerequisite for free choice of people.

To sum up, personal choice is not simply a matter of individual decision and action; it is subject to many social constraints that are independent of individuals. In the nature of things, the material conditions and the development of democracy constitute the main concerns that people must seriously take into account when they decide to make choices.

feier521

Admittedly being limited by the resources and natural rules, the chance of choice is also limited in a small cycle. However, with the improvement of people's abilities and the development of technology and politics, the chance to choose can be accordingly increased to some extent. Therefore, I fundamentally agree with the speaker on the assertion that the absence of choice is a circumstance is very rare.

As social animals, people are unable to do anything arbitrarily outstepping the limit of their physical abilities, the laws of nature and social rules and regulations. For instance, no matter how high people can jump, they can not fly freely like a bird for the reason that any species, mankind included, can not escaped the rules of gravity; And no matter how fast people run, they can not surmount the speed of the light due to people's physical limitation. People's life process is also lacking the choice. We can not choose our parents. Children have to select the schools based on the previous performance in the junior schools. Within the restriction of social laws and regulations, it is illegal for a man to marry with two or more women. Even when we choose our career, our professional knowledge and skills and the potential roles that the society provides restrict our choices. All these examples demonstrate that human can not make a random choice outstripping the limitation of the natural disciplines and the established laws and rules of our society.

However, it does not follow that people are deprived of all chances to make a choice and therefore turn out to be pessimistic and even cynical. On the one hand, although both the physical and natural limitations hinder people making arbitrary choices, people can augment their chances of choice by self-improvement. For example, through rigid and scientific trains and exercise, athletes can hugely improve their potentials and break the previous records they made. Those job-hunters can enrich their faculties by digesting and assimilating an amount of special knowledge to make themselves qualified to as many fields as possible which provide them more working choice. Therefore, people themselves can to some extent increase the chances of choice by their own efforts.  

On the other hand, with the development of economy and politics, the scale and the chance that people can make a choice are expanded accordingly. Nowadays people can safely live in almost any circumstance, no matter how hot or cold, by equipping with the air-conditioners in their homes which was only unrealized dream for our ancestors. And the advanced traffic vehicles make people travel almost every corner all over the world while those in the ancient periods can seldom walk out of their nation. As for political field, more and more people can take part in policy-making nowadays, while it is impossible for our forefathers who were deprived of almost all political rights in the autocratic nations. From these changes, we can safely draw a conclusion that the range for choosing are coordinately inclining with the development of the economy and democracy.

In conclusion, although people can only make choices within the limitation of their own abilities and the laws of the nature, they can change it by self-improvement or personal efforts, and meanwhile the advanced technology and the opening democracy can also grant them various chances of choice.

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

193
发表于 2010-2-4 09:47:48 |显示全部楼层
2.3
     一边写一边改。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

194
发表于 2010-2-4 12:01:38 |显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 ieyangj08 于 2010-2-4 13:21 编辑

2.4
      用自然流畅的小词写作要好于晦涩难懂的不常用词汇。
      文章在于较好地表意,而非仅仅完成写作任务。
      好文章给人留下的是深刻的思想、表意的精确、行文的流畅。

使用道具 举报

Rank: 6Rank: 6

声望
92
寄托币
2707
注册时间
2009-12-28
精华
0
帖子
38

GRE梦想之帆

195
发表于 2010-2-5 11:42:11 |显示全部楼层
AdelineShen的话,觉得很有道理,贴过来学习

现在最重要的是做Issue的限时练习,并且不断修改issue高频前20,如果你有时间可以再多写点,但不必多于30.关键是每篇自己写过的文章要仔细修改,让有经验的人帮你改,反复斟酌,最好写到在考场上你可以信手拈来的程度。改issue的过程非常非常重要,只写不改等于不写。改的时候多看看ETS的AWintro

Argument一是要多过几遍题库,便于到考场上在一分钟内能有清晰的逻辑思路,争取最多的时间来论证。二就是进行限时练习和经常总结修改了~

使用道具 举报

RE: 1006G 备考日记 by ieyangj08——行胜于言 [修改]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
1006G 备考日记 by ieyangj08——行胜于言
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1046185-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
报offer 祈福 爆照
回顶部