[作文] 2.17 独立综合 by 静音 [复制链接]

静音
UID：2893385

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 24
寄托币: 835
注册时间: 2010-8-31
精华: 0
帖子: 43

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2011-2-18 16:12:36 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TPO17 综合

The reading passage explores the issue ofdeclination of bird’s population in USA. The lecture deals with the samesubject. However, the professor cast doubts on the illustration of the readingin three specific points.

Initially, the professor asserts thatinstead of decreasing, the number of certain kinds of birds is growingrecently, whereas the author of reading claims general number of birds isinevitable to be cut down. The professor proves that claim is indefensible bypointing out that urbanization realizes the importance of the bird’s habits, sopeople build excellent habits for birds in the same breath in the process ofmodernization. In light of professor, birds like seagulls, pigeons, and evenhocks are more and more visible in the city.

Moreover, despite the statement in thereading that land for agriculture uses is substitute for the birds habits, theprofessor states another viewpoint without denying the declination that agriculturallands won’t be expanding so soon as showed in the reading. The professorsupports his idea with the fact that people are researching at a new kind ofcrops, whose production is doubles of that in the past. With the plant of thiscrops increasing, people will be able to manufacture more food with less ands.This is incompatible with what the article states owing to the factor thatagriculture will not threaten the land of birds sooner.

The professor’s last stance concerns on thefinal notion of the reading referred to the spread of harmful pesticides.According to the reading passage, with the growth of population andagriculture, the deposit of pesticides will flow into river and places thatwill influence the survival of birds. The professor argues in the lecture intwo points. For starters, the professor believes the coming kind of pesticidesis decenter than past because it’s new and people will use less. Moreimportantly, more and more crops will automatically persists pests, which meansthe use of pesticides is no longer necessary in the near future.

In conclusion , the contents of the readingpassage are completely refuted by the lecture and the lecture advocates totallydifferent ideas on the central standpoints of the reading.

独立因为要考了，所以用了机经
life will be happier with less possessions

Coincident with the development of thesociety is the growing awareness about the complex situation of amount of individualpossession. A strong voice is that people with a wealth possession lose the happinessof tranquility and innocence. From my own perspective, I doubt that this assertionis largely from people who don’t have such a possession. After deliberation, Imaintain that life won’t be splendid with less possession. On the contrary, thelarge amount of possession to a great degree decides the level of happiness.

The main reason for my propensity is that agreat number of possessions bring us material affluence which gives rise toenjoyment in our life. Obviously, the reason is self-evident. People with muchpossession could easily achieve the desirableness like amazing dresses, famouscars and houses in tourist destination for every vacation. I believe that notso many people would hate this kind of life and resist to receiving all these fancies.And a true fact I am presenting here is that miserable people in this societyare always those with less possessions. The needy ones couldn’t even affordtheir basic life. Little better ones are also worried about expenses in their normallives.

Not merely being benefit for the materialworld, do possessions also bring on the favorable effect on promoting one’sprestige status. Those people with many possessions are often caught the attentionof all levels of society. Yes, it is the special group named the celebrity. Womanwearing Chanel and gentleman wearing Rolex in one fascinate party full of champagnesis the normal life scene of celebrity but in the same breath causes people withless possessions crazy envy. We couldn’t deny that possessions represent one’sstatus in this society. The level of prestige is proportion to one’spossessions. A respected people’s life would be poorer than a civilian? I don’tthink so and I believe a majority of people will side with me.

Striking although the valuable aspects thatowning more possessions leads to are, isn’t it necessary that the merit ofbeing a normal person without so many possessions should never be neglectedtoo. With the temptation of material starts, it is hard for rich people tocontrol the principle. The purse of money sometimes do like drugs and causemany crimes.

In a nutshell, though we couldn’t deny thedangerous aspect of owning too many possessions, it is still reckless to assertthat life with less possession is happier. Via the careful illustration above,we could safely draw the conclusion that people with wealth of possession couldgain a material satisfaction and social status, which both lead to a happierand successful life.