[i习作temp] issue69科技类高频附提纲第一次写issue 严重超时希望指点共同提高 [复制链接]

phobe
UID: 199595

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 286
注册时间: 2005-3-8
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-7-30 14:17:34 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

69"Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"

提纲：1 政府应该对研究加以一定限制例子：核能
   2过度的限制是不行的例子：Einstein的相对论（这个例子是不是有点俗透了，大家有什么好例子麻烦指点一下）
   3 对于一些有争议的研究但长期的投资价值，经管其他机构因为可能投资风险大而不愿支持，政府不但不能限制，反而应该资助。例子：一些转基因作物危害生物多样性（不知道这个例子的可信度多高。有没有影响生物多样性的转基因庄稼呢？]

Should government place any restrictions on scientific research and development? The speaker contends not, however, I disagree with him because without the regulation of government some researches will bring us great disasters.

Nowadays, scientific research plays an important role in improving technology and thus improves people's live. However, in many cases, the greater benefit there is, the more harm there is if it misused. Consider, for instance, nuclear energy is developed originally to supply clear and efficient energy to mitigate the energy problem. However, it can also be used to make nuclear weapon which can make destructive disasters. In order to prevent the terrorists make use of this kind of weapon and keep the peace in the world, government should take measures to ban the disabuse of nuclear energy. Imaging that if the government leaves freedom to all the scientists no matter what their motivations are to do any research they would like to do, people all over the world would be caused in a panic ------a devastating war may burst out anytime anywhere.

Admittedly, undue restrictions may hamper the development of science. Scientists should be given sufficient space to do what they like to do. A case of  " the special relative theory" comes to my mind immediately. Einstein---a prodigious physician who contributes his whole life in the scientific research, though successfully, may be a quite lonely people in the scientific world-----his theory was hardly understood by people even most of the physicians. It was said that for quite a long time there were only three people who can accept his relative theory at that time. Then how should the government treat him? Should the government prevent the publishing of his "whimsy" theory? Certainly not, the new theory nearly caused a fatal disaster for Einstein in German, luckily, he ran away to American------a free country where he became a professor in Princeton University and spread his ideas to people and then the theory were gradually accepted. Therefore, the government should have a magnanimous attitude towards researches bringing original ideas.

For some controversial researches, which can get little fund from other organizations because of its high risk, the government should not give restrictions to these researches and contrarily they should fund it because it may bring unexpected surprise or cause long term benefit. Take gene engineering for example. Genetically modified seeds bring themselves powerful insecticide and high production, but the controversy is that some of these super organisms are too resistant and kill a lot of other organisms. Hence the widely use of them are prevented and big companies would not like to support the future research to improve it because of the high risk. At this time, the government should play an active role to encourage the researchers to make improvement because the research may bring high production of crops, which can solve the problem of hunger in the third country.[不知道这个例子的可信度多高。有没有影响生物多样性的转基因庄稼呢？]

In sum, the government should put proper restrictions on scientific research. For the research that may bring potential harm for human the government should ban it. And for some controversial research that is likely to bring benefit to human, the government should give support.

回应
0

使用道具举报

clearbaby
UID: 2114410

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 545
注册时间: 2005-7-7
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2005-7-31 17:37:40 |只看该作者

Should government place any restrictions on scientific research and development? The speaker contends not, however, I disagree with him because without the regulation of government some researches will bring us great disasters.

Nowadays, scientific research plays an important role in improving technology and thus improves people's live. However, in many cases, the greater benefit there is, the more harm there is(there is可去掉） if it is misused. Consider, for instance, nuclear energy is developed originally to supply clear and efficient energy to mitigate the energy problem. However, it can also be used to make nuclear weapon which can make destructive disasters. In order to prevent the terrorists make（making） use of（这里应该用abusing 滥用） this kind of weapon and keep the peace（维护和平是preserve peace） in the world, government should take measures to ban the disabuse（abuse） of nuclear energy. Imaging that if the government leaves freedom to all the scientists no matter what their motivations are to do any research they would like to do, people all over the world would be caused in a panic ------a devastating war may burst out anytime anywhere.

Admittedly, undue restrictions may hamper the development of science. Scientists should be given sufficient space to do what they like to do. A case of " the special relative theory" comes to my mind immediately. Einstein---a prodigious physician who contributes his whole life in the scientific research, though successfully, may be a quite lonely people in the scientific world-----his theory was hardly understood by people even most of the physicians. It was said that for quite a long time there were only three people who can accept his relative theory at that time. Then how should the government treat him? Should the government prevent the publishing of his "whimsy" theory? Certainly not, the new theory nearly caused a fatal disaster for Einstein in German, luckily, he ran away to American------a free country where he became a professor in Princeton University and spread his ideas to people and then the theory were gradually accepted. Therefore, the government should have a magnanimous attitude towards researches bringing original ideas.（这句不大顺）
这个例子不合适，有杜撰成分，爱因斯坦被纳粹党追杀完全是政治因素，而非政府对科学的限制。

For some controversial researches, which can get little fund from other organizations because of its high risk, the government should not give restrictions to these researches and contrarily they should fund it because it may bring unexpected surprise or cause long term benefit. Take gene engineering for example. Genetically modified seeds bring themselves powerful insecticide and high production, but the controversy is that some of these super organisms are too resistant and kill a lot of other organisms. Hence the widely use of them are prevented and big companies would not like to support the future research to improve it because of the high risk. At this time, the government should play an active role to encourage the researchers to make improvement because the research may bring high production of crops, which can solve the problem of hunger in the third country.[不知道这个例子的可信度多高。有没有影响生物多样性的转基因庄稼呢？]
这一段内容没有看，但论点不大对。这里说的是政府对科学的限制，限制是关键词，你的观点要么是限制要么是不限制，而支持就远些了~~

In sum, the government should put proper restrictions on scientific research. For the research that may bring potential harm for human the government should ban it. And for some controversial research that is likely to bring benefit to human, the government should give support.

总体说来，没有破题，你既然不同意作者观点，就应该说明政府不应该限制科学研究和发展以及政府限制科学研究和发展的弊端。而且行文结构有问题，整篇文章大负小正，应该把正放在最后写，也就是你的B1应该放在B3的位置。你的B2观点也不该强调过度，这样感觉你的论述与你的观点不符。而B3不能说跑题，但你强调的应该是不限制，而不该是支持。个人拙见~~

8.17 济南

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报