- 最后登录
- 2006-10-24
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 2460
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2005-5-1
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 帖子
- 8
- 精华
- 2
- 积分
- 2276
- UID
- 207837
![Rank: 5](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level3.gif) ![Rank: 5](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level1.gif)
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 2460
- 注册时间
- 2005-5-1
- 精华
- 2
- 帖子
- 8
|
Issue38 第43篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧!
------摘要------
作者:fantasia 共用时间:45分1秒 628 words
从2005年7月25日11时19分到2005年7月25日12时05分
------题目------
In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books.
------正文------
As the trend of society and culture fluxes and ebbs in its specific periodicity and yet progresses in its accelerating and eternal velocity, people are now becoming more and more interested in self-fulfilling, which involves learning as a great part. Though parts of population articulate that the symbol of contemporary is television which provides so abundant information that reading books is no longer as important as it once was, books still maintain the vital position as it was in the past in most areas.
Admittedly, television enables common people to enjoy beautiful video and melodious voice, as well as grasp certain aspects of knowledge. The program Discovery has expressed so many domains that lots of people realize series of things that they are not open to in the ordinary lives, such as how to ascertain the place of a drown ship, say, Titanic, what happens in the far dessert, where and how doctors of forensic medicine usually fulfill their tasks and so forth. With the help of television, persons are able to get a well-rounded impression of things or occurrences and are more likely to develop a profound and prolonged memory with them.
Although people are indebted to television for somehow a large scale of their knowledge, television is unable to replace books outside the extent of "common sense" or other simple aspects of knowledge. For one thing, television could not explore all the information individuals need in all their lives in light of the limit to television's ability of exhibiting. Take mathematics for example. When television may succeed in introducing the principles of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division, it fails to explain how to carry out a detailed process in proving why two things are topological equivalent, or how to calculate a calculus, etc., without the supplement of books. Besides, in the exact examples above, another deficiency of television is exposed that it lacks the capability in showing profound thoughts and complicated process. What is more, considering the variety of television audience and the television companies' needs in profit from advertisement, it is neither sensible nor feasible for television to broadcast programs relying too much on major, forcing specialists back to the books.
What is more, to acquire knowledge necessitates the process of thinking in depth, which exactly forbids television from supplanting books in people's study. Put it more precisely, when one reads a book, the individual may stop anywhere she or he needs or wants to make a closer examination to the point--this is exactly what decent readers, no matter whether their are scientists, philosophers or so, do--in order to make sure of something or refute with something. Only in this way can a person detect or notice the authentic idea without confusion and errors. In contrast, concerning the fast pace of television programs, hardly can the audience pause and digest those showed in the programs, which indeed let the content either remain little in the audience's brains or stipulate confusion or puzzle and furthermore, resentment.
As a conclusion, in the course of contemporary, the so-called "television times", television helps a lot in showing people three-dimensional pictures, making them aware of what happened, is happening or will happen (by prediction) not only around them but also far from them. No doubt is the coming of the assertion that television is replacing books insofar as conditions and situations permit, like the field of "common sense" or such kinds of simple facts. Further, the society has to nevertheless realize that in much more other cases, books should not be turned away from, because the widespreadness and depth of their information. Only when the two combined in an appropriate way or proportion, could an individual advance--and therefore would a society and culture improve. |
|