issue175 我的第四篇，修改版 创新之个人Vs集体

lakeqianUID：157560

It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual.

艺术文学革新（艺术的革新=个人创作+引起跟风）的个人性
早期科学的[U]发现[/U] 与简单的设备[U]发明[/U] 。
现代科学采取集体创造,因为简单的理论，发现都被早就被搞定了
（下划线表明结构词及提示性词）

Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature and primitive(早期) scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.

When we turn to [U]literature and art[/U] , their creativity is, after all, always an individual task such as the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by Van Gogh derived from his own impetus. When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre. So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.

In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce. At that time, when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor. For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student.

What succeeded these basic [U]discoveries [/U]  is the primitive [U]inventions [/U]  which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.

As to the contemporary science, when the [U]basic discoveries [/U]  and inventions have been already [U]depleted and drained[/U] , the innovation has become [U]increasingly sophisticated[/U] , and required an exacting task mostly through a myriad of trials with error and correction. The computer is a grand innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research. When physicist began to marching into the micro-world, experiment [U]loomed incrediblely difficult[/U] . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.

And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together. All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.

In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation.

lakeqianUID：157560

up下。二次修改 :D

lakeqianUID：157560

再改：个别题眼仍然没照顾到。哎，向面面俱到不容易。true, impetus就给放了。牛人们能交小弟怎么把本题诸多题眼圈写到吗？

艺术方面 艺术本身的个人创作决定了创新的个人性。
早期科学 不跨学科，本学科内的知识可以被一个人掌握。例子没想到更好的，就用原来那个了。大家有更合适的例子吗？
当代科学 实验难度大，经常跨学科，一个人不可能掌握全部知识因此需要合作。（隔行如隔山，想不出好例子，sigh...）
大家看看论述是否深入吧。我只能把例子详细推理一遍增强逻辑（增了但仍然不够强），其他深入证明的方法就不知道了。。。

Innovations of new ideas, new discoveries and new inventions have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art and primitive scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.

To begin with, in terms of art, the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself. Their creativity is, after all, always an individual task. Beethoven wrote every one of the nine great symphonies by himself. Though it is undeniable that Beethoven drew out some elements from his predecessors such as Haddon, he did composed the symphonies himself. When new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre, the innovation began. So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. Monet member of Nameless Painters Association desperately exhibited his painting of <sunrise, impression> and was scolded as impressionist. Immediately the painting caused a sensation and the genre of impressionism was soon established. So was born the new genre single-handedly.

In the pioneering day of natural science, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discovery because the discipline itself was not yet fully-constructed at that time, and the innovations usually to explore the certain field were consequently confined to the boundary of discipline, whose knowledge a person is likely to attain and absorb. For instance, when Physics was still under exploration, basic theory was not yet found. The basic rule in the sub-domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself. If, suppose the experiment had to deal with the combination of physics, chemistry and statistic as it may appear in recent experiment, then a single physicist is unlikely to complete the trial because of lack of chemistry and statistic knowledge.

As to the contemporary science, due to that the basic discoveries of a certain field have been almost depleted and drained, human marched to utility integrative knowledge from different fields with experiments mounting to a vast scale. The total knowledge of several fields is far beyond any single one’s capacity and to make cooperation more indispensable, innovation became an exacting task requiring the effort of scientists and technicians both from the same fields and different ones.
Take Apollo Project for example（要再改，见附注）, in the mid 60s, all fellow workers reached an astonishing number of 420000, among them being 43000 scientists major in aero-dynamic physics, geostatic, combustion chemistry and so on(我瞎写的，隔行如隔山). If it were not for the endeavor of so many scientists from the same fields and different ones, the innovative project so huge can never come true. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists.

In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but the contemporary science mainly resided in the pattern of cooperation whereas primitive science and art adopted the individual innovation.

PS.
apollo的例子不太好，且冗长，要再改。大家凑合看看论证过程如何。例子打算换成：
in the aim of grasp the consumers’ feeling, marketing, consumer psychology and statistic should function together in an integrated fashion.
不是学理科的，一写试验、发明啦就没谱~~

GanymedeUID：159195

No.1 issue175 我的第四篇，修改版 创新之个人Vs集体
It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual.

艺术文学革新（艺术的革新=个人创作+引起跟风）的个人性
早期科学的发现 与简单的设备发明 。
现代科学采取集体创造,因为简单的理论，发现都被早就被搞定了
（下划线表明结构词及提示性词）
单从提纲来看，很有新意。但好像没有涉及两个关键词 the detail  &  true innovation.
Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature and primitive(早期) scientific innovationprimitive science就好了吧 may be the outcome of individual endeavor while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.一个疑问：将现代的创新限定在scientific上面是否有偏颇？

When we turn to literature and art , their creativity is复数吧。或者加个either, after all, always an individual task such as the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by ofVan Gogh derived from his own impetus. When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetites of the massesmass, suddenly 倒是很突然gain popularity, and start a new genre. So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence 定语后置？traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.

In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge wethey held then was too scarcelimited是不是好些?. At that time, when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor 这句话有问题，还原一下endeavor found discovery?. For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet 感觉that后饲喂解释有点多余was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student.

What succeededvi吧 these basic discoveries is the primitive inventions which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.

As to the contemporary science, when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained这句话没看懂的说 , the innovation has become increasingly sophisticated , and required an exacting task mostly through a myriad of trials with error and correction. Thethe不要吧 computer is a grand可以做定语马？ innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research看不出这个例子跟论点有什么关系. When physicist began to marching into the micro-world, experiment loomed incrediblely difficult . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled 两个动词？ by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.

And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together. All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.

In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation.
从思路来说，应该是比较新颖的。界定了连个方面，如果在涉及一下题目中提示的individual cooperation的两个不同方面就更好了；个人感觉可以考虑把B2 B3，B4 B5和在一起写成两段，不过这样写好象也没什么大问题；语言没说的，句式变化很多，难词也很多，很多要借助金山才能看明白，学习ing。如果是现时的，那就是很强的牛人了。今天偶没写issue，看王义夫去了，中国又拿了一块金牌。呼呼~~好爽。希望大家在作文的考试中都能拿到自己心目中的金牌。共勉~~~~明天我也会贴个issue有空帮我看看吧。salute

lakeqianUID：157560

欢迎回来！！
看来论证是很有问题。。。。
因为我觉得这些常见的例子本身已经很明显了self-evident，觉得摆出来就行。。。sigh。。。。
改变思路！！

另外，把你以前今日说法那些文章顶上来让大家看看吧？我试图顶过，似乎顶不上来啊？？怪异。。。再发一变也行，好文章啊！

DendisUID：158017

Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature and primitive(早期) scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.
（首先感觉对于革新的分类有点不同意见：如果从大的属概念来说，文学本来就属于艺术学科，你在之后提到的是科学技术，显然在此有些种属混合。而且之后又是早期和当代的科学进步的分类，是以时间来划分，前后划分属性不同，发现这样有点混乱。）

When we turn to literature and art , their creativity is, after all, always an individual task such as the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by Van Gogh derived from his own impetus. （Shakespeare和Van Gogh作为个人到底对艺术作出什么样的贡献呢？没有讲清楚，例如可以展开Shakespeare如何促进戏剧的发展，或是详述Van Gogh如何贡献于印象主义流派等）When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre. So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence （不具说服力，没有说明必然性））traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.
（B1想说明的似乎是个人创作对于艺术革新的决定性，但是感觉例证不明显，而且缺乏进一步分析展开，都是结论的重复～～～）

In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce. At that time, （？）when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor. （这里有试图以偏概全的嫌疑，^_^，physics和science还是有所不同的，采用类比可能效果好些） For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. （具体阐述论证，B1就没有这里展开的详细）Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student.
（B2的例证明显强于B1，但是对于你自己分析的原因because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce才导致个人易于创新显然还可以深入）

What succeeded these basic discoveries is the primitive inventions which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.
（名字的集中——问题同B1。伤其十指不如断其一指，你连一个人都没有说明其individual贡献，即使再多的人也不一定就可以证明。建议你可以先设立一个台阶：说明某个人的作用，再进一步类比分析出其他人的具体作用，效果可能会好很多）

As to the contemporary science, when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained , the innovation has become increasingly sophisticated , and required an exacting task mostly through a myriad of trials （这里需要凸现集体的重要，但是你并没有说明个人就不能满足日益复杂的要求，你需要进一步点破）with error and correction. The computer is a grand innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military （可能也是由个别的人研发，它是由American military 发起，但真正革新的人不一定是一个集体）and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research. When physicist began to marching into the micro-world, experiment loomed incrediblely difficult . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.
（B3一再强调实验研发的困难性，但是没有说明个人就不能克服这些困难，强调集体的必要性。相反下段的部分内容可以填入例证。）

And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together. All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.
（这里其实是让步，但是在上面三个分层后又开始这样一种结构，感觉不是很舒服）

In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation.
（结尾可以更充实一些，略微简单了一点）
（分类写法比较独特，但是具体操作可以再斟酌一下。看得出写得很用心，不错，加油，继续努力……
文章中名人很多，但是例证说服力不够，具体功效并不大，论证有待深入。
评点有所不足，言辞不当请谅解，具体问题可以继续探讨，^_^
lakeqian也要练习一下argument，考试时的时间还是很紧的，而且argument提高比较快，期待你的不断进步！！！）

lakeqianUID：157560

仍然是列举现象：怎么让人信服？怎么让人确定的确是他们的individual effort？你的例子在这里都应该突出的是"individual effort"，尽量证明这个是必然现象才是

检讨中。。。。的确是堆例子没说服力。。。。。。
谢谢imong老大！！！！！bow！！！

lakeqianUID：157560

用简单来解释为什么一个人也可以完成，个人觉得不太合适，或者换一种说法，只需要狭小范围的知识，而个人完全可以掌握，你觉得呢？
嗯，有道理，又牵扯到社会分工协作了。。。sigh...

lakeqianUID：157560

最好给一个将早期艺术单列出来的理由...早期艺术。。。偶不懂。。。早期？近代？艺术
觉得艺术本身基本都是个人的是，innovation当然就是个人的事啦。
关于impetus。应该加一段。但是，280篇里的文章根本没提impetus耶。奇怪。
对于艺术中的跟风，如果点出与论点的关系可能更好，比如产生了从外部看是团体innovation的假象等等
我不太懂艺术，所以略写艺术详写科技了。。。
3x

ialalUID：168098

很不错的语言:)
有几个问题：
1. 最好给一个将早期艺术单列出来的理由
2. 个人在题目的理解上有一些不同观点
   an individual who is the impetus for innovation这里的impetus可以理解成fuse一类的东西，这样对于现代科技而言，很多方面虽然最终的模型什么的是由一个实验室，一个团队做出来的，但前期是某一个人发现理论中的一些待完善之处，提出一些想法，最终导致innovation(现在很多论文都是这么做出来的:)),从这个层面上说，individual的作用仍如题所说。

3. 对于艺术中的跟风，如果点出与论点的关系可能更好，比如产生了从外部看是团体innovation的假象等等

imongUID：140258

Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature（加个逗号） and primitive(早期) scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor（加个逗号，while改成whereas） while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.

When we turn to literature and art , their creativity is, after all, always an individual task such as（such as在这里能这么用吗？） the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by Van Gogh derived from his own impetus. When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre.（自己检查语法，一个when管到头了，主句呢？） So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.（列举现象，原因呢？Without your illustration我是不能从现象看出原因来的）

In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce. At that time, when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor. For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student. （这一段比上一段好些，仍尚未做到足够）

What succeeded these basic discoveries is the primitive inventions which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.（仍然是列举现象：怎么让人信服？怎么让人确定的确是他们的individual effort？你的例子在这里都应该突出的是"individual effort"，尽量证明这个是必然现象才是）

As to the contemporary science, when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained , the innovation has become increasingly sophisticated（innovation become sophisticated搭配？） , and required an exacting task（require task搭配？） mostly through a myriad of trials with error and correction. The computer is a grand innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research.（这里的关键是military还是collaborative？） When physicist began to marching（to marching？？） into the micro-world, experiment loomed incrediblely difficult . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.

And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together.（这句话本来是一个相当好的展开点） All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.

In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation.

堆例子，例子对论点做诠释做的不到位。语法错误自己查。

这个题目开篇就提出TRUE innovation，并且在后半句还有个让步，true这里有可能大做文章的其实。

lakeqianUID：157560

嗯。考虑开头来个定义。加一段论述impetus的个人性。接下来不变，算是讨论innovation的实现吧。。。

detail_yyyUID：167745

同意gra cie的意见，所以我觉得lakeqian在文中应该给个定义，这样更容易自圆其说 :)

gra cie0213UID：157500

而且这题前半部分的impetus怎么理解?
在文章中是不是要体现呢?
如果仅仅是推动的话,就有很多因素了

gra cie0213UID：157500

innovation的范围很广, 我比较倾向a creation (a new device or process) resulting from study and experimentation
定义不同,行文就不同了