1006G[REBORN FROM THE ASHES组]备考日记 by LILY——坚定信念，如愿以偿！

lilylove0624UID: 2720394

130"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."




The speaker assert that children’s socialization determines the destiny of society nowadays, and also conjecture that we have not yet knew how to raise children for construct a better society. I disagree with the statement on both sides cause bewildering and unproved assumptions that the speaker offered. The speaker’s logical is obviously flawed in views of there is no direct connection between two assumptions.
It might be tempting to agree with the speaker that we have not learned how to raise children for some special objectives. Indeed, the only thing we can offer to our children is the basic knowledge of survival and merit. The former help them against hungry and out of work, the latter make them a better person and obtain high respect and identification. However, we don’t have ability to raise children as we expect, especially when they have individual ideas about the world.
Yet, there are two compelling arguments refute the speaker’s assumption. The first argument I concede is that the speaker does not offer sufficient evidences to establish the importance of socialization, let alone how the socialization to influent the future society. In fact, the speaker was mistakenly thought that only socialization can influent the society. One apt illustration is about scientists. As we all know, most of scientists don’t like to socialize, and that’s the reason why they could keep standing in the lab to attempt some boring and repeated researches one after another. However, it is the un-socialization helps scientists invent the light, the car, the flight and all stuff that progress our society. Therefore, we can suppose that if all scientists love to socialize together, then they have no time to concentrate on difficulty tasks and we have no chance to step into industrial era and information era.
The other argument against the speaker’s position has to do with the standard of judge whether they help bring about a better society.  Even if the premise of speaker is right, we cannot judge the children we raised are helpful to construct our society as well. After all, the society is a complex compound which affected by many factors; meanwhile, the standard of human judgments is progress along with the development of science and technology. If we mistaken criticized the truth, we denied a possibility of a progressive; similar, if we encouraged the error, a tragedy would have been caused. Consider the invention of DDT，which helps people killing mosquitoes to control the spread of diseases, and which destroys the environment and chain of life as a by-product. Before 1960s, people were so excited and applauded of DDT’s appearance to support the inventor of DDT won the Nobel Prize. But then the other scientists found out that DDT have a bad effect on chain of live and destroy people’s life as a result. People were banned to use it. The DDT example is appropriate proof to refute the speaker on the vague standard about better society.
In the final analysis, the speaker’s assertion is troubling in two respects. The key to influent the future society is not only associate with socialization but also associate with development of science, enhancement of human spirit and so on. The choppy connection between socialization and better society reduce the creditable of the statement.