1006G[REBORN FROM THE ASHES组]备考日记 by Fancy——no pain no gain

fancywwUID: 2583671

这个天花板放fancy12.27--1.31的学习计划

小组任务
每天一篇comment

Issue
任务1：看issue写作精华帖
要求：突破陈规，掌握方法，找到自己的风格。

任务2：过题库。
要求：重点做四个工作：思路、提纲、素材、参考。
        因为之前已经有提纲了，这次强调质量。关于一个题目，找准自己的立场，找到自己独特的素材。
        根据每天时间，3-8篇不等。

Argument
任务1：看argument写作精华帖
要求：主要也是突破陈旧的方法，打开思路。

任务2：过题库
要求：分析题目结构，根据学到的方法建立论证过程。
        根据每天时间3-8篇不等。

其他
单词：从蓝宝开始背。
写作方法：【fundamental course of writing】反复看
官方指导：AWINTRO 反复看

题目命名：[日期][任务来源：小组/小小组/fancy][任务内容]

海王泪UID: 2673613

FANCY姐的语言很赞呢。 像你学习··· 加油！

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][fancy][argument的技术思考——学习笔记]
  
    看了这么多遍argument习作，除开语言不说，总觉得大家写得都大同小异。找出几个错误，套上模板，想几个他因，批判一通，OK结束。首先，模板语言自己用起来觉得很舒服，自我感觉十分良好，觉得自己“太牛了，这么通畅的句子，这么到位的词语都能用”。但其实读者读起来就觉得干巴巴的，很生硬，尤其是那些还没有嵌套进内容的句子。其次，各个错误攻击段落之间没有很好的联系；第三，错误也只找到最浅显的层面，导致攻击时没有力度，像在隔靴搔痒。
    所以这次仔细研究AWINTRO、范文和精华帖，力求解决以上三个问题。


来自AWINTRO的建议

You might want to organize your critique around the organization of the argument itself, discussing the argument line by line. Or you might want to first point out a central questionable assumption and then move on to discuss related flaws in the argument's line of reasoning.

    也就是说，可以：1.按照argument本身的顺序来驳斥；2.围绕一个中心错误来驳斥；
    第一点应该是大家常采用的吧，找出一个错误，驳斥一个。但事实上并不这么简单。
argument的短短几句话其实大有深意，awintro告诉我们：

you should consider the structure of the argument—the way in which these elements are linked together to form a line of reasoning; that is, you should recognize the separate, sometimes implicit steps in the thinking process and consider whether the movement from each one to the next is logically sound. In tracing this line, look for transition words and phrases that suggest that the author is attempting to make a logical connection (e.g., however, thus, therefore, evidently, hence, in conclusion).

    也就是说，如果按照argument本身的顺序来批驳的话，也不仅仅是把错误一个个摆在那里就好了。每个argument都有一条 reasoing line for you to trace. 有些implicit steps作者漏掉了，我们也就没发现，这样写出来当然每个点之间感觉就是脱节的了。所以其实按照argument本身的顺序来批驳的话，应该是个不错的方法，只要用好了。
    举个例子吧：
   

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
    我刚一拿到这个题目，也觉得无从下手，感觉就一个大问题，即一个错误的比较。而这个比较如何错误的，还需要深入分析   
argument结构：
facts:
1.Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy
2. especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low
3.New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore
4. especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high.
inference：（这一块它整个就缺了）
缺少一个直接的事实，即： most of the factories prefer the new technologies, and will adandone the old technologies for the new ones.
为了要证明这一点，需要以下facts：
5. the efficiency of the new technologies is the same or better than the old ones. (time, purity)
6. the expenditure of updating the equipment with new technologies is acceptable
7. the profit will improve if the factory uses the new technologies.
without 5&6&7，the author cannot infer that most of the factories prefer the new technologies, and adandoned the old technologies for the new ones.
conclusion：
we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly
    可以看出这个作者根本就没有论证的过程，直接蹦到了结论。中间忽略了好几个必须的steps，而这几个steps都是作者认为理所当然的，但其实并非是这样，而是都需要事实支撑的。有可能事实就与其设想不符合。所以我们可以一点一点地批驳。

    虽然AWINTRO也说道：What matters is not the form the response takes, but how insightfully you analyze the argument and how articulately you communicate your analysis to academic readers within the context of the task. 但是，在评分标准中我们可以看出：

6分：“develops ideas cogently, organizes them logically, and connects them with clear transitions”
5分：“develops ideas clearly, organizes them logically, and connects them with appropriate transitions”

    所以，文章的起承不仅仅是一个简单的“firstly，secondly，thirdly”的问题，而是这条中心线的问题。
    那么如何找这条中心线，下面来看看几个精华帖给的建议。

   

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][fancy][argument技术思考——学习笔记]

PART 2 来自GTER精华帖的建议
   
    先阅读了下面两个贴：
    关于Argument中理清谬误攻击顺序的入门帖
    关于Argument论证顺序的一些感想（欢迎讨论）

    总结一下主要内容：
   

让步驳斥法。
    能这么驳斥的题目一般有这样的特点：
1 基于一个错误，然后从该错误出发，作出一个推断（同样不能证明），再作推断（依然不能被证明）来论证题目作者的结论。
2 由几个并列的错误推出结论，这些错误之间是“与”逻辑关系，即" if A and B, then C"（学过一点计算机语言的同学应该能理解这个 if语句的执行方法：A条件和B条件同时正确，才能执行C）。A和B最好有不同种类错误
    相对应的攻击方法就是：
1 驳斥大基础，让步，驳斥小基础，让步，驳斥第三基础，（让步，驳斥结论，这个和第三基础可以做个取舍）
2 驳斥A，让步，驳斥B，让步，驳斥结论

    那么整篇文章就可以这样来组织：到达主要机场的外国游客数量翻倍，是否真是来旅游的人增多了？->即使Bellegea的旅游业真的发展了，那么也不一定是因为去年开展的生态旅游的广告推广的功劳。->即使是广告推广活动的功劳，但是仅有去年一年的情况还不足以说明问题。->即使今后也很有可能成功，联系到广告推广活动本身，也不一定是该主任的功劳。->即使是他的功劳，但是在Bellegea出任广告顾问，由于两国可能有的差异，也不一定会成功。
    这样一来，攻击顺序就比较清楚了。一点点的让步，使得整篇文章有一条“红线”贯穿，感觉很紧凑，让阅卷人看着也很有条理，这样首先就达到了对文章把握的要求了；接下来就是具体对错误进行攻击的问题了，再此就不再赘述了。

    结论：“让步驳斥法”是一种不错的顺序组织方法。

    接下来看的是：AW进阶手册: 合理推断, 强化论证——挑战Argument完美逻辑
    Argument错误类型：

    严格来说，Argument的错误都是可以归纳为“缺乏常识”的，即使它最表面的错误不是这么明显：（以ARGUMENT2为例）比如房子涂漆不一定使房价上涨，这个不是常识，但是人们对于房子颜色喜好各有不同就是常识，喜好不同购买欲望也不同也是常识，变态点的可以把一些专业知识也说成常识，比如房屋投资不光要考虑外观还要考虑户型、精装修、升值空间、按揭政策、环境情况、国家经济发展指数、资金机会成本、资金时间成本……因此Argument的每个错误都可以被分解成一连串常识性错误，只要把它们一个一个理出来，它们如何错误就很有说服力了。
    而另一方面，Argument的错误还可以归纳为“证据不足”，所有的Argument题目管你有没有提供证据，都可以说作者没有提供足够的证据证明……所以它不成立。张雷东教的“流氓大法”相信不少人都听过。
    不过最普遍的是，Argument的错误还都可以归纳为“考虑不周全”，这个好象也是目前我看过的考生文章中最普遍的归纳方式，凡遇到错误就说，还有很多可能性作者忽略了。这个估计大家都有感觉我就不单独举例了，有疑问的私下PM我我再打，人懒没办法。
    那么到底哪个才是Argument的根本错误呢？推理下吧。
    一般我们什么时候说“还有其它可能”，是不是“证据不足”之后？无数模版都是"the author provides insufficient evidence/vague survey/sucking facts...leaving it entirely possible..."因此证据不足比它因优先。那么为什么证据不足？通常情况下套用模版和流氓大法最致命的缺陷就是不能解释这个问题，虽然它可以通过举出它因来进行支持，而且能有效论证观点，但并不能从根本上指出作者错误并解决问题。我这么说不是因为我多鄙视其它可能性例证（可能性/它因例证在论证中同样很重要，等下再说），而是来自于ETS对于观点“Well-developed"的定义。
    5分范文的论证内容已经足够说明作者的错误了，但比起6分范文，它缺乏了对于常识层面的关注，没有从人们对事实接受的常态出发，玩了个纯统计的游戏，的确这样做“够”了，但不“出色”。
    老有人抱怨自己字数不够，叫我改的时候给看看，但我也改不出什么问题来，因为我改的时候都是按照5分标准来的，指出错误并正确支持没有硬伤就行了，这种情况下不用去考虑常识推断，只要提出可能性推翻作者就行，于是字数自然不用多。上面这篇5分范文总共才301字，估计比很多第一次写AW的同学写的都少的多。

   
    “完美逻辑”

    所谓的“完美”，是在逻辑步骤上保持完整，从根本上把作者的错误揪出来，发展出强有力的论证。
    这个步骤中很重要的一步就是“常识”，符合常识的，即为合理推断；无关常识的，为一般推断；不符合常识的，为脑残推断。所谓的“论据不足”，根本上讲就是因为这些论据不足以填满我们常识中需要形成固定结果的条件，因此它才不足。写ARGUMENT的时候怎么说明这种不足就成了很重要的话题。

    这里作者强调的常识，其实应该就是我们在分析一个问题时，有没有深入到这个问题最根本的地方，有时候最根本的问题就是不符合常识。而很多时候我们只是指出这个不对，然后找一堆他因。殊不知我们这些他因虽然有可能，可以推翻argument的论证，但这些他因和argument中的论证其实也是处于同一个假设的层面上。

    习作和范文的主要区别就是主题句或者引出可能性的句子上范文更加有针对性，而不是笼统的说evidence, explanation。
    把no evidence这一步给省去了，直接点出可能性。这个只是顺带提下，因为我个人不是很喜欢这种主题句+它因的结构，它的推断显得没什么道理，但效率确实非常高，比起用很笼统的词去说作者证据不足，这样能省下时间让文章变得更紧凑。

   

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][fancy][argument论证技术思考——学习笔记]

（接上帖）PART 2 来自GTER精华帖的建议

    继续看帖，接下来是一个牛人的系列：arguement就应该这样写！！！
     仔细读题的重要性——不仅仅是简单地找出错误，而是要找出内在逻辑。又回到了awintro告诉我们的东西了。这里再引用一点awintro的话：

In reading the argument, you should pay special attention to
• what is offered as evidence, support, or proof
• what is explicitly stated, claimed, or concluded
• what is assumed or supposed, perhaps without justification or proof
• what is not stated, but necessarily follows from what is stated

    也就是说读argument的时候，我们应该分清楚作者的line of reasoning，是[前提]—>[结论]，还是[论据]—>[论证]—>[结论]，或者其他情况。当中必然会有缺失，或者错误的推断。

    在回来看帖：

arguement51The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment“

先看我同学是怎么写的。他的3段攻击大概是这样的：
1。2个医生背景不同
2。2个实验组的具体情况信息实在太少，不足以判断
3。并不一定所有的病人都会发生2次感染

想来他的思路具有一些普遍性
-------------------------------------
现在来看我说：
要写好arguement，首先就是要学会读题目
怎么读题目？不是单单找逻辑错误就完了的
你更要分析题目句子和句子间的逻辑关系
也许有的人此刻会笑，心说，”哪个模版上不说，‘arguer的所说的结论是什么，他的论据是什么。。。’“，有谁会分不清楚？”
虽然谁都知道，但是你有没有真正想过这里面的内在含义？

这个题目，我会分成3快
第一是前提：Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain
第二是结论：Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment
剩下来的都是论据。
但是请分清楚这些都是谁的论据，他们都是用来证明“This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results of a study of two groups of patients.”的
那换言之，就是前提的论据。

简单说来，就是作者的话可以这样复述“因为[前提]的存在，所以我的[结论]是。。。那为什么说这个[前提]是正确的呢？因为。。。[论据]”

那现在我们来分析，这3者间的逻辑关系
前提和结论 可以说是一个因果关系 （至少作者想体现出一种因果关系）
论据和前提 也可以说是一个因果关系，因为这里的论据是用来证明前提的
但是，究竟哪个逻辑关系是主关系呢？
显然应该是前提和结论的因果关系
如果你承认这点，那么就应该在你的第一攻击点，首先考虑攻击这个关系
反过来说，如果你第一段攻击了，那2个病人的实验，那你就是主次没分清楚
好，我们来看，这个结论和前提的因果关系到底有什么逻辑问题！
这个又是一个读题目能力的考察，一定要仔细啊！！！

前提：Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain
结论：Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment

最明显一些关键词，我已经给标出来了。剩下的也有值得关注的 比如 结论里面的 part。
是否发现，单单这2句话，比那一段实验还要有多话说？
secondary infections may ——> 一个仅仅是may 的事情，居然推广到都会发生，显然错了
some——>all 一些病人 推广到 所有病人 显然也错了
severe muscle strain 和一般的 muscle strain 病人能同等对待么？只有严重肌肉损伤的人中才有某些人可能发生再次感染，没有说任何关于整个肌肉损伤病人的信息。

由此，一下就至少3个攻击点
怎么攻击，不用我说了，这个你们很熟悉
但是在这里，我必须要再次强调为什么要先攻击这个地方
这个是西方的习惯，先攻击最重要的逻辑问题
为什么这个比2个病患组的例子更重要？
病患组的例子你再怎么攻击，最多也就是能说“这些证据，并不能表明[前提]是一定存在的”，那也就等于说，[前提]还是有可能存在的。你最后的攻击无非就是“一个不一定确实存在的[前提]，不能推导到那样的结论”
而我攻击前提和结论这个逻辑层面，我就能说，即便[前提]是完全正确的，我也不能得到那样的结论。
所以，要先攻击这个逻辑关系
这个地方说的有点绕，希望大家仔细想下

那这3个点攻击完了，这个主逻辑层次攻击完了
怎么着至少攻击了2段了吧？如果你愿意此刻攻击了3段了
接着是什么？接着才是那2个病患组的攻击，也就是攻击他的前提了
想怎么攻击怎么攻击
但是不知道你们发现了没有，不管你怎么攻击这个证据，顶多也就是个information too vague，没有能重伤这个文章让别人怀疑的能力。

而我们最开始的攻击，相对于前者，可以说就是招招致命，让人足够怀疑了。
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

所以，大家要分清楚，攻击是有主次的，攻击不同的逻辑层次产生的效力也是完全不一样的。不要觉得什么地方好写，就多写。什么错误先出现就先写。
很有可能最后出现的错误就是最致命的错误。
同时也请大家注意读题目，先要把题目句子间的逻辑顺序搞清了，前提和结论都好好的仔细读。总会有收获的。

    我记得当初第一次看这个题目时，就没有好好分析。把证明前提的论据当成论证结论的了，所以还晕晕乎乎地想“第一句话是干什么的，这个argument怎么这么混乱，最后连结论都弄混了”。事实是没有搞清楚reasoning line。
    其次是对调查/研究的攻击。就像前一个帖子讨论的“基本常识”一样，调查/研究其实有时候并不是最根本的错误点，而有的同学一上来就批调查/研究，提出一堆可能存在的他因或没考虑到的地方。其实这些东西和argument给出的调查是在一个层面上的，也是一种可能性。所以不太具有说服力。

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][fancy][argument论证技术思考——学习笔记]

（接上帖）PART 2 来自GTER精华帖的建议
     接下来这两个贴要一起看，我看得有点confused了。先消化消化，或者看几个argument题目实践一下。明天再继续这个“技术思考”。
    argument就应该这样写(二)！！！
    "arguement就应该这样写(二)！！！"吗？

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][Mosaic小小组][翻译]

汉语：在我们这个时代，谁要想在社会上做点事，就必须接受一定的教育。随着科学技术的进步，现在学校里开设的课程越来越多，即使在中小学也是这样。与过去的教育相比，现代教育更强调其实用方面。

我的翻译：In our time, people (someone) must recieve some some education, if he/she wants to accomplish something in society. As (with) the development of science and technology,  more and more coursed are offered at school, even in primary and secondary school. Compared with the traditional education, modern education focuses more on practicality.


参考翻译：In our times, substantial education is indispensable for anyone to play his role in society. With the progress of science and technology, more and  more courses are offered even in primary and secondary levels. And greater emphasis is put on the practical side, as compared with the education  in the past.

一个to就解决了表目的的从句，比较简洁；
greater emphasis is put on....

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.27][fancy][argument题库]

Argument1
The following appeared in a memorandum written by the vice president of Nature's Way, a chain of stores selling health food and other health-related products.
"Previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives. We should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville, which has many such residents. Plainsville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs. The local health club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack of business, has more members than ever, and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full. We can even anticipate a new generation of customers: Plainsville's schoolchildren are required to participate in a 'fitness for life' program, which emphasizes the benefits of regular exercise at an early age."

Facts:
F1:Previous experience has shown that our stores are most profitable in areas where residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives.
F2:Plainsville merchants report that sales of running shoes and exercise clothing are at all-time highs.
F3:The local health club, which nearly closed five years ago due to lack of business, has more members than ever, and the weight training and aerobics classes are always full.
F4:Plainsville's schoolchildren are required to participate in a 'fitness for life' program.
Inference:
step1:F2&3--> assumption1：Plainsville's residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives.
step2:F5--> assumption2:The program anticipates a new generation of customers.
step3:assumption1&2&F1-->the store in P will be profitable-->conclusion
Conclusion:We should therefore build our next new store in Plainsville.

写个开头：
The author's based his conclusion that Nature's Way should build its next store in Plainsville on the assumption that the new store in P will be profitable. However, this assumption is supported by former experience and another assumption that P's residents are highly concerned with leading healthy lives. And the evidence the author gives to support the later assumption is also unconvincing.

Question:
experience 那句话要不要批呢？怎么批呢？

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.28][小小组&fancy][argument109]
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Maple City newspaper.
"Twenty years ago Pine City established strict laws designed to limit the number of new buildings that could be constructed in the city. Since that time the average housing prices in Pine City have increased considerably. Chestnut City, which is about the same size as Pine City, has over the past twenty years experienced an increase in average housing prices similar to Pine City, but Chestnut City never established any laws that limit new building construction. So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices. So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices

Facts:
P:    20 years ago        law √        prices in P ↑      
C:（the same size as P）  law ×        prices in C ↑( similar to P)     

Inference:  
[前提]So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices.

Conclusion:
[结论]So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices


崩溃了。。。这个讨论一个多小时无果。。。等待草草的点拨。。。。。

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.29][REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment]

My comment：

This article may drive some people crazy I think. And I am one of them. So I tried my best to figure it out, and here goes my comment.

This article is a review about the book How Religion Evolved and Why it Endures by Nicholas Wade.

First, the article mentions the place where the author's idea about sanctity comes from. Coincidentally,  Darwin also got his idea of sacred from a private school. And both Wade and Darwin thought that the study of the origin of religion should start with the examination of human's beginning.

Next the article summarizes the main view point of Mr Wade's book. In the book, Mr Wade believes that the reason why faith has persisted for thousands of years is that it helps human race to survive. So according to this notion, Darwinian selection takes place at the level of group as well. While the article affirms and appreciates the well made arguments in the book, as well as the clear and limpid style, the article does point out the shortness of the book in oversimplifying the link between rules and ecstatic rites.

Then the article makes some points on the intensive relationship between moral and ecstasy in some great religions. After a brief introduce of the matter, the article sites the research of Max Weber to show the contradictions between moral and ecstasy. And here comes my confusion. Without some background knowledge on religion, I can hardly understand the relationship of moral and ecstasy they are talking about. Nor can I see the weakness of Mr Wade's book on this issue.

And next, the article summarizes his view on monotheism. From the evaluation I can see that Mr Wade's view is quite provocative, radical, and daring. Again, I have nothing to comment on this point due to lack of relative knowledge. Following this summery, the article points another weakness of the book.

At last, the article gives the book a quite high evaluation. I believe at the end the article makes a joke about Mr Wade's autobiographical reference to Eton. However, I cannot understand. What a pity on the difference of culture background.

vocabulary：
primordial
:the rudiment or commencement of a part or organ

religious ecstasy is an altered state of consciousness characterized by greatly reduced external awareness and expanded interior mental and spiritual awareness which is frequently accompanied by visions and emotional/intuitive (and sometimes physical) euphoria. Although the experience is usually brief in physical time, there are records of such experiences lasting several days or even more, and of recurring experiences of ecstasy during one's lifetime. Subjective perception of time, space and/or self may strongly change or disappear during ecstasy.

hideous : 1 : offensive to the senses and especially to sight  : exceedingly ugly
2 : morally offensive  : SHOCKING
Hymns:a song of praise to God
Muddy:1 : to soil or stain with or as if with mud
2 : to make turbid
3 : to make cloudy or dull
4 : CONFUSE
Priestly:祭司
Caste：种姓
Limpid：1 a : marked by transparency  : PELLUCID  *limpid streams*  b : clear and simple in style  *limpid prose*
2 : absolutely serene and untroubled
Protestant：新教
Rite:the ceremonial practices of a church or group of churches
Monotheism: 一神教
Dissident: disagreeing especially with an established religious or political system, organization, or belief
Hellenic and Hebrew:希腊和希伯来
Messiah：弥赛亚

plukaUID: 2721764

新年快乐~！
扇子同学加油！（看到你的ID就觉得想喊你扇子啊）

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.30][REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment]

useful words and expressions
accountability: the quality or state of being accountable;  especially   : an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility or to account for one's actions  *public officials lacking accountability
thwart: a : to run counter to so as to effectively oppose or baffle  : CONTRAVENE  b : to oppose successfully  : defeat the hopes or aspirations of 【frustrate】
pending:IMMINENT, IMPENDING
allude:to make indirect reference
The warning signs would have triggered red flags
withering assessment: acting or serving to cut down or destroy  : DEVASTATING
Mr. Obama sided with critics: 站到一边，agree with
outflank：1 : to get around the flank of (an opposing force)  2 : GET AROUND, CIRCUMVENT
aftermath：比result，consequence等形象
culpable: GUILTY, CRIMINAL
But he spared little in his sharp judgment
breach of security:1 : infraction or violation of a law, obligation, tie, or standard;  2 a : a broken, ruptured, or torn condition or area  b : a gap (as in a wall) made by battering;  3 a : a break in accustomed friendly relations  b : a temporary gap in continuity  : HIATUS
overhaul: a : to examine thoroughly  b (1) : REPAIR  (2) : to renovate, remake, revise, or renew thoroughly
overarching:dominating or embracing all else  *overarching goals

comment
The thwarted bombing incident exposed the failure in American security. There are so many organizations protecting the safety of America:FBI, CIA, Homeland Security, etc. The share of information is very important, especially among such agencies.  Just like the president stated:Had this information been shared, it could have been compiled with other intelligence and a fuller, clearer picture of the suspect would have emerged. Of course they should learn from this lesson and fix the flaw quickly.
And like usual, there goes the critique and debate between the Republican and Democrats on the security system. Whatever their purposes are, their critique on each other is the motivating power, and promotes a better security system in USA.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[12.31][REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment]

useful words and expressions:
……is far from obvious：比not obvious 好
scrambling up the mountain of mathematics:比climbe好
Midway up the slope, however, I staggered to a halt, gasping in the rarefied air, well before I reached the heights where the equations of Einstein and Dirac would have made sense.
radiance: 光芒
predilection:an established preference for something synonyms PREDILECTION, PREPOSSESSION, PREJUDICE,
affinity:sympathy marked by community of interest  : KINSHIP
A universe so prodigal of beauty may actually need us to notice and respond, may need our sharp eyes and brimming hearts and teeming minds, in order to close the circuit of Creation
How unlikely, that a short-lived biped on a two-bit planet should be able to gauge the speed of light, lay bare the structure of an atom, or calculate the gravitational tug of a black hole.

My comment:
The articlereminds me of three things.

The first thing is an Issue statement:"Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction--in other words, to make things as simple as possible".(Issue 25)  I quite agree with the issue's statement, and I think this article expresses the same idea. Just as the author says at first, a beautiful theory should be "Simplicity, symmetry, elegance, and power."  Science may be the field that mostly requires things to be concise and simple. This is the pursuit of beauty. Great thinkers and scientists should be able to draw clear and simple conclusion through out a number of findings and facts. For example, before Einstein's famous mass-energy equivalence, various formulas appeared trying to explain and show the relationship of mass and energy. However, none of them is as simple but also precise and elegant as Einstein's theory.

The second thing is Angels & Demons, a novel by Dan Brown. The novel uses the idea of a historical conflict between science and religion. However, in the novel the author actually wants to discuss the relationship between science and religion. Just as this article writes:"By discerning patterns in the universe, Newton believed, he was tracing the hand of God". In the fiction, Leonardo Vetra was a famous physicist studying the antimatters, but he is also a priest and a pious believer in God. He believes that science and religion are actually not antagonistic; but in fact the God has already created the world perfectly and waiting for human beings to discover it. Through the characters, Dan Brown conveys his belief that "Faith is universal. Our specific methods for understanding it are arbitrary. Some of us pray to Jesus, some us go to Mecca, some of us study subatomic particles. In the end we are all just searching for truth, that which is greater than ourselves. " So like the article suggests, scientists need the notion of Creation to be their faith in searching for truth. And without this belief, they can hardly appreciate the beauty of the process and the result of their work.

The third thing is a TV series The Big Bang Theory. In the sitcom, four genius scientists in 20S are crazy about science. Their high IQ and their enthusiasm in science make them a little "abnormal" in common sense and social skills. However, to them science is their goddess. And they can see the charm and beauty in their scientific quest. In daily life, their pursuit for perfectness, especially Sheldon, seems silly but reasonable, because we can imagine all the persistence and strictness derive from alert intelligence and keen senses in their scientific research. Although the sitcom is an irony of their geekiness, I personally like their personality.

I'm not a science students. I believe that the pursuit of scientific results and the belief in the notion of Creation by God does not conflict. The God of science is not one of protons, masses, and particle charges. Their God is actually like the religious one, have the power of inspiration, the power to reach the hearts of man and to remind him he is accountable for a significant beauty. Despite of the different approaches, in the end we should all be aware of the same thing: that life is beautiful; that we are grateful for that created us.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[01.01][REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment]

words and useful expressions:
...is a vast area never visited, largely unknown, usually forgotten and populated only by aboriginal peoples with quaint( unusual or different in character or appearance) customs.(很漂亮的并列)
Pangnirtung, population 1,300, on the east coast of Baffin Island, a settlement mostly known for Inuit art and a nearby national park, will see construction start on a C$42m ($40.5m) harbour for the small Inuit fishing fleet. (强大的同位语)
...,plus the publication of plans for a deep-water port at Nanisivik. (喜欢这样的用法)
...if all goes according to plan...
outfit: SUPPLY  *outfitting every family with shoes
delineation: the action to indicate or represent by drawn or painted lines
Canada’s record in curbing greenhouse-gas emissions is the worst in the G8. (形象的用法)
belated interest


Comment:
Just like the article indicates, Canada’s belated interest in its Far North is somewhat ironic. It should not be something to celebrate or proud of that the Far North is now more suitable for development. On the contrary, Canada need a reflection on the "contribution" to climate change. As the article tells us, Canada's record in curbing greenhouse-gas emissions is the worst in the G8. We have all the reasons to doubt whether Canada can be responsible on environment protection while making money from the vast northern land, cause mineral and fossil-fuel exploration, ships traversing the north, all of these do not sound environmentally-friendly. As for the political concerning, I don't think it is unwise for Canada to go rival with the USA, Russia, EU, and other related nations and organizations. They cannot take their natural resources for granted. At least to me, I think the scenario in the movie THE DAY AFTER TOMARROW is quite believable.

fancywwUID: 2583671

[01.02][REBORN FROM THE ASHES][comment]

words and expressions:
We now live in a world of the 24-Hour Movie, one that plays anytime and anywhere you want. (同位语从句)
The 24-Hour Movie now streams instead of unspools（to execute or present artfully or gracefully）
algorithmically:    algorithm  a procedure for solving a mathematical problem (as of finding the greatest common divisor) in a finite number of steps that frequently involves repetition of an operation;  broadly   : a step-by-step procedure for solving a problem or accomplishing some end especially by a computer
with the exciting if cryptic headline:SECRET, OCCULT
proprietor : a person who has the legal right or exclusive title to something  : OWNER
ferociously: ferocious:1 : exhibiting or given to extreme fierceness and unrestrained violence and brutality  *a ferocious predator*  2 : extremely intense  *ferocious heat*
synonyms see FIERCE

obsessively:痴迷地
techno-fetishists：fetishists：有...癖者
Bluntly put：直接地说
fervently:exhibiting or marked by great intensity of feeling  : ZEALOUS
threadbare: having the nap worn off so that the thread shows  : SHABBY
cinephile: a devotee of motion pictures
quintessentially ： the most typical example or representative
a spate of ：a large number or amount
despite Hollywood’s initial anxiety, became a crucial television staple：主要产品
Generations of cinephiles fell in love with the object of their obsession while flopped on the floor, basking in the glow of the family television. 很形象的比喻



Comment:

After reading the article and inspecting my own life, I am exactly the case discussed by the author. I used to be a movie fan when I was in 10s, watching 3 to 4 movies per week in the theatre, because my aunt worked there. I think it was one of the main reasons that I could get in the cinema without paying a ticket. More important is that the large space of cinema and its huge screen give me a totally different feeling from sitting in front of the TV in my own room.

However, in recent years the number of movies I watch per year can be count by one hand. One main reason is that the easy and convenient access to the movies on the net. So watching movies becomes a solitary affair. But occasionally when I go to the cinema, I can still tell the difference. For example, last month I went to see 2012. After the movie was over, along with many other people, I stayed to watch the credits. Although I barely knew the name on the screen, it seemed a way to show my respect to those who made such a great movie, and some time to calm down after a exciting experience. I think some movies are still attractive and magnificent enough for us to go to the cinema and enjoy.

Just like the article says, as a viewer, I seldom care whether the movie is made with film process or digital created. Maybe some people are worried and unhappy about this transition, such as some arts students, but to me it is naturally acceptable. And even the author does not know whether should we care. I wonder for those who born after 1990s, the movies they see more or less have been processed digitally. But one thing I'm clear is that I will never watch a movie on iphone, or any other hand-held devices. And I'm going to the cinema for Avatar.