issue69 政府不该限制科学研究 谢谢，有拍必回

rodgoodUID: 2619326

针对2楼lghscu童鞋提出的建议，我对这篇文章作了一定程度的改进。修改后的文章贴在了4楼。请各位战友选择原文章或改进后的文章猛拍。谢谢~~有拍必回！！

TOPIC: ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"

"Scientific research should be kept away from politics," President Obama said when he signed to lift the ban of embryonic stem cell research last year. It represents a definite point of view to scientific research that government should place few restrictions on it. But scientific development, which focuses on the results of research and gets evidence into practice, is different. If development from research tends to be a danger to human beings, government is supposed to take actions to restrict it or even stop it.

Without restriction from government scientific research will develop faster and more comprehensively. Firstly, as the saying goes that interest is the best teacher, if scientists are free to choose a subject they are interested in and skilled at, inspirations could easily sparked; thus more effectible work and progress could be achieved. Inversely, restriction would make scientists discouraged with a result of block to research. Secondly, working in a country with few restrictions on scientific research is a good choice for scientists. One of the reasons why America can keep attractive to so many intellectuals is that it can provide them with good conditions and, most importantly, a relatively relaxed environment for research. Thirdly, scientific research is the basis of scientific development, which is a balance of all subjects and could be likened as a rocket that takes satellite into orbit. It involves research of physics, chemistry, materials science and so on without any of which the rocket cannot be launched into sky. Therefore, few limitations are necessary for scientific research.

On the other hand, scientific development is much different from research, and government should play a role as a supervisor guiding the direction of scientific development and, if necessary, banning the development that may be antihuman or against to ethics. Based on the same results of scientific research, varieties of developments could be born, which may be beneficial to people or probably will be a thread to human beings, world peace, or against ethics. Take the topic of embryonic stem cell for example. With the same results and experiences from basic research, scientists could give an answer to the disease that afflicted former President Reagan in his last days, while others could clone another Hitler to wage the World War Three. So government needs to take advantage of its power of enforcement to place restriction on it.

In sum, because scientific research and development are two things with different characteristics and functions, government should place different policies on them. That is to say, to scientific research, a relaxed environment with few restrictions needs to be provided, while to scientific development, guidance and strict limitations is necessary.

lghscuUID: 2552043

TOPIC: ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"
"Scientific research should be kept away from politics," President Obama said when he signed to lift the ban of embryonic stem cell research last year. It represents a definite point of view to scientific research that(红色部分换为àindicating that)
government should place few restrictions on it(表述欠准确：Obama一句话能表明government should or not?，不要用点盖面).
But(该转折词前后不能形成“转折关系”：政府不应该限制scientific research，下句为scientific development定义。更恰当的方法是先表明scientific development的restrictions，然后以从句或其它句多带来scientific development的“定义”，即后面两句话需要重新组织) scientific development, which focuses on the results of research and gets evidence into practice, is different. If development from research tends to be a danger to human beings, government is supposed to take actions to restrict it or even stop it.(本段虽然告诉rater将从两方面论述，但缺乏一T，以概括两方面致统一的层面。另外，全篇it用法泛滥，望克服)

Without restriction from government scientific research will develop faster and more comprehensively(TS过于单薄，不能有力地统领Firstly, secondly, and thirdly). Firstly, as the saying goes that interest is the best teacher, if scientists are free to choose a subject they are interested in and skilled at, inspirations could easily sparked(这个“结论”轻率，与事实吻合程度不够);(分号的作用是什么？) thus more effectible work(这是一个自创的用法？) and progress could be achieved(作者的思路为：兴趣à灵感à成就。从作者的表述来看，它们是一个充分关系，而实际上它们则为必要关系，望措辞严谨，推理缜密). Inversely(对该词这种用法表示怀疑), restriction would make scientists discouraged with a result of block to research(WHY and HOW?论证不充分！其实现在很多research还是政府部门的监管之下进行，为什么还是取得比较注目的成就？是否说明监管并不害？). Secondly, working in a country with few restrictions on scientific research is a good choice for scientists(语言组织顺序不当，重点few restrictions不突出àworking is a good choice这就是该句的主谓宾，请看看与文章主题有什么关系). One of the reasons why America can keep attractive to so(delete) many intellectuals is that it can provide them with good conditions and, most importantly, a relatively relaxed environment(=few restriction?，什么是“relatively relaxed environment”) for research(这一层原因developed不够!没有看出与TS有什么关系). Thirdly, scientific research is the basis of scientific development, which is a balance of all subjects and could(看看这个情态动词的用法) be likened as a rocket that takes satellite into orbit. It involves research of physics, chemistry, materials science and so on without any of which the rocket cannot be launched into sky(确实没有看懂这个比喻，更没有看懂与TS的关系). Therefore, few limitations are necessary for scientific research.(三个层面的原因均不能有效支持TS-- scientific research will develop faster and more comprehensively，因为前两个原因纠结于scientists本身，没有归位于scientific research，最后一个原因偏得更厉害—好像在说各学科平衡发展)
On the other hand, scientific development is much different from research, and government should(尽量避免以should 回答题目的should) play a role as a supervisor guiding the direction of scientific development and, if necessary, banning the development that may be antihuman or against to ethics. Based on the same results of scientific research, varieties of(various) developments could be born, which may be(delete) beneficial to people or probably will be a thread(X) to human beings, world peace, or against ethics. Take the topic of embryonic stem cell for example. With the same results and experiences from basic research, scientists could give an answer to the disease that afflicted former President Reagan in his last days, while others could clone another Hitler to wage the World War Three(请看看什么是clone。一个对世界有害的Hitler只是基因决定的吗？Cloned Hitler具备“may be antihuman or against to ethics”?). So government needs to take advantage of its power of enforcement to place restriction on it.( much different from research没有论述论证，本段论证偏移重心，而且偏移的论证推理不严密！)
In sum, because scientific research and development are two things with different characteristics and functions(全文并没有有效论述这个different XX and XX ), government should place different policies on them(前半句与后半句的困果关系不明朗). That is to say, to scientific research(“对…来说”的用法难道也是自创？), a relaxed environment with few restrictions needs to be provided, while to scientific development, guidance and strict limitations is necessary.

---------
以上纯属个人意见，难免有妥当之处，望批判性接受

jinziqiUID: 2387034

TOPIC: ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"

"Scientific research should be kept away from politics," President Obama said when he signed to lift the ban of embryonic stem cell research last year. It represents a definite point of view to scientific research that government should place few restrictions on it. But scientific development, which focuses on the results of research and gets evidence into practice, is different. If development from research tends to be a danger to human beings, government is supposed to take actions to restrict it or even to stop it.

Without restriction from government, scientific research will develop faster and more comprehensively. Firstly, as the saying goes, that interest is the best teacher, if scientists are free to choose a subject they are interested in and skilled at, inspirations could will easily be sparked; thus more effectiveeffectible work and progress could will be achieved.(感觉主句应该用将来时) Inversely, restriction would will make scientists discouraged with a result of block to research. Secondly, working in a country with few restrictions on scientific research is a good choice for scientists. One of the reasons why America can keep attractive to so many intellectuals is that it can provide them with good conditions and, most importantly, a relatively relaxed environment for research. Thirdly, scientific research is the basis of scientific development, which is a balance of all subjects and could be likened asjust like a rocket that takes satellite into orbit. It involves research of physics, chemistry, materials science and so on, without any of which the rocket cannot be launched into sky. Therefore, few limitations are necessary for scientific research.

On the other hand, scientific development is much different from research, and government should play a role as a supervisor guiding the direction of scientific development and, if necessary, banning the development that may be antihuman or against to ethics. Based on the same results of scientific research, varieties of developments could be born, which may be beneficial to people or probably will be a threadthreat to human beings, world peace, or against ethics. Take the topic of embryonic stem cell for example. With the same results and experiences from basic research, scientists could give an answer to the disease that afflicted former President Reagan in his last days, while others could clone another Hitler to wage the World War Three. So, government needs to take advantage of its power of enforcement to place restriction on it.

In sum, because scientific research and development are two things with different characteristics and functions, government should place different policies on them. That is to say, to scientific research, a relaxed environment with few restrictions needs to be provided, while to scientific development, guidance and strict limitations is necessary.

字数是不是可以再多些。向LZ学习此文的观点 呵呵~


I69.doc (31.5 KB, 下载次数: 3)

2010-1-17 17:15:25 上传

下载次数: 3

rodgoodUID: 2619326

针对lghscu童鞋的不吝赐教，自己进行了修改，现在贴上修改后的文章。关于lghscu童鞋对could的建议，我查阅了草木斑竹在reborn from ashes第一次作业中的“情态动词”帖，帮助很大。
0910AW SPECTACULAR 之【SU & SY SO】第二期——情态动词https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=960678&highlight=

欢迎各位战友针对原来的或现在的版本进行狂拍，越狠越欢迎。灰常感谢~~~~~~有拍必回！！

"Scientific research should be kept away from politics," President Obama said when he signed to lift the ban of embryonic stem cell research last year, indicating that American government is holding an open mind to basic scientific researches, especially controversial ones like this. I side with what Mr. Obama said and believe that few restrictions need to be placed on scientific research. But government should place appropriate restrictions to scientific development, which focuses on the results of research and gets evidence into practice, to ensure it to make good use of basic research and be more beneficial to human beings.

Few restrictions from government will make scientific research to develop faster and more comprehensively for two reasons that involve scientists and subjects, which are two main factors related to it. Firstly, scientists are free to choose a subject they are interested in and skilled at. As the saying goes that interest is the best teacher, scientists working on their favorite subjects will devote more time and energy on it, probably leading to a more efficient work. In addition, interest may help inspirations hit scientists and make progress develop faster. Furthermore, scientists abroad are willing to choose a country where there are few restrictions on their subjects. One of the reasons why America is comprehensive in scientific research is that it can keep attractive to many intellectuals majored in various subjects in the world because compared to other nations America has fewer restrictions on scientific research. Secondly, scientific research of every subject can not develop alone but in harmony with each other. Nowadays research of one subject is no longer limited in one field and has no communication with others, like one or two hundred years ago, but has to take advantage of results of others and, in turn, offers useful information to others. For instance, microwave chemistry, a subject born in recent years, is a crossed one from subjects of electromagnetics, chemistry, thermodynamics and so on with any of which restricted microwave chemistry research will be fatally influenced. Therefore, in order to prompt scientific research, few restrictions are needed from government.

On the other hand, government is supposed to play a role as a supervisor guiding the direction of scientific development and, if necessary, banning the development that may be antihuman or against to ethics. Unlike scientific research that sheds light on the essential of nature, scientific development is biased toward application. Based on the same results from scientific research, various developments could be born, beneficial to people or a threat to human beings, world peace, and ethics. Take the topic of embryonic stem cell for example. With the same results and experiences from basic research, scientists can give an answer to the disease that afflicted former President Reagan in his last days, while others may clone human that leads to problems in ethics and sociology and should be banned by government. Meanwhile, absolute restriction or banning is also inadvisable. Cloning organs rather than a whole body is of great use in organ transplantation, which is a stubborn problem brought by rejection. So, for these scientific developments, government needs to make some policies or restrictions to guide its direction.

In sum, because of the relationship and differences between scientific research and development discussed above, government had better treat them respectively. That is to say, for scientific research, few restrictions are needed, but for scientific development, appropriate restrictions should be placed.

rodgoodUID: 2619326

3# jinziqi

谢谢指正。的确感觉这篇文章would, could 用得混乱，需要多学习。字数也少，不过修改过的这篇字数就多了些了，呵呵。

小灵易碎UID: 2733622

"Scientific research should be kept away from politics," President Obama said when he signed to（学习了） lift the ban of embryonic stem cell research last year. It represents a definite point of view to scientific research that government should place few restrictions on it.（这个观点表明什么？奥巴马就是对的？觉得主语还应该是奥巴马） But scientific development, which focuses on the results of research and gets evidence into practice, is different. （什么不同？我没明白这句话）If development from research tends to be a danger to human beings, government is supposed to take actions to restrict it or even stop it.

Without restriction from government scientific research will develop faster and more comprehensively. （这句是without开头，貌似要用到倒装结构，你再找找，我记得是这样的）Firstly, as the saying goes that interest is the best teacher, if scientists are free to choose a subject they are interested in and skilled at, inspirations could easily sparked; thus more effectible（effective） work and progress could be achieved. Inversely, restriction would make scientists (be) discouraged with a result of block to research. Secondly, working in a country with few restrictions on scientific research is a good choice for scientists. One of the reasons why America can keep attractive to so many intellectuals is that it can provide them with good conditions and, most importantly, a relatively relaxed environment for research. Thirdly, scientific research is the basis of scientific development, which is a balance of all subjects and could be likened as a rocket that takes satellite into orbit. It involves research of physics, chemistry, materials science and so on without any of which the rocket cannot be launched into sky. Therefore, few limitations are necessary for scientific research.
这段指出没有政治限制，科学可以发展更好，理由有三：提供科学家自由选择的空间；在限制很少的国家工作是件好事（在我看来这是个例子，不是理由）；科学研究是科学发展的基础（这个是理由吗？没有说明题目啊）

On the other hand, scientific development is much different from research, and government should play a role as a supervisor guiding the direction of scientific development and, if necessary, banning the development that may be antihuman or against to ethics. Based on the same results of scientific research, varieties of developments could be born, which may be beneficial to people or probably will be a thread to human beings, world peace, or against ethics. Take the topic of embryonic stem cell for example. With the same results and experiences from basic research, scientists could give an answer to the disease that afflicted former President Reagan in his last days, while others could clone another Hitler to wage the World War Three. So government needs to take advantage of its power of enforcement to place restriction on it.
政府应该扮演监督者的角色，当遇到对人类有害的事时，政府应该管理或限制

In sum, because scientific research and development are two things with different characteristics and functions, government should place different policies on them. That is to say, to scientific research, a relaxed environment with few restrictions needs to be provided, while to scientific development, guidance and strict limitations is necessary.

文章整体逻辑结构是有的，但是理由和例子都不充分，有时候感觉跑题了，可以再充实一些。
拍狠了点，请见谅。

rodgoodUID: 2619326

7# hyq533

On the other hand, scientific development is much different from research, (In my opinion, development is a result of research ,how could they be compared??)值得思索

谢谢

另外关于scientific research和scientific development的关系的问题，我在网上下了一篇站在health care角度讨论这两者关系的论文，里面的确对两者是作了区分的。大家可以下载看看，可以作为例子引用，呵呵。

rodgoodUID: 2619326

9# hyq533

Thank you for your suggestion.~~~Yes, according to what you said, I think I should have given some instances to elaborate what exactly the scientific research and development are, respectively, but not only have offer some definitions of them.

jinziqiUID: 2387034

Hi, I come here again.
I have just written an issue at https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1052474-1-2.html
Looking forward to your suggestions! Thanks!