2010－作文求改

liuyi2003UID: 2503510

Scientist should be responsible for the negative effects made by their discoveries

The advanced technologies have brought about convenience and comfort to our modern life. While people are intoxicated in the great performance of high technologies, some negative effects resulting from the high technologies and discoveries are also increasingly drew people’s attention. Some people begin to argue that scientists should be responsible for the negative effects produced by their discoveries. Others including myself, however, contradict with this position.

To begin with, some negative effects are caused by the users due to the abuse of technologies and discoveries instead of by technologies themselves, so we should not request scientists to take responsibility for the negative effects which are caused by other people’s misuse. For example,. Scientists have good intention to invent pesticide, which is one of great invention throughout human history. The pesticide has greatly contributed to the growth of crops and assured us the harvesting. In this sense, how can we blame our scientists on the negative effects resulting from abuse of pesticide, such as suicide with pesticide and environmental contamination by excessive use? Otherwise, it will be unfair to our scientists. Therefore, when we appreciate a great discovery made by the scientists, we must recognize the fact that the misuse of any discovery by people may cause irrevocable damage to the human rather than attribute the responsibility to the inventors.

Furthermore, attributing the negative effects from new discoveries to scientists would damp scientist’s enthusiasm. It is common that peoples would act more prudently and ensure everything including consequential results would be under control if they need undertake all adverse effects. Similarly, if we hold scientists responsible for all negative effects incurred by their discoveries, the scientists would hesitate to put their research and ideas into reality even into experiments. This definitely would inhibit the development pace of our society. For instance, if scientists who invented computers need take the responsibility for the losses caused by hacker, then no one would like to announce their invention of computer because the consequential adverse results are unexpected. Just imagine what our world would be if we never enter into the era of computer and only use traditional way to post our messages.   

Admittedly, the negative impact originated from certain high technologies and new inventions indeed cause troubles to human beings. For example, the controversial cloning technologies lead to originate dilemma. We, however, still need face the contingent negative and side effects instead of shifting responsibilities for such side effects to the scientists.

In sum, based on the above analysis, we may safely draw a conclusion that scientists should not be responsible for the negative effects made by their discoveries. We should use rational laws and regulation to induce the proper use of discoveries and diminish such negative effects as low as possible.

mpromanusUID: 2565872

The advanced technologies (If you use 'the', the noun phrase needs to be specific, like 'the advanced technologies in electronic communication' or 'the advanced technologies of modern mass production'.) have brought about convenience and comfort to our modern life. While people are intoxicated in the great performance of high technologies (高科技 doesn't translate to 'high technology'. This is one of the most classic wrong phrases I've seen..), some (If you specify 'some' hegative effects, readers will expect specific examples. If you don't want to be specific, stay with the generic form of noun phrases.) negative effects resulting from the (Again, if you use 'the', the noun needs to be specific, e.g. 'discoveries of [somthing]'.) high technologies and discoveries are also increasingly drawing people’s attention. Some people begin to argue that scientists should be responsible for the negative effects produced by their discoveries. (Right, but what does 'high technology' has anything to do with scientists and their 'discoveries'? The point is that you're trying to fit 'scientific discoveries' into your 'science and technological topics' template, but there's no reasoning whatsoever that explains why your discussion goes from 'technology' to 'discoveries'. You just tuck the word 'discoveries' into the middle of one of the sentences about 'technology', and hope that readers would accept that as reasonable. It's not okay per my standards.) Others including myself, however, contradict with this position.

To begin with, some negative effects are caused by the users due to the abuse of technologies and discoveries instead of by technologies themselves, so we should not request scientists to take responsibility for the negative effects which are caused by other people’s misuses. For example,. scientists have good intentions to (This sounds more like scientists haven't yet invented pesticide but only have the intention to do so. A better construct would be 'scientists HAD good intentions when they invented the pesticide'.) invent pesticide, which is one of great inventions throughout human history. The pesticide has greatly contributed to the growth of crops and assured us the of harvests. In this sense, how can we blame our scientists on the negative effects resulting from abuse of pesticide, such as suicide with pesticide and environmental contamination by excessive use? Otherwise (What are you contradicting with by 'otherwise'? The next sentence naturally follows from your previous sentence, and I don't see why you need to turn around.), it will be unfair to our scientists. Therefore, when we appreciate a great discovery made by the scientists, we must recognize the fact that the misuse of any discovery by people may cause irrevocable damage to the human race rather than attribute the responsibility to the inventors. (Don't you feel awkward that you've been talking about 'inventions' throughout the example but your conclusion ends on 'discoveries'? The example is good, but the way you phrased it with a keyword that doesn't match with the question puts it at jeopardy. Again, you're just filling up the template, shoving in the word 'discoveries' after you spent a lot of time talking about something else, and hoping your readers won't notice or will gladly accept the two as the same, without any strong reasoning that how they are related. Logic doesn't work that way. You need to show your readers that you're perfectly clear about what's in the question, what's in your discussion and how the two come together.)

Furthermore, attributing the negative effects from new discoveries to scientists would dampen scientist’s enthusiasm. It is common that peoples would act more prudently and ensure everything including consequences results would be under control if they need to undertake all adverse effects? (Do you mean 'bear the responsibility for all adverse effects'?). Similarly, if we hold scientists responsible for all negative effects incurred by their discoveries, the scientists would hesitate to put their researches and ideas into reality, or even into experiments. This definitely would inhibit the development pace of development of our society. For instance, if scientists who invented computers need to take the responsibility for the losses caused by hackers, then no one would like to announce their invention of computers because the consequential adverse results are unexpected. Just imagine what our world would be if we never enter into the era of computers and only use traditional ways to post our messages. (Actually I personally think the world is better without computers..just a quick bite at my cynical side. There are two things at hand here: 1. from what you're describing in this example, I think your example is meant to talk about the Internet rather than computers; 2. again you're talking about 'inventions' rather than 'discoveries', and this time you didn't even bother to throw 'discoveries' back in. Now, would you say the inventors 'discovered' computers? Certainly, discoveries may lead to inventions and vice versa, but they are not necessarily the same. If you want to use examples of 'inventions', this difference would be the tricky part, and you'll need to clearly resolve it for your essay to be truly reasonable.)

Admittedly, the negative impacts originated from certain high technologies and new inventions indeed cause troubles to human beings. For example, the controversial cloning technologies lead to originate dilemma?. We, however, still need to face the contingent negative and side effects instead of shifting responsibilities for such side effects to the scientists.

In sum, based on the above analysis above (This is not the first time I see this error. If you're using a template or a sample essay as your guide, be aware that such writings can and sometimes do have errors.), we may safely draw a conclusion that scientists should not be responsible for the negative effects made by their discoveries. We should use rational laws and regulation to induce the proper use of discoveries and diminish such negative effects as low much as possible. (This is not relevant to the question. The question is about who should be responsible of these -ve effects, not what we should do to control them. You can, of course, say this as an implication from the stand that as a society we are all responsible, but you should end the essay on the responsibility note, not on what to do.)

总结：

你的语法和词汇还是比较有模样的，但是要注意一些很基础的语法错误，和一些明显你不确定该怎么表达就随便写了的用法。。

逻辑方面我只能说不仔细看题就用一个大类模板的后果就是这样。。题目看到一个 科学家，就拿出 科技类 模板，于是你就在完全没有打好基础逻辑的情况下开始写 科技，发明。。题目的关键字是‘发现’，你不是不可以写科技发明，但是你要先解释清楚为什么这样写是合理的才能继续沿着科技发明的路子写下去，否则就变成偷换概念了。。