issue 48_倒数6天高频_跪求狠拍

pigaretUID: 2749103

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 578

TIME: 00:45:09
DATE: 2010/2/5 17:52:08

I concede with the speaker that groups of people whose identities were lost in the history contributed a lot in making it happen. Yet, the famous leaders and heroes are also of great significance since they make critical decisions in the course of changing events, thus being frequently regarded in historical studies.

Upon opening history textbooks, we find a number of big names commemerated with honor and being regarded as representatives of the events. The reason why study of history place great emphasis on exploring few individuals may lie in the nature of the study. History, as is known, is the study of human past. The human history expands across such a long time period that if we compress it to one hour, centuries of modern life would only accounts for five seconds. Therefore, in analyzing the history, researchers select what they think of as critical moments. It is impossible to include all of the names of soldiers died in the World War Two in a paper discussing the large number of casualties, nor will any single historian has adequate effort and time to do so.

Furthermore, the purpose of observing history lies in learning from past experience rather than remembering the whole chronological lists of events. This is the second reason why not mentioning every single individual involved in certain events. In analyzing past failures and triumphs, focuses are always given to the most significant events that can be representative of the general. Historians fail to give concentration to the aim of exploring history if they are made to honor literally everybody involved in history. It is the halls of momentary that should do the job if we were only to show respects to our ancestors.

Therefore, historical study selects what is of significance. And their concentration naturally targets at those few individuals since they represent historical events in following ways:

First, It is the individual who propose actions. In social turmoils, it is very likely that a lot of people start to fight for their survival. However, their power is largely scattered and restricted for fear of the ruling power. Thus a leading rebel should stand out to organize the whole group. A century ago, the African Americans found themselves discriminated and separated from the society. But not until Martin Luther King shouted out its world famous cries for equal rights that these people start to unit to fight back. Without an outburst, no event is likely to occur on a large scale.

Second, it is the individual who claims responsible for the events. As leaders and heroes, the few individual have to bear the consequence no matter whether its victory or defeat. The criticle moments of declaring winning or losing make them stand out. In the foundation of a new era of France in the eighteenth century, what is most remembered and honored by people was the name Napoleon instead of the troops fighting for him. It was the very single person who was to take the crown.

In sum, combining the nature of historical study which intends to learning past experience from critical events with the nature of leaders and heroes who show great significance in the events leading by them, the study of history is bound to focus more on individuals rather than the involved mass. The forgotten identities should be better honored and respected by ways of building historical meseums while the concentration of a serious study should aim at the representatives.

小圆猫团卷UID: 2761043

刚写完 我也贴上来 互相改吧~~

小圆猫团卷UID: 2761043

48"The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."  

The speaker’s view of point is that the most significant in the history were made possible not by the famous few, but by group of people whose identities have long been forgotten, yet too much emphasis has been placed on individuals. Basically, I tend to disagree with this claim.
To begin with, in all ages, the success of revolutions, thoughts and campaigns are directly related with masses of people. Lacking of the support of the majority, famous few were not able to achieve success without a hitch. If no one supports them, their success we see today are probably not be wide spread and recorded. For example, it is known to all that Martin Luther King’s speech leads the African-American Civil Rights Movement. Black people were stimulated by the inspiring speech. Their supports were one of the main ideas of the success of Martin Luther King. Nevertheless, without the large quantity of advocates, he cannot be such success, and certainly will not lead that important movement.
In my view, however, history places most emphasis on individuals is reasonable to some extends. People focus on the famous few when they are recording or talking about history can come down to two reasons. One is that we cannot write down all of the people’s names no matter whom they were and what they have done. It is possible that they are general publics and have little effects in the history, they are not necessarily being remembered and record permanently. The other reason is that the purpose of human study history is to get possible trends of the development of society. The famous individuals can more or less represent the feature of the history. There is an example can prove that. Marie Antoinette stands for the France’s luxury and falling in the end of 1700s. There are also other people who are extravagantly at that period of time, but Antoinette is the queen of France at that moment, she is well-known so that she is recorded more easily. Considering record all the people’s name in the history events is too huge a work to do, only famous few are written down.
Finally, it is too one-side that people does not record the group of people led us ignore the contribution they made. We are aware that history is not created by one person. It is made by a certain number of people instead. As though people pay their most attention on some individuals, it cannot be asserted they dismiss the achievements of the majority. History’s great architectures such as the Great Wall in China agglomerate the hard working by large groups of workers. They are recorded as a group and their efforts are now appreciated by people all over the world. As for, we can see there are also some groups of people observed in the history and be memorized eternal.
To sum up, when people study the history, they throw more lights on the famous individuals for fear that they are more representative, typical and easily to be record and studied. People still take notice of groups of people. Although the famous few provide sights of the history, groups of ordinary people cannot be forgot. Their influence to the history and the society are continuing.
最近刚开始写作文 这是我写的第二篇issue 比较菜 谢谢大虾互相交流~~~