Issue168 by Headeye 有拍必回，求长期互拍

headeyeUID: 2671390

168."Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field."

批判性的判断在任何领域当中都是没什么用的，除非它是来自于该领域中的专家。


提纲：
开头：提出论点，外行的意见也同样重要
第二段：很多时候外行的评价看起来是不正确的。（3个例子）
第三段：其实我们可以通过外行的评价来确立努力（改进）的方向。
第四段：讲内行，内行也会犯错误，但他们的意见也很重要。
第五段：结尾。

（非限时，写了两个小时。。。主要是例子想了好久……神啊）

The speaker argues that only experts in a certain field can give valuable critical judgments to work in that field. I concede that the experts' advices are useful and indispensable for the improvement of work in the field they specialized in. However, judgments from others are so essential that we can not ignore them as "valueless".

It seems laymen could judge works in a special field incorrectly. A farmer judges a painting with corn fields in it better than Mona Lisa simply because there is a corn field behind his or her house. And in a teenager's opinion, none of works of Beethoven, Chopin or Mozart could compare with that of Beyonce, his or her favorite pop star. Spectators around a chess game thought one player made a mistake, but they don't know that move was the player's best choice at that time.

Despite all that problems caused by laymen's judging, they are meaningful for us to establish a valuable objective to pursue. We still take the Beyonce as an example. Everyone in the record company knows who is a better musician between Beethoven and Beyonce. But since the works of Beyonce are more popular among the young people, they could produce more records of Beyonce in one or two years to pursue more benefits. Considering it is more often that the laymen are the majority. Work in any field should particularly ponder their suggestions if it wants to cater their tastes.

On the other hand, the experts could not always remain correct. Their judgments are sometimes misleading and restrain the innovation of that field. Scientists have believed that object falls at a speed proportional to its weight for thousands of years since Aristotle claims his theory in 300s B.C. Nevertheless, we should turn to experts for advices in most cases. Because they are more experienced and could probably give us an incisive judgment.

In a nut shell, I think the critical judgment of work in any given field by outsiders is as important as that by experts. Since we would know what we shall do through outsiders when we are trying to cater the public. Oppositely it is possible that the experts making mistakes. So critical judgment is usually valuable, no matter it comes from an expert or an outsider.

after17UID: 2681985

The speaker argues that only experts in a certain field can give valuable critical judgments to work in that field. I concede that the experts' advices are useful and indispensable for the improvement of work in the field they specialized in. However, judgments from others are so essential that we can not ignore them as "valueless".

It seems laymen could judge works in a special field incorrectly. A farmer judges a painting with corn fields in it better than Mona Lisa simply because there is a corn field behind his or her house. And in a teenager's opinion, none of works of Beethoven, Chopin or Mozart could compare with that of Beyonce, his or her favorite pop star. Spectators around a chess game thought one player made a mistake, but they don't know that move was the player's best choice at that time.这几个例子很有力的说明了观点

Despite all that problems caused by laymen's judging, they are meaningful 建议换一个词 for us to establish a valuable objective to pursue. We still take the Beyonce as an example. Everyone in the record company knows who is a better musician between Beethoven and Beyonce. But since the works of Beyonce are more popular among the young people, they could produce more records of Beyonce in one or two years to pursue more benefits. Considering it is more often that the laymen are the majority. Works in any field should particularly ponder their suggestions if it wants to cater their tastes. 这句话有点没说明白

On the other hand, 和上一段没有形成对比 the experts could not always remain correct. Their judgments are sometimes misleading and restrain the innovation of that field. Scientists have believed that object falls at a speed proportional to its weight for thousands of years since Aristotle claims his theory in 300s B.C. Nevertheless, we should turn to experts for advices in most cases. Because they are more experienced and could probably give us an incisive judgment.

In a nut shell, I think the critical judgment of work in any given field by outsiders is as important as that by experts. Since we would know what we shall do through outsiders when we are trying to cater the public. Oppositely it is possible that the experts making mistakes. So critical judgment is usually valuable, no matter it comes from an expert or an outsider.

注意一下词的用法。感觉第三段Beyonce的例子不太有说服力

after17UID: 2681985

欢迎回拍 https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... age=1#pid1773584322

headeyeUID: 2671390

谢谢after17~

不明白的那句我本来想表达一个这个意思：考虑到外行人占大多数，任何领域的作品应该考虑外行的意见，如果这个作品是为了迎合公众的口味的话。但是写得太chinglish了……指代不明。。改成这样会不会好点，把两句并作一句。。
Considering it is more often that the laymen are the majority, work in any field should particularly ponder their suggestions if it wants to cater the public’s tastes.

例子是我的大问题啊……疯狂积累例子中。。。各位大侠对积累例子有什么建议……
再次感谢~回拍中...

iwvUID: 2759912

The speaker argues that only experts in a certain field can give（put forward 更好一点） valuable critical judgments to work in that field. I concede that the experts' advices are useful and indispensable for the improvement of work in the field they specialized in. However, judgments from others are so essential that we can not ignore them as "valueless".

It seems laymen could judge works in a special field incorrectly. A farmer judges a painting with corn fields in it better than Mona Lisa simply because there is a corn field behind his or her house. And in a teenager's opinion, none of works of Beethoven, Chopin or Mozart could compare with that of Beyonce, his or her favorite pop star. Spectators around a chess game thought one player made a mistake, but they don't know that move was the player's best choice at that time.

Despite all that problems caused by laymen's judging, they are meaningful for us to establish a valuable objective to pursue. We still take the Beyonce as an example. （Take Beyonce, who has been mentioned, as an example. 这样会不会好一点）Everyone in the record company knows who is a better musician between Beethoven and Beyonce. But since the works of Beyonce are more popular among the young people, they could produce more records of Beyonce in one or two years to pursue more benefits. Considering it is more often that the laymen are the majority. Work in any field should particularly ponder their suggestions if it wants to cater their tastes.（ Considering that laymen make substantive comments and suggestions in most cases,  works has to play to the gallery.
这样改可以吗）
On the other hand, the experts could not always remain correct. Their judgments are sometimes misleading and restrain the innovation of that field. Scientists have believed that object falls at a speed proportional to its weight for thousands of years since Aristotle claims his theory in 300s B.C. Nevertheless, we should turn to experts for advices in most cases. Because they are more experienced and could probably give us an incisive judgment.

In a nut shell, I think the critical judgment of work in any given field by outsiders is as important as that by experts. Since we would know what we shall do through outsiders when we are trying to cater the public. Oppositely it is possible that the experts making mistakes. So critical judgment is usually valuable, no matter it comes from an expert or an outsider.

iwvUID: 2759912

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1057861-1-1.html 让我们的互助一直进行下去吧:)