【Big Fish】3月8日Issue69-By jjooyy

jjooyyUID: 2704028

Issue No.069

"Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development."

As science research and development advance, the complexity and congruity is arriving to the point that beyond people’s expectations. Then there comes the debate about whether limitations are bound to set by government on science. From my perspective, to some extent, restrictions should be placed considering some moral and social problems.

To begin with, judging by the nature of science, no clear boundaries are supposed to be drawn, so that the pace of scientific researches would not slow down, or even stop. Science is to seek for the answers to the unknown, to satisfy curiosity and to solve the past, present and future problems- that is, even scientists would frequently not know what exactly they are looking for. Only though innumerous researches and thorough consideration could they realize the results and meanings of their experiments. Without a clear prospect before they research, how could the government define which field should be prohibited for its possibility of being inhumane? Such limitations would only prevent science from advancement.

However, on the other hand, once scientific developments show a destructive influence on society or environment, restrictions should be immediately set to stop further destruction, and alternative solutions to the problems are to be sought in all efforts. For instance, the use of insoluble plastic is one source of the pollutions on the earth, as plastic cannot be buried under soil or burnt in the air innoxiously. With this realization coming up to society, government should take all measures to stop the development of plastic use, substituting with paper or other environmental materials. Otherwise, white pollution would be increasingly terrible and unimaginable difficult to solve.

In addition, limitations ought to be considered or relatively taken in the violations of morality and ethics. Nowadays, clone is one of the most heated discussions which concern about science and humanity. Once clone is widely spread, undoubtedly some who lose their beloved ones and are too grief to move on would spare no effort utilizing clone to create a person. Ethical and moral distort in such cases, many dispute, would cause social disorder in the end. Similarly, both mercy killing and abortion are kinds of murder, ending people's lives willingly. In regard of the fairness of every life, government are expected to, at least strictly limit the occurrences. Only by certain rules and orders can these inhumane incidences hardly happen.

In conclusion, while the nature of science is the pursuit of truth, which determines the government cannot anticipate the result and restrict the scientific researches and development, it is acceptable to make limitations to those developments that are harmful to society or environment, or against morality or ethics.

cloudwind-greUID: 2462220

As science research and development advance, the complexity and congruity is arriving to the point that beyond people’s expectations. Then there comes the debate about whether limitations are bound to set by government on science. From my perspective, to some extent, restrictions should be placed considering some moral and social problems.

To begin with, judging by the nature of science, no clear boundaries are supposed to be drawn, so that the pace of scientific researches would not slow down, (not slow down 和后面的even stop 好像不成递进关系吧,不慢递进就应更快了哦.) or even stop. Science is to seek for the answers to the unknown, to satisfy curiosity and to solve the past, present and future problems- that is, even scientists would frequently not know what exactly they are looking for. Only though innumerous researches and thorough consideration could they realize the results and meanings of their experiments. (这里可以加上一两句,就是要突出说明一下连他们都不知道,然后后面再连接上government这样连接得更好,也突出了本段的重要) Without a clear prospect before they research, how could the government define which field should be prohibited for its possibility of being inhumane? Such limitations would only prevent science from advancement.这一前面一部分是要说明科学的不可预见性,后面一部分应是说明政府不知道应怎样管理科学,这一段的重点应是后面一部分吧,但好像后面一部分说的不够哦,如果加一个例子我想会更好.

However, on the other hand, once scientific developments show a destructive influence on society or environment, restrictions should be immediately set to stop further (worse这个词会不会更好呢?) destruction, and alternative solutions to the problems are to be sought in all efforts. For instance, the use of insoluble plastic is one source of the pollutions on the earth, as plastic cannot be buried  under soil or burnt in the air innoxiously. With this realization coming up to society, government should take all measures to stop the development of plastic use, substituting with paper or other environmental materials. Otherwise, white pollution would be increasingly terrible and unimaginable difficult to be solve.  这段写得不错, 不过停止plastic use 这个好像有点绝对,我想改为support the development of soluable plastic 会更好一点.

In addition, limitations ought to be considered or relatively taken (exerted 会不会更好呢?) in the violations of morality and ethics. Nowadays, clone is one of the most heated discussions which concerns about science and humanity. Once clone is widely spread, undoubtedly some who lose their beloved ones and are too grief (sad, grief is a noun) to move on would spare no effort utilizing clone to create a person. Ethical and moral distort in such cases, many dispute, would cause social disorder in the end. 这个COLON的危害我想详细说明一下会更好.Similarly, both mercy killing and abortion are kinds of murder, ending people's lives willingly. In regard of the fairness of every life, government are expected to, at least strictly limit the occurrences of clone. Only by certain rules and orders can these inhumane incidences hardly happen. 我想改成only by certain rules and orders can we proscribe these inhumane incidents happen, 感觉hardly 这里是这些事情自己不发生,但我想他们是被禁止发生.

In conclusion, while the nature of science is the pursuit of truth, which determines the government cannot anticipate the result of scientific research and can not 这里如果不加上cannot 可能会出现理解成政府应限制这个意思. restrict the scientific researches and development, it is acceptable to make limitations to those developments that are harmful to society or environment, or against morality or ethics.最好在结尾深化一下主题,比如说 government and researchers should collaborate to develop science...或政府可以用什么方法来限制.


文章总体来说逻辑结构较好,特别是后面两段基本比较有说服力,主要还注意一下适当的地方加深一下就很好了,
语言其实不用刻意追求很难明白的词语和短语.有些好像硬加上去一样,有点怪,像To begin with, judging by the nature of science, no clear boundaries are supposed to be drawn, so that...这一句其实重点是要说明科学的"nature是什么"
如果用你自己的语言,像第三,四段,看越就就比较顺.
总的来说,文章已较好了, 就是开关和结尾有点短.希望作者继续努力.

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

【Big Fish】3月8日Issue69-By jjooyy

Issue No.069 "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development." As science research and development advance, the complexity and congruity is arriving to the point that beyond people’s expectations. Then there comes the debate about whether limitations are bound to set by government on science. From my perspective, to some extent, restrictions should be placed considering some moral and social problems. To begin with, judging by the nature of science, no clear boundaries are supposed to be drawn, so that the pace of scientific researches would not slow down, or even stop. Science is to seek for the answers to the unknown, to satisfy curiosity and to solve the past, present and future problems- that is, even scientists would frequently not know what exactly they are looking for.(中式思维，说得我觉得有点悬。) Only though innumerous researches and thorough consideration could they realize the results and meanings of their experiments. Without a clear prospect before they research, how could the government define which field should be prohibited for its possibility of being inhumane? Such limitations would only prevent science from advancement. However, on the other hand, once scientific developments show a destructive influence on society or environment, restrictions should be immediately set to stop further destruction, and alternative solutions to the problems are to be sought in all efforts. For instance, the use of insoluble plastic is one source of the pollutions on the earth, as plastic cannot be buried under soil or burnt in the air innoxiously. With this realization coming up to society, government should take all measures to stop the development of plastic use, substituting with paper or other environmental materials. Otherwise, white pollution would be increasingly terrible and unimaginable difficult to solve. (用plastic的例子是很冒险的一个，plastic之所以能够久盛不衰必然有其对人类更为重要的一面，而你完全忽视。 Take all measures 太绝对...) In addition, limitations ought to be considered or relatively taken in the violations of morality and ethics. Nowadays, clone is one of the most heated discussions which concern about science and humanity. Once clone is widely spread, undoubtedly some who lose their beloved ones and are too grief to move on would spare no effort utilizing clone to create a person. Ethical and moral distort in such cases, many dispute, would cause social disorder in the end. Similarly, both mercy killing and abortion are kinds of murder, ending people's lives willingly. In regard of the fairness of every life, government are expected to, at least strictly limit the occurrences. Only by certain rules and orders can these inhumane incidences hardly happen. In conclusion, while the nature of science is the pursuit of truth, which determines the government cannot anticipate the result and restrict the scientific researches and development, it is acceptable to make limitations to those developments that are harmful to society or environment, or against morality or ethics.

8错的一文。不过提醒你在举例的时候小心地雷区。你举的两个例子都是满争议的，对于争议性强的例子，建议你在将其往自己观点靠近的同时不能太绝对，也就是做些许的必要的让步，承认其存在的优点或者缺点。过于绝对反而缺乏说服。这是我的感觉了…仅供参考。