Issue48 历史中个人与群体的作用【求拍，有拍必回】

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

Issue48: 576 words
45 minutes
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.

Open our history book and turn to the first several pages. What can we see? Are there photos of those famous heroes in our history? I guess most of us would say yes. Thus some would argue that the current history study emphasizes too much on individuals while ignores the groups of people who in fact created the history. But unlike biography, history is to record the significant past rather than tiny common events. Therefore it is reasonable to study famous individuals while keeping an eye on the groups.

It is undoubted that the most significant events and trends of history were achieved by thousands of infamous people like you and me. No matter in the wartime years or in the peaceful developing years, common people's efforts play an important part in boosting the society. For example, in the World War II, it is the countless soldiers from various countries that sacrifice their lives to stop the unrest and bring us a bright peaceful world. Even the greatest generals can not achieve that without the efforts of groups of soldiers. While in the contemporary world, the development is not created merely by the Presidents of countries but by the over 6 billion people in every corner of the world. They devote themselves to the build a better society. However, no one would remember the name of each individual in the groups. All in all, without the groups of people who are not famous as a few individuals, our world can hardly advance.

However, just as mentioned above, it is impossible to record all the 6 billion people into history. Only they names may add up to a million pages. Not to mention what they do in their lives. History is not biography, which aims to record what one does and what one thinks. Instead, history is attempting to provide brief and objective scenes of human beings, which inform who we are, how we achieve today's accomplishments, and even indicate what we should do in the future. Therefore, it is impossible and unnecessary to study the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten, even if they contributed a lot to the development of the world.

Moreover, there is another reason to support studying famous individuals, that is, they are good representatives of those common groups. Look at those wartime heroes. There are thousands of brave soldiers, some of whom have even lost their lives, in the yard. But we usually pick a few of them and record their stories into history, as a way to describe the war. The same or similar stories can be easily found in the rest soldiers, which represent the groups of soldier whose names are forgotten after years. Or in the Industry Revolution, there might be thousands Watt who use their intelligence to improve the efficiency of machines. But Watt's story reflects the trend of history sufficiently and throws light upon our later generations to gain a whole understanding of that period of history.

In sum, although the history can not be made by the famous few, but the famous few can best represent the numberless groups of people whose actually create the history. The study of history is to generalize the features of specific period of times and to enable us understand the past. There is no need and is impossible to focus on the nameless groups, even though it is their efforts that create significant events and trends in the past.

qisaimanUID: 2703629

Open our history book and turn to the first several pages. What can we see? Are there photos of those famous heroes in our history? I guess most of us would say yes. Thus some would argue that the current history study emphasizes too much on individuals while ignores the groups of people who in fact created the history. But unlike biography, history is to record the significant past rather than tiny common events. Therefore it is reasonable to study famous individuals while keeping an eye on the groups.
Add I maintain / contend in the beginning.

Our history book sound uncomfortable; maybe it is not the case in some other countries.


It is undoubted that the most significant events and trends of history were achieved by thousands of infamous people like you and me. No matter in the wartime years or in the peaceful developing years, common people's efforts play an important part in boosting the society. For example, in the World War II, it is the countless soldiers from various countries that sacrifice their lives to stop the unrest and bring us a bright peaceful world. Even the greatest generals can not achieve that without the efforts of groups of soldiers. While in the contemporary world, the development is not created merely by the Presidents of countries but by the over 6 billion people in every corner of the world. They devote themselves to the build a better society. However, no one would remember the name of each individual in the groups. All in all, without the groups of people who are not famous as a few individuals, our world can hardly advance.

“You” should be avoided in the essay.
The later part does not focus on the “most important trends or events”.

However, just as mentioned above, it is impossible to record all the 6 billion people into history. Only they names may add up to a million pages. Not to mention what they do in their lives. History is not biography, which aims to record what one does and what one thinks. Instead, history is attempting to provide brief and objective scenes of human beings, which inform+s who we are, how we achieve today's accomplishments, and even indicate+s what we should do in the future. Therefore, it is impossible and unnecessary to study the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten, even if they contributed a lot to the development of the world.



Moreover, there is another reason to support studying famous individuals, that is, they are good representatives of those common groups. Look at those wartime heroes. There are thousands of brave soldiers, some of whom have even lost their lives, in the yard. But we usually pick a few of them and record their stories into history, as a way to describe the war. The same or similar stories can be easily found in the rest soldiers, which represent the groups of soldier whose names are forgotten after years. Or in the Industry Revolution, there might be thousands Watt who use their intelligence to improve the efficiency of machines. But Watt's story reflects the trend of history sufficiently and throws light upon our later generations to gain a whole understanding of that period of history.

There are other events except wars, such as important inventions and discovery.


In sum, although the history can not be made by the famous few, but the famous few can best represent the numberless groups of people whose actually create the history. The study of history is to generalize the features of specific period of times and to enable us understand the past. There is no need and is impossible to focus on the nameless groups, even though it is their efforts that create significant events and trends in the past.


From this essay I see an isolated comprehension on the individual and the public. The example is not fully analyzed and thus unconvincing to me.

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

2# qisaiman

呃。。。？等楼主修改！

wu-intrepidUID: 2659758

1# 爱上千年的猫

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.

Open our history book and turn to the first several pages. What can we see? Are there photos of those famous heroes侧重于个人，但不代表一定是英雄。 in our history? I guess most of us would say yes. Thus some would argue that the current history study emphasizes too much on individuals while ignores the groups of people who in fact created the history. But unlike biography, history is to record the significant past rather than tiny common events. Therefore it is reasonable to study famous individuals while keeping an eye on groups.既然历史记录重大事件，我们为何还要关注groups呢？TS的后半段有点突兀

It is undoubted that the most significant events and trends of history were achieved by thousands of infamous people like you and me万一考场上读你文章的是某牛学校的学术大牛呢... No matter in the wartime years or in the peaceful developing years, common people's efforts play an important part in boosting the society. For example, in the World War II, it is the countless soldiers from various countries that sacrifice their lives to stop the unrest and bring us a bright peaceful world. Even the greatest generals can not achieve that without the efforts of groups of soldiers. While in the contemporary world, the development is not created merely by the Presidents of countries but by the over 6 billion people in every corner of the world. They devote themselves to the build a better society. However, no one would remember the name of each individual in the groups我知道你在做个人和群体的比较，但这句话有问题，题目只说关注个人，没有说关注每一个个人，所以each individual可以换掉. All in all, without the groups of people who are not famous as a few individuals, our world can hardly advance.

However, just as mentioned above, it is impossible to record all the 6 billion people into history. Only they their? names may add up to a million pages. Not to mention what they do in their lives. History is not biography, which aims to record what one does and what one thinks. Instead, history is attempting to provide brief and objective scenes of human beings, which inform who we are, how we achieve today's accomplishments, and even indicate what we should do in the future. Therefore, it is impossible and unnecessary to study the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten, even if they contributed a lot to the development of the world. 完整的推理是这样，因为历史有…的作用（本段蓝体字部分），群体无法实现这个作用，但个人可以实现，所以应该研究个人而非群众。但是粉红字体部分你没有论证，如果说关于群众有一句biography涉及的话，对于个人完全没说，因此论证需完善

Moreover, there is another reason to support studying famous individuals, that is, they are good representatives of those common groups. Look at those wartime heroes. There are thousands of brave soldiers, some of whom have even lost their lives, in the yard. But we usually pick a few of them and record their stories into history, as a way to describe the war为什么能这么做，pick up的标准又是什么？. The same or similar stories can be easily found in the rest soldiers, which represent the groups of soldier whose names are forgotten after years. Or in the Industry Revolution, there might be thousands Watt who use their intelligence to improve the efficiency of machines. But Watt's story reflects the trend of history sufficiently and throws light upon our later generations to gain a whole understanding of that period of history.为什么有这么多瓦特我们偏偏选择这一个？为什么有这么多士兵我们选择他们中的一员？肯定不是随机的吧，一定有与众不同的地方的让他们如此重要，是什么呢？最好展示出来。如果仅仅说他们只是人民中的一员，恐怕不够compelling

In sum, although the history can not be made by the famous few, but the famous few can best represent the numberless groups of people whose actually create the history. The study of history is to generalize the features of specific period of times and to enable us understand the past. There is no need and is impossible to focus on the nameless groups, even though it is their efforts that create significant events and trends in the past.
吹毛求疵地说了些个人看法，见谅啊，如有需讨论的地方，告诉我~一起学习进步：）

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

4# wu-intrepid

谢谢楼主，晚上回来仔细看看，再帮你修改~

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

From this essay I see an isolated comprehension on the individual and the public. The example is not fully analyzed and thus unconvincing to me.
qisaiman 发表于 2010-3-10 23:50

我这一篇的思路是：
1. 支持群众在历史中的作用，以二战为例，如果没有成千上万的士兵，即使是所有出色的将军在一起也无法结束战乱带来和平；和平年代如果没有群众的努力，即使是各国的元首在一起，世界也无法发展。
2. 但是让历史记录下每一个个人是不可能也是不必要的：因为人太多所以不可能全部记录，并且因为历史不同于个人传记所以不需要记录每个个人的所有事迹；
3.历史研究的个人是能够代表广大群众的个人，所以研究典型个人就可以代表历史：战争中的英雄是广大战士的缩影，瓦特是广大技术工作者的代表。

楼主为什么说是an isolated comprehension on the individual and the public呢？至于例子的问题，我承认，我一直不善于用例子证明，现在正在努力改进。

wu-intrepidUID: 2659758

6# 爱上千年的猫
关于你的第二点，你只说没必要记录个人，但似乎没有从正面说从个人身上为什么就能使研究历史获得价值。
关于第三点，你的原文并没有把中文提纲里的典型体现出来，为什么是典型？有什么特质使之成为典型？这种特质为什么能让我们即使过分关注也不为过？
关于例证，单独的例子不能说明任何问题。比如证明“天鹅都是白的”这个命题，你拿一只白天鹅根本无济于事。而Issue基本都是全称判断，但例子都是个别的，因此仅仅使用一些例子很难支持观点。我猜这是为什么二楼说There are other events 。所以例子前最好有个推理过程，而例子是来支持这个推理过程的，这样即便我们不能穷尽所有情况，但至少已经站在“一般”的角度上论证过了。我上面所提的问题都是推理部分可以写的。
一家之言，批判地对待O(∩_∩)O~
不用帮我改，我刚考完，只是看到你的ID蛮有意思的，就来帮你看看，但愿对你有帮助啊~

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

6# 爱上千年的猫  
所以例子前最好有个推理过程，而例子是来支持这个推理过程的，这样即便我们不能穷尽所有情况，但至少已经站在“一般”的角度上论证过了。wu-intrepid 发表于 2010-3-12 16:17

楼主这个说的有道理，我会注意到，再次感谢你~~~

P.S.原来ID起得古怪也有好处，哈哈。。。

adcolorsUID: 2256933

提醒楼主mm注意下时态。之前也看到过时态不太确切的地方。虽然是小错，但是犯这种错不值。

爱上千年的猫UID: 2476232

9# adcolors

好犀利~~~我的确对时态方面稍微有点疑惑，推理论证部分应该都是现在时，举例的时候有疑惑，不知道改用什么了。。。