Issue130 急求修改！！！

jacky.j.6UID: 2636430

"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."


Generally, I do not agree with the author's view from three aspects. First, though how children are socialized today has some influence on the destiny of society, it does not own enough power to determine the destiny of society. Second, what the children are born with also has great effects on what they can achieve in their adulthood. Last, a better society needs different types of individual, which means, children who are raised up by the same method would not necessarily bring about a better society.

To begin with, the socialization process to some extent influences the destiny of society. In my opinion, the term "socialization" means the way children get to acquire the wisdom of living techniques, including how to deal with dangerous, how to stick to their principles, or how to communicate with others. Socialization may teach them to pursue leadership throughout his life, then he may become a Machiavellianism whose will to succeed was so strong that he does not care what the means he should take------according to the theory in communication field. The study points out that Machiavellianism is a personal trait which is formed during socialization, often in one's childhood. A Machiavellianism believes that he should say what his audience what to hear, and to speak out what he really thinks about is of no value; a Machiavellianism always strives to become leaders, do whatever is needed to reach his goal. Take, for example, Hitler, who wanted to kill off all the Jewish for the glory of his own nation, Germany; or consider, Elisabeth, the famous female Russian emperor, who killed her husband to get the power. Both them two are typical Machiavellianism. Apparently, it is the socialization that made great influence on them, resulting in the destiny of the society in their times.

The socialization process in which one grows up certainty influences the society, however, the inner characteristics from one's birth also has great effects. Consider Albert Einstein, who did very poorly in school, that his teachers thought he was slow; consider young Napoleon Bonaparte, who was just one of hundreds of artillery lieutenants in the French Army; and consider the teenage George Washington, with little formal education, who was being trained not as a soldier but as a land surveyor. Their socialization was not successful, for they did not receive good education or effective guidance; however, each of them went to carve a place for themselves in history. By studying these figures' experience, scientist found that what people were bored with did matter one's achievements, influencing the destiny of the whole society. One of their in-born characteristics is the never surrender attitude. Simonton, a scientist in Yale University, said that "it is an unrelenting drive to succeed, a tendency to think that they are endowed with something super-normal". Another example for this inborn trait is Winston Churchill, Britain's prime minister during world War Two. Thrust into office when his country's morale was at its lowest, Churchill rose brilliantly to lead the British people. In a speech following the Allied evacuation at Dunkirk in 1940, he inspired the nation when he said," We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end... We shall never surrender." But for their in-born characteristics, society would not have been what it looks like currently.

Put aside the in-born influence on each individual, the author's claim to socialize all the children in one pattern is too Quixotic, for a better society needs different types of individuals. Imagine a society with children all the same; the Groupthink must have been occurred. Groupthink, found by the American social psychology Irving Janis, asserts that when members of the society begin to become similarly, the probability that the society will reach an effective decision would have been greatly reduces. Since a high level of cohesiveness among members exists, the pressure on individual's pointing out views that deviates from the group position becomes much highly. So without a rigorous decision-making procedure, the society can more easily succumb to pressure toward uniformity and thus agree to a very flawed course of action. When groupthink occurs, the society tends to overestimate its power and importance ------- believing strongly that right is on its side and that opposing forces are evil, which situation is highly dangerous. In fact, the society may be stepping behind rather than going ahead. So, the development of the society needs different voices, different individuals.

In the end, although socialization influences the destiny of society, it does not own the power to determine it. The individual's inborn-characteristics matters much, and the same are other characteristics. What’s more, to get a better society, we need different individuals rather than people socialized in one pattern.

xiao.xinUID: 2682051

大男子主义写的文章，因为你把所有的的“儿童”都用he代替，在第二段，应该改称they,要是一个女 阅卷人你就傻了。还有第一段的it 也是指儿童？我没太懂意思