Issue126 求拍, 有拍必回~

mobius.x64UID: 2628671

126. "Society's external rewards are no measure of true success. True success can be measured only in relation to the goals one sets for oneself."
社会所给予的外部奖励不是成功的真正衡量标准。真正的成功只能通过自己所设立的目标来衡量。


Outline:
* 部分反对: 对成功的衡量标准不应一元化;
* 人们通常将成功与所创造的社会价值联系, 但人不可能给予社会自己没有的东西, 因此创造社会价值的前提是在个人目标的指引下, 实现个人的人生价值, 南丁格尔对成功的定义突出了"目标的实现", 这也说明对成功的衡量首先在于是否达到了个人目标; 例子: 作为成功的印象派艺术家, 梵高在他的时代并未得到多少社会回馈, 真正标识他成功的是他对艺术的热爱和执着追求
* 但是人是社会化的个体, 一个人为自己设立的人生目标如果不放在一定的社会体系下衡量是没有意义的, 因此社会的外部回馈对衡量成功仍有其意义. 反面例子: 大奸大恶之人对自己人生目标的追求绝不可能被视作成功的例子;
* 结论;


Text:
Success is a common desire shared by the majority of people. Although everyone may have his own understanding of success, it is possible to establish a general standard to measure success anyway. Then on what standard shall we judge success? In my opinion, this measurement should firstly involve the factors of self-fulfillment and then the external rewards from society. Success needs to be appreciated by society, but it truly lies in one's endeavor of achieving one's goal.

People often associate success with certain social reward like money or fame. However that's just a plausible image of success. Society reward man for the social value he provided, but man cannot provide anything that he hasn't possessed yet. It suggests that before being able to contribute to society, a man has to first realize the value of his own life. And only through the guidance of a clear goal and the accompanying resolution can one accomplish this task. Without certain intentions, result from unconscious and mere coincidence would hardly be regarded as a successful one. Thereby, the essence of success is intrinsically to achieve the goal of one's own. Earl Nightingale once wrote: Success is the progressive realization of a worthy goal or idea. So the true success lies in whether we have achieved our goals, the worthy goals that deserve full devotion and endeavor. Van Gogh is indubitably a successful impressionist with a far-reaching influence on modern art, but his life was ended up with suffering and misery. If measured by the reward of society in 19th century, the success of Van Gogh is completely void, while people now remark it by his artistic expression that he wholeheartedly pursued throughout his career. Thus, it is more reasonable to claim that measurement for success should be firstly established on self-fulfillment.

On the other hand, however, the social value of the goals deserves no neglect. A man is a socialized individual, and his goals should also be evaluated under certain social circumstance to some extent. To fulfill a socially meaningless target seldom guarantees a socially worthy result, despite the strong will and remorseless effort behind that. Take those who spare no effort to carry out genocidal policies as example, nobody living in civilization would approve that their bloody goals are appropriate marks of success. That's the reason why Nightingale didn't miss the word "worthy" before "goals or ideas" in his definition of success. The social significance of success requires social factors be included as auxiliary part in the measurement, and the society's external rewards are apparently the most expressive one. Of course, the external reward is secondary anyway, as it might be too captivating for one to remain one's focus on the true goals.


To sum up, I agree with the statement that true success shall be measured in relation to the goals one set for oneself rather than the external social rewards, but the measurement should not be constructed as a unitary criterion. Beside the primary self-fulfillment, we need social influence and reward as necessary complement in the measure of success. Only by pursuing the goals of certain social meaning wholeheartedly can we truly achieve the so-called success.

nkjancyUID: 2549844

1# mobius.x64
Success is a common desire shared by the majority of people. Although everyone may have his own understanding of success, it is possible to establish a general standard to measure success anyway. Then on what standard shall we judge success? In my opinion, this measurement should firstly involve the factors of self-fulfillment and then the external rewards from society. Success needs to be appreciated by society, but it truly lies in one's endeavor of achieving one's goal.

People often associate success with certain social reward like money or fame. However that's just a plausible image of success. Society reward man for the social value he provided, but man cannot provide anything that he hasn't possessed yet. It suggests that before being able to contribute to society, a man has to first realize the value of his own life. And only through the guidance of a clear goal and the accompanying（corresponding） resolution can one accomplish this task（具体指代什么task?）. Without certain intentions, result from（of） unconscious and mere coincidence would hardly be regarded as a successful one. Thereby, the essence of success is intrinsically（和the essence有的重复，我觉得应该删掉） to achieve the goal of one's own. Earl Nightingale once wrote: Success is the progressive realization of a worthy goal or idea. So the true success lies in whether we have achieved our goals, the worthy goals that deserve full devotion and endeavor. Van Gogh is indubitably a successful impressionist（我觉得，从某种角度上来说，还是社会认同了他成功） with a far-reaching influence on modern art, but his life was ended up with suffering and misery. If measured by the reward of society in 19th century, the success of Van Gogh is completely void, while people now remark it by his artistic expression that he wholeheartedly pursued throughout his career. Thus, it is more reasonable to claim that measurement for success should be firstly established on self-fulfillment.
（我觉得这段论述的重心有点发散，好像同时在论述：成功在于个人 和 成功不在于社会。虽然这两个话题很相似，但是交织着来说，还是觉得不是很好。）


On the other hand, however, the social value of the goals deserves no neglect. A man is a socialized individual, and his goals should also be evaluated under certain social circumstance to some extent. To fulfill a socially meaningless target seldom guarantees a socially worthy result, despite the strong will and remorseless effort behind that. Take those who spare no effort to carry out genocidal policies as example, nobody living in civilization would approve that their bloody goals are appropriate marks of success. That's the reason why Nightingale didn't miss the word "worthy" before "goals or ideas" in his definition of success. The social significance of success requires social factors be included as auxiliary part in the measurement, and the society's external rewards are apparently the most expressive one. Of course, the external reward is secondary anyway, as it might be too captivating for one to remain one's focus on the true goals.
（我觉得这段的论述在支撑the social value of the goals deserves no neglect上没有问题。但不是很切入对external reward的讨论）

To sum up, I agree with the statement that true success shall be measured in relation to the goals one set for oneself rather than the external social rewards, but the measurement should not be constructed as a unitary criterion. Beside the primary self-fulfillment, we need social influence and reward as necessary complement in the measure of success. Only by pursuing the goals of certain social meaning wholeheartedly can we truly achieve the so-called success.

PS：楼主的语言好强大，挑楼主语言上的错误真和在鸡蛋里挑骨头差不多！:L


还请楼主帮忙看看我的文章：
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1082272-1-2.html

nkjancyUID: 2549844

1# mobius.x64
楼主好像还没回拍！:L

mobius.x64UID: 2628671

3# nkjancy

实在抱歉, 拖到现在才把回拍的发上来, 请nkjancy快去看看吧:P