【1010G精英组】ISSUE48 Ambition组回收站

lvruochenUID: 2792806

48"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."

附：改作文指南 by 最後の使徒

5.4  17:00前上交
  20:30BS

注意改上次的作文

lvruochenUID: 2792806

48"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."

not constructed by mere outstanding figures but they formed the outline of
the old days
studying famous is the most possible
and effective way
delegate

Words 649
Time 120min

History is the study of human past. We search for facts of the past and analyze them to draw a reasonable view of what we have done. And history is now mainly about things happened before the era of information when records are not as available as today. As we all know, the traditional study of history is aimed at famous few. And a lot of facts have been concluded by studying their lives. Recently, there is a saying emphasize that we should turn our mainly focus to groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. It is true that none of the well-studied popular individuals can make the history of his time all by his own. Nevertheless, famed ones are symbols of their time, studying such prominent persons is not only the most feasible way, but also the most effective means to learn about the past.

History is not constructed by mere outstanding figures but they formed the outline of the old days. What Napoleon said at the Saint-Bernard Pass is always blamed from the point that groups of people should be studied priorly, however the words can resemble the influence of the leading. When Napoleon was crossing the Alps with his troops, at the pass he was so proud and ambitious that he said the noted remark that he was higher than the Alps. By saying this he means he will definitely conquer the world, the time belongs to him and that he is outstanding one of his ages. Some people argues that he thought too much of his influence by his words. They believe Napoleon can never achieve that much without the help of the soldiers after him, and in other words, they are higher than the Alps as well. Nonetheless, Napoleon wrote his own history with others' help instead of all by himself. Nobody can be the only one to make the history, but they change the history. And like what Napoleon said, they are higher than the mountains, but here the mountain means the other people who help to make the history. They are outstanding and worth well-regarded.

Not just for their value to be learned, learning the leading few is the most possible way to study history. History is not about today and we can get a good view of what is happening.
Such events we are interested in happened years ago. Thus, the only means to acknowledge what happened is to read the memorials also written years ago. Such writers can not write down everything happened in their time, for that is beyond their ability, and that they are not omniscient of their age. They just write more about the famous few. Even if they take down what some certain ordinary individuals did, their words are less convincible because it is likely that their words are the only ones about some certain persons. Without comparison, it is impossible for us to take those words seriously. In contrast, we know more about the famous, only because they are referred to more. We learn the famous because we know almost nothing about the past when faced with an abysmal lack of information. Learning the celebrated is the only practicable way.

Learning the story of the distinguished individuals is also the most efficient way. If we think learning these persons are not comprehensive, then we must learn everyone in the past to be so. But that is both impossible and useless. We learn the famous persons because they are delegates of their classes and their time. It is efficient to learn about them and analyze the society then. Putting aside the lack of information of all individuals, we can get more from them with our limited energy and time.

All in all, the great individuals before are worth studying. What's more, that is the most feasible and effective way to learn about the past.

lvruochenUID: 2792806

加油。。。。
作文贴子发晚了
sorry

whiteoutUID: 2699068

History is a study not only of certifiable heroes, the great men and women of history who successfully worked through moral dilemmas, but also of more ordinary people who provide lessons in courage, diligence, or constructive protest. However, this idea is now being questioned by more and more people, who point out that history is teaching by examples, which means “the famous few” who have been playing the significant leading role in the most times. Thus, in my view, the speaker unfairly generalizes for the following reasons.

Turning first to every significant events and trends in history which are worth eulogizing, no one could deny the basic fact that “the famous few” played the most important leading role. A correlative example for individual success involves this fact is Gandhi’s legend. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, one of the most influential political leaders, is known as the international symbol of a free India. His “nonviolent protest” impacts on the world’s nationalists and those who seek peace in the international campaign. Albert Einstein once said, “Generations to come will find it difficult to believe that a man such as Gandhi ever walked the face of this earth.” Gandhi had also inspired many famous persons such as Martin Luther King and Mandela. In conclusion, the great man theory has never been out of favor. Maybe someone will doubt that without the majority of Indian people, how could Gandhi achieve the Indian independence? But is it really the case? We surely affirm the undeniable role of the masses, but Gandhi rendered the freedom and independence accessible to every class of Indian people throughout the country. On no account can we ignore the most essential achievement of the great leader.

As for the other place, the assumption that groups of people make history is an extreme performance of philosophy. To some extent, the policy that making a portion of people to get rich first, which is advocated by the Chinese opening and reforming policy in 1980s, is essentially the return of the great man theory. Thus, it should be universally acknowledged that the people theory is standing behind the great man theory. At the time when the progress of society means building a better future, we need “the famous few” now more than ever. These “famous few” are such models who are providing the moral standards of social behavior. They make the key choices at the very crucial moment on the very crucial issues on our behalf and break through all the self-serving biases and constraints for us. That is why “the real famous few” make us naturally to be close to them. Therefore, we cannot emphasis the important leading roles too much.

From what had been discussed above, the study of history should emphasis the achievement and leadership on individuals as much as it can. “The famous few” have become an indispensable part of our history, which tend to be our guidance in both social life and spiritual world. In addition, to a large extent, these individuals represent the majority of groups of people. They come from groups and agglomerate the power of groups, from which we can safely draw the conclusion that emphasis on individuals has a firmly positive effect on the social development.

In the final analysis, there is a growing tendency for this society to study history with emphasis much on individuals. Furthermore, “the famous few” indeed play a major leadership role and make the most significant events and trends in the history. Thus, the study of history cannot place emphasis on individuals too much.

whiteoutUID: 2699068

不知道怎么多发了一遍。。。

TO lrc

History is the study of human past. We search for facts of the past and analyze them to draw a reasonable view of what we have done.（好~）And history is now mainly about things happened before the era of information when records are not as available as today. As we all know, the traditional study of history is aimed at（the）famous few. And a lot of facts have been concluded by studying their lives. Recently, there is a saying emphasize（emphasizing） that we should turn our mainly focus to groups of people whose identities have long been(这两个词倒过来？) forgotten. It is true that none of the well-studied popular individuals can make the history of his time all by his own. Nevertheless, famed ones are symbols of their time, studying such prominent persons is not only the most feasible way, but also the most effective means to learn about the past.
History is not constructed by mere outstanding figures but they formed the outline of the old days.（but后面偷换主语了~）
What Napoleon said at the Saint-Bernard Pass is always blamed from the point that groups of people should be studied priorly, however the words can resemble（感觉这个词不是很合适）
the influence of the leading. When Napoleon was crossing the Alps with his troops, at the pass he was so proud and ambitious that he said the noted remark that he was higher than the Alps. By saying this he means he will（would）
definitely conquer the world, the time belongs（would belong） to him and that he is outstanding one of his ages.(he would be the most outstanding one in his age) Some people argues that he thought too much of his influence by his words. They believe Napoleon can never achieve that much without the help of the soldiers after(behind?) him, and in other words, they are higher than the Alps as well. Nonetheless, Napoleon wrote his own history with others' help instead of all by himself. Nobody can be the only one to make the(去掉) history, but they change the(去掉) history. And like what Napoleon said, they are higher than the mountains, but here the mountain means the other people who help to make the history. They are outstanding and worth well-regarded(well-regarding?).
Not just for their value to be learned(句式有点奇怪~), learning the leading few is the most possible way to study history. History is not about today and we can get a good view of what is happening.（has happened?）
Such events we are interested in happened years ago. Thus, the only means to acknowledge what happened is to read the memorials also written years ago（also去掉，末尾加too或者as well好一些）. Such（such用的很奇怪） writers can not write down everything happened in their time, for that is beyond their ability, and that they are not omniscient（好~） of their age. They just write（wrote）more about the famous few. Even if they take down what some certain ordinary individuals did, their words are less convincible because it is likely that their words are the only ones about some certain persons.（整个这段花了半天时间才搞懂你的意思，是说那些记载史料的人没有能力记载全面，只能记载the famous few？而且即使他们记载了这些也不那么可信？整个说的有些混乱~~）Without comparison, it is impossible for us to take those words seriously. In contrast, we know more about the famous, only because they are referred to more（？）. We learn the famous because we know almost nothing about the past when faced with an abysmal（这词。。。） lack of information. Learning the celebrated is the only practicable way.
Learning the story of the distinguished individuals is also the most efficient way. If we think learning these persons are not comprehensive, then we must learn everyone in the past to be so. But that is both impossible and useless. We learn the famous persons because they are delegates（此代表貌似非彼代表）
of their classes and their time. It is efficient to learn about them and analyze the society then. Putting aside the lack of information of all individuals, we can get more from them with our limited energy and time.
All in all, the great individuals before（不太合适~） are worth studying. What's more, that is the most feasible and effective way to learn about the past.

xiaohaixxxUID: 2317561

48"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."



     Human always tend to regard and remember hero, though we are always taught that "history is wrote by people", the truth is when we come to study history, we always place too much emphasis on individuals, which we regard as hero, but ignore groups work at background.
     This phenomenon may be unfair, but it seems that we cannot avoid it. There are too much these kinds of example in the study of history, for example: when we come to mention about the civil war, we will naturally think of Lincoln, however, if without those people who fight for freedom, and those people who sacrificed in the war, how can Lincoln face the south army just by himself? When we come to mention about the Second World War, we will naturally think of Stalin, Churchill, Roosevelt, however, if the people of world didn't united together how could the tree men win the war? When we come to mention about the emancipation of Black cattle we will naturally think of MartinLutherKing, however, if people, no matter black or white, didn't conscious of racial equality, how can he push to great wheel of history?
      It is true that some individuals did great, sometimes even crucial, contributions to the historical event. These individuals catalyze the even happen, and lead the event deduce in a right way. Without these individuals, the history may appear in another way. So it's give no cause for much criticism to emphasis on these individual, however, we should not ignore those groups who support the hero while we emphasize hero. For the history wheel is also pushed by these unknown groups. But why those groups who make great efforts and sacrifice to these historical events are easy to be forgotten? In my opinion, this phenomenon may be coursed by the way we study history. As we all know, when we study historical event, we tend to analyze how and why the historical event happen, how and why the historical event developed in such way, then we will cannot help fix our eyes on the few individual who lead the development of the historical event , because those critical decision were made by them. Sometimes the way we study historical events like we hear story, a story needs leading actors and history needs hero. For example, the RECORD OF HITORY- a Chinese history book - wrote by Simaqian thousands years ago recorded thousands of Chinese history as telling story, the book just record what emperor or minister did and said, but never mention normal people.
      However, if we study history in a new way, for example we can study history from a normal man's aspect, such as the movie Saving Private Ryan did, we can have chance to regard the normal men or those groups work at background.
       In conclusion, the way we study history lead to that we always regard few individual and ignore groups of people work background. But if we can study history in another way, we may regard those important but normal persons.

lvruochenUID: 2792806

这次交了3个
做个记号。。。。。

还没交的加油了

lvruochenUID: 2792806

就到此为止了。没交的不可以继续交了
一楼终于可以改作文了。。。。。。。。

xiaohaixxxUID: 2317561

5# whiteout

History is a study not only of certifiable heroes, the great men and women of history who successfully worked through not only
moral dilemmas, but also of more ordinary people who provide lessons in courage, diligence, or constructive protest(啥意思？). However, this idea is now being questioned by more and more people, who point out that history is teaching by examples, which means “the famous few” who have been playing the significant leading role in the most times. (觉得这地方写的有点不明白)Thus, in my view, the speaker unfairly generalizes for the following reasons.
Turning first to every significant events and trends in history which are worth eulogizing, no one could deny the basic fact that “the famous few” played the most important leading role. A correlative example for individual success involves this fact is Gandhi’s legend. Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, one of the most influential political leaders, is known as the international symbol of a free India. His “nonviolent protest” impacts on（enlightens） the world’s nationalists and those who seek peace in the international campaign. Albert Einstein once said, “Generations to come will find it difficult to believe that a man such as Gandhi ever walked the face of this earth.” Gandhi had also inspired many famous persons such as Martin Luther King and Mandela. In conclusion, the great man theory has never been out of favor. Maybe someone will doubt that without the majority of Indian people, how could Gandhi achieve the Indian independence? But is it really the case? We surely affirm the undeniable role of the masses, but Gandhi rendered the freedom and independence accessible to every class of Indian people throughout the country. On no account can we ignore the most essential achievement of the great leader.（觉得这里论证的有点不充分，要是能加上如果没有甘地会怎么样就好了）

As for the other place, the assumption that groups of people make history is
an extreme performance of philosophy（没看懂）. To some extent, the policy that making a portion of people to get rich first, which is advocated by the Chinese opening and reforming policy in 1980s, is essentially the return of the great man theory. Thus, it should be universally acknowledged that the people theory is standing behind the great man theory. At the time when the progress of society means building a better future, we need “the famous few” now more than ever. These “famous few” are such models who are providing the moral standards of social behavior（why？）They make the key choices at the very crucial moment on the very crucial issues on our behalf and break through all the self-serving biases and constraints for us（学习）. That is why “the real famous few” make us naturally to be close to them. Therefore, we cannot emphasis the important leading roles too much.（额 怎么和前面论述的观点相反了）

From what had been discussed above, the study of history should emphasis the achievement and leadership on individuals as much as it can. “The famous few” have become an indispensable part of our history, which tend to be our guidance in both social life and spiritual world. In addition, to a larger extent, these individuals represent the majority of groups of people. They come from groups and agglomerate the power of groups, from which we can safely draw the conclusion that emphasis on individuals has a firmly positive effect on the social development.

In the final analysis(这地方不用analysis吧), there is a growing tendency for this society to study history with emphasis much on individuals. Furthermore, “the famous few” indeed play a major leadership role and make the most significant events and trends in the history. Thus, the study of history cannot place emphasis on individuals too much.

觉得你文中的例子占的篇幅太大，但又不能很鲜明的支出伟人的重要性，读起来的感觉就像是中间插了一个独立的小故事，甘地这个例子举得有点空，就是泛泛的说甘地非暴力，他付出了努力，带领印度人走向自由，所以甘地很重要，但是甘地怎么带领的？甘地付出了什么牺牲？度过了什么困难？如果没有甘地怎么就不行呢？却没有具体的写出，这就显得论证不够有力。但是这种论证是有问题的。因为你这么说的时候实际上事先已经假设了甘地很重要，因此能带领印度人走向自由，所以甘地很重要。逻辑链就是：【1）甘地重要】假设——》 2）甘地带领印度人走向自由——》3）甘地重要    我的水平也不高  上面是我的一点点建议    互相帮助吗  你批判的接受吧~~~~   

whiteoutUID: 2699068

11# xiaohaixxx

"Therefore, we cannot emphasis the important leading roles too much.（额 怎么和前面论述的观点相反了） "

这里 cannot……too much  表“再怎么……也不为过” 所以我没有论述相反观点。。。。。


其他一并接受了 3Q！

lvruochenUID: 2792806

To soonyu

When studying history, we often pay more attention to individuals than groups. We can recall of Martin Luther King, Lincoln, Franklin, but not easily remember their assistants and adherents who played important role in their career but have been 时态forgotten. When we mention a historical event, we often name it by the leader who was famous for it instead of other names. That is to say, we always emphasize the importance of famous people in history but ignore the performance of people who was not as famous as their leaders. 是不是最后一句可以改的切题一点

Remarkable people in history always have high aptness especially in leadership. We cannot deny that person who created significant historical events was a great leader who can make the right decision quickly and expresses charisma. Nevertheless, without the support of adherents who correctly executed the decision, leaders could not make any difference. However, we always place much more emphasis on people with这个错了吧 leaderships than others who can implement 这个词decisions. In our memory, the success in Normandy landings—the most important campaign during the World War II—attributed to the right decision made by Dwight Eisenhower—the commander of Allied. 好例子However, without joint efforts of many officers and soldiers, that campaign could not win. That is to say, no matter how outstanding the leader is, he cannot create any significant event without the support by his partners whose identities might have been forgotten. The study of history that only places emphasis on individuals is a partly study instead of an objective one. 你说的是历史是由人民创造的------》应该研究历史的创造者是吗？学习了

In summary, the study of history often places too much emphasis on individuals. However, to learn more from the history, we have to pay our attention to people who was not very famous but had contributed to creating significant events.
这个当第一段最后一句不错

字数差点，是不是限时了