1010G零散版友作文互改帖（Issue）

sucre1990UID: 2619918

153 Students should bring a certain skepticism to whatever they study. They should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively

Passive learning is always regarded as a questionable method of learning. But, with my reservation, in fact it is necessary during the learning process. To this point, the statement generalizes unfairly that students should hold skepticism to everything they are taught instead of accepting passively.

    Firstly, passive learning is a good way to keep people themselves out of the emergency which is related to their life. For example, students are taught that rattlesnake is a very dangerous animal and if you encounter it, you should keep silent and don't infuriate it. At this moment, if you follow the tips you studied, you may save your life and avoid being hurt. But, On the contrary, if you still hold the skepticism to it, you will be in big trouble and even lost your rest opportunities to argue with me that whether this statement is wrong or right. This is just an ordinary instance. The importance of passive learning exists in every aspect in our lives. The basic survival principles need you just to believe, you dare not doubt it.

  And then accepting knowledge directly sometimes is worth doing. Compare our life-span to human history, we don't have enough time to speculate and suspect every notion and regain all the knowledge you need. A lot of knowledge is the reflection of nature law, it do exist. If insist doubting, though you will finally realize it is what is as you are taught, you will waste a lot of time. Just like the basic mathematic principle that one plus one equals two, you doubt it and then you begin to spend a lot of time thinking it. However the result, as we all can image, it still equals two. I will really appreciate the spirit, but is it a kind of waste of your precious time which you could have learnt more? And to this point, I think passive learning is worth doing.

  Finally, on the contrary, always holding certain skepticism，to some extent, will impede you from improving. A person who is with a strong suspicion will be difficult to find his/her disadvantage and don’t mention to amend it. The example of genius professor John Nash in Princeton will illustrate it perfectly. During John first two years in school, he doubted everything and even didn't go to class. He thought the knowledge they taught would make him think wrong. However, during this period of his life, he did nothing and even got mental illness. His brilliant mind didn't show its real value until his instructor recommended him to receive other's opinion. And then his Noble-wining work was published. Sometimes it is correct to listen to others, and you don't need to suspect. Because of that they teach you how to improve yourself.

  In summary, learning and teaching is one inseparable unit. If you always suspect what you have been taught, teaching becomes meaningless and you will also find you are in a dilemma. Actually accepting directly will do you a good favor. And passive learning is not always a bad thing. It do help human continue its specie, civilization and evolution.

anniehalUID: 2716032

153 Students should bring a certain skepticism to whatever they study. They should question what they are taught instead of accepting it passively

Passive learning is always regarded as a questionable method of learning. But, with my reservation, in fact it is necessary during the learning process. To this point, the statement generalizes unfairly that students should hold skepticism to everything they are taught instead of accepting passively.

    Firstly, passive learning is a good way to keep（help?） people themselves out of the emergency which is related to their life(lives). For example, students are taught that rattlesnake is a very dangerous animal and if you encounter it, you should keep silent and don't infuriate it. At this moment( it was “if” encounter it, then you’d better make “this moment” clear), if you follow the tips you studied, you may save your life and avoid being hurt. But, On the contrary, if you still hold the skepticism to it, you will be in big trouble and even lost your rest opportunities to argue with me(a little bit weird) that whether this statement is wrong or right. This is just an ordinary instance. The importance of passive learning exists in every aspect in our lives. The basic survival principles need you just to believe, you dare(would better) not doubt it.

  And then accepting knowledge directly sometimes is worth doing. Compare our life-span to human history, we don't have enough time to speculate and suspect every notion and regain all the knowledge you need. A lot of knowledge is the reflection of nature law, it do exist. If insist doubting, though you will finally realize it is what is(that it is the same) as you are taught, you will waste a lot of time( and a lot of time will be wasted). Just like the basic mathematic principle that one plus one equals two, you doubt it and then you begin to spend a lot of time thinking it. However the result, as we all can image, it still equals two.(I don’t know, but it does sounds weird) I will really(do) appreciate the spirit, but is it a kind of(seems like) waste of your precious time which you could have learnt more? And to this point, I think passive learning is worth doing.

  Finally, on the contrary, always holding certain skepticism，to some extent, will impede you from improving. A person who is with a strong suspicion will be difficult to find his/her disadvantage and don’t mention to amend it. The example of genius professor John Nash in Princeton will illustrate it perfectly. During John first two years in school, he doubted everything and even didn't go to class. He thought the knowledge they taught would make him think wrongly. However, during this period of his life, he did nothing and even got mental illness. His brilliant mind didn't show its real value until his instructor recommended him to receive other's opinion. And then his Noble-wining work was published. Sometimes it is correct to listen to others, and you don't need to suspect. Because of that they teach you how to improve yourself.

  In summary, learning and teaching is one inseparable unit. If you always suspect what you have been taught, teaching becomes meaningless and you will also find you are in a dilemma. Actually accepting directly will do you a good favor. And passive learning is not always a bad thing. It do help human continue its specie, civilization and evolution.

逻辑很好的~完全支持passive learning.
B1 避免生活中的危险。
B2 吸取别人经验，节约时间。
B3 怀疑导致阻碍自身发展，个人觉得这里可以强调topic里面提到的怀疑所有教授的知识，这样与之后的例子也可以切合~然后，觉得这个例子应该详细描述后半段，他停止skeptism之后的好处在哪里，因为stop skeptism和nobel prize不能体现因果联系阿。这里有点argu的因果问题~
不错~

对了对了，忘了我之前也犯的错误，提干里有student的亚，但很容易忽略，然后只讨论skeptism的。。

anniehalUID: 2716032

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "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."
WORDS: 503-674

TIME: 00:41:38
DATE: 2010-7-24 11:09:47

It is true that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. And I agree with the statement above that the significant events and trends, no matter in what kind of fields, may be led by the famous few, but must be made the groups of unknown people.

Art is an important part of history, which represents the culture, value and taste of people in a certain time. However, most of us just remember several famous artists or some worldwide known artifacts, but know a little about other unfamous artists who were the indispensable component of an era's art trend, and never mention the workers or supports who made an essential contribution to the accomplishment of those artifacts. For the Cologne Cathedral as an example, it is wildly famous for the Gothic sharp arch and beautiful stained glasses. Whilst actually, it was under construction for nearly six hundred years, and almost no one knows the names of those genius workers and designers. And it is entire obvious that without these unknown people's ideas and endeavors, the Cologne Cathedral is impossible to be the way as it is today. This happens the same when people study the trend of art. Monet and Van Gogh are the renowned representatives of Impressionism; however, the trend of art was surely not developed on those several few. Other unfamiliar painters were also improper to neglect due to it is their works that made impressionism complete and colorful. Therefore, we can find that the study of art history just notices the several amazing artifacts and some artists, but pay a little attention to other important supporters and parts.

The study of politics is a never ending topic of history, and what the rulers achieved or did wrongly is always under heat discussion. However, without their forgotten followers and conductors, I believe no policy could lay any influence on the general people. And the policy would simply be a piece of paper if no one helped the rulers to make it come true. We may familiar with the New Deal of F.D Roosevelt, which helped American economies recovered quickly from the Depression and Second World War. But how many of us remember the name of Roosevelt's colleagues who played an important role in conducting that New Deal and realize each step of the policy. Without their support and work, I think it is impossible to achieve the great success as we know it today. While these folks' names have been long forgotten or even never mentioned. According, it is a fact that people who study the history of politics just remember the policy makers or rulers, but forget those who worked behind.

Science and technology is another significant part of history, and it happens the same that we just simply honor those famous few who achieved great success, but never mention the ancestors working ahead who laid a indispensable foundation to the new achievements and also forget their follow workers who helped them in the process of experiments and researchers. Actually, no breakthrough could be made merely by one single person and his or her own intelligence. Most of us know John von Neumann who invented the first computer EINAC whose development has totally changed everyone’s life pattern in whole world. But rare people have ever heard the name of John Napier who initially built the basic theory of computers thirty years ago before the first computer was ever made. In addition, Nobel is well-known for inventing the bomb and Edison is famous for making the bulb, but who knows their assistants’ names? Without their helping behind, how could these great scientists have achieved the success? Hence, it is true that when we study the history of science, little attention was laid to the scientists who made the useful basic theory and co-workers who backed the well-known scientists.

From the discussion above, we can safely find the conclusion that the majority truly just remember those famous few artists, rulers and scientists, but neglect other important followers, workers and supporters.

悦茗UID: 2818584

占楼改108楼

悦茗UID: 2818584

题目：ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"
字数：458          用时：0:42:46          日期：2010/7/23

I strongly agree with the claim that governments should place few restrictions on scientific research and development, if any, since a free and encouraging atmosphere and environment is important for scientific research and development. At the same time, for the sake of ensuring public security and social benefits, appropriate restrictions are necessary because some scientific researches are of potential danger or challenging to social conventions.

On one hand, scientists need a free and encouraging atmosphere and environment in which their imaginations and potential talents can be best inspired and realized. Such examples are often seen in history. For instance, the greatest physicist in the 20th century Albert Einstein escaped from Nazi Germany to the United States for the free research environment. It is during his stay in the United States that he developed the Special and General Theories of Relativity and found the photoelectric effect. As a country where freedom is highly valued and encouraged, the United States continues to attract thousands of talents and promising young scientists from all over the world.

On the other hand, however, appropriate restrictions on scientific research and development are indispensable since there are some scientific research that may do harm to the society or even the whole world. The ethical issue of cloning has caused heated discussions among the mass media and the public across countries. Because of its contradiction with the human ethics and values, now no cloning research is allowed in any country. Another example involves the nuclear research. Nuclear projects developed as weapons are strictly restricted by many countries, considering that nuclear weapon can lead to devastating damage to all the world.

Appropriate restrictions are needed to protect public security and social benefits, yet when determining whether a scientific research should be placed restrictions, the government has to evaluate both the potential good and harm that that research may do to the society. Differentiating decisions on restrictions should be made based on the evaluation for that different kinds of scientific research leads to different results. Scientific research on and development of renewable and clean energy such as solar energy should be greatly encouraged without restrictions, even financial support should be given to such research and development. Research on new medicines against serious diseases like cancer and AIDS should also be supported by government. Nuclear research for electric energy should received certain restrictions while nuclear research for military purposes should be placed with strict restrictions.

In conclusion, the prosperity of scientific research and development requires an free and supporting environment, while appropriate restrictions on certain research can make sure that the public security and social benefits are under protection. Government should be wise enough to distinguish between different kinds of scientific research and make its decisions based on careful evaluations.

悦茗UID: 2818584

108# anniehal
TOPIC: ISSUE184 - "It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data."
WORDS: 336-511          TIME: 00:36:02          DATE: 2010-7-22 23:11:37

It is true that study for some aspects, building a theory without enough data is uncountable and improper. However, concerning to different fields of work, this does not be the case. Sometimes, it is acceptable to theorize purely based on existed theories or logic thinking.

Studying in the fields of sociology and science, real figure(研究数据的话会不会还是用data比较好呢) of experiment and research is indispensable and important to form a new theory. Without the real and true number（建议authentic data）, any theory related to these fields would be unconvincing, or even wrong. For building theory about people's behavior as an example, the sociologist will first draft an assumption, and then design a survey according to the assumption. The next and most important step is conducting this survey and collecting figures about the responders. That is exactly what the sociologist needs to support or 推翻(reject)his or her idea before building any new theories. Devoid of these data, it is impossible for researchers to obtain the idea of the real phenomenon and situation. And the sociology theory built without real number would be entirely unconvincing, and just stay as an assumption or hypothesis. This situation happens in the scientific world as well that scientists are required to make experiments and collect information about the results of their works. These can help them to get the idea of the effectiveness of their inventions, which serves well to the further study and new theories’ building. In (To ) sum up, data plays an important role in forming any fresh theories in the fields of science and sociology.

However, regarding to other fields, such as astrology(astrology是占星术，严格说没有被承认是科学。astronomy才是天文学 ), which is quite difficult to obtain the first-hand data, building a theory before getting enough number or fact is still helpful to develop the further study and research. The famous Black Hole theory of Hawkins is a good example, which merely depends on existed ideas and knowledge. Even this theory cannot be considered as a fact now, but it definitely was not a mistake to build it, since it already has left a profound and meaningful influence on today's astrology field. And many astrologists are making their observations and researchers on the base of it.

Moreover, in other fields like philosophy, I could say that the objective data is of no use to theorize. The thing more important（感觉有点中式英语的味道，）is logic and critical thinking. Literally, what the philosophers do to make a new theory is observing the real world, looking for the connections between facts, thinking hard about the causal relationships and looking for their new ways to answer the questions. These steps are definitely not relevant to any data, and what（what’s ）required is philosophers’ deeper understanding and thinking.

According to the discussion above, we can safely find that whether it is a mistake to theorize before one has data largely depends on what kind of subject it is. If it is about sociology and science, the real number and phenomenon is of paramount importance to build any new theories. While, when it comes to the work of astrology and philosophy, theorizing without enough data is acceptable and reasonable.

我的看法
建议分自然科学和社会科学来论证， 每种下面在列举具体的学科来论证。
文章举了社会学和科学，可能不是很好，因为science 其实也包括了astronomy。

sucre1990UID: 2619918

111# 悦茗 占楼改110楼 孙同学你的格式弄错了 看看楼主的规则
题目：ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"
字数：458          用时：0:42:46          日期：2010/7/23

I strongly agree with the claim that governments should place few restrictions on scientific research and development, if any, since a free and encouraging atmosphere and environment is important for scientific research and development. At the same time, for the sake of ensuring public security and social benefits, appropriate restrictions are necessary because some scientific researches are of potential danger or challenging to social conventions. （第一段的观点我怎么感觉有点矛盾啊，先说不限制后面又说限制，你的观点在文章中表现的很清晰，你可以说你对题目的观点不完全同意。如果改一下会更好）

On one hand, scientists need a free and encouraging atmosphere and environment in which their imaginations and potential talents can be best inspired and realized. Such examples are often seen in history. For instance, the greatest physicist in the 20th century Albert Einstein escaped from Nazi Germany to the United States for the free research environment. It is during his stay in the United States that he developed the Special and General Theories of Relativity and found the photoelectric effect. As a country where（which比较好如用where先行词应该为in a country where） freedom is highly valued and encouraged, the United States continues to attract thousands of talents and promising young scientists from all over the world. （这段爱因斯坦的例子不是太好。爱因斯坦来到美国为的是躲避纳粹的迫害而不是追求自由的研究氛围，我认为作者用别的例子会更好。）

On the other hand, however, appropriate restrictions on scientific research and development are indispensable since there are some scientific research that may do harm to the society or even the whole world. The ethical issue of cloning has caused heated discussions among the mass media(medium) and the public across countries. Because of its contradiction with the human ethics and values, now no cloning research is allowed in any country.(这句明显有背于事实，请作者查证) Another example involves the nuclear research. Nuclear projects developed as weapons are strictly restricted by many countries, considering that nuclear weapon can lead to devastating damage to all the world.

Appropriate restrictions are needed to protect public security and social benefits, yet when determining whether a scientific research should be placed restrictions, the government has to evaluate both the potential good and harm that that research may do to the society. Differentiating（微分的？） decisions on restrictions should be made based on the evaluation for that different kinds of scientific research leads to different results. Scientific research on and development of renewable and clean energy such as solar energy should be greatly encouraged without restrictions, even financial support should be given to such research and development. Research on new medicines against serious diseases like cancer and AIDS should also be supported by government. Nuclear research for electric energy should received（语法有错误） certain restrictions（这句意思写反了） while nuclear research for military purposes should be placed with strict restrictions.

In conclusion, the prosperity of scientific research and development requires an free and supporting environment, while appropriate restrictions on certain research can make sure that the public security and social benefits are under protection. Government should be wise enough to distinguish between different kinds of scientific research and make its decisions based on careful evaluations.
总的来说，除了第一段会给人产生矛盾的感觉外，文章的思路是清晰的，用词和造句感觉都不错
文章的缺点可能在于例子选取不当。
互相交流，共同进步

sucre1990UID: 2619918

43"To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."

To be frank, I have thought about this subject for a long time but cannot get a opinion that satisfies me just yet.  To reach one, however, I think we have to make a few questions clear step by step. First one, what is an ethical and moral standard? The second, what do we mean by calling a leader effective? And the last one, what is the role of a public official in a society?

  I think we can define moral and ethical standard the principle that guides people behave abiding by what we think is good to others and them. From this point, moral and ethical standards, in its turn, mean the way of interaction with a society which is the least disturbing or better pleasing other members of a society. It is just a individual rule.

  And now, how a leader is, can we call him a effective leader? In my consideration, a real effective leader must be one that owns a lot of people's loyalty and is treated respectfully by people. But how can people grant one their respect and loyalty? We always speak highly of the people who have a further view, thinks wider, move faster and knows the answers that we don't. Because, in case of that we feel protected and comforted by the capability that they don't possess. And according to this fact, I think we can now come to the root of the statement, to be an effective leader one must possess the great capability, knowledge, power of action and a further foresight that will come over the fears normal people have and can fulfill his people’s needs of required protected. However, from all above, to be a effective leader has nothing to do with the highest moral and ethical standards.

  And come to the last question--what is the role of a public leader in society? In my point, a public leader whether is selected by people or appointed should has the responsibility to maintain his group and society stable and prosper. Therefore, his own characteristic doesn't matter as much as the actual leadership. And it just need as enough moral and ethical level as the leader can maintain his duty. However, the real height of the leader's personality will not be evaluated and justified in his job.
   
  At last, I want to offer a good example to illustrate my conclusion I get from the above question. As he is called a crazy man and a devil according to the crimes he committed in World War 2, we cannot mention Hitler with the concept of moral and ethical person. But we cannot gainsay he was a real effective leader based on the fact he turned Germany from a vanquished country of World War 1 having no alliances with terrible deficit and more than 6 million unemployed people to one of the most powerful and developed countries.

  Summary all I've proposed, my point is clear that I do not agree with the statement at all. A real effective leader should maintain his leadership and acquire better ability than the people he/she leads instead of being asked to maintain the highest moral and ethical standards.
谢谢楼下的

anniehalUID: 2716032

43"To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."

To be frank, I have thought about this subject for a long time but cannot get a opinion that satisfies me just yet.  To reach one, however, I think we have to make a few questions clear step by step. First one, what is an ethical and moral standard? The second, what do we mean by calling a leader effective? And the last one, what is the role of a public official in a society?

  I think we can define moral and ethical standard the principle that guides people behave abiding by what we think is good to others and them. From this point, moral and ethical standards, in its turn, mean the way of interaction with a(the) society which is the least disturbing or better pleasing other members of a society. It is just a individual rule.(I can’t understand it..I am sorry)

  And now, how a leader is, can we call him a effective leader?(what kind of leader can be called as effective?) In my consideration, a real effective leader must be the one that owns a lot of people's loyalty(chinglish,buddy.) and is treated respectfully by people. But how can people grant one their respect and loyalty? We always speak highly of the people who have a further view, thinks wider, move faster and knows the answers that we don't know. Because, in case of that we feel protected and comforted by the capability that they(who?) don't possess. And according to this fact, I think we can now come to the root of the statement, to be an effective leader one must possess the great capability, knowledge, power of action and a further foresight that will come over the fears normal people have and can fulfill his people’s needs of required protected. (this sentence is too00 long) However, from all above, to be a effective leader has nothing to do with the highest moral and ethical standards.

  And come to the last question--what is the role of a public leader in society? In my point, a public leader whether is selected by people or appointed should has the responsibility to maintain his group and society stable and prosper. Therefore, his own characteristic doesn't matter as much as the actual leadership. And it just need as enough moral and ethical level as the leader can maintain his duty(can’t grasp the idea). However, the real height of the leader's personality will not be evaluated and justified in his job.
   
  At last, I want to offer a good example to illustrate my conclusion I get from the above question. As he is called a crazy man and a devil according to the crimes he committed in World War 2(it should be Ⅱ) , we cannot mention Hitler with the concept of moral and ethical person. (Adolf Hitler, who can never be taken as a moral and ethical person, is regarded as a crazy man and a devil according to the crimes he committed in World War Ⅱ.) But we cannot gainsay he was a real effective leader based on the fact he turned Germany from a vanquished country of World War 1 having no alliances with terrible deficit and more than 6 million unemployed people to one of the most powerful and developed countries. (个人觉得你写长句的时候，语法，还有意思表达很容易出现问题啊。。)

  Summary all I've proposed, my point is clear that I do not agree with the statement at all. A real effective leader should maintain his leadership and acquire better ability than the people he/she leads instead of being asked to maintain the highest moral and ethical standards.

我觉得作者的逻辑思路很好，但hitler的例子感觉用的不是很恰当。。个人觉得他不能算是effective leader,因为他最终又把经济搞差拉。。
还有就是语法，长句的组织。
我的很多外交都告诉我，其实他们不喜欢长句。适当就可以来。而且我们写的长句又不精确，很容易弄巧成拙的。建议作者多看看范文什么的~恩~
长句是体现我们组织句子的能力，但不是长到让读者找不到主语阿。。

anniehalUID: 2716032

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "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."
WORDS: 503-674

TIME: 00:41:38
DATE: 2010-7-24 11:09:47

It is true that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. And I agree with the statement above that the significant events and trends, no matter in what kind of fields, may be led by the famous few, but must be made the groups of unknown people.

Art is an important part of history, which represents the culture, value and taste of people in a certain time. However, most of us just remember several famous artists or some worldwide known artifacts, but know a little about other unfamous artists who were the indispensable component of an era's art trend, and never mention the workers or supports who made an essential contribution to the accomplishment of those artifacts. For the Cologne Cathedral as an example, it is wildly famous for the Gothic sharp arch and beautiful stained glasses. Whilst actually, it was under construction for nearly six hundred years, and almost no one knows the names of those genius workers and designers. And it is entire obvious that without these unknown people's ideas and endeavors, the Cologne Cathedral is impossible to be the way as it is today. This happens the same when people study the trend of art. Monet and Van Gogh are the renowned representatives of Impressionism; however, the trend of art was surely not developed on those several few. Other unfamiliar painters were also improper to neglect due to it is their works that made impressionism complete and colorful. Therefore, we can find that the study of art history just notices the several amazing artifacts and some artists, but pay a little attention to other important supporters and parts.

The study of politics is a never ending topic of history, and what the rulers achieved or did wrongly is always under heat discussion. However, without their forgotten followers and conductors, I believe no policy could lay any influence on the general people. And the policy would simply be a piece of paper if no one helped the rulers to make it come true. We may familiar with the New Deal of F.D Roosevelt, which helped American economies recovered quickly from the Depression and Second World War. But how many of us remember the name of Roosevelt's colleagues who played an important role in conducting that New Deal and realize each step of the policy. Without their support and work, I think it is impossible to achieve the great success as we know it today. While these folks' names have been long forgotten or even never mentioned. According, it is a fact that people who study the history of politics just remember the policy makers or rulers, but forget those who worked behind.

Science and technology is another significant part of history, and it happens the same that we just simply honor those famous few who achieved great success, but never mention the ancestors working ahead who laid a indispensable foundation to the new achievements and also forget their follow workers who helped them in the process of experiments and researchers. Actually, no breakthrough could be made merely by one single person and his or her own intelligence. Most of us know John von Neumann who invented the first computer EINAC whose development has totally changed everyone’s life pattern in whole world. But rare people have ever heard the name of John Napier who initially built the basic theory of computers thirty years ago before the first computer was ever made. In addition, Nobel is well-known for inventing the bomb and Edison is famous for making the bulb, but who knows their assistants’ names? Without their helping behind, how could these great scientists have achieved the success? Hence, it is true that when we study the history of science, little attention was laid to the scientists who made the useful basic theory and co-workers who backed the well-known scientists.

From the discussion above, we can safely find the conclusion that the majority truly just remember those famous few artists, rulers and scientists, but neglect other important followers, workers and supporters.

figuechenUID: 2850619

改115

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "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."
WORDS: 503-674

TIME: 00:41:38
DATE: 2010-7-24 11:09:47

It is true that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. And I agree with the statement above that the significant events and trends, no matter in what kind of fields, may be led by the famous few, but must be made the groups of unknown people.
[恩？最后一句什么意思来着。。。漏了一个by吧？还是不要把这两个放在一句话里吧，感觉意思怪怪的。。。]

Art is an important part of history, which represents the culture, value and taste of people in a certain time. However, most of us just remember several famous artists or some worldwide known artifacts, but know a little about other unfamous [infamous] artists who were the indispensable component of an era's art trend, and never mention the workers or supports who made an essential contribution to the accomplishment of those artifacts. For the Cologne Cathedral as an example, it is wildly famous for the Gothic sharp arch and beautiful stained glasses. Whilst actually, it was under construction for nearly six hundred years, and almost no one knows the names of those genius workers and designers. And it is entire obvious [entire好像可以去掉吧，完全显然？显然就够了] that without these unknown people's ideas and endeavors, the Cologne Cathedral is impossible to be the way as it is today. This happens the same [这个有语法错误，the same happens就可以了] when people study the trend of art. Monet and Van Gogh are the renowned representatives of Impressionism; however, the trend of art was surely not developed on those several few. Other unfamiliar painters were also improper to neglect due to it is their works that made impressionism complete and colorful. Therefore, we can find that the study of art history just notices the several amazing artifacts and some artists, but pay a little attention to other important supporters and parts.
[这段用艺术为例，说明了历史遗忘了普通人。]

The study of politics is a never ending topic of history, and what the rulers achieved or did wrongly is always under heat discussion. However, without their forgotten followers and conductors, I believe no policy could lay any influence on the general people. And the policy would simply be a piece of paper if no one helped the rulers to make it come true. We may familiar with the New Deal of F.D Roosevelt, which helped American economies recovered quickly from the Depression and Second World War. But how many of us remember the name of Roosevelt's colleagues who played an important role in conducting that New Deal and realize each step of the policy. Without their support and work, I think it is impossible to achieve the great success as we know it today. While these folks' names have been long forgotten or even never mentioned. According, it is a fact that people who study the history of politics just remember the policy makers or rulers, but forget those who worked behind.
[这段以政治为例，例子用了罗斯福新政，还是很恰当的。]

Science and technology is another significant part of history, and it happens the same that we just simply honor those famous few who achieved great success, but never mention the ancestors working ahead who laid a indispensable foundation to the new achievements and also forget their follow workers who helped them in the process of experiments and researchers. Actually, no breakthrough could be made merely by one single person and his or her own intelligence. [这句好像有点太绝对，不过我不知道这个是不是靠谱：我记得牛顿和爱因斯坦好像都是独立地搞出了自己的研究成果的。也有很多科研成果是个人搞出来的。另外数学这种学科，似乎也是单飞的比较多吧] Most of us know John von Neumann who invented the first computer EINAC whose development has totally changed everyone’s life pattern in whole world. But rare people have ever heard the name of John Napier who initially built the basic theory of computers thirty years ago before the first computer was ever made. In addition, Nobel is well-known for inventing the bomb and Edison is famous for making the bulb, but who knows their assistants’ names? Without their helping behind, how could these great scientists have achieved the success? Hence, it is true that when we study the history of science, little attention was laid to the scientists who made the useful basic theory and co-workers who backed the well-known scientists.
[这段用科学为例，说明了论点。但是遗憾的是作者并没有说明那些科学家的助手们到底做了什么工作，对成果有多大的贡献。如果能再详细地说明一下他们的存在不可或缺，那就能更好地切题了。因为你的例子总是在说没有了他们，那些成果就不可能有，但缺乏证据，有点主观臆断的感觉。]

From the discussion above, we can safely find the conclusion that the majority truly just remember those famous few artists, rulers and scientists, but neglect other important followers, workers and supporters.

[我觉得开头和结尾有点小矛盾。开头说是任何历史，而结尾却变成了科学、政治和艺术史，这两者还是有区别的。像作者这种分段落写的文章，我觉得最关键的是要理清段落之间的逻辑关系，要能在最后提升一下思想的高度。以这篇文章为例，你说明了科学、政治和艺术史的情况，但是没有办法说明其它无数个学科的历史。所以比较好的分法是分成人文科学和自然科学，或其它诸如此类的能概括所有学科的分法；或者是作者能够说明科学、政治和艺术这三个学科对社会上的所有学科有普遍类比性，因此可以得出相同的结论。如果没有最后的一个升华，就感觉文章只是罗列了三个不同方面的事实，却缺乏自己的归纳和思想。]

一点小意见，仅供作者参考，有不妥之处恳请指教。

figuechenUID: 2850619

TOPIC: ISSUE11 - "All nations should help support the development of a global university designed to engage students in the process of solving the world's most persistent social problems."
WORDS: 590          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2010-7-24 11:18:24

TS：有好处，但很难实现。
提纲
1. 罗列好处。如加强政府与学界的跨国交流；解决跨国难题等
2. 有些社会问题难以靠这所大学解决，因为这些社会问题根植于文化之中。
3. 大学的运营有诸多难题。如管理问题，学生问题等。

    There is nowhere more ideal than the idea of establishing a global university on the purpose of solving social problems worldwide. Admitted that the global university is helpful to some of the global social issues, the suggestion also faces many realistic questions. After all, the idea might be merely a dream like utopia.
    First of all, the development of a global university will bring benefits to human society. To start with, it will serve as a bridge to connect governments and academic fields in solving certain problems. Nowadays, the result of a social research project in a specific country might not be open to the public, which leads to the lack of communications between government and academic fields in other countries. For example, the suggestions which have been provided by professors in America to solve racial problems might also lend a helping hand to China which is facing ethnic problems. The global university will enhance the relationship between them and all the countries will acquire benefits. What's more, it will be useful to solve global issues such as shortage of resources, environmental protection and terrorists. These problems cannot be solved through the efforts of a single country. With the help of the global university, there will be more frequent and tied cooperation between countries to deal with these tough questions.
    However, provided that a global university might be of great importance in solving global problems, we cannot lose sight of fact that some of the world's most persistent social problems are deeply rooted in the native culture where global university is of no help. Take racial problems in the U.S. for example, it had strong correlation between American history and culture. Only those who had experienced the culture can understand the derivation and solution to the problem. Global university which consists of students from all over the world may not have positive impact on these issues. Besides, some social problems are linked with the political situation of a country and the native people may welcome its advice since it is interfering their own affairs. For instance, world trade has suffered a lot from pirates in Somalia. However, this problem was the result of anarchy in Somalia. The political struggle ruins the country and global university will not have crucial influence on its domestic affairs.
    In addition, the operation of the global university will face a series of questions. One problem is that the money endowed to build the global university might determine the percentage of administrators in the school board committee, who have crucial influence on the university. If so, the school will be easily manipulated by several wealthy countries and small countries will definitely have no voice in choosing the projects. In this way, the university might be a tool for some countries for political use, such as justifying the military invasion. Another problem is that different students from varieties of culture may have some conflicts against each other. For instance, common gestures in certain countries might be taboos in still others, and students from these countries might consider other students who perform this gesture as a kind of desecration. Misunderstanding like this might bring negative effects on the global university.
    After all, global university sounds like a good idea and may have positive influence on many global issues. However, many problems have impeded it from being realized. It will not perform its original function if not well designed and managed. Therefore, it is a pity that the global university will not come into reality in the near future.

请楼下狠拍，先谢了~

aoweiUID: 2848764

占改117楼

aoweiUID: 2848764

Issue 108. "In many countries it is now possible to turn on the television and view government at work. Watching these proceedings can help people understand the issues that affect their lives. The more kinds of government proceedings-trials, debates, meetings, etcthat are televised, the more society will benefit."

在很多国家中，现在通过电视来观看政府的工作已经成为可能。观察这些过程有助于人们了解那些影响他们生活的决策。转播的政府运作(审判、辩论、会议等等)越多，对社会的好处就越多。

The government operation is so obscurity to public that the politicians are questioned by ordinary people. We may wonder that a law, which actually be enacted during a long-period, drastic debate between so-called questionable politicians, may be admitted easily for politicians are of same kind. This misunderstanding lies in the scare communication. We do not trust the administrators can really take our hopes into their consideration while those officers are reluctant or ashamed to explain themselves. Both sides of the controversy should back a step to reach an agreement.

Fortunately, technology helps us get a progress in that dilemma. Just as radio means a lot public for the President Roosevelt used to get forgiveness to government and picked American’s faith up. Television, in some countries, can more lively broadcast some attracted political events to public. We may so rapture to know the real scenario of politic and fulfill our supervised duty. In front of millions of eyes, all facts are clearly presented above broad and any little illegal actions will be restricted. We may remember that several senators fight with each other for irreconcilable divergence, and the local officers are severely interrogated by people’s delegate without abusing his/her authority to refuse the ask. Moreover, in the process of watching those items, we may contemplate things in a more legal perspective and exchange our minds with each other that improve our cognitive of things such as law, criminal. There may be more willing for us to comprehend the politicians and officers and their suffering. So many advantages of broadcasting the politic things impulse the ascending appeal that more transparency is needed for a justice government and a stable society. Thus, television stimulates the communication between the public and leaders.

Although People’s expectation is important that no leaders dare to ignore it, we can not be selfish to only concern our minds. Maybe we would enjoy reading news about others, it is extremely doubtful whether we would equally enjoy reading about ourselves. We ought to stand in the side of those who are broadcasted to scan the thing. Most of us are nervous in front of the lens of TV, we are worried about whether our action is decent and our expression is articulated, nor our clothing are tidy. So does the person in the TV. Their unnatural behaviors impede them to concentrate on thing itself while some natural things, sincerely feeling for example, are covered. They fear to express their angry, sadness, or agreement. What we see may just a group of affectation that hinder the very rightly justice.

So, we public should have our own judge criteria. We do need the government open their secret to sunshine; we also should realize that absolutely transparency may exert counterproductive effect to away from our expectation. Just as each coin has two sides, the perspective we standing to look at the question need to be more dialectic but not biased. The government also needs to explain the policy more actively and widely. Through the compromise methods, I think both sides can find their positions in the final solution.

aoweiUID: 2848764

TOPIC: ISSUE11 - "All nations should help support the development of a global university designed to engage students in the process of solving the world's most persistent social problems."
WORDS: 590          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2010-7-24 11:18:24

TS：有好处，但很难实现。
提纲
1. 罗列好处。如加强政府与学界的跨国交流；解决跨国难题等
2. 有些社会问题难以靠这所大学解决，因为这些社会问题根植于文化之中。
3. 大学的运营有诸多难题。如管理问题，学生问题等。

    There is nowhere more ideal than (no more than?) the idea of establishing a global university on the purpose of solving social problems worldwide. Admitted that the global university is helpful to some of the global social issues, the suggestion also faces many realistic questions. After all, the idea might be merely a dream like utopia (这句话好像多余了).
    First of all, the development of a global university will bring benefits to human society. To start with（for one), it will serve as a bridge to connect governments and academic fields in solving certain problems. Nowadays, the result of a social research project in a specific country might not be（删掉be） open to the public(另外，一是这句话不合理，现在很多政策或者说研究成果都是公开的，二，你这里说不公开，后面种族的例子又说可以去拿去相互借鉴，岂不矛盾？？), which leads to the lack of communications between government and academic fields in other countries. For example, the suggestions which have been provided by professors in America to solve racial problems might also lend a helping hand to China which(where?) is facing ethnic problems (两国间的经验学习可以换成别的例子吧，比如说全球金融危机，能源政策等，中国的种族问题貌似不好). The global university will enhance the relationship between them（指代不明？） and all the countries will acquire benefits. What's more, it will be useful to solve global issues such as shortage of resources, environmental protection and terrorists. These problems (replaced by "which") cannot be solved through the efforts of a(删) single country. With the help of the global university, there will be more frequent and tied(tight？) cooperation between countries to deal with these tough questions.
    However, provided that a global university might be of great importance in solving global problems, we cannot lose sight of fact that some of the world's most persistent social problems are deeply rooted in the native culture， where global university is of no help. Take racial problems in the U.S. for example, it had strong correlation between(with？？) American history and culture. Only those who had experienced the culture（表述感觉有问题？？） can understand the derivation and solution to(of) the problem. Global university which consists of students from all over the world may not have positive impact on these issues(你前面说的问题就一个吧，怎么能用these呢). Besides, some social problems are linked with the political situation of a country and the native people may welcome its（指代不明） advice since it is interfering their own affairs（会欢迎别人来干涉内政么？？）. For instance, world trade has suffered a lot from pirates in Somalia. However, this problem was the result of anarchy in Somalia. The political struggle ruins the country and global university will not have crucial influence on its（指代不明？？） domestic affairs.
    In addition, the operation of the global university will face a series of questions. One problem is that the money endowed to build the global university might determine the percentage of administrators in the school board committee, who？ have crucial influence on the university. If so, the school will be easily manipulated by several wealthy countries and small countries will definitely have no voice in choosing the projects. In this way, the university might be a tool for some countries for political use, such as justifying the military invasion. Another problem is that different students from varieties of culture may have some conflicts against each other. For instance, common gestures in certain countries might be taboos in still others, and students from these countries might consider other students who perform this gesture as a kind of desecration. Misunderstanding like this might bring negative effects on the global university.
    After all, global university sounds like a good idea？ and may have positive influence on many global issues. However, many problems have impeded it from being realized. It will not perform its original function if not well designed and managed. Therefore, it is a pity that the global university will not come into reality in the near future.

文章中呢，感觉又几处问题都是介词和代词的使用，你可以再好好看看
感觉文章中的逻辑不是很严密
有些句子表述的不是很通顺，读起来不顺畅
加油