AW金鹰

fufan6711UID: 2788330

70"In any profession—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

fufan6711UID: 2788330

With the rapid development of the democratic society, tenure exists in almost any profession in the modern world. When it comes to the issue that when should the people in power step down, there are always a myriad of different opinions held by different people in different fields. Do those people in charge must step down after five years? Admittedly, changing leadership after a proper tenure can surely bring in enterprise revitalization. However, whether to change leaders every rigid five years should be discussed before a case-by-case analysis.

It is true that any profession will make progress through new leadership. When it comes to the politics, every leader has his or her tenure in a democratic country. Only through this way, can we prevent autarchy. Sir Acton once said: “Absolute power will surely lead to absolute corruption”. History is replete with such examples. George Washington, the first president of the US, refused to run for the third term as the president exactly because he feared to bring autarchy to the America. On the contrary, Napoleon Bonaparte, a hero who emancipated the French from the shackle of feudalism and defended them form the invasion of neighboring countries, but it is also his absolute power that entrapped France in the war with Russia and brought the French total pandemonium after the collapse of the empire of France.

While in certain circumstances, it is better no to change the leadership for the big picture. Let us take F. D. Roosevelt for instance. He is the only American president elected to more than two terms, leading the United States during a time of worldwide economic crisis and world war. In 1940, when Roosevelt’s second tenure was due, the American people decided no to change the president in order to keep the consistency of the foreign policy during the World War II. As a matter of fact, this choice is proved to be a wise one. We cannot imagine what the history would be like if the America change the president under the circumstance that the new government is unfamiliar with the rapid changing situation.

Moreover, in some areas, change the leadership can bring the reverse result. Sometimes, some positions require the leader to have abundant experience and expertise. For example, the development of a research group is mainly depend on the leader’s management. If the group leader is a experienced scientist, he or she would use his or her expertise to serve as a beacon, leading the group to the right direction and make fruitful progress. If the group leader changed to a someone who have little knowledge of their research field, but just an administrative official, the group will soon diminish due to its lack of origin research or out of date research.

As a consequence, from what has been discussed above, we must see the advantage of the changing leadership, while, at the same time, we should have a thorough  case-by-case analysis whether we should change the leadership.

HYPS2011UID: 2618437

1. 更新领导者来保持活力
i. 长期处于权力高峰容易独断/腐化。
ii. 新鲜观点与方法注入

2. 5年是个不错的period : 太短不稳定，太长没效果。
3. Neverthelss
i. 不一定非要5年
ii. 特殊行业需要保持稳定：Greenspan 20

In general, I agree with the author that the man in power should be changed regularly. It's crucial to keep the enterprise or government fresh. People may believe that a great leader should be at the position as long as possible to benefit the organization, yet this is not always the case, as discussed followed.

One reason for my fundamental agreement with the speaker is that in order to keep the organization running normally, the leader cannot be always the same. People who are always at the peak of power will easily be arbitrary, or even corrupted. Although this view might seem pessimistic, this is the truth. Since they are always full of power; and few things can restrict them. They will get used to ordering without discussing with others. After a long time, they may forget how to ask others' opinion or how to compromise. Moreover, a man, no matter how great he is, has his own shortage in view. Thus we need some more thoughts and methods to be entered. This can be easily accomplished by changing the leader regularly. Consider the example of Chairman Mao. No one will doubt he is one of the greatest leaders we have ever seen. However, he made a serious mistake in his later time. In contrast, George Washington retired after being the president of U.S. for eight years. History proves his decision was correct.

Another reason why I agree with the claim is that five years is an excellent period. As discussed earlier, we change the leadership mainly in order to revitalize. Thus, if the period is too long, the enterprise may already have been lack of vitality; and the effect will not be so good. On the other side, if the leadership is changed too frequently, for example, one year, it is obviously that the relationship altered too rapidly to become a good workplace. All people are busily becoming familiar with the new environment. Therefore five years is a good balance for the two sides.

We have recognized that the movement of leadership every five years is beneficial; nevertheless it should not be obeyed without exception. First of all, besides five years, other time period may also be reasonable. Consider the example of the U.S. presidential election. As it is known to all, it is held every four years, and each president can hold his or her position for at most eight years. And I think this is also a significantly good system, for it ensures the vitality in American politics while encourages the excellent governor to prevail their idea. Furthermore, in certain situation the leader can be stable, as it did in the case of Alan Greenspan, the 13th Chairman of the Federal Reserve, who has been in the office for about 20 years. When there are only few people competent for the job, or the policy made should keep steady, it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, for the leaders remain unchanged.

In sum, to guarantee success, any organization should revitalize through new leadership. Admittedly an alternation for every five years is a good idea; other reasonable methods can also lead to success. Yet this is not the golden rule and can be invalid in some special occasion.

cherryzxrUID: 2845950

       In today’s world ,every field is developing at high speed. Is it necessary that those in power step down after five years so as to success of enterprise? In any profession it would be effective ? Though I admit it can bring some advantages ,I agree with the speaker reservedly .

         Generally speaking, young power can do better on creativity .A new leadership usually has greater initiative and would bring in new ideas .Though in some degree ,they are so active in mind that their thoughts appears incredible and unrestrained ,they actually bring up a breath of fresh blood to enterprise or government .In business ,new leading ideology makes more innovation .Furthermore ,new relationships try the better management concept .Obamahas his group ofyoung assistants who were all born after 80s. They take active working manners into White House and  American government. But it is common to see that those in power are in corruption . If revitalization through new leadership can be take into measure ,they can stay away from abusing power ,and then ,carry out politics which benefit nation and enterprise ,just like the president election .This fully reflects the democratic system.



        However ,what is really related to success of a leader is that the capability and characteristics .General public are willing to be leaded by a strong  leader no matter how long he is in power.It depends on the capability and leadership ability  rather than the terms they are on the position. Moreover , some professions call for stability and experiences .The longer time they are engage on such a profession ,the more authoritative they are .we prefer to employ an senior lawyer rather than an junior one when we go to court. Besides ,there are lifelong great judge. Also ,no one will not respect academic authority who have achieved greatly in the right field.


       Despite of the above problems,over-frequent change of project will produce performance. Regardless of the interests of the incumbent was not considered long-term goal. Thereby , it is true to decide terms in power according to ability and achievements ,and whether he wins the respect of employees and masses. Hence, situation varies based on different people. On the other hand , various methods can be taken into practice ,such as condensing frameworks,streamlining and reasonable bonus-penalty system ,periodic rotation of leadership, better oversight and checks and balances right. For businesses, the introduction of advanced technology, lower costs. Staff training, increase productivity and so on.


                In summary , I hold the point of view that it is not necessary that those in power step down after five years so as to success of enterprise. Thus taking different measures according to different personal characteristic ,profession and situation .

candygegeUID: 2792059

Words:510

The author concerned that, if an enterprise want to be successed, the surest method is to revitalize a new leader instead of the old one, as a result, those in power should resignate after five years. Leadership is certainly essential for any realm to succeed. But, is the revitalization surely the best way to thrive a profession? The answer may be "NO".
   Primarily, what else may be said, most people would claim that the leaders play an important part for enterprises' success by their management ideas and strategies, leading-styles even their personalities. Nearly everyone wants to be or have such a perfect team leader. Finding a leader who fit for a powerful position need to spend much time and money, so as the revitalization. Hence, once become or found one, they may hope the leader always be there and guidance the whole team to be succeeded.
   However, a man, who stays in one powerful positon for a long time, may form a stubben stereotype of thinking, lacking of imagination. It seems a perfect situation: unthreating, no challenge and safety. But it may also be a dangerous condition: leaders probably become laziness, addict to others' sweet words, and even lost the sense. After all, no one is flawless, esspecially when he/she meets the tempatation of fame and money. They may lost and abuse their power. To some extent, the limited tenure may solve this problem by providing a threating signal that the powerful position is only open to the man who maximize the profits to the whole institution, but not to the one who enjoys and abuse the power. Though the competition, the "winners" -- new leaders may termly bring fresh blood to the companies, governments or schools. Then the teams probably become more active, and certainly, the one should not be neglected is keeping it from misusing of authority.
   What important to notice is that leadership is only one influencing factor for the enterprises' success, even not the most significant one. Other alternative factors, like cooperation, the communication, the capacities of team members, the business planning and so on, also take important roles in the development of organizations. Just refreshing leaders seems too simple to ensure the enterprises' success. It indeed seems like a gambling between new guys and old ones. How do you ensure the new one is full of experience, and fit for the position? And the changes may be so offen that affect the teams' solidation, or the steady policy, or the management style. All of these may block the growing of an enterprise, and the members always have to adapt the new leader, the new condition, and the new everything.
   To conclude, what we want is to succeed. Although there are millions relative factors existed, to the extent of leadership, there are millions pathes to keep leaders avaluable and effective, like a training specially for leaders, without the five-year setting down. Sometimes, selecting new leaders is a wise and reasonable idea, but remember to consider other solvements, which may be the basic ones, before you decided.

fufan6711UID: 2788330

136"The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare."

fufan6711UID: 2788330

136"The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare."


With the rapid development of the science and technology, people tend to have to deal with a myriad of things everyday. When it comes to the issue that what choice they have to make, there are always a host of different opinions held by different individuals from different areas. You may wonder, do we have a choice to make when encountered with so many things. Admittedly, in some cases, we do no have the free to choose what we want. However, in most circumstances, the absence of choice is very, very rare.

When we have a detailed review of the human life, we may find that we do not have a choice from the very beginning. To begin with, we cannot choose our parents, our brothers and sisters, and we cannot choose our gender, and we cannot choose our nationality, and so on. Then, during the growing process, we almost all have to follow the pattern—“study--have a job--constitute a family--raise our children--go to the heaven”. From what we have experienced and witnessed, we may find that sometimes we do not have a choice to make but obey the natural rule.

Nevertheless, we can choose the life we prefers regardless what we cannot change. Life is replete with such examples. Although we cannot choose whether to go to school, we can choose our ideal school and choose our favorite major. When we graduated, we cannot choose but to have a job, yet we can choose the job we like according to our interest. When we are old enough to marry, we can choose the person who we admire to constitute a family to fulfill the social responsibility. In general, choice is ubiquitous, but sometime we just do not realize it.

Moreover, when the choice is made properly, the benefit would be enormous George Washington, the first president of the United States and one of the most important leaders in United States history, chose not to use his power to establish a military dictatorship or to become a king, and laid down the guidance for the future presidents, laying foundation for the democracy of the United States. As a consequence, the later generations have crowed him with the simple title ”Father of His Country”.

As a consequence, from what has discussed above, we may draw the conclusion that in most cases we have abundant choices to make, while, we have to admit that in some circumstances, the situation leaves us “no choice”.

HYPS2011UID: 2618437

Choice, is similar to option, means selecting one among two or more alternatives. From the author's claim that the absence of choice is rare is, to some extent, affirmative in particular aspects while further exploration on this issue leads to other perspectives.

Unarguably, any single individual or the society as a whole has to choose in reality. For a common person, we continually make choices and decisions. Common sense tells us that humans have free will and therefore the true absence of choice is rare. Like, we have to choose our daily routine, preference on bus number, and our clothing style. While the society has to choose its path on the society’s future, like the preservation of old historical heritages or infinite city expansion, take more attention on economy or on education, which are all of choices the authority have to deal with. All in all, choices are being existentially such in , either for individual or society, in almost every respect.

Someone who vocied constant complaint that there was no choice in emergency which they have to confront, are those who are unwilling to take a risk. Risk, in terms of its nature, concerns the deviation of one or more results of one or more future events from their expected value. Technically, the value of those results may be positive or negative. Because risk versus uncertainty , thereby the unsure state people fear about subconsciously keep people in a stable environment rather than spur them on to make a change. Along all the way to pursue the stability, certainty, and peace, people become more and more reliable on destiny. However, this sort of inclination will turn any once promising ,ambitious man into quite average person. Only those take endeavors in life intersection can achieve accomplishments what they deserve to. Take, Hellen keller, for instance, she was the first deafblind person to earn a bachelor of arts degree. She once said that"the public must learn that the blind man is neither genius nor a freak nor a idiot" Her persistent and encouragous attitudes toward unfortunate life have motivated countless person and the influence will continue.

However, we cannot choose with complete freedom. We must obey regulations in the practice of deciding options, and in most cases, we are bounded by law and moral when making choices. One reason accounting for this statement is our limited resources. For example, if you have a desirable score on the college entrance examination, you can decide which college you are going to enroll just rely on your preference, while if your score is not shining enough to meet the reputable university' needs you have to be selected. Another case of this view is that we must choose within the confines of law, or chaos will emerge. For example, when a policeman confront the suspect of the murder of his families, he has no right or authority to fire him.

As so often people will complain of lacking of choices. Ironically, when there are too much of choices that it is really hard to make a decision is more detrimental than beneficial to us. Student who get several admissions of famous college will experience a tough period to make a choice. In some sense, being around with abundant choices is not always a good thing.

To sum up, In response to this issue, we need to analyze the proposition comprehensively and systematically. In my viewpoint, life abounds with choices call for making a decision whether you are willing to or not. Only those who cannot take a risk in life will complain of no choices. However, as everything is a double-edged sword, everyone should look choices in the face and not allow yourself to be involved in a dilemma.

cherryzxrUID: 2845950

    In daily life ,we may face with various choices ,which makes us very confused and got caught in dilemma.At the same time, we may feel desperation and that there is no way can we go. The statement argues thatthe absence of choices is rare to see in life ,which I basically agree with speaker.

Although laws and principles restrict action of the public.Sometimes people's choices are limited by a set of fundamental principles.Even if behaviors are within laws and principles ,we are yet limited by a invisible network ,namely morals and ethics . great amount of restrictions make us feeling the absence of choices . however, all of these exist in purpose of protecting safety and order for society . without these essential principle to normal society , we will live in chaos and apart from the regular life .beside of these restrictions ,there is really much room of freedom for not only citizens but also individuals.


     Rich materials and spiritual life brings us convenient .furthermore , nationals possess the right of free speech and behaviors in democratic society,if not breaking laws.As for personal lives, people choose their life styles, values, and religion belief as they like. Also , environments in which they live and  the quanlity of life ,including the way that we go are under ourselves own selecting. It can be said ,we stand before crossroads every minute and seconds.


I admit that in the certain circumstance,we may face with situation that there is no choice for us tohave a selection. For example, when one sticks into emergency, he reacts only relying on instinct and behaviors in the certain way at first moment. Apart from this , a terminally ill patient have no choice but to accept the death .but ,he can choose spending spare life in happy ending.


       Sometimes people are feeling despairing and put himself into deep jam .while, sometimes people are plunged into dilemma, and forced to decide with no better choices. The pinned behaviors might be the result of lack of experience or knowledge and he is not enough tough and full of tolerance .In other words, one's feeling of no choice roots in their fragile beliefs and short-term views. Of course ,there is ideal who overcome difficulties that ordinary people regard as hopeless and shows us a strong heart.Helen Keller became blind and deaf due to   the disease at her two years old .however, she did not bow to fate but to study hard and master the language, which encouraging millions of people. As a result ,don’t complain about there is no choice for us and life put you into a desperation. On the contrary ,too much choice lead to unnecessary confusion .In addition, treasuring the chance to choose is actually teaching us the way approaching to success.


Generally speaking ,life is full of choice not only in the personaldaily life but also in affairs of nation and enterprise. Nevertheless ,we may be fall into the circumstance that desperation put us into difficulties ,we can overcome those by strengthening ourselves. Moreover , aithough the life is rough ,we have to be tough whatever we face to dilemma or impasses.

HYPS2011UID: 2618437

ISSE 184

In this statement, the speaker claim that theorizing before one has data is a deadly mistake. In response to this issue, I am in favor of this issue to some extent while there are some conspicuous indefensible flaws needs comprehensively and systematically discussion.

Admittedly, take the experimental disciplines into account, it is true that one must have data before form a theory. In those fields, there is a firm rule that any process of theory's formation must submit to a procedure -that is, first design the experiment plan, then do the research, last acquire the data and generalize a theory from the factual data-which all of steps involved in are crucial. Concrete examples are numerous, Here, take the study of a particular sort of plant's evolution for instance, any theory must associate with data upon different times and variable inhabitants of such plant. Thus in the realm of experimental subjects before any theorizing can be made the researcher must possess relevant data.

Another point of my view worth discussion refers to the field of Natural Science in which it is crucial for one to make hypothesis before one has data, for latter study or evaluation will either prove or disprove the existed theory. The most obvious reason for this contention is that the data grouped to some to demonstrate or give a better description on already existed theory, or others that strongly refute the former ideas. One sound case for this matter is  David Bohr who proposed quantum physics, which is branch of physics and provides a mathematical description of much of the particle-like and wave-like behavior and interactions of energy and matter, that depart from the commonly realized classic mechanics at his times. Knowledge and perceptions of certain times people are limited  for the undeveloped technology and the scarcity of experimental facilities, and with the ever-increasing of scientific research more data can be achieved to better decipher a theory.

However, the adverse aspect of a theory without sufficient data support is the crux of fabrication in scientific areas. Those who has no data to form theory and then illegally publish his accomplishments on papers will consequently result depravity in this area. And careful inspection on those fabrication issues reflect a similar motives that most people are driven by the fame, promotion, and even money. Hendrik Schon, a German physicist who briefly rose to prominence after a series of apparent breakthroughs that, however, were discovered to be fraudulent. His actions ,with no regard for his contemporary scientists, lead to waste numerous money and the time of others. Because someone still believe schon's work may have value. Scientists of the world spent millions of dollars to reproduce Schon's results is worthless. From another aspect, too hasty to theorize will prison one's mind that harmful for progress and future success.

Meanwhile, the author's claim does not apply to arts and humanities, because here, original thoughts is the goal. Arts, the nature of which has been described as one of the most elusive of the traditional problems of human nature that has been defined as a vehicle for the expression or communication of emotions or ideas; humanities are academic disciplines which study the human condition, using methods that primarily analytic, critical or speculative, as distinguished from the mainly empirical approaches of the natural and social science. Thus, the author's statement that it is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data is inexcusable on arts and humanities.