ISSUE 1 恳求各位前辈指教！

暮野长歌UID: 2686695

"We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning."

The speaker believes that we can learn much more from the people whose ideas we share than from those people whose ideas contradict ours; for the reason that disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. I concede that in some undue discord really can obstruct our learning. Otherwise, in my view we can obtain more benefits through discussing with the people whose views contradict our own.

Admittedly, people with different values or different world outlooks will surely produce diverse advocates and opinions. Therefore, dispute with each other is unavoidable. I concede that under some circumstances disagreement with others can be decreased the learning efficiency.For instance, in political realms, if a scholar who advocates the democracy debates with a despotism holder, the result of the discussion may be developed into a bitter quarrel. I can not believe that president Washington will talk the common language with Adolf Hitler. In short, when people's values and beliefs have too many conflicts, their disagreements will cause stress and inhibit learning.

Furthermore, some of human frailties are the reasons that make us cannot learn from the people whose views contradict with our own. For instance, Assuming two arrogant people discuss a question; if both sides have different ideas, the discussion even give rise to a conflict. Under this circumstance, people just quarrel with each other about protecting self-respect, the end result is that learning impeded.

Aside from the foregoing two extreme provides, however, I agree with the speaker's board assertion. Assuming both sides’ arguers' difference of values and faiths within a rational scope and willing to debate on academic achievements, both opponents stand to gain much from that debate. As a matter of fact, it is these debates that push the history of mankind forward. For example, the first written constitution of the world - The Constitution of the United States - is an achievement of debate. The conference has lasted for four months. During that time, both opponents began to understand and compromise each other little by little and finally reached an agreement. In other words, it is the debate that laid the political system of the United States.

In sum, unless two sides of opponents are each willing to observe a same role and conduct themselves with modesty and prudence, I concede that disagreement can impede learning. Otherwise, rational discussion and debate people between with different opinions is the foundation of progress of human's civilization. Accordingly, on balance the speaker is fundamentally correct.

暮野长歌UID: 2686695

唉，悲剧了:L

justbegunUID: 2746795

ISSUE1 - "We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning."



The speaker believes that we can learn much more from the people whose ideas we share than from those people whose ideas contradict ours; for the reason that disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. (重复题目内容的话可以换几个词比如contradict到different from；disagreement也可以换成conflict等；stress, inhibit这种词都可以换掉……这样虽然重复了题目意思 但不是完全重复) I concede that in some undue discord really can obstruct our learning. Otherwise, (in my view可以去掉) we can obtain more benefits through discussing with the people whose views contradict our own.



Admittedly, people with different values or different world outlooks （世界观？value就足够了 or后面没有必要了）will surely produce diverse advocates and opinions （同上……opinion就足够了）. Therefore, dispute with each other is unavoidable.（因为意见不同就肯定要争论吗？这个貌似不符合逻辑） I concede that under some circumstances disagreement with others can be decreased the learning efficiency.（无法理解这句的含义……） For instance, in political realms, if a scholar who advocates the democracy debates with a despotism holder, the result of the discussion may be developed into a bitter quarrel. I can not believe （也许用imagine 更能表达意思）that president Washington will talk the common language with Adolf Hitler. （这个例子以if开头……是一个假设吧~但是感觉没有说服力 不能说明什么问题……没有讲清楚更深层次的原因 只是针对题目 摆出了一个现象） In short, when people's values and beliefs have too many conflicts, their disagreements will cause stress and inhibit learning. （然后很突然的又跳到了题目上 当中没有任何过渡）



Furthermore, some of human frailties are the reasons that make us cannot learn from the people whose views contradict with our own. For instance, Assuming two arrogant people discuss a question; if both sides have different ideas, the discussion even give rise to a conflict. Under this circumstance, people just quarrel with each other about protecting self-respect, the end result is that learning impeded. （从人的弱点这个角度来分析问题是挺好的，这的确是一个阻碍学习进步的原因。也许需要使用更加贴切的例子来说明。只是assuming的话，与上段一样 可能不是很有说服力 另外有些句子写得也不是很通顺的感觉 语法方面有点问题）


Aside from the foregoing two extreme provides, however, I agree with the speaker's board assertion. Assuming both sides’ arguers' difference of values and faiths within a rational scope and willing to debate on academic achievements, both opponents stand to gain much from that debate. As a matter of fact, it is these debates that push the history of mankind forward. For example, the first written constitution of the world - The Constitution of the United States - is an achievement of debate. The conference has lasted for four months. During that time, both opponents began to understand and compromise each other little by little and finally reached an agreement. In other words, it is the debate that laid the political system of the United States. （比起前面几段的话 上面这段还是比较好的恩~也可以再举例结束后再加上一点自己的论证分析，而不是单单举例子）


In sum, unless two sides of opponents are each（are both） willing to observe a same role and conduct themselves with modesty and prudence, I concede that disagreement can impede learning. （这个unless句加得很奇怪）Otherwise, rational discussion and debate people between(between people) with different opinions is the human's civilization foundation of progress.(一下子套了个大帽子……不知道从哪里得出了这结论) Accordingly, on balance the speaker is fundamentally correct. （没必要再加上最后一句）



可能是刚开始写的关系 问题比较多的感觉~

文章中觉得LZ还是很想表达自己的想法 只是有的时候可能组织不好逻辑&语言~~


语法的地方请注意~写完的文章自己多读下~有些地方貌似不是很能看明白呢~~~

然后~文章的总体结构还是很清楚的。偶也有挺久没有碰AW了……

所以只是很简单的改了下 给了下自己的想法~~请不要介意啊~

暮野长歌UID: 2686695

十分感谢，很有收获啊！:handshake 3# justbegun