issue172，关于truth的，昨天看了人家说逻辑比文采重要，结果今天写得全无逻辑可言

imongUID: 140258

真是不知道怎么搞得，词汇上倒是乱七八糟什么都用
今天晚上我会发一个issue构思经验谈（个人的一些体会啦，如果能多inspire几个人就最好了）

172"Important truths begin as outrageous, or at least uncomfortable, attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time."


While some outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time are later proven important truths, some others are not. I believe it is important for people to distinguish from the two though they take the same form at the beginning.

First of all, I agree with the statement thoroughly that important truths begin as outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of time. There are plenty of examples to this point in the academic field, as we look back on how relativism had challenged classical physics, how wave and particle are painstakingly proven to be the same thing, and in the ancient times, how a thinker was executed for the discovery of real number. This is to say, so important these truths are that they shake the former standards, beliefs, systems, and no wonder they are considered outrageous. Later proven principles, these truths are so profound that it is barely possible for them to be appreciated by the masses at their births. Therefore they are destined to conflict with the accepted wisdom of the time, and only in this way can wisdom be bettered. And, not limited within the academic fields; this feature applies universally. In politics for example, reforming and improving administration always face censures at first that accuse such measures of breaking the harmony and tranquility of the society, yet in most cases they are welcomed in the end. It is clear that important truths are too meaningful to be well accepted at their beginning.

Nevertheless, it is equally important to emphasize that not all attacks upon the accepted wisdom are important truths, and actually some are mere senseless gossips or irresponsible accusations. Every now and then there are people going to extremes and making declarations unbearably offensive, as we see that Nazi is coming back to Europe and has been lurking for a chance to revive: several years ago French almost have elected a Nazi president. It is needless to paraphrase their outrageous, anti-human claims; we have already learned how uncomfortable they are. So, are they important truths since they fiercely attack the common acknowledgements? Obviously no. Heretical supposal are commonplace in this era of freedom as no one is denied the right to speak, yet how many of them are proven righteous, instructive, valuable? It is hard to tell. Important truths emerge from these outrageous opinions, in which they co-exist with unfounded or ill-intended attacks.

Thus it is of great significance for people to distinguish. Having learned that important truths seem unacceptable at its birth, no one should deify all outrageous declarations. The right way to identify is to take a holistic view on the issue so as to draw objective conclusion. One should question: Is the proposal well intentioned? Is it effectively supported by scientific evidences? Does it bring solutions to certain problems? And so forth. People should be cautious with the outrageous. Both unreasonable denial and inconsiderate deference are wrong, as one may reject the truth and advocate the evil in this way. It is advisable to take careful scrutiny so as to form disinterested judgment, which is beneficial and instructive to the people.

In conclusion, I agree that the nascent important truths are somewhat uncomfortable for its great impact on the former beliefs, yet not all these uncomfortable ideas are important truths. Hence to reject or accept these outrageous claims should be based on scientific investigation, which prevents people from abandoning the right and following the wrong.

1h10min 感觉逻辑不是很好, 查了一些单词

gambellUID: 122696

曾经想改你的另一篇，可惜看不懂，惭愧啊！！

172"Important truths begin as outrageous, or at least uncomfortable, attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time."


While some outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time are later proven important truths, some others are not. I believe it is important for people to distinguish from the two though they take the same form at the beginning. (前面对反面的情况只用了一个not, 后面的two觉得会比较别扭)

First of all, I agree with the statement thoroughly that important truths begin as outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of time. There are plenty of examples to this point in the academic field, as we look back on how relativism had challenged classical physics, how wave and particle are painstakingly proven to be the same thing, and in the ancient times, how a thinker was executed for the discovery of real number. This is to say, so important these truths are that they shake the former standards, beliefs, systems,（感觉加一个威胁到了卫道者的利益，而且新的观点造成赖以旧观点生存的人的恐慌更爽，嘿嘿） and no wonder they are considered outrageous. Later proven principles, these truths are so profound（用超前好一点吧，深刻不一定不能被接受） that it is barely possible for them to be appreciated by the masses at their births. Therefore they are destined to conflict with the accepted wisdom of the time, and only in this way can wisdom be bettered. And, not limited within the academic fields; this feature applies universally. In politics for example, reforming and improving administration always face censures at first that accuse such measures of breaking the harmony and tranquility of the society, yet in most cases they are welcomed in the end. It is clear that important truths are too meaningful（同profound情况，个人意见）to be well accepted at their beginning.

Nevertheless, it is equally important to emphasize that not all attacks upon the accepted wisdom are important truths, and actually some are mere senseless gossips or irresponsible accusations. Every now and then there are people going to extremes and making declarations unbearably offensive, as we see that Nazi is coming back to Europe and has been lurking for a chance to revive: several years ago French almost have elected a Nazi president. It is needless to paraphrase their outrageous, anti-human claims; we （尽量避免，可用感叹句式或无灵主语，那样更地道，我不写是因为你的语言要强于我，应该写得好）have already learned how uncomfortable they are. So, are they important truths since they fiercely attack the common acknowledgements? Obviously no. Heretical supposal are commonplace in this era of freedom as no one is denied the right to speak,（这个原因逻辑不好，难道有权说就会乱说吗，应该强调违反常规言论的缘由，前面有极端，比较宽泛，这里可以具体说一下） yet how many of them are proven righteous, instructive, valuable? It is hard to tell. Important truths emerge from these outrageous opinions, in which they co-exist with unfounded or ill-intended attacks.
（羡慕你的vocabulary啊，我老是不会用，关键没背好）

Thus it is of great significance for people to distinguish. Having learned that important truths seem unacceptable at its birth, no one should deify all outrageous declarations. The right way to identify is to take a holistic view on the issue so as to draw objective conclusion. One should question: Is the proposal well intentioned? Is it effectively supported by scientific evidences? Does it bring solutions to certain problems? And so forth. People should be cautious with the outrageous. Both unreasonable denial and inconsiderate deference are wrong, as one may reject the truth and advocate the evil in this way. It is advisable to take careful scrutiny so as to form disinterested judgment, which is beneficial and instructive to the people.（第四段基结尾没仔细看，注意了一下大概内容）

In conclusion, I agree that the nascent important truths are somewhat uncomfortable for its great impact on the former beliefs, yet not all these uncomfortable ideas are important truths. Hence to reject or accept these outrageous claims should be based on scientific investigation, which prevents people from abandoning the right and following the wrong.



我觉得你写文章的逻辑和我很像，类似这种情况先admit一下，再转则，第四段有原因接着驳，否则扯些其他的。这个时候我觉得第四段在论述上的位置会提高重要性，以接着驳斥为好，第四段所提的比如解决方案于注意事项如果有必要且可以用来从充实结尾，让结尾深刻一点（这是看你的文章时突然发现的，互助啊）
听人说，最好一开始就驳，最后让步显得比较像老美的文章，圆滑。

happyman2000UID: 136936

172"Important truths begin as outrageous, or at least uncomfortable, attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time."


While some outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of the time are later proven important truths, some others are not. I believe it is important for people to distinguish from the two though they take the same form at the beginning.

First of all, I agree with the statement thoroughly that important truths begin as outrageous attacks upon the accepted wisdom of time. There are plenty of examples to this point in the academic field,(we should go no far to see this point ) as we look back on how relativism had challenged classical physics, how wave and particle are painstakingly proven to be the same thing, and in the ancient times, how a thinker was executed for the discovery of real number. This is to say, so important these truths are(are是不是应当放在these truths的前面？) that they shake the former standards, beliefs, systems, and no wonder they are considered outrageous. Later proven principles, these truths are so profound that it is barely possible for them to be appreciated by the masses at their births. Therefore they are destined to conflict with the accepted wisdom of the time, and only in this way can wisdom be bettered. And, not limited within the academic fields; this feature applies universally. In politics for example, reforming and improving administration always face censures at first that accuse such measures of breaking the harmony and tranquility of the society, yet in most cases they are welcomed in the end. It is clear that important truths are too meaningful to be well accepted at their beginning.以举例为主，语言流畅！

Nevertheless, it is equally important to emphasize that not all attacks upon the accepted wisdom are important truths, and actually some are mere senseless gossips or irresponsible accusations. Every now and then there are people going to extremes and making declarations unbearably offensive, as we see that Nazi is coming back to Europe and has been lurking for a chance to revive: several years ago French almost have elected a Nazi president. It is needless to paraphrase their outrageous, anti-human claims; we have already learned how uncomfortable they are.(这句话觉得有些多余!) So, are they important truths since they fiercely attack the common acknowledgements? Obviously no. Heretical supposal are commonplace in this era of freedom as no one is denied the right to speak, yet how many of them are proven righteous, instructive, valuable? It is hard to tell. Important truths emerge from these outrageous opinions, in which they co-exist with unfounded or ill-intended attacks.我觉得有些偏题。提干的意思是important truths都是outrageous attacks，并没有说凡是outrageous attacks都是important truths。也就是说Outrageous attacks是important truths的必要条件，而非充分条件。人家没有这么说，你却要攻击人家。人家会喊冤的！

Thus it is of great significance for people to distinguish. Having learned that important truths seem unacceptable at its birth, no one should deify all outrageous declarations. The right way to identify is to take a holistic view on the issue so as to draw objective conclusion. One should question: Is the proposal well intentioned? Is it effectively supported by scientific evidences? Does it bring solutions to certain problems? And so forth. People should be cautious with the outrageous. Both unreasonable denial and inconsiderate deference are wrong, as one may reject the truth and advocate the evil in this way. It is advisable to take careful scrutiny so as to form disinterested judgment, which is beneficial and instructive to the people. 和上一篇的风格一模一样，又是一个补充说明。不是不能作补充说明，关键是补充说明能否增加一些的新的内容（当然是补充性的），如果只是重复上文的意思，我认为还不如不说。更何况，你在一个偏题的论点下补充偏题的观点！

In conclusion, I agree that the nascent important truths are somewhat uncomfortable for its great impact on the former beliefs, yet not all these uncomfortable ideas are important truths. Hence to reject or accept these outrageous claims should be based on scientific investigation, which prevents people from abandoning the right and following the wrong.

1h10min 感觉逻辑不是很好, 查了一些单词

paisleyUID: 64183

很不错呀！很有气势，语言也好。

给你补充一个。你区分的是古怪的、与现有知识冲突的东西是不是都是真理，而我一看到这个题目想到的就是，要区分“是不是所有的真理都是古怪的、与现有知识冲突的”。一部分你已经在第二段里讲了，我给你补充：另外有许多真理的面目非常温和，并且从古到今没有多大变化。比如，人都是要死的，父母总是爱自己的孩子的，冬天天气寒冷等等。（truth一词也可以理解为“真相”，所以不一定非得指什么高深的科学真理或者社会生活中的真理）

当然这个论点不需要花很多笔墨，如果觉得没必要也可以不写的。

happyman2000UID: 136936

to paisley:
人要死之类的真理，只能说是常识，不能够算作important truth.
同意你的观点，该题的意思是importanta truth 是否总是outrageous. 而不是imong理解的outrageous knowledge总是truth.
这是个致命的审题错误！