【无名组】新第一组第四次习作楼due10.28

rourourou_dadaUID: 2985653

60Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

rourourou_dadaUID: 2985653

60Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

Most people think that politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals from the common knowledge that the obligation of the government is to reach a consensus to meet the need of majority of people. Yet the essence of politics is the ideals which is too elusive to realizing that the policies are just the methods and process to go to ideals. Simultaneously, it is easy to ignore for these people that people who pursue common ground and reasonable consensus just want to fulfil their ideals. Therefore, I have partly embrace this statement.

One of the important goals for the politics is to search for the common ground and reasonable consensus which can be analysed in two aspects. First, only finding the common ground to let the laws and regulations accessible for most people, could a nation operate and develop on the way in that laws are enacted based on the custom treaties which are acquiesced as the norms for behaviour by majority of people. Thus, it seems necessary for politicians to pursue common ground.. Second, the purport of research reasonable consensus is also to make society prosperous and satisfy the interests of people. Otherwise, the government will be toppled by the citizens, which is evident in retrospect of the history such as Egypt riot in the beginning of this year. That meeting the well-being of most people like employment, house and so forth is the premise of the the operation of a nation. Thus, we can know why politicians pursue the common ground and reasonable consensus.

The people who advocate the statement, however, have no idea that if it does not political ideals, there is no necessary to talk about the politics itself. Politics is no more than the method and process of achieving a party's ideals of economics, ideology and politics. The party is found is based on the same politics who held together. If there is no ideals, the coherence of a party, a social group and even society will be lost, so that the so-called "pursue common ground and reasonable consensus" loses its norm. People do not know why they come together to form a team or later they pursue their own interests instead of pursuing the political ideals to carry out some policies only to convenience them. From this , it is not exaggerated that the political ideals is the core norms for politicians to deal with the political affairs, which is the basis of the politics.

In addition, from the history we know that it is human nature that where exists people exists political ideals. Since the politics of a nation can be only approximate to the ideals, but can hardly reach it, people desire to seek for the common grand and reasonable consensus for pursuing political ideals. In the course of heading for the political ideals step by step, there are a lot of problems for politicians to solve whose purpose is still to meet the ideals. Hence, common ground and reasonable consensus are the results of the compromise for fulfilling the political ideals. Elusive ideals are the reason for searching the common ground as well as the the terminal of the reasonable consensus, so it is somewhat that politicians should not pursue ideals which is like putting the cart before the horse.

In conclusion, politicians should pursue the poetical ideals as the goal in terns of making common ground and reasonable consensus as method in the process.

fadotianUID: 2733387

2# rourourou_dada

60Politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals.

Most people think that politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals from[这里是for吗？还是什么，不然这句话好像读不通] the common knowledge that the obligation of the government is to reach a consensus to meet the need of majority of people. Yet the essence of politics is the ideals which is too elusive to realizing that the policies are just the methods and process to go to ideals[怎么这句话我也看不懂呀]. Simultaneously, it is easy to ignore for these people that people who pursue common ground and reasonable consensus just want to fulfil their ideals. Therefore, I have partly embrace this statement.

One of the important goals for the politics is to search for the common ground and reasonable consensus which can be analysed in two aspects. First, only finding the common ground to let the laws and regulations accessible for most people, could a nation operate and develop on the way in that[这里往后能不能另起一段话，不然这个因为后面实在是太长了] laws are enacted based on the custom treaties which are acquiesced as the norms for behaviour by majority of people. Thus, it seems necessary for politicians to pursue common ground.. Second, the purport of research[研究合理的共识？] reasonable consensus is also to make society prosperous and satisfy the interests of people. Otherwise, the government will be toppled by the citizens[我觉得你这里的理由没有说清，为什么合理共识就等同于满足人们的利益呢？], which is evident in retrospect of the history such as Egypt riot in the beginning of this year. That meeting the well-being of most people like employment, house and so forth is the premise of the the operation of a nation. Thus, we can know why politicians pursue the common ground and reasonable consensus.

The people who advocate the statement, however, have no idea that if it does not political ideals[第一句话看不懂嘞】, there is no necessary to talk about the politics itself. Politics is no more than the method and process of achieving a party's ideals of economics, ideology and politics. The party is[两个is?] found is based on the same politics who held together. If there is no ideals, the coherence of a party, a social group and even society will be lost, so that the so-called "pursue common ground and reasonable consensus" loses its norm. People do not know why they come together to form a team or later they pursue their own interests instead of pursuing the political ideals to carry out some policies only to convenience them. From this , it is not exaggerated that the political ideals is the core norms for politicians to deal with the political affairs, which is the basis of the politics.[我感觉你这一段好像说的是需要有一种大而化之的理想来指导行动？】

In addition, from the history we know that it is human nature that where exists people exists political ideals. Since the politics of a nation can be only approximate to the ideals, but can hardly reach it, people desire to seek for the common grand and reasonable consensus for pursuing political ideals. [我觉得这里全是抽象概念，是不是解释一下或者举个例子呢？】In the course of heading for the political ideals step by step, there are a lot of problems for politicians to solve whose purpose is still to meet the ideals. Hence, common ground and reasonable consensus are the results of the compromise for fulfilling the political ideals. Elusive ideals are the reason for searching the common ground as well as the the terminal of the reasonable consensus, so it is somewhat that politicians should not pursue ideals which is like putting the cart before the horse【这一段是说idea和reasonable 的关系？】.

In conclusion, politicians should pursue the poetical ideals as the goal in terns of making common ground and reasonable consensus as method in the process.

rourourou_dadaUID: 2985653

This editorial recommends that government should pay attention more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets based on the conclusion that who helmets when bicycling feel safer leading to taking more risks as a result.  The conclusion is resulted from analysis of the two studies during the same ten-year period about the rate of people who wear helmets and about the rate of bicycle-related accidents, which has a positive connection reached by the author. However, the argument relies on a serious of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

First, the author assumes that the number of bicycle-related accidents are aroused by the bicyclists without considering other factors. It is completely possible that the majority of these accidents are caused by the vehicles or pedestrians, not bycyclists' responsibility. And even if such accidents are mostly caused by the bicyclists, the author also assumes that most of the bicyclists involved are wearing helmets. There is no evidence to support this assumption. Thus, without the substantial evidence to buttress the two assumptions, the study on the number of bicycle-related accidents is unconvincing.

Second, the author assumes that the bicyclists feel safer in that they are wearing helmets are unconvincing. The author does not offer any evidence to support the claim. So it is entirely possible that since it is not comfortable for the bicyclists to wear helmets, they ride more carefully instead. And the author put forward another more unreasonable assumptions that when bicyclists feel safer they will take more risks as a result. It is possible that they will watch the traffic condition more carefully to avoid the sudden occurrence happen when they feel safer. Hence, the assumptions claimed by the author are not reliable.

Even assuming that the assumptions stated above are all convincing, the assumption that educating people about bicycle safety can reduce the number of serious injurious from bicycle accidents is hard for me to believe. Since it is possible that even if they know it is dangerous to violate the traffic rules, but they break the regulation just for convenience causing the accidents. Even if the bicyclists obey the traffic rule, it is possible that others such as drivers or pedestrians who disobey the laws actually lead to accidents. So it is useless through only educating bicyclists to reduce the number of accidents; the government should educating other people who arouse the accidents. Thus, the assumptions lack evidence to support it.

In conclusion, the recommendation for more education people about bicycle safety and lesson encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets is not well supported. To convince me that the recommendation is needed, the author should offer enough data to demonstrate the bicycle-related accidents are caused by bicyclists themselves who are wearing the helmets. The author should also prove his assumption that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets and they take more risks as a result. To better support the recommendation well, the author also should find evidence to confirm that bicyclists in the accidents are nearly who bread the traffic rules.

panmingming2008UID: 2535351

3# fadotian
fadotion的批改指出了要害：要有例子。否则难达到评分标准里的development一项，分数要掉到3分以下！


段落基本结构：论点--理由如此如此--证据（例子）


tiP:要重视修改。建议根据其他同学的批改意见+自己的反思重新改一遍。这样才能有“质”的提高。

fadotianUID: 2733387

2# rourourou_dada

rourou,这道题我自己觉得也比较晦涩，所以按我自己的想法重新改了下，你就权当参考吧，有时间讨论下~~

Most people think that politicians should pursue common ground and reasonable consensus rather than elusive ideals from the common knowledge that the obligation of the government is to reach a consensus to meet the need of majority of people. Yet the essence of politics is the ideals which is too elusive to realizing that the policies are just the methods and process to go to ideals. Simultaneously, it is easy to ignore for[ignore for?] these people that people who pursue common ground and reasonable consensus just want to fulfil their ideals. Therefore, I have partly embrace this statement.我觉得开头是不是还是要把common ground 和elusive ideal定义一下呢？我个人是觉得elusive ideal是那种类似于终极理想的东西（是那种目前无法达到的，或者很难用一些简单的方法达到的理想），比如共产主义，比如达到最高程度的民主。但是common ground 指的是一些达到那种大目标的具体的可行的方法（你上面有所提到）

One of the important goals for the politics is to search for the common ground and reasonable consensus which can be analysed in two aspects. First, only finding the common ground to let the laws and regulations accessible for most people（这里你把共识定义为法律法规）, could a nation operate and develop on the way in that laws are enacted based on the custom treaties which are acquiesced as the norms for behaviour by majority of people（我觉得这里你想论证的东西是：为什么需要共识？但是这里first aspect表达的意思貌似是如何取得共识--要把法律定在大多数人约定俗成的想法之上。）. Thus, it seems necessary for politicians to pursue common ground.. Second, the purport of research reasonable consensus is also to make society prosperous and satisfy the interests of people. Otherwise, the government will be toppled by the citizens, which is evident in retrospect of the history such as Egypt riot in the beginning of this year. That meeting the well-being of most people like employment, house and so forth is the premise of the the operation of a nation. Thus, we can know why politicians pursue the common ground and reasonable consensus（第二个理由，要保持社会稳定）.

The people who advocate the statement, however, have no idea that if it does not political ideals, there is no necessary to talk about the politics itself（为什么？）. Politics is no more than the method and process of achieving a party's ideals of economics, ideology and politics. The party is found is based on the same politics who held together（我觉得这里是说政治家所建立的政党要有一个共同的目标是吧）. If there is no ideals, the coherence of a party, a social group and even society will be lost, so that the so-called "pursue common ground and reasonable consensus" loses its norm. People do not know why they come together to form a team or later they pursue their own interests instead of pursuing the political ideals to carry out some policies only to convenience them. From this , it is not exaggerated that the political ideals is the core norms for politicians to deal with the political affairs, which is the basis of the politics.（这段还是要举些例子比较好）

In addition, from the history we know that it is human nature that where exists people exists political ideals. Since the politics of a nation can be only approximate to the ideals, but can hardly reach it, people desire to seek for the common grand and reasonable consensus for pursuing political ideals. In the course of heading for the political ideals step by step, there are a lot of problems for politicians to solve whose purpose is still to meet the ideals. Hence, common ground and reasonable consensus are the results of the compromise for（为什么是compromise for ?） fulfilling the political ideals. Elusive ideals are the reason for searching the common ground as well as the the terminal of the reasonable consensus, so it is somewhat that politicians should not pursue ideals which is like putting the cart before the horse.

In conclusion, politicians should pursue the poetical ideals as the goal in terns of making common ground and reasonable consensus as method in the process.