- 最后登录
- 2021-2-22
- 在线时间
- 4673 小时
- 寄托币
- 12296
- 声望
- 762
- 注册时间
- 2008-10-30
- 阅读权限
- 50
- 帖子
- 907
- 精华
- 4
- 积分
- 6161
- UID
- 2565872
 
- 声望
- 762
- 寄托币
- 12296
- 注册时间
- 2008-10-30
- 精华
- 4
- 帖子
- 907
|
发表于 2012-12-26 11:23:45
|显示全部楼层
12.22
Does the study of animals helps us to learn about human nature?
Recently, there has been a controversial topic debated by a lot of people about whether studying of animals is essentially helpful for us to learn human nature. It would appear that the connection between animal behaviors and human nature is itself ridiculous, since we human has been evolved (Either 'has/have evolved' or 'has/have been evolveing'.) completely (I'm not sure why you specified 'completely'. Evolution is essentially a non-stop process.) since millions of years ago. Nevertheless, I definitely disagree with this statement for the main two reasons I will outline below.
First and foremost, we cannot deny that no matter to what extent we evolve from chimpanzees, we still belong to animals in the essence. The similarities between humans and animals are numerous and conspicuous. For instance, the observation of new born sheep's behavior reveals that they suck mother’s latex (I'm not really sure what you think 'latex' means but it doesn't mean 'milk', at least not animal milk. Latex is a kind of vegetable milk that's used to make a certain kind of rubber, its most common products being surgeon's gloves and condoms.) while kneeling, in order to show their appreciation and respect to mother,(Pardon me for laughing out straight at this. How on earth do you know this is the reason, since sheep can't tell you their feelings and probably nobody ever scanned a sheep's brain to verify this? It could well be that their front legs are not as strong as their back legs so they tend to kneel when trying to reach for something low, like a mother sheep's nipples..羊羔跪乳乌鸦反哺 are essentially educational fables like Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Wolf. Please do not cite them as scientific truth.) which is consistent with the nature of human-the love and thanksgiving to parents. In this way, a study of animals behavior is an effective way to learn human nature since we share plenty similarities with animals.(If your point is that we can learn about human nature through studying animals because we share plenty similarities with animals, then a single example of a single trait is rather unpersuasive. )
Besides, through observation and study of animals, human has invented great works which have great impact on, even totally change our daily lives. To name a few, the fist plane was invented by researching the birds' flying secrets, the submarine was invented by studying the fish's swimming method and the radar was invented by investigating the ways bats determine the obstacles ways (That's a sonar, not a radar. A radar operates with radio waves, but a bat operates with sound waves beyond human hearing, therefore it's a proper sonar, not a radar. There's no conclusive evidence on whether, if at all, any animal can naturally produce radio waves.). Therefore, I do not doubt that we could learn more from animals, especially the aspects of the human nature, since we have abundant similarities with animals. (If your point is that we can learn a lot about human nature from observing animals because we share many similarities with animals, then your examples do not illustrate the 'because' part, since they are examples of similarities between animals and human inventions, not animals and humans. If your point is that if we can invent so many important things by observing animal behavior, we must be able to learn about human nature by observing animal behavior too, it's a non sequitur, 'something that does not follow'. This reasoning is only true when you can establish 'invent important things' equals 'learn about human nature', and this is obviously false.)
Yet my agreement to this statement (By now I have no idea which statement you are agreeing to, since in the first paragraph you said you 'disagree' with a certain statement.) does not suggest that all the studies of animals have a vital function to understanding human nature. Human has evolved for millions of years and thus are more sophisticated than any species of animals in the world from both mental and psychology.(Almost the same thing. The point is I don't see why you must mention these as two separate aspects in this sentence.) During the process of evolution, we gradually command on how to control ourselves and restrain ourselves within the social codes frame ('the frame of social codes'. You tend to form complex noun phrases exactly like how you'd do it in Chinese, that is, to pile all qualifiers to the left of the main noun. That's not the way to go in English.). Such behavior cannot be acquired by whatever animals. (From a purely scientific point of view, many social animals are capable of establishing and conforming to 'social codes': bees, ants, hyenas, wolves, most monkeys. Only that they do not always do it in a way that humans find familiar or comprehendible.) From this angle, learning human nature via studies of animals has its own limitation. But as long as we share the common (The common what?) with animals, studying of animals cannot be an inefficient way to understand the essence of human.
All in all, although we could not understand human nature totally dependening on doing research on animals, I firmly believe that studying animals is one fundamental way to get to know our nature, as no matter how fast the world changes, we are still the members of animals and we share a lot of similarities with them.
总结:
于是词用词性搭配语法还有第二个论点基本不靠题目神马的我都不说了。。看到第一个论点段的论据是羊羔跪乳我直接给跪了啊。。你不如说伊索寓言里吃不到葡萄说葡萄酸的那只狐狸让我们知道狐狸和人一样喜欢吃甜葡萄不喜欢吃酸葡萄 = = 羊羔跪乳神马的属于俗语故事,和小红帽大坏狼之类的童话一样,你可以说它们隐喻了社会价值神马神马但你不能拿它们当科学事实引用好吧。。
|
|