issue1 大家提 提意见 ——共同进步！！！

Adrian555UID: 123864

1、"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."



Everywhere in this world, sorts of discussions and seminars exist, which help to certify the tenor of a project or an investigation and obtain deversified opinions because the multi-world needs multianalysis. Therefore, we can safety draw a thought that the ideas of the lemma above is quite a little extreme. Facing the more and more complex course, obviously we need more diversification but not sole view by reason that we couldn't evade the rule of survival of the fittest.

Actually, contradictory communication makes us learn more than no communication or unilateral instruction or utterly uniform views. we will have little harvest If we want to hear of others' evaluation to own ideas of a difficult thing but only receive the praise or sharing sight. why should this be so? At the first glance, we obtain the approval and it seems it is plain sailing and progresses over a smoth and direct way, nothing to worry about; but further thinking tells us that, on the one hand, we may not be willing to think about it more deeply since we consider this view correctly in our subconscious; and another, sometimes this delution may enshroud the fallacious fact untill it comes out in the wash. For instance, Columbus, a sailing hero, but was miserable in respect that he didn't know what he found was Latin America but not India even  until he dead. It serves as the best example to illustrate this view. In addition, there is a old saying in chinese that " one of the three person who learn all together could become the teacher"(I paraphrased), which edify us that study getting along with the contradiction finally give birth to truism. If, say, everything or people's views draw to great harmony, there  would not be any illustrious fruition as Renaissance, Industrial Revolutions at all. As a conclusion, we can only think more, thereby learn more from the opposition.

Contradiction will lead to controversy and debate, and then the competition will come into being. Either will face being throwing out, because none can ensure he is always right. Admittedly, disagreement can cause stress, but may not inhibit learning.Diasgreement, in many's eyes, is the challenge of self-confidence and determination, which is the origin of stress.  People usually hear that, the white-collar repine against their onerous working stress. The stress, coming from the burden of the quality and quantity of work, but in my point of view, comes from the competition more because they have to prove themselves in this high-intelligent colony. Nevertheless, someone acquired much from it, and contrastively, someone was eliminated. According to the lemma above, if "disagreement causes inhibit learning" is right, it just deny the evolution of human being: our ancestors were continuously learnning and adapting this world on the mighty pressure of the deversified enviorment of nature, and the competition of congener and non-congener.

For our share target, we still need just one view to a certified project. Disagreement could be debated in the preparative stage, but absolutely cann't exist in the progressive stage. The aim of discussion to contradiction is to find a best solution and idea, then offer a short cut. The divarication on the running, which like a pair of reverse forces, will be harmful and painful. The invention and application of A-energy can prove the whole causality: many socientists hold together to  investigate and discuss, and finally, after countless contradiction and unification, A-energy was born through the concerned effort of these scientists. But unluckily, because of the divatication of the original intention of the most scientists of the politicians, A-energy was simultaneously apply to the generating electricity and military affairs.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, we can believe that, divarication is welcome because the most of us can learn more form it, think about it and correct our partial and fallacious thoughts, which may help us to figure out the similar problems more carefully and judgematically in the next time. Otherwise than the pre-debate, solidarity is more important because it is the doing-stage if we entitle the discussion as discovering-stage. Both the optimization and the practice of one mind are crucial and decisive to the best outcome.

imongUID: 140258

请先看公告。

Leave us a note if you have read and understood our announcement. Your essay will be checked then.

jxkingUID: 141801

1、"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."



Everywhere in this world, sorts of discussions and seminars exist, which help to certify the tenor of a project or an investigation and obtain deversified ( ->diversified) opinions because the multi-world needs multianalysis. Therefore, we can safety(-> safely) draw a thought that the ideas of the lemma above is quite a little extreme. Facing the more and more complex course, obviously we need more diversification but not sole view by reason that we couldn't evade the rule of survival of the fittest.

Actually, contradictory communication makes us learn more than no communication or unilateral instruction or utterly uniform views. we will have little harvest If we want to hear of others' evaluation to own ideas of a difficult thing but only receive the praise or sharing sight. why should this be so? At the first glance, we obtain the approval and it seems it is plain sailing and progresses over a smoth(-> smooth) and direct way, nothing to worry about; but further thinking tells us that, on the one hand, we may not be willing to think about it more deeply since we consider this view correctly in our subconscious(-> subconsciousness); and another, sometimes this delution (->dilution) may enshroud the fallacious fact untill it comes out in the wash. For instance, Columbus, a sailing hero, but was miserable in respect that he didn't know what he found was Latin America but not India even until he dead. It serves as the best example to illustrate this view. In addition, there is a(-> an) old saying in chinese that " one of the three person(persons) who learn all together could become the teacher"(I paraphrased)(and you paraphrases incurrately), which edify(->edifies) us that study getting along with the contradiction finally give birth to truism(好像不是吧！那句谚语是强调能从别人那里学到东西，而不一定是truism). If, say, everything or people's views draw to great harmony, there would not be any illustrious fruition as Renaissance, Industrial Revolutions at all. As a conclusion, we can only think more, thereby learn more from the opposition.

Contradiction will lead to controversy and debate, and then the competition will come into being. Either will face being throwing(改为thrown out) out, because none can ensure he is always right. Admittedly, disagreement can cause stress, but may not inhibit learning.Diasgreement, in many's eyes, is the challenge of self-confidence and determination, which is the origin of stress. People usually hear that, the white-collar repine against their onerous working stress. The stress, coming from the burden of the quality and quantity of work, but in my point of view, comes from the competition more because they have to prove themselves in this high-intelligent colony. Nevertheless, someone acquired much from it, and contrastively, someone was eliminated. According to the lemma above, if "disagreement causes inhibit learning" is right, it just deny the evolution of human being: our ancestors were continuously learnning and adapting this world on the mighty pressure of the deversified enviorment of nature, and the competition of congener and non-congener.

For our share target, we still need just one view to a certified project. Disagreement could be debated in the preparative stage, but absolutely cann't exist in the progressive stage. The aim of discussion to contradiction is to find a best solution and idea, then offer a short cut. The divarication on the running, which like a pair of reverse forces, will be harmful and painful. The invention and application of A-energy can prove the whole causality: many socientists hold together to investigate and discuss, and finally, after countless contradiction and unification, A-energy was born through the concerned effort of these scientists. But unluckily, because of the divatication of the original intention of the most scientists of the politicians, A-energy was simultaneously apply(改为) to the generating electricity and military affairs.

To sum up, due to the above mentioned reasons, we can believe that, divarication is welcome because the most of us can learn more form it, think about it and correct our partial and fallacious thoughts, which may help us to figure out the similar problems more carefully and judgematically in the next time. Otherwise than the pre-debate, solidarity is more important because it is the doing-stage if we entitle the discussion as discovering-stage. Both the optimization and the practice of one mind are crucial and decisive to the best outcome.

意见：
1. 阁下文章立场使用disagree. 因此正文自然是归纳式1.2.3.三个理由。
2. 结构老方法：总分总， 正文又是三段，几乎大家都是这么写的，也无可厚非。 但是正文部分的层次比较乱，消耗次虽然有，但是一段话里东西说得太杂， 我反而读不太懂 你要表达什么意思。 比如你的正文地一段我就读懂你关于columbus的例子，和你那句”三人行有我师，“ 但两个例子总觉得不太恰当。要不可能我的阅读理解能力太差。
3. 语言方面做这表现出有较大的硬盘容量和较强的CPU处理能力，词汇量丰富，该用时用的上，也挺恰当， 但是你和我一样，杀毒软件没装好，老拼错单词，或不注意语态与人称，被动式等。
4. 个人认为一片好的issue 应该用一下几个注意点：（1）立场清楚 （2）结构完整，思路清晰 （3）正文部分能有几个相对独立的分论点 （4）每个理由，几分论点的应有相应的论据支持 （5）语言功力好，用词丰富，恰当，句式多变。
5.此为在下敝见，希望仁兄多一修改我的文章，我的署名是: jxking. 我们互相修改，共同进步。

galaxysongUID: 152834

互相“掐”（即“批”的意思，imong用语）是很有好处的。二位加油！