issue125 (The past is no predictor of the future)

forwwwUID: 154260

125. "The past is no predictor of the future."


In the observatory we forecast tomorrow’s weather via observing nebula and stars; In the stock market we predict the tomorrow’s price through the various curves on the big screen; in the football gambling, we stake on the team which has better current conditions and previous achievements. The past has a strong correlation with future. Though the past may not be the absolute predictor of the future, it is too utterly to say the past is no predictor of the future as the speaker asserts. From my observation, the past can partly foretell the future.

From the past, we can formulate many natural rules that can be employed to the future. We all know that the moon and the sun cannot rotate more rapidly at a sudden because the moon and the sun would not rotate disregarding their own orbits. With the rule, Astronomers predict eclipse precisely by watching the moon and the sun. These rules help us predict with reason. The formation of a rule is a long history: It is based on a hypothesis, which can well explain the observation of the past. Only after it can resist a large amount of examples and tests, can it be formulated into rules. As long as the hypothesis cannot explain any phenomenon, it should be revised or rebuilt. Therefore the future cannot easily destroy rules, also cannot easily discord with the prediction by the rules formulated in the past.

Someone may remain arguing that there still exist chances that the moon and the sun move suddenly rapidly because of a certain universal clash. He/she may also refute that how we can explain that a healthy strong young man may die in traffic accident tomorrow. That is exactly the limitation of the past. The past is not at the mercy of contingency, it is only itself. When contingency involves, the prediction becomes not as accurate as we expect. Nevertheless, nothing in the world is one hundred percent sure. We cannot well predict the weather one year later; we hesitate to buy or sell stocks when the prices are ever changes; we cannot make up our mind to stake when two football teams are strong all square. All these events involve too much contingency that the past is no longer a reliable predictor of the future.

However, for most of the things, the chance for contingency is not so much that it makes the past – the predictor of the future – work in vain. Applying the example of the traffic accident, the past can tell that a healthy person may be long living and is not likely to die suddenly. The reasoning is still applicable for it is much more likely to happen.

To conclude, the past can never utterly predictor the real future because of the existence of hap; however, with the logic rules underlying in the past, the past remains a useful way to foretell the future.

猫咪meUID: 155478

刚好这篇我也有写，我帮你看看。

gdhdannyUID: 125843

In the （不用冠词）observatory we forecast tomorrow’s weather via observing nebula and stars; In（in） the（不用冠词） stock market we predict the（不用冠词） tomorrow’s price through（有点别扭） the（不用冠词） various curves on the big screen; in the （不用冠词）football gambling, we stake on the team which has better current conditions and previous achievements（并列的成分颠倒一下，满足时间顺序）. The past has a strong correlation with future. Though the past may not be the absolute predictor of the future, it is too utterly（这是个副词啊） to say the past is no predictor of the future as the speaker asserts. From my observation, the past can partly foretell the future.

From the past, we can formulate many natural rules that can be employed to the future. We all know that the moon and the sun cannot rotate more rapidly at a sudden because the moon and the sun would not rotate disregarding their own orbits. With the rule, Astronomers（astronomers） predict eclipse precisely by watching （the movement of）the moon and the sun. These rules help us predict with reason. The formation of a rule is a long history（process）: It is based on a hypothesis, which can well explain the observation of the past. Only after it can resist（Only after qualified by） a large amount of examples and tests, can it be formulated into （can it turn out to be）rules. As long as（as long as 后面加上个否定的条件感觉很别扭） the hypothesis cannot explain any phenomenon, it should be revised or rebuilt. Therefore the future cannot easily destroy rules, also cannot（nor can it） easily discord with the prediction by the rules formulated in the past.

Someone may remain arguing that there still exist（exists?） chances that the moon and the sun move suddenly（suddenly move） rapidly because of a certain universal clash. He/she may also refute （refute表示驳倒，就是证明后面的东西是错的）that how we can explain that a healthy strong young man（today我觉得加上这个词很关键） may die in traffic accident tomorrow. That is exactly the limitation of the past. The past is not at the mercy of contingency, it is only itself. （过去不受意外支配，那现在和过去到底是个什么关系呢？）When contingency involves（involved要被动啊）, the prediction becomes not as accurate as we expect. Nevertheless, nothing in the world is one（a好一些吧，感觉） hundred percent sure. We cannot well predict the weather one year later; we hesitate to buy or sell stocks when the prices are ever changes（are changes?）; we cannot make up our mind（minds） to stake when two football teams are strong all square. All these events involve too（so） much contingency that the past is no longer a reliable predictor of the future.

However, for most of the things, the chance for（of） contingency is not so much that it makes the past – the predictor of the future – work in vain. Applying the example of the traffic accident, the past can tell that a healthy person may be long living and is（不用is） not likely to die suddenly（前面的事故不就让他die suddenly了么）. The reasoning is still applicable for it is much more likely to happen.（这句不解）

To conclude, the past can never utterly predictor（predict） the real future because of the existence of hap; however, with the logic rules underlying in the past, the past remains a useful way to foretell the future.
可以看出作者在追求一种语言上的文学性。几个并列的排比句想法非常好，可以考虑通过否定连词变换一下句式，会更有效果。

结构上先肯定过去与未来之间的必然联系，再考虑偶然因素的作用，思路很清晰。第二部分论证中提出的观点优点和中心里的优点远，其实整段还是很精彩的。

forwwwUID: 154260

diction要加把劲呀！谢谢楼上。谢谢鼓励性的语言，让人蛮有希望的.:D

下面两个问题我是这么看的：
1. 过去和将来什么关系： 随即偶然的事情是导致我们不能够准确预计将来的原因。我的意思是，过去，比方说，可以给出个正态分布，我们知道了事情发展的大致可能，偶然事件就可能改变分布的mean, standard deviation，还有oscillation之类的。
2. die的问题，我的意思是由于概率的问题，我们预计他不死要比死要来的准确性高。所以推断不死是有根据的可行的。还是我表达上的问题呀呀呀呀呀呀呀

猫咪meUID: 155478

No.1 issue125 (The past is no predictor of the future)
1.        125. "The past is no predictor of the future."


In the observatory we forecast tomorrow’s weather via observing nebula and stars; In the stock market we predict the tomorrow’s price through the various curves on the big screen; in the football gambling, we stake on the team which has better current conditions and previous achievements. The past has a strong correlation with future. Though the past may not be the absolute predictor of the future, it is too utterly to say the past is no predictor of the future as the speaker asserts. From my observation, the past can partly foretell the future.

From the past, we can formulate many natural rules that can be employed to（用得挺好的） the future. We all know that the moon and the sun cannot rotate more rapidly at a sudden because the moon and the sun would not rotate disregarding their own orbits. With the rule, Astronomers predict eclipse precisely by watching the moon and the sun. These rules help us predict with reason. The formation of a rule is a long history: （rule不是形成的，是本来就客观存在的，是我们对rule的认识才是主观的，才是渐渐形成的，所以从这个意义上来讲，可能你这一段得适当改改。） It is based on a hypothesis, which can well explain the observation of the past. Only after it can resist a large amount of examples and tests, can it be formulated into rules. As long as the hypothesis cannot explain any phenomenon, it should be revised or rebuilt. Therefore the future cannot easily destroy rules, also cannot easily discord with the prediction by the rules formulated in the past.

Someone may remain arguing that there still exist chances that the moon and the sun move suddenly rapidly because of a certain universal clash. He/she may also refute that how we can explain that a healthy strong young man may die in traffic accident tomorrow. That is exactly the limitation of the past. The past is not at the mercy of contingency（反了吧？我记得at the mercy of是受什么支配，那就是 contingency is not at the mercy of past ） , it is only itself. When contingency involves, the prediction becomes not as accurate as we expect. Nevertheless, nothing in the world is one hundred percent sure. We cannot well predict the weather one year later; we hesitate to buy or sell stocks when the prices are ever changes; we cannot make up our mind to stake when two football teams are strong all square. All these events involve too much contingency that the past is no longer a reliable predictor of the future.

However, for most of the things, the chance for contingency is not so much that it makes the past – the predictor of the future – work in vain. Applying the example of the traffic accident, the past can tell that a healthy person may be long living and is not likely to die suddenly. The reasoning is still applicable for it is much more likely to happen. （这段显得太单薄了吧？）

To conclude, the past can never utterly predictor the real future because of the existence of hap; however, with the logic rules underlying in the past, the past remains a useful way to foretell the future.

我觉得这篇文章看下来，语法错误和句法错误很少，几乎没有，结构也还行。但是就是让人读了觉得很平淡，好像说了点什莫又没有说，换句话说就是论证不够充分，彻底，从文字的多少上可见一斑，当然不是说好文章就要字数多，但是少了讲不透问题。
那三个例子的排比用得挺好的，但个人认为，举的例子全是比较生活化的，有没有正式一点的？只是个人看法，交流交流。：）

猫咪meUID: 155478

Issue 125. “The past is no predictor of the future.”

The speaker alleges that the past is no predictor of the future. I agree with the assertion insofar as that what happened in the past will not exactly recur in the future , but the speaker overlooks the significance of history to infer the future.

On one hand, what took place in the past will not exactly happen again in the future. Past has passed—we call it “history”, and it won’t come again in the future, otherwise, it will turn the world upside down. History of human is the process how human progressed. Generally speaking, the stage we’re on nowadays is higher than that of past. It is a firm rule that historical trend clears the outdated old style ruthelessly away, take 波旁王朝in France, for example.波旁Dynasty ,standing for the interests of old feudal lords in the French Great Revolution, was replaced by a new monarch, on the side of revolutionaries. The former monarch tried to take into power again .All kinds of complicated statuses led Charley The Second be back on the Throne again, however, he eventually failed. From the point of historical view, the outdated, old things are eliminated, and will never be in the mainstream again. As for this example,波旁Dynasty was then thrown over again and never returned ,while revolutionaries, the new power, took into authority. Another example, people today can’t imagine the primitive society come back again,—maybe, with exception that human is ruined totally. What happened in the past is history, and will not recur and stay, for the great historical trend can’t be avoided. Any adverse trickle will be rushed away by the mighty historical torrent. In short, totally speaking, with the light of firm historical law, what happened in the past will not exactly reappear and last, giving way to new power.

On the other hand, learning from history helps infer the future. It is true that past can’t recur in future, but it doesn’t mean it has no significance for the future. Yet the fact is that  via scrutiny of history, great help can we get. Perhaps history is mostly relevant to the past, however, lessons are given by history—we learn from it, avoid foolish mistakes, stimulate merits, and therefore human makes progress. (问：几个相继发生的动作可不可以这样连接而不用加连词？) Consider, world war, for example。 Thousands of people gave their lives in the Second World War, together with disaster to our homes—still a nightmare today. It is an indeed terrible mistake. Hence people never want it to happen again, great measures taken after Second World War to avoid such mistake in future. Nations all over the world participate a organization—United Nations, mainly with the purpose of improving the cooperation between countries and eliminate the possibilities and factors potentially leading to World War. Until now, United Nations  functions on the political stage in the world. We learn from history and therefore avoid  similar mistake. Also, through close scrutiny of history, trend of history is shown. Take the European Union for example. Compared to United States, European countries, having common interests in economy, sharing the similarity in culture, add to each other on the basis of economical factors: market, raw material. They are easy to come together for better development, and play more important roles in international affairs. Such trend of Europe can be seen through close examination or past. What’s more? A tendency is revealed that EU might become a big united states, through the phenomenon of the unified market, Euro, European Court of Justice, and a plan of Constitution of EU. Two examples illustrate that quite a lot can be learned from history and ,to some degree, by studying history, future can be forecasted.

In sum, past has passed and attributing to historical law, past will not appear again in future, but by scrutiny of history, lessons are learnt to avoid mistakes, and stimulate merits, leading to progress.

写完后还觉得没什莫不对，但是昨天看了别人的文章后，我发现我是整个的习惯从文科思维去想问题，都没有想过根据自然规律是可以预测自然现象的发生的，只是看历史能不能预测未来，好像是局限了点。看了楼上的文章，大受启发，看来还得继续修改。
先把原文拿出来给大家批评一番吧，再图进取。

猫咪meUID: 155478

关于这个主题的,还有没有其它们文章,一起讨论吧

forwwwUID: 154260

关于你的建议 :p ：
1. rule的确是本来就有的，但是我感觉这个还是要我们自己formulate出来。而总结发掘的过程是漫长的。元素周期表本来就有的，但是我们归纳出来却花了很长的时间去验证。
2. at the mercy of是我傻了。contingency因为不受past支配所以我们不能从past预测出来，从而不能准确预测未来。
3. however那段我是想表达因为contingency的概率很小，很多是对我们用past的formula来预测未来的准确性影响不是太大。
论证上我还是不能有点thinking gap，思維一跳跃就搞得我的作文很郁闷别人也看不懂。
谢谢你的坦率批评 :D 。

forwwwUID: 154260

Issue 125. “The past is no predictor of the future.”

The speaker alleges that the past is no predictor of the future. I agree with the assertion insofar as that what happened in the past will not exactly recur in the future ,（insofar是在这个范围，recur这件事情不是对这个论断的限制，diction有欠斟酌） but the speaker overlooks the significance of history to infer the future.

On one hand, what took place in the past will （would） not exactly happen again in the future. Past has passed—we call it “history”, and it won’t come again in the future, （；）otherwise, it will turn the world upside down. History of human is the process how human progressed. Generally speaking, the stage we’re （are ）on （有点别扭）nowadays is higher than that of past. （The world we are living is much better than that of our ancestors ） It is a firm rule that historical trend clears the outdated old style ruthelessly （? ）away, take 波旁王朝in France, for example.波旁 ( Bourbon) Dynasty ,standing for the interests of old feudal lords in the French Great Revolution, was replaced by a new monarch, on the side of revolutionaries. The former monarch tried to take into power again .All kinds of complicated statuses led Charley The Second be back on the Throne again, however, he eventually failed. From the point of historical view, the outdated, old things are eliminated, and will never be in the mainstream again. As for this example,波旁Dynasty was then thrown over again and never returned ,while revolutionaries, the new power, took into authority. Another example, people today can’t imagine the primitive society come back again,—maybe, with exception that human is ruined totally. What happened in the past is history, and will not recur and stay, for the great historical trend can’t be avoided. Any adverse trickle will be rushed away by the mighty historical torrent. In short, totally speaking, with the light of firm historical law, what happened in the past will not exactly reappear and last, giving way to new power. (不是说一模一样的发生才能够预测不够严密，但是你仍然可以从历史前进的角度强调，以后的和现在可能很不一样, 所以很难预测)

On the other hand, learning from history helps infer the future. It is true that past can’t recur in future, but it doesn’t mean it has no significance for the future. Yet the fact is that via scrutiny of history, great help can we get. Perhaps history is mostly relevant to the past, however, lessons are given by history—we learn from it, avoid foolish mistakes, stimulate merits, and therefore human makes progress. (问：几个相继发生的动作可不可以这样连接而不用加连词？行，可以把human改为we) Consider, （不用逗号了吧？）world war, for example。 Thousands of people gave their lives in the Second World War, together with disaster to our homes—still a nightmare today. It is an indeed terrible mistake. Hence people never want it to happen again, great measures taken after Second World War to avoid such mistake in future. Nations all over the world participate a organization—United Nations, mainly with the purpose of improving the cooperation between countries and eliminate the possibilities and factors potentially leading to World War. Until now, United Nations functions on the political stage in the world. We learn from history and therefore avoid similar mistake. Also, through close scrutiny of history, trend of history is shown. Take the European Union for example. Compared to United States, European countries, having common interests in economy, sharing the similarity in culture, add to each other on the basis of economical factors: market, raw material. They are easy to come together for better development, and play more important roles in international affairs. Such trend of Europe can be seen through close examination or past. What’s more? A tendency is revealed (reveal) that EU might become a big united states, through the phenomenon of the unified market, Euro, European Court of Justice, and a plan of Constitution of EU. Two examples illustrate that quite a lot can be learned from history and ,to some degree, by studying history, future can be forecasted.
（我们可以从过去学习到很多东西,为什么EU可能成为一个统一的国家？有点仓促。从过去发现趋势，预测未来。主题句不够这么清楚）

In sum, past has passed and attributing to historical law, past will not appear again in future, but by scrutiny of history, lessons are learnt to avoid mistakes, and stimulate merits, leading to progress.

有时候表达的观点不够清楚明确。
最后有点重复之前的。可能需要再修改。你的例子是很充实的，比我的例子有文化的多了。呵呵。好好利用这些例子，有时候说得多了，就不够分析了。你着重从历史发展角度来谈过去和将来的关系，可能是比较文学的思路吧？我是没想出来。看来例子的饱满上我要好好向你学习了！！！ :mad:

猫咪meUID: 155478

你帮我找出了波旁王朝，太感谢了。我其实觉得我这篇文章有的问题还很大，但是自己写的，看得不是很清楚。谢谢你的指正！
继续讨论rule这个话题，我明白你的意思，rule是可观的，但是我们现在的对它的认识是主观的，而且是一个不断发展的过程。你可不可以用“我们对rule的认识”来代替你文中的rule呢？
这是严密，或许有点严苛了。见笑了。：）

bennywu320UID: 157820

The development of History is not that easy way, which can be formulated by mathematical sinwave or normal distribution. But it is really follow the way and controlled by a secret hand.

A famous historist once summarized them in three way. One is a tidewave, raising and sinusoidal. One is a crew, periodic and progressing. One is sawtooth, irregular with sudden change.

You just focus on the weather forecast, which is a small area of holistic.