Issue48 机井椰树，历史研究重在个人还是无名大众

needleUID: 158900

Issue48:
The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.

困~~~sigh~~~睡去了 :(  文章要是错误百出表打我~~写的中间几乎睡着了~~sigh

忘了贴提纲，补上先：

1.disagree, case-by-case
2.nature science,individuals first
3.social life, both
4.总结

Who made the most significant events and trends in history, individuals or groups of people whose names have slipped out of memory? The answer of this question will determine which should be emphasized by the historical study. In my opinion, it is a matter case-by-case.

To begin with, as for the nature science, priorities should be given to individuals since most significant achievements can be ascribed to individuals rather than the groups. Taking it into account that groups of people forgotten lack of the necessary advantaged knowledge required in natural science studies, it is impossible for them to contribute to accomplishments in this field, and so, the history of nature science is something like a history of individuals recording their courage, efforts and outstanding intelligence. To research on such subjects, it is reasonable to focus on the individuals. For instance, in 18th century, an England doctor named Jenner found cowpox to cure smallpox, which was a milestone in humanity's medicine treatment. Besides, Mrs.Cruie took a seat in chemisty and physics history by her immortal founding of the new element. Individuals play a crucial role in writing the history of nature science.

Next, from the angle of social life, difference occurs. Although the names of prominent individuals have been carved in history and they have contributed much to the historical process, researchers should not concentrated on them only, neglecting the far less famous, even unknown groups of people. It is the mass who is defining the trends of the society, and coagulated together into powerful voices. At the same time, individuals are nothing but the exceptional ones selected by the mass and executing upon people's wills, who impart history by their decisions upon their abilities and characteristic.

Genghis Khan was the very historical figure, cited as a sound example here, to which researchers always attribute the rise of Yuan Dynasty in Chinese history. Yet, could him solely achieve it? Or, could such a crucial event be an affair obeying one person's will? Actually, there was a booming of the nomadic nations on the plain prairie of north China so expanding their confined lands became critical to totally solve the conflicts among kinds of small nations. Genghis Khan's advent just complied with the trends created by the groups of nomadic nations rather than any individuals. However, just imagine that if Genghis Khan had not decided to invaded the mainland of China, but the those of what is today Russia instead, then even if the purpose of acquire space to survive could be achieved similarly, there would be a quite different historical process for us to study.

Another example would be represented here. Jorge Washington, one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history, was known and commended as the founder of the great country. But anybody familiar to the liberation process of U.S.A knows that at the beginning of the Independence War, Washington was a supporter to England until his lands were also deprived by the army. In this case, it was the mass rather than individuals merely such as Washington who make up to the torrent standing up and against England. On the other hand, the performance of the critical individuals exactly conducted and induced the trend, leading the victory of the war. Anybody studying this period of history cannot belittle the influence from both groups of nameless people and historical individuals.

Therefore, historical individuals and unhornored mass are more likely two aspects from which people research the history of social life, as they are both members of the writers of it.

To sum up, in history studies, whether put individuals or the groups whose identifications are forgotten in history studies on the first rank cannot be pointed out without detailed analyses. When it comes to nature science, individuals should be given priorities; otherwise, in the aspect of social life, either of individuals and groups should be emphasized synchronously.[643words]

nekoUID: 162772

第一个占位置
这两天怕是没空写了
看文献看得眼睛都花了~~~

莫名NUID: 146481

占

so猫UID: 148633

怎么会到page 3去了呢~~~
真是的~~~~~~~
偶再顶
马上改~~

so猫UID: 148633

Issue48:
The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.

困~~~sigh~~~睡去了  文章要是错误百出表打我~~写的中间几乎睡着了~~sigh

忘了贴提纲，补上先：

1.disagree, case-by-case
2.nature science,individuals first
3.social life, both
4.总结

Who made the most significant events and trends in history, individuals or groups of people whose names have slipped out of memory? 呵呵 我发现了 设问开头是needleJJ的御用开头咧~~~The answer of this question will determine which should be emphasized by the historical study. In my opinion, it is a matter case-by-case.忽忽~~case by case 猫猫基本上不敢涉足的论证方式~~学习ing~~~

To begin with, as for the nature science, priorities should be given to individuals since most significant achievements can be ascribed to individuals rather than the groups. Taking it into account that groups of people forgotten lack of the necessary advantaged knowledge required in natural science studies恩恩 一长串的ed形式终于把我弄晕了~~~, it is impossible for them to contribute to accomplishments in this field, and so, the history of nature science is something like a history of individuals recording their courage, efforts and outstanding intelligence. To research on such subjects, it is reasonable to focus on the individuals. For instance, in 18th century, an England doctor named Jenner found cowpox to cure smallpox太PF你了兔子 这不前天才说的瘟疫吗~~~偶说你当时怎么从牛痘到琴纳都给出来了呢~原来有准备~~~头狂点地ing~~~, which was a milestone in humanity's medicine treatment. Besides, Mrs.Cruie你想说的是猫猫最敬佩的科学家居里夫人奶奶是不是~~~可是你打错了人家名字~FT~是Madame Curie!!!记得下回不准错了啊!!!她跟偶们家小哀是猫猫的idol的说!!!实验狂人~~~挖哈哈~~(暴汗~走题了~~拖出去打~喵~~) took a seat in chemisty and physics history byby? her immortal founding of the new element. Individuals play a crucial role in writing the history of nature science.这这这..最后一句冒得也太突兀了吧~好歹你前面弄个连词什么的啊~

Next, from the angle of social life, difference occurs. Although the names of prominent individuals have been carved in history and they have contributed much to the historical process, researchers should not concentrated on them only, neglecting the far less famous, even unknown groups of people. It is the mass who is defining the trends of the society, and coagulated together into powerful voices. At the same time, individuals are nothing but the exceptional ones selected by the mass and executing upon people's wills, who impart history by their decisions upon their abilities and characteristic. 恩恩 觉得这段太简单罗~

Genghis Khan偶拼了半天都没拼出来这是谁~不会是成吉思汗大叔吧~我念得舌头都要打结了~ was the very historical figure, cited as a sound example here, to which researchers always attribute the rise of Yuan Dynasty in Chinese history.我没有懂咧~~为什么这里要另外起一段啊?换成从历史角度看了? 不是吧 一开始就搞个例子堆上面???TS都没有??? Yet, could him solely achieve it? Or, could such a crucial event be an affair obeying one person's will? Actually, there was a booming of the nomadic nations on the plain prairie of north China so expanding their confined lands became critical to totally solve the conflicts among kinds of small nations. Genghis Khan's advent just complied with the trends created by the groups of nomadic nations rather than any individuals. However, just imagine that if Genghis Khan had not decided to invaded the mainland of China, but the those of what is today Russia instead, then even if the purpose of acquire space to survive could be achieved similarly, there would be a quite different historical process for us to study.

Another example would be represented here.也是个没有TS的~ Jorge Washington老米看到会气死D~George Washington啦~~jorge 想成版子上的谁了~~, one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history, was known and commended as the founder of the great country. But anybody familiar to the liberation process of U.S.A knows that at the beginning of the Independence War, Washington was a supporter to England until his lands were also deprived by the army. In this case, it was the mass rather than individuals merely such as Washington who make up to the torrent standing up and against England. On the other hand, the performance of the critical individuals exactly conducted and induced the trend, leading the victory of the war. Anybody studying this period of history cannot belittle the influence from both groups of nameless people and historical individuals.

Therefore, historical individuals and unhornored mass are more likely two aspects from which people research the history of social life, as they are both members of the writers of it.
偶鲁钝 真的是没看明白兔子的分段

To sum up, in history studies, whether put individuals or the groups whose identifications are forgotten in history studies on the first rank cannot be pointed out without detailed analyses. When it comes to nature science, individuals should be given priorities; otherwise, in the aspect of social life, either of individuals and groups should be emphasized synchronously恩 看到结尾明白了那么一点
但是为什么不就分3段呢~~

needleUID: 158900

实际上，自然段的3，4，5，6是一个大body，3是论述，4，5是两个例子，6是总结。写成一个body感觉太长了，所以尝试了新的分段法。不知道可以吗？

居里夫人&华盛顿~~~55555，还是去水版剁jorge吧~~~

KitKatUID: 164708

偶也不知道可以不可以那样子分段~~~
哪个脑袋级别的人出来说一下~~~~~

imongUID: 140258

Who made the most significant events and trends in history, individuals or groups of people whose names have slipped out of memory? The answer of this question will determine which should be emphasized by the historical study. In my opinion, it is a matter case-by-case.（有没有个更好点的表达？）

To begin with, as for the nature（natural） science, priorities should be given to individuals since most significant achievements can be ascribed to individuals rather than the groups. Taking it（好像作为从句应该去掉it的样子？） into account that groups of people forgotten lack of the necessary advantaged knowledge required in natural science studies, it is impossible for them to contribute to accomplishments in this field, and so（therefore，正规）, the history of nature（natural） science is something like a history of individuals recording their courage, efforts and outstanding intelligence. To research on such subjects, it is reasonable to focus on the individuals. For instance, in 18th century, an England doctor named Jenner found cowpox to cure smallpox, which was a milestone in humanity's medicine treatment. Besides, Mrs.Cruie took a seat in chemisty and physics history by her immortal founding of the new element. Individuals play a crucial role in writing the history of nature（natural） science. （其实你把history给做出了延伸才得到的这样的结论，在其他人看来可能蛮诡辩的——尤其如果对history还理解的比较狭义的人的话。我看到这里更觉得刚才那个case by case要改，至少也得把你关于history的拆分给初步交代的说。就好比上次Dendis的Freud一样，先交待完我该交待的，然后就照着我这一套自己说下去。）

Next, from the angle of social life, difference occurs. Although the names of prominent individuals have been carved in history and they have contributed much to the historical process, researchers should not concentrated on them only, （这个逗号非常不好）neglecting the far less famous, even unknown groups of people. It is the mass who is defining the trends of the society, and coagulated together into powerful voices. At the same time, individuals are nothing but the exceptional ones selected by the mass and executing upon people's wills, who impart history by their decisions upon their abilities and characteristic.

Genghis Khan was the very historical figure, cited as a sound example here, to which researchers always attribute the rise of Yuan Dynasty in Chinese history. Yet, could him solely achieve it?（太怪异的表达） Or, could such a crucial event be an affair obeying one person's will? Actually, there was a booming of the nomadic nations on the plain prairie of north China so expanding their confined lands became critical to totally solve（maintain？好像可以用maintain themselves的样子） the conflicts among kinds of small nations. Genghis Khan's advent just complied with the trends created by the groups of nomadic nations rather than any individuals. However, just imagine that if Genghis Khan had not decided to invaded the mainland of China, but the those of what is today Russia instead, then even if the purpose of acquire space to survive could be achieved similarly, there would be a quite different historical process for us to study. （最后一句话入侵russia觉得不好。这一假设让你的论证未免显得不够有力。比较一下：如果你这样说：如果成吉思汗自己没有这个will，到时候由于人们的趋势发展etc照样会出来个人完成类似的事情....这是不是更加切合支持你的论证？除了这句话我觉得前面都不错）

Another example would be represented here. Jorge（哎....没事，错误还是提前犯出来的好。明天会来剁了那只兔子） Washington, one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history, was known and commended as the founder of the great country. But anybody familiar to the liberation process（去掉process） of U.S.A knows that at the beginning of the Independence War, Washington was a supporter to（supporter to？） England until his lands were also deprived by the army. In this case, it was the mass rather than individuals（这里倒似乎可以删掉merely加个逗号） merely such as Washington who make up to the torrent standing up and against England. On the other hand, the performance of the critical individuals exactly conducted and induced the trend, leading the victory of the war. Anybody studying this period of history cannot belittle the influence from both groups of nameless people and historical individuals.

Therefore, historical individuals and unhornored mass are more likely two aspects from which people research the history of social life, as they are both members of the writers of it.

To sum up, in history studies, whether put individuals or the groups whose identifications are forgotten in history studies on the first rank cannot be pointed out without detailed analyses. When it comes to nature science, individuals should be given priorities; otherwise, in the aspect of social life, either of individuals and groups should be emphasized synchronously.[643words]
（很不错清晰的文章。分分段没问题，5分范文写打篮球的那个还不是分的乱七八糟的。应该至少5分的样子。）

needleUID: 158900

roger that

I should add "depend on the field of research in history " into the first paragraph~~~

Thanks a lot...considering your advoice now

so猫UID: 148633

谢谢imong脑袋~~~
偶也学习了!!!