issue48感觉写的不错

pippo1983UID: 172110

48"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."


Undeniably, the most significant events and trends are created by populace but not by individuals. After all, power of an individual is limited. So it is unjust to place too much emphasis on individuals when study history. But because of objective conditions and subjective wills, we have to emphasize study of history in individuals. My reasons go as follow.

Admitted that, when we mention about some significant events or important changes in history, what first come into our mind is brilliant names one after another. When we recall Normandy, which beaches are the focal points of Allied landings on D-day (June 6, 1944) in World War II, what we can image are these great generals such as Patton, Eisenhower. But most soldiers, who participated in this battle and lost blood and sweat, or even their lives, are usually neglected by us. But in fact, without them, victory will not come into being no matter how excellent their generals are. When we talk about atom bomb, which is considered to be the most powerful weapon in the world, who we can remember is only Oppenheimer or Einstein. Most people who participated in the Manhattan Project do not have such glory although their contribution is indispensable. Maybe researchers in history study should pay attention to most people, but they can not.

First of all, there are so many people who participated in historical events that we can not study all of them one by one. Maybe we can divide them into different groups, but by now there is no general criterion about how to classify them. General standards of different groups of people are their wealth, vocations, ages, nations or races. But people of historical events can include wealthy and poor, engineer and students, children and grandparents, Chinese and Americans, black and white, so it is difficult for researchers of history to divide them into different groups. For instance, they divide people into groups of vocations. But there will be different races existing, so maybe researchers have to consider about problems of racial discrimination. And they may also have to pay attention to different ages of the same vocation. That will impede historical research result since there are so many works have to be done with discriminating different groups that real study of history events may be neglected.

In the other hand, because of the effectiveness in accelerating process of historical events and trends, study in famous few will be useful for analyzing history. As the same instance of Normandy, although most people do their effort to the victory of battle, the most important work such and making a plan, arraying force, were done by generals and political leaders. Actually they controlled the whole battle; they can decide whether to fight, how and when. Maybe without them this event even would not happen. Atom bomb, its accomplishment firstly due to presentation of theory and director of project. What the others do is only to follow plan and do work distributed to them. So people remember Einstein and Oppenheimer because they make the greatest contribution but not considering that atom bomb can be made by only the two men. The relation of famous people and populace is like CPU and main board.
Although main board is foundation, CPU is core of a computer. Further more, some researchers prefer to study famous people rather than common populace because they think that famous people have some particular characters or intellect. Therefore study of these people will be more valuable and useful. Maybe this is psychological phenomena of adoring great people.

In sum, although study of populace is important for historical study, we have to pay most attention to famous few because some subjective and objective conditions. While admit effort of populace, we still emphasize study of famous few.

lakeqianUID: 157560

恩觉得还行。
最后一段：in famous few will be useful for analyzing history是想回应：The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals吗？？一个事实一个倾向(useful涉及价值判断吧)似乎。。。
不过这不一定是跑题吧。。。

pippo1983UID: 172110

是想做一个让步，对个人在历史的作用做个交待，谢谢批改^_^

pippo1983UID: 172110

up

Grinning PotatoUID: 175192

b3 楼主涉及了两个问题，一个是individuals的作用很大，但是在结尾时又说他们能表现大家的特点，对于这一点的出现有点突兀，而且没有仔细分析，个人认为这一点是至关重要的，建议另起一段。

pippo1983UID: 172110

结尾并没说他们表现大家特点，只是说他们有独特的个性
谢谢审批^_^