issue40----有不少的GTER写过，来改下吧。谢谢。

panda2727UID: 138271

40. "Scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem."

Scholars and researchers are those people whom are focused on when their work makes a contribution to the society, while in other time, people are not interested in those group of people's individual interests. Do the populace pays much more attention only to the contribution to the larger society, which Scholars and researchers make? Is it more important the populace should concern with their individual interests, no matter how unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem? If it is necessary to select the more important one, the selection is definitely whether they make a contribution to the larger society.

Society is the thing that no individual can replace. Society is the group concept, which is composed by all of people, physical implements, and natural environment, and is the only existence of all people in the world. When society is mentioned, there is no individual feather, but the common characters of all of the people. Individual is just like a sand in the desert, compared with the society. When an individual die, in fact, the society goes around at its orbit normally. But if the society died, supposing it can, does any individual survive? The same instance may illustrate the assumption: when the desert dies out, there is, of course no a sand existing. So the society is much more important than any individual. In this case, scholars and researchers should be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society.

Meanwhile, it is the society that supports scholars and researchers to keep on their work. In the modern society, any research is a very big engineering, which no individual can afford either the money or the intelligence necessary for it. The society supplies that environment in which scholars and researchers can keep on their work. Since the invest, the equipment for research, or something like that, needed by scholars and researchers are all supplied by the society, it is their duty to repay them in their contribution to the society. And the how big contribution to the society or how larger society the contribution to are the standard for judging the benefit of scholars and researchers’ work.

On the other side, it should bring lots of problems if scholars and researchers' individual interests are more concerned with, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem. Without the judgment whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society, scholars and researchers' individual interests may only interest himself, which is a waste of invest of society, according to the judgment that whether the research work is beneficial. In addition, it cannot be avoidable some evil interests grow up in some researchers' mind. They may develop very horrific technology, such as the technology of cloning the human, the biochemical weapon. Those technologies not only make little contribution to the society, but those also threaten its safety. So it id necessary to pay more attention to the contribution that scholars and researchers make to the society, not their individual interests.

Of course, that scholars and researchers should be concerned with their contribution to the larger society does not mean those people's individual interests should be ignored. Where is interests, where is achievement. Only the interests can spur the inspiration of the researchers, needed to make big achievement. What is encouraged is that scholars and researchers pursue their individual interests on the field that can also make contribution to the society.

zzfalconUID: 175235

一点点意见，不知是否合适，我的QQ252337457。大家可以互助啊！！
40. "Scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem."

Scholars and researchers are those people whom are focused on when their work makes a contribution to the society, while in other time（times）, people are not interested in those group of people's individual interests. Do the populace pays(does the populace pay/the populace does pay) much more attention only to the contribution to the larger society, which Scholars and researchers make? Is it more important the populace should concern with their individual interests, no matter how unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem? If it is necessary to select the more important one, the selection is definitely whether they make a contribution to the larger society.（好像冗余了）

Society is the thing that no individual can replace. Society is the(a) group concept, which is composed by all of people, physical implements, and natural environment, and is the only existence of all people in the world. When society is mentioned, there is no individual feather, but the common characters of all of the people. Individual is just like a sand in the desert, compared with the society. When an individual die(dies), in fact, the society goes around at(不要) its orbit normally. But if the society died, supposing it can, does any individual survive?（不同意，一个部落被屠杀殆尽，总有几个幸存者，像troy的故事） The same instance may illustrate the assumption: when the desert dies out, there is, of course no a sand existing. So the society is much more important than any individual. In this case, scholars and researchers should be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society.

Meanwhile, it is the society that supports scholars and researchers to keep on their work. In the modern society, any research is a very big engineering, which no individual can afford either the money or the intelligence necessary for it. The society supplies that environment in which scholars and researchers can keep on their work. Since the invest, the equipment for research, or something like that, needed by scholars and researchers are all supplied by the society, it is their duty to repay them in their contribution to the society. And the（不要the） how big contribution to the society or how larger society the contribution to are the standard for judging the benefit of scholars and researchers’ work.(没有和interests挂上钩, 我的interests亦有可能对社会有贡献)

On the other side, it should bring lots of problems if scholars and researchers' individual interests are more concerned with, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem. Without the judgment whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society, scholars and researchers' individual interests may only interest himself, which is a waste of invest（investment） of society, according to the judgment that whether the research work is beneficial. In addition, it cannot be avoidable some evil interests grow up in some researchers' mind. They may develop very horrific technology, such as the technology of cloning the human, the biochemical weapon. Those technologies not only make little contribution to the society, but those also threaten its safety. So it id(is)  necessary to pay more attention to the contribution that scholars and researchers make to the society, not their individual interests.（这段可以）

Of course, that scholars and researchers should be concerned with (judged by) their contribution to the larger society does not mean those people's individual interests should be ignored. Where is interests, where is achievement. Only the interests can spur the inspiration of the researchers, needed to make big achievement. What is encouraged is that scholars and researchers pursue their individual interests on the field that can also make contribution to the society.( 好像和你的主体偏了，你是说以social contribution 来评价，现在又改为并重)

panda2727UID: 138271

谢谢你评得这么细致。
最后一段实际上是一个让步作为一个完整的逻辑。然后再另起一段做结尾。上面这样写是不好。
“不同意，一个部落被屠杀殆尽，总有几个幸存者，像troy的故事”我这里指的是人类这个大的社会。
“没有和interests挂上钩, 我的interests亦有可能对社会有贡献”：实际上我并没有排除你说的这种可能性，我是说他们取之社会，那么就应该回报社会。不管他们有无兴趣，这都是他们应该做的。
开头是写的有点绕。不清晰，干净。