Issue181 希望大家帮忙改一下，谢谢

sillymouseUID: 194326

Issue 181
The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Different interpretations come about when people with different personalities look at exactly the same objects, facts, data, or events and see different things.

   When faced with the question whether training or personality plays more important role in interpreting things, people may find it difficult to come to consensus due to their respective angles and conflicting values. As a matter of fact, the complex nature of the issue challenges us to draw a definite conclusion on it. While the speaker hold a stance that the way students and scholars interpret the materials is more a matter of personality than of a training, I can not agree with it totally. I concede that the title statement has merits in a sense, however, its analysis is not quite complete.
   Admittedly, one's personality as well as experience is sure to have some impacts on his or her academic pursuits. Even when we talk about the issue above, as I mentioned before, different people will come to different conclusions because of their distinguished characters and stances. Another typical example can be provided from psychological experiment: with the same half glass of water, an optimist will say there is still half glass of water while a pessimist will say there is only half glass of water. Psychology gives us a scientific explanation that different personalities can mainly be judged by the ways they interpret things. So it is not strange that students and scholars would interpret the materials in their academic fields subjectively to some extent. And that is why there is a saying that " one thousand readers create one thousand Harmlets."
    However, over emphasis on subjective factors may dilute the consequences of training, and that is not the case in fact. As is known to all, most scientific researches lie in results that required objective observations and interpretations from trained experts. How can we believe in them if no accurate explanations or conclusions are provided? In most cases, scholars and students restrict their interpretations under certain rules and values from their own fields so as to eliminate their personal bias. Psychologists also help to make experiments convincing by methods like single blind or double-blind experiments, which both are famous ways to minimize subjective factors. Therefore, we can make sure that people with certain training know more in their fields than ordinary people under most circumstances and only through this way can our society be specialized.
    Moreover, we must realize that the importance of personality and training can vary greatly among different subjects. An expectation to the same contribution of training or personality in maths and art is certainly unfair. Students and scholars in mathematics, physics, chemistry and so forth need more training to interpret their fields, since most of their work is to solve problems in an objective way. When we use caculus, few of us can find out the solutions without trained methods. On contrary, people who engage in art, literature, sociology should always cultivate their own personalities so as to create new perspectives and unique ways.
To put all into a nutshell, though the issue is a controversial one, public awareness of the major concerning addressed above will certainly propel the understanding of this challenging problem. Meanwhile, the analysis above must have proved my view a lot that neither should we ignore the significance of personality nor should we over emphasize it. And such consideration differs according to diverse fields.
                                Total: 545
                                Time: 45 minutes 37”

yogurt4UID: 198389

作文改到一半,寝室里搞起大清洁,你等等,我明天给你发上来
不要说这是你的第一篇啊,限时写成这样,你这不是打击人吗

yogurt4UID: 198389

Issue 181
The way students and scholars interpret the materials they work with in their academic fields is more a matter of personality than of training. Different interpretations come about when people with different personalities look at exactly the same objects, facts, data, or events and see different things.

When faced with the question whether training or personality plays amore important role in interpreting things, people may find it difficult to come to consensus due to their respective angles and conflicting values. As a matter of fact, the complex nature of the issue challenges us to draw a definite conclusion on it. While the speaker hold holds a stance that the way students and scholars interpret the materials is more a matter of personality than of a training 不要a, I can not agree with it totally. I concede that the title statement has merits 题目的陈述有理，不是有优点吧in a sense, however, its analysis is not quite complete.
Admittedly, one's personality as well as experience is sure to have some impacts on his or her academic pursuits. Even when we talk about the issue above, as I mentioned before 去掉before, different people will come to different conclusions because of their distinguished characters and stances.前面又没有例子,这里怎么说是another Another typical example can be provided from psychological experiment: with 改成evaluating the same half glass of water, an optimist will say there is still half glass of water while a pessimist will say there is only half glass of water. Psychology感觉上有点空，改成psychologists比较好 gives us a scientific explanation that different personalities can mainly be judged by the ways they interpret things.这一看就知道是你自己的说法，作为论据，要客观具体，你可以编成某某人说的，某某期刊说的等等，比较有说服力 So it is not strange that students and scholars would interpret the materials in their academic fields subjectively to some extent. And that is why there is a saying that " one thousand readers create one thousand Harmlets." Hamlets
这一段没有什么论据支撑TS
However, over emphasis on subjective factors may dilute the consequences  dilute the effect 要好一些of training, and that is not the case in fact.过分的强调主观因素可能回削弱训练的效果，然而事实不是这样。这句话不能统领后面的内容 As is known to all, most scientific researches lie in results that required objective observations and interpretations from trained experts. How can we believe in them 指代不清 if no accurate explanations or conclusions are provided? In most cases, scholars and students restrict their interpretations under certain rules and values from their own fields so as to eliminate their personal bias. Psychologists also help to make experiments convincing by methods like single blind or double-blind experiments, which both are famous ways famous ways 感觉好别扭 to minimize subjective factors. Therefore, we can make sure that people with certain training know more in their fields than ordinary people under most circumstances and only through this way can our society be specialized.
Moreover, we must realize that the importance of personality and training can vary greatly among different subjects. An expectation to the same contribution of training or personality in maths math and art is certainly unfair. Students and scholars in mathematics, physics, chemistry and so forth need more training to interpret their fields, since most of their work is to solve problems in an objective way. When we use caculus calculus, few of us can find out the solutions without trained methods. On the contrary, people who engage in art, literature, sociology should always cultivate their own personalities so as to create new perspectives and unique ways.
To put all into a nutshell, though the issue is a controversial one is controversial 更简洁, public awareness of the major concerning addressed above will certainly propel the understanding of this challenging problem. Meanwhile, the analysis above must have proved my view a lot that neither should we ignore the significance of personality nor should we over emphasize it. And such consideration differs according to diverse fields.
总的来说还可以，说理的成分多了一点，第三段有一点小混乱，拉拉拉拉拉~~~~~~
Total: 545
Time: 45 minutes 37