Issue44政府资助科学, 暴长,有时间有耐心的xdjm看看?多谢喽

花之颜色UID: 187195

------题目------
Government should not fund any scientific research whose consequences, either medical or ethical, are unclear.
提纲:
1很多有益的科技成就源于不确定甚至是不道德的研究
2科学研究本身的不确定性
3政府不赞助可能造成的不良后果
------正文------
Admittedly, when people savoring the convenience and efficiency brought about by the technology, many problems arise: environmental problems, weapons of mass destruction, and the ethical degradation alike. To avoid the potential problems, someone argues that the research whose medical or ethical results are unclear should not be funded. However, this shortsighted measure will be nothing but obstacles on human progress.

To begin with, in human history, a lot of beneficial scientific achievements have derived from the uncertain, even immoral studies. The atomic energy, which is scolded for its mammoth power to create mass destruction when used in the war at its birth, is also powerful to benefit the people when used to generate electricity. The development of airplane also aptly illustrates this point. Undoubtedly, the rapid improvement of airplanes should be owed to the two world wars, which ignited the race to develop aviation. Numerous innovations in materials, designs and engines are put to application quickly to adapt to war. However, with these improvements, after the war, a beginning to building passenger and cargo planes continued on a worldwide scale. Since the inventions or findings used wrongly at the beginning can also do good to the society if used properly, the government does not have to be so conservative to prevent the research, whose results, either medical or ethical, are unclear.

In fact, the scientific development itself is uncharted and of course produces unclear results. The more obscure the results, the more valuable it is to study. The uncertainty suggests that there remain many things we are unaware of in this field so that we should give more emphasis on explorations in this unknown field. In nature, the exploration and research on science is a risk. If we dropped today's explorations and attempts to the unfamiliar realm for fear of future harmful consequence, no progress would be made in human history. Had our ancestors given up their attempts to go down the trees and live on the land, there would not be modern human beings. Human progress is a process of exchanging problems. That is, we firstly find a problem, then solve the problem and step forward; new problems arise, and new solutions are worked out. This everlasting circulation forms the history of human development. Therefore, there is no necessity to fear and evade the prospective problems at the cost of today’s exploration. Even if the results of scientific research are vague, they deserve the money from government to find an answer, sometimes a desirable answer.

In short of funds from governments, the scientists would have no more than two choices, so to speak, to drop their interested research reluctantly, which would be a great loss, or to resort to the other organizations, who are willing to provide them sufficient money to go on study. Neither of them is a wise choice. The former choice is quite pitiful for the reason that though future harm may be avoided, prospective benefits are also lost, which may not only help solving current problems in large measure but also boost the academic development dramatically. Besides, the consequence of the latter choice is even worse. After all, the one who provides the funds has the final say on the direction of research. When the government subsidizes the scientists, it can make the research under control to some extent so that the results can be used to serve the public good. But the consequence is obscure when the research is dependent on the private organization. Maybe with such dependence come some benign effects. Nonetheless, since the private organizations usually pay more attention to their own interests, there is every chance that the fruits of research will be harmful to the society as a whole, especially when some evil people master them. See, some Fascists trying to clone Hitler, which aptly illustrate the harm when the vicious men master the advanced technology. To avoid this terrible consequence, the government should not limit their funds on the uncertain research.

To sum up, without the government's control on the usage of the fruits through funding the research, the results of certain research will be used wrongly and produce unknown disasters, therefore, the government should not give up the decisive rights. In addition, due to the uncertainty of scientific research, no matter what the results may be, the government should fund the research without hesitation.

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

占座，明天给你答复，呵呵，大家可以先改~~~

zhoulin00001UID: 189304

Admittedly, when people savoring->savor the convenience and efficiency brought about by the technology, many problems arise: environmental problems, weapons of mass destruction, and the ethical degradation alike. To avoid the potential problems, someone argues that the researchresearches whose medical or ethical results are unclear should not be funded. However, this shortsighted measure will be nothing but obstacles on human progress.

To begin with, in human history, a lot of beneficial scientific achievements have derived from the uncertain, even immoral studies. The atomic energy, which is scolded for its mammoth power to create mass destruction when used in the war at its birth, is also powerful to benefit the people when used to generate electricity. The development of airplane also aptly illustrates this point. Undoubtedly, the rapid improvement of airplanes should be owed to the two world wars, which ignited the race to develop aviation. Numerous innovations in materials, designs and engines are put to application quickly to adapt to war. However, with these improvements, after the war, a beginning to building passenger and cargo planes continued on a worldwide scale. Since the inventions or findings used wrongly at the beginning can also do good to the society if used properly, the government does not have to be so conservative to prevent the research, whose results, either medical or ethical, are unclear.题干是不资助，不是阻止吧？

In fact, the scientific development itself is uncharted and of course produces unclear results. The more obscure the results不加be动词吗？, the more valuable it is to study. The uncertainty suggests that there remain many things we are unaware of in this field so that we should give more emphasis on explorations in this unknown field. In nature, the exploration and research on science is a risk. If we dropped today's explorations and attempts to the unfamiliar realm for fear of future harmful consequence, no progress would be made in human history. Had our ancestors given up their attempts to go down the trees and live on the land, there would not be modern human beings. Human progress is a process of exchanging problems. That is, we firstly find a problem, then solve the problem and step forward; new problems arise, and new solutions are worked out. This everlasting circulation forms the history of human development. Therefore, there is no necessity to fear and evade the prospective problems at the cost of today’s exploration这句是以今天的研究/冒险为代价的意思吗？看不太明白. Even if the results of scientific research are vague, they deserve the money from government to find an answer, sometimes a desirable answer.

In short of funds from governments, the scientists would have no more than two choices, so to speak, to drop their interested research reluctantly, which would be a great loss, or to resort to the other organizations, who are willing to provide them sufficient money to go on study. Neither of them is a wise choice. The former choice is quite pitiful for the reason that though future harm may be avoided, prospective benefits are also lost, which may not only help solving current problems in large measure but also boost the academic development dramatically. Besides, the consequence of the latter choice is even worseworser. After all, the one who provides the funds has the final say on the direction of research. When the government subsidizes the scientists, it can make the research under control to some extent so that the results can be used to serve the public good. But the consequence is obscure when the research is dependent on the private organization. Maybe with such dependence不太明白？ come some benign effects. Nonetheless, since the private organizations usually pay more attention to their own interests, there is every chance that the fruits of research will be harmful to the society as a whole, especially when some evil people master them. See, some Fascists trying to clone Hitler, which aptly illustrate the harm when the vicious men master the advanced technology. To avoid this terrible consequence, the government should not limit their funds on the uncertain research.

To sum up, without the government's control on the usage of the fruits through funding the research, the results of certain research上面的例子是说不资助会产生坏结果，不是好结果被人人恶意利用把？ will be used wrongly and produce unknown disasters, therefore, the government should not give up the decisive rights. In addition, due to the uncertainty of scientific research, no matter what the results may be, the government should fund the research without hesitation.

总体感觉挺好，结构很清晰，只是上面的打问号那些问题我不太懂，楼主能解释一下吗？好让我有所提高

花之颜色UID: 187195

题干是不资助，不是阻止吧？

这里的确有点跳了~谢谢提醒

上面的例子是说不资助会产生坏结果，不是好结果被人人恶意利用把？
这个我改用would可能效果好点

chrisyUID: 160364

同意 楼上提出的问题挺关键的
语言的功底比较好 问题不多 只是有一点要提醒
真是有点太长了~~ 楼主多长时间写完的啊
这个在考试中不太适用哦
继续加油:)

花之颜色UID: 187195

是啊~偶限时只写完开头结尾和B3,B2写了一半(40分钟写了快500),,B1后来补的