issue36[color=fuchsia]同主题写作一限制时间就不行了，题目大的可以写成

flyingwindUID: 189320

Issue36  The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
------正文------
Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realm of science and art both illustrate my dual point.

In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementary fields such as: physics, chemic, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc. Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubt obvious for they win even the greatest prize by their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are easily known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to dupe the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body. History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle; Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burning at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.

The reason lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take them for granted. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature.

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely in his time he still enduring many criticisms for many famous man peers for not conform the canon. Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of arts determines that different people have different subjective appreciation; different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly evaluated by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment the righter the evaluation meet the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment of those we view as heroes or heroines? Let time tells!

imjasonUID: 176604

好长啊
可是我都还是写不出来
学习下
占个座

imjasonUID: 176604

Issue36 The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
------正文------
Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realm of science and art both illustrate my dual point.

In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementary fields such as: physics, chemic, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc. Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubt obvious for they win even the greatest prize by[我觉得这里用from可能就更合意] their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are easily[well?] known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to dupe the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body.这句我觉得可能是要表达说反对者既要压制那些人的言论甚至是人身报复，但是dupe是欺骗愚弄的意思啊。] History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle; Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burning at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.[这两个观点很8错啊]

The reason [什么原因呢？没有说明啊！ETS很BT的，它肯定会拿你这个做文章]lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature[与生俱来？]. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators[你是想指评估者么还是别的意思，但是我在金山词霸看到的意思是求值程序，然后在W-M里竟然没有看到:O。前后两次出现，我觉得都不是很清楚] are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute[这里这两个词是要表达什么意思啊？！] they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take them for granted[这句话有语法问题吧]. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature.

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely in his time he still enduring many criticisms for[from可能更好些] many famous man peers for not conform[ing] the canon. Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of arts determines that different people have different subjective appreciation;[我觉得应该是因为不同的人有不同的主观评价标准才导致了艺术的主观，而不是艺术的主观性决定的] different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly evaluated[评估这个词好象一直用的是evaluate，还可以用其他的啊，比如说appraise,estimate,value,score等] by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment the righter the evaluation meet the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment of those we view as heroes or heroines? Let time tells!
文章很不错啊，我都还写不出来啊，看了你的很受用了。一点评价，只是班门弄斧了。嘿嘿:)
谢谢你的文章啊！

sblbaslerUID: 175229

首先，我想问楼主一下，你这篇文章写了多长时间呀！真的好成一本书了！
关于文章，我只是想粗评一下，总的感觉就是太长，以至于让人不愿意再看下去了，逻辑我就不说了（我的文章经常让各位，尤其是斑竹们找出一大堆逻辑问题我现在都怀疑。。。。。）说到语言，我觉得其实楼主的语言功底还可以，没有必要刻意去用一些难词，就上楼上的给你提出的词的误用的问题，再一个就是语法错误，有的时候句子一写长，语法错误就出来，在一个每句话一定要说的清楚，比如the two adjudicators both do in their way 中什么叫 do in their way 呢！

粗评，个人愚见，有则改之，无则加勉！

flyingwindUID: 189320

谢谢
imjason
sblbasler
意见我先看 看

写了1个小时,本来不会太长,看了pooh的分析觉得就是一本书的分析啊,可以有200面呢



1这句我觉得可能是要表达说反对者既要压制那些人的言论甚至是人身报复，但是dupe是欺骗愚弄的意思啊。]
你说的对！是mute

2[什么原因呢？没有说明啊！ETS很BT的，它肯定会拿你这个做文章]
呵呵，对！该有个why！

3你是想指评估者么还是别的意思，但是我在金山词霸看到的意思是求值程序，然后在W-M里竟然没有看到:O。前后两次出现，我觉得都不是很清楚]
你看看issue241里面有这个词：
241An individual's greatness cannot be judged objectively by his or her contemporaries; the most objective evaluators of a person's greatness are people who belong to a later time.

4。[我觉得应该是因为不同的人有不同的主观评价标准才导致了艺术的主观，而不是艺术的主观性决定的]
我是这个意思，加个欣赏就没问题了

flyingwindUID: 189320

Issue36  The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
------正文------
Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realms of science and art both illustrate my dual points.

In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementary fields such as: physics, chemic, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc. Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubt obvious for they win even the greatest prize from their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are well known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to mute the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body. History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle; Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burning at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.
       
Why, for more or less, do the people in the later time make more appropriate justification to the value of scientists? The reason lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take for granted. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature.

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely in his time he still enduring many criticisms from many famous man peers for not conforming the canon. Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of artistic appreciation determines that different people have different subjective appreciation; different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly appraised by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment the righter the evaluation meet the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment from our descendants about those we view as heroes or heroines nowadays? Let time tells!

davidjackyUID: 135962

Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realms of science and art both illustrate my dual points.
【开头可以，case by case例子science and art】
In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementarypure theoretic fields such as: physics, chemicchemistry,我最不容许别人写错我曾经的专业, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc. Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubt obvious for they win even the greatest prize from their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are well known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to mute the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body. History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle; Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burning at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.

Why, for more or less, do the people in the later time make more appropriate justification to the value of scientists? The reason lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take for granted. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature.

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely in his time he still enduring many criticisms from many famous man peers for not conforming the canon. Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of artistic appreciation determines that different people have different subjective appreciation; different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly appraised by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment the righter the evaluation meet the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment from our descendants about those we view as heroes or heroines nowadays? Let time tells!
文章没有认真的看，很抱歉，我想第一感觉是论述过于复杂，B1和B2给出以后，B3是个总结分析；B4再作另一领域的分析；最后是个总结。平时的写作到时可以接受，下一步要养成注意在规定的时间内完成文章，这样我们提出的问题更有针对性，对你的考场写作更有帮助，期待你的下一篇，同时要注意回改帮你修改文章的同学

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

不论如何佩服一个先，810words！天呀！如果限时的话怕是写不了这么多吧
Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realms of science and art both illustrate my dual points.开头清晰的提出问题的复杂性和自己的看法，不错。不过我个人不稀饭这样should/is…?一句打头，觉得用的人太多了

In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementary fields such as: physics, chemic, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc.这一堆列举没有多大的作用 Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubt obvious for they win even the greatest prize from their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are well known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to mute the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body.这句不懂，请赐教 History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle; Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burning at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.

Why, for more or less, do the people in the later time make more appropriate justification to the value of scientists? The reason lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take for granted. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature. 这段原因分析的很透彻，不错

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely? in his time he still enduring many criticisms from many famous man peers for not conforming the canon.这句是病句吧 Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of artistic appreciation determines that different people have different subjective appreciation; different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.唔，也很深入，越来越佩服咧

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly appraised by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment the righter the evaluation meet the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment from our descendants about those we view as heroes or heroines nowadays? Let time tells!

抱歉，语句上没有仔细改，因为今天小鬼斑竹让我写4篇作文，我正发愁中怎么能写出来2篇呢，sigh….
提几个个人意见：
1．        关于science 前两段有些过于详尽，占用了大量篇幅，其中一些例子的描述完全可以简略点，把笔墨用在你的分析上（当然那段分析很不错捏），因为考试时间有限，能有这么多东西可以写当然好，只是要抓住重点，那些例子不用描述那么精确生动，能说明你的问题足够，这样的话B1B2可以适当的合并和缩减，嘿嘿
2．        艺术方面的论证觉得很不错，读着也很舒服，只是开头一句表述的别扭
3．        因为文字较多，显得你把问题分析的过于复杂了点，当然主要我觉得还是科学领域的论述有些太多了，其中包括一些可以删减的东东呵呵。因为要考试用啊，还是保证45分钟把精髓写出来
4．        总的来说，很不错了，羡慕呢，加油

flyingwindUID: 189320

最初由 davidjacky 发布
[B]同时要注意回改帮你修改文章的同学
以下省略...... [/B]

好的，谢谢提醒！

flyingwindUID: 189320

谢谢victoriazhizhi
时间老是限制不成功啊，烦啊

最初由 flyingwind 发布
[B]这一堆列举没有多大的作用 [/B]

是罗嗦了

最初由 flyingwind 发布
[B]Not only those opponents attempted to mute the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body.这句不懂，请赐教  [/B]

想说不仅打击个人，还想至于死地，不知道说对了没有

最初由 flyingwind 发布
[B]Though Shakespeare was namely? in his time he still enduring many criticisms from many famous man peers for not conforming the canon.这句是病句吧 [/B]

Though Shakespeare was known in his time he still endured many criticisms from many famous peers for not conforming the canon

flyfish9UID: 156664

Issue36 The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
------正文------
Should the greatness of individuals be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries? In my point of view this debate is not a simple yes-or-no question, it should be determined by a case-by-case analysis. On balance, in almost every area of human endeavors, the two adjudicators both do in their way. Examples involving the realms of science and art both illustrate my dual points.

In the realm of science, on the one hand, it is obvious that many researchers and scientists have gained great honor in value of their extraordinary contribution to the development of science and technology in the elementary fields such as: physics, chemic, ,biology ,etc. ; and applying fields such as: computer science, engineering mechanics, electronic engineering, etc. Many great honors such as Nobel Prize are set up to pick out the top outstanding persons who have made great achievements in their own areas and award them the honor from contemporaries. One need only look no further than the list of winners to find this is case. Einstein, Curie all involve in the list. The greatness of any of those winners is no doubtdoubt不能做副词，这里不如用doubtless（有副词词性） obvious for they win even the greatest prize from their contemporaries.

On the other hand, there are some exceptional, which are well known in the history of scientific developing. To some degree, the great breakthrough in science often bring about huge obviation to the mind of contemporaries, in some cases it even runs contrary to the commonsense of daily life of contemporaries. Thus it is understandable to see opponents in great amounts. Not only those opponents attempted to mute the voice of those individuals but also they might attack their physical body. History is replete with those examples. Galileo's two-ball experience on the famed Leaning Tower of Pisa tower was misconstrued by the contemporary powers as conjuring up on the balls just because the results have nothing to do with the notion of great Aristotle;has nothing to do与...无关用在这里不对，应该是the results show the error of Aristotle's belief Copernicus's theory that sun lies in the center of the universe bring about prevalent sneer while Bruno's insistence on that theory end up his being burningburnt at stake. Now history has reevaluated those individuals and given them high reputation which might have gained in their time.

Why, for more or less, do the people in the later time make more appropriate justification to the value of scientists? The reason lies in the specific circumstance that a true valuable scientific invention own by nature. The true evaluator lies in whether the invention or contribution reflects the law of nature objectively. Whereas all evaluators are grouped by our human being no matter how keen and astute they are. Limited by time, scientific tools or implements, developing of knowledge in all respective areas, even their different religious notion, they make the decision they take for granted. With the developing of knowledge and technology in all fields, those filtered by the obsolete notions reached the right evaluation, just as Galileo was credited right by the Roman Church after he had died for 400 years. So as to the evaluation of scientific invention, it must withstand myriads of rigorous scientific experiments and computation and especially it must obey the reality of the nature. 分析原因,很不错;版上很少有人能做到这一点吧

When it comes to the arts, it is the same but with different reasons. The evaluation of art lies not in accordance to some sorts of law or cannon but lies in the feeling, spirit, and impact at first to the authors at first glance. Thus in under most circumstance it is easier to judge the evaluation of the artistic work contemporarily rather than justify it later. Hemingway, Mark Twin, Mozart, Goethe, were all achieved high esteem at their time. Nevertheless, there are still minor exceptions. Van Gogh suffered poverty during his whole life and had sold only one painting till death; it is sharply contrasted by his later more than 10,000,000 dollars price of his only one paining nowadays. Though Shakespeare was namely in his time he still enduring many criticisms from many famous man peers for not conforming the canon. Now Shakespeare is judged as the greatest playwright in English literature, which is never imagined by anyone in Shakespeare's time. The subjectivity of artistic appreciation determines that different people have different subjective appreciation; different times have different evaluating standards. Here lies the reason for distinctive evaluation of the time for those maestros in today’s viewpoint.

In sum, in almost every realm of human inquiry, some great individuals are rightly appraised by their contemporaries; while some others were reexamined to be great only after many years after their death. People living in their time are doing their personal evaluation in term of their own perspectives. Generally, the newer the judgment is the righter the evaluation meet meets the nominees. Then, who knows the judgment from our descendants about those we view as heroes or heroines nowadays? Let time tells!

flywind的文章总是才华洋溢，呵呵。这篇文章的优点很明显，举例恰当充分, 而且有自己的分析，结构也没得说
提点意见：
1.文章中还是有不少低级语法错误，可能作者写的时候情绪很高而达到不拘小节的境界，但是这些低级错误看起来确实很扎眼
2.文章中的用词给我的感觉可以用“嚣张”来形容，很多可以用常用词表达清楚意思的都用较生僻的词代替了；当然我英语底子薄，不敢妄加评论这些词语恰当与否，还需作者自己斟酌。反正我是想不出这么多高深词语
3.这篇文章是限时完成? 如果是的话我无语了；如果不是呢，我觉得似乎过于复杂了，应该压缩压缩，以适应考场的时间限制
恩，就这样了。不过还是得佩服一下的^_^

flyingwindUID: 189320

非常感谢flyfish，一家人哈多交流（fly家族的，呵呵）
我写的很罗嗦了！大家表学我，我在改呢。。。

no doubtdoubt不能做副词，这里不如用doubtless（有副词词性）
no doubt不就是adv的吗？

最初由 flyfish9 发布
[B]文章中还是有不少低级语法错误，可能作者写的时候情绪很高而达到不拘小节的境界，但是这些低级错误看起来确实很扎眼[/B]

555,打错了我都不知道哦

最初由 flyfish9 发布
[B]这篇文章是限时完成? 如果是的话我无语了；如果不是呢，我觉得似乎过于复杂了，应该压缩压缩，以适应考场的时间限制
[/B]

限制时间老是不成啊，写少了估计