issue36 同主题写作,第三篇,希望砖头来得猛一些!

thminUID: 192642

这是不限时写的,粗略算了一下可能有一个多小时呢,
刚开始,所以限时可能写不出来太多东西.提纲是以前想好的.

题目
"The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries."
正文
There had been so many great individualists, including scientists, writers, artists and philosophers, who had people’s affirmation in their of own field of study long after they had passed away; while there also had been enormous numbers of distinguished individualists alike who had achieved accomplishment and obtained great fame while they were still alive. Therefore, whether the greatness of human individuals are decided by people who live after them or by those of their own time remains a controversial topic in discussing about great people’s recognition. As far as I’m concerned, this complicated question can never be solved by an agreement on its answer for it need a close case-by-case analysis.

In the scientific field, great scientists’ achievement on their specialized studying field may always involved long time of hard work and close examination so that the identification of these achievement tend to be difficult to ordinary people who know very little about the methods and basic rules of these fields. Furthermore, the process of testifying these scientific conclusions, sometimes will take years to complete. It is not difficult to find historical examples to illustrate this. Calileo, one of the most distinguished scientists ever in the world, had lived an ignoble life and disdained by the people of his society whose values are dominantly affected by the Pope. Bruno, who had claimed his support to Copernicus’ theory in the cosmos, was cruelly burned at stakes for his skepticism to religion. With the development on technology and civilization, these people finally turned out to be the greatest thinkers and scientists long after their death and even today their great talents and courage in insisting truths are widely praised in our modern society.

While in the field of art, like music, painting, and sculpture and so on, the practitioners of these fields are somehow luckier than the ones of science. Unlike people devoting to science who ought to invest large amount of energy and time to convince people their hypothesis, conclusion and theory, people dedicated to arts just need to show the public how beautiful the music they had produced, how vividly their painting had expressed the visions and how fineness the sculpture had developed by the artists themselves. The greatness of an art can easily judged by face value. And the artists themselves more or less affected by the prevailing aesthetic values in the present society to produce these great creations.

By the analysis above, however, it will be rather superficial to reach the conclusion that people in the scientific world would surely not recognized by their contemporary people and those in art field inevitably receive an immediate affirmation. Exceptions happened in both of the two important fields that greatly influence our social and technological life. Even though it’s hard for scientist to let the world accepts his new theory at once and recognizes his or her contribution, the example of Einstein developing relative theory and gaining worldwide prestige when he was still young existed; even though it’s quite common for people in arts field to get success and gain fame in their living years, there still had been Von Gough’s story told that the genius painter had led miserable life and it was after his death people had truly understood the meaning of his paintings in a very profound and unique way. Therefore, the concept of “greatness” is a rather vague and relative notion that involves people’s judgment, standard, criterion and even existing values. To recognize the individual’s greatness does not depend on a concrete rule. That is to say, we can only “recognize” it but to “decide” it for sometimes it was there and we didn’t reach that far.

In conclusion, there only had been some tendencies but not rules on recognizing the greatness of scientists and artists. People’s capacity of recognizing the greatness, in a large scale, would play more important roles on this issue. It’s not the simple matter of which types of people from the two—the contemporary or the condescending—can decide the greatness.

thinking in GTUID: 195028

There had been so many great individualists, including scientists, writers, artists and philosophers, who had people’s affirmationrecognition??听歌时没觉得他有认同的意思 in their of own field of study long after they had passed away; while there also had been enormous numbers of distinguished individualists alike who had achieved accomplishment and obtained great fame while they were still alive. Therefore, whether the greatness of human individuals are decided by people who live after them or by those of their own time remains a controversial topic in discussing about great people’s recognition. As far as I’m concerned, this complicated question can never be solved by an agreement on its answer for it need a close case-by-case analysis.有人不主张用case-by-case，说这是layman的话

In the scientific field, great scientists’ achievement on their specialized studying field may always involved long time of hard work and close examination so that the identification of these achievement tend to be difficult to ordinary people who know very little about the methods and basic rules of these fields. Furthermore, the process of testifying these scientific conclusions, sometimes will take years to complete. It is not difficult to find historical examples to illustrate this. Galileo, one of the most distinguished scientists ever in the world, had lived an ignoble life and disdained by the people of his society whose values are dominantly affected by the Pope. Bruno, who had claimed his support to Copernicus’ theory in the cosmos, was cruelly burned at stakes for his skepticism to religion. With the development on technology and civilization, these people finally turned out to be the greatest thinkers and scientists long after their death and even today their great talents and courage in insisting truths are widely praised in our modern society.

While in the field of art, like music, painting, and sculpture and so on, the practitioners of these fields are somehow luckier than the ones of science. Unlike people devoting to science who ought to invest large amount of energy and time to convince people their hypothesis, conclusion and theory, people dedicated to arts just need to show the public how beautiful the music they had produced, how vividly their painting had expressed the visions and how fineness the sculpture had developed by the artists themselves. The greatness of an art can easily judged by face value. And the artists themselves more or less affected by the prevailing aesthetic values in the present society to produce these great creations.

By the analysis above, however, it will be rather superficial to reach the conclusion that people in the scientific world would surely not recognized by their contemporary people and those in art field inevitably receive an immediate affirmation. Exceptions happened in both of the two important fields that greatly influence our social and technological life. Even though it’s hard for scientist to let the world accepts his new theory at once and recognizes his or her contribution, the example of Einstein developing relative theory and gaining worldwide prestige when he was still young existed; even though it’s quite common for people in arts field to get success and gain fame in their living years, there still had been Von Gough’s story told that the genius painter had led miserable life and it was after his death people had truly understood the meaning of his paintings in a very profound and unique way. Therefore, the concept of “greatness” is a rather vague and relative notion that involves people’s judgment, standard, criterion and even existing values. To recognize the individual’s greatness does not depend on a concrete rule. That is to say, we can only “recognize” 改为see，好像recognize就是认可it but to “decide” it for sometimes it was there and we didn’t reach that far.

In conclusion, there only had been some tendencies but not rules on recognizing the greatness of scientists and artists. People’s capacity of recognizing the greatness, in a large scale, would play more important roles on this issue. It’s not the simple matter of which types of people from the two—the contemporary or the condescending—can decide the greatness.结尾有点不明白
用两个领域的对比，呵呵，跟我的思路差不多，不过楼主的例子引得好

medwinUID: 189909

There had been 改成were吧，过去完成时不太好吧 so many great individualists, including scientists, writers, artists and philosophers, who had people’s affirmation in their of own field of study long after they had passed away; while there also had been enormous numbers of distinguished individualists alike who had achieved accomplishment and obtained great fame while they were still alive. Therefore, whether the greatness of human individuals are decided by people who live after them or by those of their own time remains a controversial topic in discussing about great people’s recognition. As far as I’m concerned, this complicated question can never be solved by an agreement on its answer for it need a close case-by-case analysis.

In the scientific field, great scientists’ achievement achievements on their specialized studying field may always involved long time of hard work and close examination so that the identification of these achievement tend to be difficult to ordinary people who know very little about the methods and basic rules of these fields.这个ts太长了，不妨先写一句说，科学界的伟大往往要后人来评判，再接这句话 Furthermore, the process of testifying these scientific conclusions, sometimes will take years to complete. It is not difficult to find historical examples to illustrate this. Calileo, one of the most distinguished scientists ever in the world, had lived an ignoble life and disdained by the people of his society whose values are dominantly affected by the Pope. Bruno, who had claimed his support to Copernicus’ theory in the cosmos, was cruelly burned at stakes for his skepticism to religion. With the development on technology and civilization, these people finally turned out to be the greatest thinkers and scientists long after their death and even today their great talents and courage in insisting truths are widely praised in our modern society.

While in the field of art, like music, painting, and sculpture and so on, the practitioners of these fields are somehow luckier than the ones of science. Unlike people devoting to science who ought to invest large amount of energy and time to convince people their hypothesis, conclusion and theory, people dedicated to arts just need to show the public how beautiful the music they had produced, how vividly their painting had expressed the visions and how fineness the sculpture had developed by the artists themselves. The greatness of an art can easily judged by face value. And the artists themselves more or less affected by the prevailing aesthetic values in the present society to produce these great creations.最好给几个例子，不然会被反驳，毕竟艺术界也有梵高的例子说明艺术也可能不被当代人接受

By the analysis above, however, it will be rather superficial to reach the conclusion that people in the scientific world would surely not recognized by their contemporary people and those in art field inevitably receive an immediate affirmation. Exceptions happened in both of the two important fields that greatly influence our social and technological life. Even though it’s hard for scientist to let the world accepts his new theory at once and recognizes his or her contribution, the example of Einstein developing relative theory and gaining worldwide prestige when he was still young existed; even though it’s quite common for people in arts field to get success and gain fame in their living years, there still had been Von Gough’s story told that the genius painter had led miserable life and it was after his death people had truly understood the meaning of his paintings in a very profound and unique way. Therefore, the concept of “greatness” is a rather vague and relative notion that involves people’s judgment, standard, criterion and even existing values. To recognize the individual’s greatness does not depend on a concrete rule. That is to say, we can only “recognize” it but to “decide” it for sometimes it was there and we didn’t reach that far.

In conclusion, there only had been some tendencies but not rules on recognizing the greatness of scientists and artists. People’s capacity of recognizing the greatness, in a large scale, would play more important roles on this issue. It’s not the simple matter of which types of people from the two—the contemporary or the condescending—can decide the greatness.

写得不错，至少比我强，语言流畅，学习ing，B3自己先提出假设再自己否定，用的绝妙，希望你能帮我改改

thminUID: 192642

to thinking in GT: 关于那个case-by-case的说法,我也是在别人文章里面学的,如果这样用不太好的话,你看用什么方法表达"具体问题具体分析"这个说法呢? 另外,用affirmation我是想表达"肯定"的意思,因为如果老用recognition会显得重复.你看呢?
to medwin: 说实话你关于我写的艺术的那段的意见,我在写的时候也有所考虑,可是想了半天也没有想起来一个例子, 之后还得去看看大家的文章,向你们学习.
谢谢两位修改,明天我再给你们拍砖,看到你们修改的文章的时候已经是晚上了,宿舍的MM在看韩剧,我实在静不下来.呵呵,我还以为新人写的文章没人注意呢,呵呵,再次感谢!555...

山坡羊UID: 169978

There had been [过去完成时，你要从哪算起呢？] so many great individualists, including scientists, writers, artists and philosophers, who had people’s affirmation in their of own field of study long after they had passed away; while there also had been enormous numbers of distinguished individualists alike who had achieved accomplishment and obtained great fame while they were still alive. Therefore, whether the greatness of human individuals are decided by people who live after them or by those of their own time remains a controversial topic in discussing about great people’s recognition. As far as I’m concerned, this complicated question can never be solved by an agreement on its answer for it need a close case-by-case analysis.

In the scientific field, great scientists’ achievement on their specialized studying field may always involved long time of hard work and close examination so that the identification of these achievement tend to be difficult to ordinary people who know very little about the methods and basic rules of these fields. Furthermore, the process of testifying these scientific conclusions, sometimes will take years to complete. It is not difficult to find historical examples to illustrate this. Calileo, one of the most distinguished scientists ever in the world, had lived an ignoble life and disdained by the people of his society whose values are dominantly affected by the Pope. Bruno, who had claimed his support to Copernicus’ theory in the cosmos, was cruelly burned at stakes for his skepticism to religion. With the development on technology and civilization, these people finally turned out to be the greatest thinkers and scientists long after their death and even today their great talents and courage in insisting truths are widely praised in our modern society.

While in the field of art, like music, painting, and sculpture and so on, the practitioners of these fields are somehow luckier than the ones of science. Unlike people devoting to science who ought to invest large amount of energy and time to convince people their hypothesis, conclusion and theory, people dedicated to arts just need to show the public how beautiful the music they had produced, how vividly their painting had expressed the visions and how fineness the sculpture had developed by the artists themselves. The greatness of an art can easily judged by face value. And the artists themselves more or less affected by the prevailing aesthetic values in the present society to produce these great creations.
[就分了两个领域，够吗？]
By the analysis above, however, it will be rather superficial to reach the conclusion that people in the scientific world would surely not recognized by their contemporary people and those in art field inevitably receive an immediate affirmation. Exceptions happened in both of the two important fields that greatly influence our social and technological life. Even though it’s hard for scientist to let the world accepts his new theory at once and recognizes his or her contribution, the example of Einstein developing relative theory and gaining worldwide prestige when he was still young existed; even though it’s quite common for people in arts field to get success and gain fame in their living years, there still had been Von Gough’s story told that the genius painter had led miserable life and it was after his death people had truly understood the meaning of his paintings in a very profound and unique way. Therefore, the concept of “greatness” is a rather vague and relative notion that involves people’s judgment, standard, criterion and even existing values. To recognize the individual’s greatness does not depend on a concrete rule. That is to say, we can only “recognize” it but to “decide” it for sometimes it was there and we didn’t reach that far.
[我觉得有点点疑惑，就两个领域，不够。而且，这两个领域不对立吧，你又反着说例外，觉得没必要]
In conclusion, there only had been some tendencies but not rules on recognizing the greatness of scientists and artists. People’s capacity of recognizing the greatness, in a large scale, would play more important roles on this issue. It’s not the simple matter of which types of people from the two—the contemporary or the condescending—can decide the greatness.
[你想谈趋势又有例外的话，论述难度更大了一点，是吗？个人觉得还没有说服人
看得比较粗，困了：）]

thminUID: 192642

to 山坡羊JJ:看来你不太同意我的这种写法,其实我想得也的确比较简单,没有同意哪一方面的意见,只是采用两个领域的情况说明各领域中明显的趋势.最后指出来趋势背后的真相,没有要否定任何一方的意思. 经你的提示,我经过思考觉得也有点不太对,我是不是应该在一段里面把科学和艺术领域的情况就说明,然后再用两三个分论点分别展开深入论述呢?或者在科学和艺术领域里面就加入例外的情形?
此外,关于你说两个领域的情况不足以说明问题,我不太同意.我在写之前参考了一下老外的文章,他从三个领域科学,艺术和商业来分别论述; 第一,我觉得科学和艺术这两个领域是最具代表性的,如果要把所有领域的情况全都说出来, 或者即使再加一个领域的话,这篇文章就显得很罗索了.第二,我想说的是他们完全不同的两种情况,一种情况分别用一个领域就可以了.
最后,要谢谢你的批改!

山坡羊UID: 169978

最初由 thmin 发布
[B]to 山坡羊JJ:看来你不太同意我的这种写法,其实我想得也的确比较简单,没有同意哪一方面的意见,只是采用两个领域的情况说明各领域中明显的趋势.最后指出来趋势背后的真相,没?.

以下省略...... [/B]

分别指出例外好吧，我觉得，否则采用前者难度较大。
三个领域的问题，可能我看习惯了，也许也可以：)