Issue87 行为高频 在线等拍

wsm1103UID: 158327

Issue87:  550words  60 minutes（ the number of words seems enough, how about time? Still worried! ）.
In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important discoveries.
观点：the speaker exaggerates the impact of the beginner and I would hold the opposite standpoint.
提纲：      1专家和发现并不矛盾。
            2.专家更有经验，而经验有助于重要发现；
            3．虽然新手有优势，但仍不能忽略专家。
"Who is more likely to make important discoveries? The beginner or the expert?" In the contemporary society, this a extraordinary frequently uttered controversy. The speaker chooses the beginner as his or her preference, while I would argue that the speaker exaggerates the impact of the beginner and I would hold the opposite standpoint. The main reasons are presented below.

Firstly, there are no necessary conflicts with experts and making import discoveries. Although at times experts might be limited due to their expertise, an able expert can easily overcome this defect. Quite the opposite, in most cases, their basic knowledge would put a way for their new discoveries. For example, the great German musician Bach, who is certainly a master in composing, has created a large quantity of enjoyable classic music. Moreover, he begins to learn compose when he was only five years old and most of his works come out late in his life. Can we regard Bach as a beginner when he has earned a great fame? It is obvious that after Bach becomes famous and certainly an expert then, Bach still creates new important works. Thus, there is little reason that experts are less likely to make important discoveries compared to the beginners.

Besides, as for experts, they have more experience, which would undoubtedly contribute to important discoveries. After a long time's broad and profound study of their subject, experts would more or less accumulate some precious experience. Meanwhile, on their way to make discoveries, they would inevitably meet numerous new problems and phenomenon which would probably lead to significant discoveries. This can be illustrated by the innovation of the first solid laser device of China. Ma Zuguang, a physicist in China, was an expert on gaseous laser device. Through 30 years'insightful reaserch into the mechanism of gas-driven laser, he ultimatedly made such an important discovery that he invented the first solid laser device in China. Due to this, he was also honored the father of laser in China, which was a marvelous achievement for a scientist. From the story above, it is not difficult to draw the conclusion that under the help of their rich experience, experts are more likely to make significant breakthroughs.

Admittedly, beginners may have some advantages such as curiosity and courage. They have great interest and intense passion which would stimulate them to take pains to make new discoveries. There is no denying that to pursue fame and success is a human being’s instinct nature. So，from this aspect ，it is appealing that beginners might be more likely to have discoveries. But we should not ignore basic knowledge and experience which experts may posses more and may be crucial to make discoveries. It is reported that during the last 10 years, 67.8% new innovations are belonged to experts who have over 10 years' working experience and 54.9% of them are PhDs. The statistics provides another evidence of the importance of experts in making discoveries.

In sum, no one can underestimate the status of experts when considering making discoveries. Without experts' contributions, making discoveries would be like water without source. In today's fast-developing world, experts still play an important role in innovation. While we advocate that we should provide more opportunities to freshmen, we should also pay great attention to the effect of experts.

AutoseaUID: 192045

分论点一没有论述好，逻辑有点混乱，比如你提到了overcome...但后文却没有详细阐述。还有，分论点一好像不是太必要，与二感觉有点重复。

iverUID: 198348

No.1 Issue87 行为高频 在线等拍
Issue87: 550words 60 minutes（ the number of words seems enough, how about time? Still worried! ）.
In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important discoveries.
观点：the speaker exaggerates the impact of the beginner and I would hold the opposite standpoint.
提纲：
1专家和发现并不矛盾。
2.专家更有经验，而经验有助于重要发现；
3．虽然新手有优势，但仍不能忽略专家。
"Who is more likely to make important discoveries? The beginner or the expert?" In the contemporary society, this a extraordinary frequently uttered controversy. The speaker chooses the beginner as his or her preference, while I would argue that the speaker exaggerates the impact of the beginner and I would hold the opposite standpoint. The main reasons are presented below.

Firstly, there are no necessary conflicts with experts and making import discoveries. Although at times experts might be limited due to their expertise, an able expert can easily overcome this defect. Quite the opposite, in most cases, their basic knowledge would put a way for their new discoveries. For example, the great German musician Bach, who is certainly a master in composing, has created a large quantity of enjoyable classic music. Moreover, he begins to learn compose when he was only five years old and most of his works come out late in his life. Can we regard Bach as a beginner when he has earned a great fame? It is obvious that after Bach becomes famous and certainly an expert then, Bach still creates new important works. Thus, there is little reason that experts are less likely to make important discoveries compared to the beginners.(论证的很有力度,bach的例子很好!)

Besides, as for experts, they have more experience, which would undoubtedly contribute to important discoveries. After a long time's broad and profound study of their subjectsubjects, experts would more or less accumulate some precious experience. Meanwhile, on their way to make discoveries, they would inevitably meet numerous new problems and phenomenon phenomena which would probably lead to significant discoveries. This can be illustrated by the innovation of the first solid laser device of China. Ma Zuguang, a physicist in China, was an expert on gaseous laser device. Through 30 years'insightful reaserch into the mechanism of gas-driven laser, he ultimatedly made such an important discovery that he invented the first solid laser device in China. Due to this, he was also honored the father of laser in China, which was a marvelous achievement for a scientist. From the story above, it is not difficult to draw the conclusion that under the help of their rich experience, experts are more likely to make significant breakthroughs.

Admittedly, beginners may have some advantages such as curiosity and courage. They have great interest and intense passion which would stimulate them to take pains to make new discoveries. There is no denying that to pursue fame and success is a human being’s instinct nature. So，from this aspect ，it is appealing that beginners might be more likely to have discoveries. But we should not ignore basic knowledge and experience which experts may posses more and may be crucial to make discoveries. It is reported that during the last 10 years, 67.8% new innovations are belonged to experts who have over 10 years' working experience and 54.9% of them are PhDs.引用这个数据很有说服力 The statistics provides another evidence of the importance of experts in making discoveries.

In sum, no one can underestimate the status of experts when considering making discoveries. Without experts' contributions, making discoveries would be like water without source. In today's fast-developing world, experts still play an important role in innovation. While we advocate that we should provide more opportunities to freshmen, we should also pay great attention to the effect of experts.
不错,不错,很好的文章!
希望能够尽力控制时间!
祝:顺利

wsm1103UID: 158327

那我就换一下分论点
我总是想到什么写什么
所以逻辑会有问题
应该如何改进啊？

wsm1103UID: 158327

例子都是瞎编的
不知道这样行不？
鬼谷子好像不提倡
呵呵，有点冒险

lunaticUID: 150745

总的看来，写的不错，观点很清晰，例子也不错，语言也挺好的
抱歉没空看小错了
但我觉得，第一和第二个body都可以再具一些例子，各用一个例子太淡薄了，
说新手有优势的时候也应该给个例子

btw： 下面这个是真的嘛？It is reported that during the last 10 years, 67.8% new innovations are belonged to experts who have over 10 years' working experience and 54.9% of them are PhDs.

tristan2004UID: 173439

感觉分论点1的例子举的不是很好，你说专家的基础知识对于他们是否能够有大发现起到重要作用，但是在后面的例子离你却没有明确证明这一点。

一点意见，仅供参考

tristan2004UID: 173439

顺便问一下，引用数字的时候可以编吗？

wsm1103UID: 158327

数据的例子可以编啊

lunaticUID: 150745

实在没办法的时候可以编一点，但是不提倡，这一点在斑竹关于例子的帖子中曾经说过
而且编数字的时候要有零有整，所我才怀疑楼主引用的数字

lunaticUID: 150745

但我觉得这个数字不太可信，我觉得专家的占的比例应该会更大一些