issue157 是列了提纲写的，从哲学角度，欢迎拍，有拍回

ardorousUID: 2115432

作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：35分2秒     385 words
从2005年6月22日16时23分到2005年6月22日16时35分
------题目------
There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires.
------正文------
In the ancient, Greek, there is a debate between empiricism and objectivism, which refers to a controversy about that is everything we observe is mere objective, or on the contrary, purely subjective? However, it is such a fantastic topic in a philosophy world that attracts almost every philosopher's attention. As to the topic today, I agree with that nothing observed to be mere objective, while I partly accepted that subjective is the main character of the observing things, which, of course, will not always depended on the observer's own interests and inclinations.


At first place, as born in the world called human society, hardly any thing is so-called purely objective - not only the normal or ordinary scene in our eyes, but also a theory discovered by the observation often regarded as pure truth, which may not be fit in every dimension. For further solidifying my claim, there are two facts that may attribute to supporting. First, a convincing case in point is from a recent study from the MIT , in there ,there is a brilliant scientist, Mahamad Exiere found that in a cat's eyes the world may be reflected as three dimension. While cat is an observer too. This case tells us different observers may have distinct body structure, thus leading to the variety of judgment when observing. As it is known to all, an objection is truly something that can not change. This research tells us no pure things are objective. Compared with this research there is a famous debate in scientific world, between Newton and Einstein, between the theory of relativity and gravitational theory. The two theories are both truly confirmed by generations of scientist, while they conflict with each other. Both are right. Since they are fit for the different realms -on the variety of times or on kinds of rooms, So no objective things exist fits for every time and room.  


Secondly , definitely , if our world reflects every thing relied on our savor, then it may be a world filled with ridiculous imagination and lacking of necessary standard. I may explain my view with two distinct evidences. In the ancient china, a period called ZhanGuo , which in English means a time full of wars .A great philosophy ZhuangZi , who believe every thing should be spontaneous or natural .One day, ZhuangZi stroll with his friend along the river, In it ,fish swimming . ZhuangZi said to the fish: "fish ,fish , why are you so happy” .His friend asked him: "being not fish , how do you know fish's feeling. "After a smile , Zhuang said ,:"being not me ,how do you know I don't know fish's feeling." From this case , we can see, without any other criteria ,man's feeling can not provide a standard with the things observed. No one can found an answer to define what an observation really is. Another evidences provided from the novel “ Quixote”, written by Cervantes, every may laugh at the Quixote for his burlesque imagination when observing every-day things. Imagining every one in the world is an another Quixote, what a laughable world it would be.  


However, there is no absolute objective nor complete subjective, then how can we describe or give a standard to the things we observe? Fortunately, an observation is rather a combination of a structure of objective element and subjective observation from the human body. Without one's recondite contemplate, he may hardly be able to grasp the truly construction of an objection.


In sum , based on the cognition of there is neither pure objective observation nor absolute subjective observation , a superior way for one to understand an observation is on the principle of agreeing with the objective element it obtained ,whereas trying all ones’ efforts with our subjective implement ,our sense , especially our intelligent mind to being aware of an observation.

超时七分，该打

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-23 at 12:09 ]

fishjoyUID: 2116013

In the ancient, Greek, there is a debate between empiricism and objectivism, which refers to a controversy about that is everything we observe is mere objective, or on the contrary, purely subjective? However, it is such a fantastic topic in a philosophy world that attracts almost every philosopher's attention. As to the topic today, I agree with that nothing observed to be mere objective, while I partly accepted that subjective is the main character of the observing things, which, of course, will not always depended on the observer's own interests and inclinations.


At thefirst place, as born in the world called human society, hardly any thing is so-called purely objective - not only the normal or ordinary scene in our eyes, but also a theory discovered by the observation often regarded as pure truth, which may not be fit in every dimension. For further solidifying my claim, there are two facts that may attribute to supporting. First, a convincing case in point is from a recent study from the MIT , in there ,there is a brilliant scientist, Mahamad Exiere found that in a cat's eyes the world may be reflected as three dimension. While cat is an observer too. This case tells us different observers may have distinct body structure, thus leading to the variety of judgment when observing. As it is known to all, an objection is truly something that can not changebe changed. This research tells us no pure things are objective. Compared with this research there is a famous debate in scientific world, between Newton and Einstein, between the theory of relativity and gravitational theory. The two theories are both truly confirmed by generations of scientist, while they conflict with each other. Both are right.But in fact,both of them are correct under definit circumstances Since they are fit for the different realms -on the variety of times or on kinds of rooms, So no objective things exist fits for every time and room.  


Secondly , definitely , if our world reflects every thing relied on our savor, then it may be a world filled with ridiculous imagination and lacking of necessary standard. I may explain my view with two distinct evidences. In the ancient china, a period called ZhanGuo , which in English means a time full of wars .A great philosophy ZhuangZi , who believed that every thing should be spontaneous or natural .One day, ZhuangZi stroll with his friend along the river, In it ,fish swimming . ZhuangZi said to the fish: "fish ,fish , why are you so happy” .His friend asked him: "being not fish , how do you know fish's feeling. "After a smile , Zhuang said ,:"being not me ,how do you know I don't know fish's feeling." From this case , we can see, without any other criteria ,man's feeling can not provide a standard with the things observed. No one can foundfind an answer to define what an observation really is. Another evidences provided from the novel “ Quixote”, written by Cervantes, every may laugh at the Quixote for his burlesque imagination when observing every-day things. Imagining every one in the world is an another Quixote, what a laughable world it would be. 怎么觉得庄子的例子有点扯


However, there is no absolute objective nor complete subjective, then how can we describe or give a standard to the things we observe? Fortunately, an observation is rather a combination of a structure of objective element and subjective observation from the human body. Without one's recondite contemplate, he may hardly be able to grasp the truly construction of an objection.


In sum , based on the cognition of there is neither pure objective observation nor absolute subjective observation , a superior way for one to understand an observation is on the principle of agreeing with the objective element it obtained ,whereas trying all ones’ efforts with our subjective implement ,our sense , especially our intelligent mind to being aware of an observation.
总体还是不错的，尤其是在限时的情况下。层次清晰，观点也有逻辑。不过我觉得你还可以写得更好一些。再磨一磨语言，写得再深刻一些，就更好了。

ardorousUID: 2115432

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

In the ancient, Greek, there is a debate between empiricism and objectivism, which refers to a controversy about that is everything we observe is mere objective, or on the contrary, purely subjective? However, it is such a fantastic topic in a philosophy world that attracts almost every philosopher's attention.这段开头写得蛮好的 As to the topic today, I agree with that nothing observed to be mere objective, while I partly accepted that subjective is the main character of the observing things, which, of course, will not always depended on the observer's own interests and inclinations.

At first place, as born in the world called human society, hardly any thing is so-called purely objective - not only the normal or ordinary scene in our eyes, but also a theory discovered by the observation often regarded as pure truth, which may not be fit in every dimension. For further solidifying my claim, there are two facts that may attribute to supporting. First, a convincing case in point is from a recent study from the MIT , in there ,there is a brilliant scientist, Mahamad Exiere found that in a cat's eyes the world may be reflected as three dimension. While cat is an observer too. This case tells us different observers may have distinct body structure, thus leading to the variety of judgment when observing. As it is known to all, an objection is truly something that can not change. This research tells us no pure things are objective. Compared with this research there is a famous debate in scientific world, between Newton and Einstein, between the theory of relativity and gravitational theory. The two theories are both truly confirmed by generations of scientist, while they conflict with each other. Both are right. Since they are fit for the different realms -on the variety of times or on kinds of rooms, So no objective things exist fits for every time and room.  这段楼主是要强调which, of course, will not always depended on the observer's own interests and inclinations.吗？我觉得两个例子是体现了这点，但是没有反应本段的ts

Secondly , definitely , if our world reflects every thing relied on our savor, then it may be a world filled with ridiculous imagination and lacking of necessary standard. I may explain my view with two distinct evidences. In the ancient china, a period called ZhanGuo , which in English means a time full of wars .A great philosophy ZhuangZi , who believe every thing should be spontaneous or natural .One day, ZhuangZi stroll with his friend along the river, In it ,fish swimming . ZhuangZi said to the fish: "fish ,fish , why are you so happy” .His friend asked him: "being not fish , how do you know fish's feeling. "After a smile , Zhuang said ,:"being not me ,how do you know I don't know fish's feeling."这个例子写得太长了，只要说明意思就可以，不需要写得这么详细 From this case , we can see, without any other criteria ,man's feeling can not provide a standard with the things observed. No one can found an answer to define what an observation really is. Another evidences provided from the novel “ Quixote”, written by Cervantes, every may laugh at the Quixote for his burlesque imagination when observing every-day things. Imagining every one in the world is an another Quixote, what a laughable world it would be.  这样的总结不大好

However, there is no absolute objective nor complete subjective, then how can we describe or give a standard to the things we observe? Fortunately, an observation is rather a combination of a structure of objective element and subjective observation from the human body. Without one's recondite contemplate, he may hardly be able to grasp the truly construction of an objection.从结构上来说，这段可以作为结论段的内容，如果想作为body 3，显得短了一些，但是这段的内容很难举例，对吧？

In sum , based on the cognition of there is neither pure objective observation nor absolute subjective observation , a superior way for one to understand an observation is on the principle of agreeing with the objective element it obtained ,whereas trying all ones’ efforts with our subjective implement ,our sense , especially our intelligent mind to being aware of an observation.
总的来说，楼主写得蛮好的，论述得挺流畅的，写了好多字啊，只超时7分钟不要紧，慢慢就好了，加油~~~也请楼主拍拍我的文章，ps:看到楼主拍过别人文章发出拍了不回的感叹，呵呵，我可是有拍必回的哦

seraph_hydeUID: 184809

In the ancient, Greek, there is a debate between empiricism and objectivism, which refers to a controversy about that is everything we observe is mere objective, or on the contrary, purely subjective? However, it is such a fantastic topic in a philosophy world that attracts almost every philosopher's attention. As to the topic today, I agree with that nothing observed to be mere objective, while I partly accepted that subjective is the main character of the observing things, which, of course, will not always depended on the observer's own interests and inclinations.


At first place, as born in the world called human society, hardly any thing is so-called purely objective - not only the normal or ordinary scene in our eyes, but also a theory discovered by the observation often regarded as pure truth, which may not be fit in every dimension. （没看懂，这个和客观观察有什么关系，题目中并没有提结果怎么样啊）For further solidifying my claim, there are two facts that may attribute to supporting. First, a convincing case in point is from a recent study from the MIT , in there ,there is a brilliant scientist, Mahamad Exiere found that in a cat's eyes the world may be reflected as three dimension. While cat is an observer too. This case tells us different observers may have distinct body structure, thus leading to the variety of judgment when observing. （猫？？）As it is known to all, an objection is truly something that can not change. This research tells us no pure things are objective. Compared with this research there is a famous debate in scientific world, between Newton and Einstein, between the theory of relativity and gravitational theory. The two theories are both truly confirmed by generations of scientist, while they conflict with each other. Both are right. Since they are fit for the different realms -on the variety of times or on kinds of rooms, So no objective things exist fits for every time and room.  （这个例子也没有提到观察啊）

Secondly , definitely , if our world reflects every thing relied on our savor, then it may be a world filled with ridiculous imagination and lacking of necessary standard. I may explain my view with two distinct evidences. In the ancient china, a period called ZhanGuo , which in English means a time full of wars .A great philosophy ZhuangZi , who believe every thing should be spontaneous or natural .One day, ZhuangZi stroll with his friend along the river, In it ,fish swimming . ZhuangZi said to the fish: "fish ,fish , why are you so happy” .His friend asked him: "being not fish , how do you know fish's feeling. "After a smile , Zhuang said ,:"being not me ,how do you know I don't know fish's feeling."（这个例子中只有庄子提出了观察得结果：鱼高兴，他得朋友只是怀疑，但并没有提出任何结果，即他得朋友没有观察出任何结果，无法体现观察得多样性，所以，这个例子也不太合适） From this case , we can see, without any other criteria ,man's feeling can not provide a standard with the things observed. No one can found an answer to define what an observation really is. Another evidences provided from the novel “ Quixote”, written by Cervantes, every may laugh at the Quixote for his burlesque imagination when observing every-day things. Imagining every one in the world is an another Quixote, what a laughable world it would be. （最后这句不太好）

However, there is no absolute objective nor complete subjective, then how can we describe or give a standard to the things we observe? Fortunately, an observation is rather a combination of a structure of objective element and subjective observation from the human body. Without one's recondite contemplate, he may hardly be able to grasp the truly construction of an objection.（没有得到支持）


In sum , based on the cognition of there is neither pure objective observation nor absolute subjective observation , a superior way for one to understand an observation is on the principle of agreeing with the objective element it obtained ,whereas trying all ones’ efforts with our subjective implement ,our sense , especially our intelligent mind to being aware of an observation.

这篇得例子问题比较严重，没什么说服力，其他都还不错，加油！