Issue168 V6 限时修改版，Issue 冲刺第一篇

mkb57288UID: 2105771

Issue168  
------摘要------
共用时间：45分10秒    637 （688 after revision） words
------题目------
Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field.
------正文------
To determine whether only critical judgment from experts has value in a given field, it is necessary to do a case-by-case analysis, as demonstrated is the fields of art and science. Although non-experts are unlikely to give any meaningful and constructive judgment to the content of science itself, their comment and critical judgment are of more value than experts in the application of science. And when it comes to the field of art, in my observation, it is the judgment from ordinary ones rather than several critics’ bears real value that contribute the appreciation of artistic value, due to the nature and goal of art--to provide the overall human beings with aesthetic value.

Admittedly, when it comes to the science itself or its content, few of critical judgment from ordinary ones can give any value to a given scientific field. After all, few of us can give constructive judgment on a complicated formulation in mathematics or physics. Except from a handful of experts in that field, others, lacking certain knowledge, can hardly understand the meaning of such things, let along giving any critical judgment of much value. On the other hand, with suitable background in the field, experts can not only give critical judgment to the given scientific research, but also improve the theory or research in turn.

When it comes to the judgment of application of science, however, ordinary individuals are more qualified to give comments or critical judgment. After, the chief goal of science is to satisfy the need of overall human beings--that is to say whether the need of human beings, which mainly consist of ordinary ones rather than experts in given field, is satiated act as the ultimate criteria for science. In fact, by leaving such critical judgment of scientific application to a handful experts, who are mainly motivated by their own interests rather the benefit of the whole society, we risk defeating the original goal of science--that is reassurement and illumination. For instance, some technology, whose application would be too controvertible or vague in ethics and mores, such as human cloning, should be banned according to the critical judgment of the mass even when there is only little possibility to success. For, if developing such controvertible technology on the tempering advisement from some experts, who often fail to possess a well-developed sense about the consequence of such scientific application, we are doomed to cope with the birth of a Frankston tomorrow. In short, to ensure the ethic development keeps pace with that of science, we must underscore the importance of critical judgments from the mass.

The rationale also applies to the domain of art. Although as a form of self-expression, art need little understanding and critical judgment, either from experts or ordinary people, under most circumstance, the art works can bear their lasting value only by being understood and criticized by ordinary individuals. Consider, for example, a film's value can be judged more accurately by its performance in box-office, which reflects the attitude of ordinary individuals, than comment by a handful of critics. The case is especially evident when taking art works as an artistic abstract of quotidian life--which can only get its value from the repercussion from its audiences or readers. In that matter, art works are doomed to be exposed to the comment and judgment from ordinary ones to gain their value. Consider a successful novel for an example. I will be hardly pressed to list even one distinguished novel, which refutes the comment of ordinary readers. The fact is just opposite, only repercussion by readers, a form of judgment of the novel, can perpetuate the aesthetic valuing of a masterpiece.

In final analysis, although in the content of science, non-experts are unlikely to give any meaningful and valuable judgment, in the field of application of science, it is the attitudes of the mass rather than a handful of experts that bear meaningful values guiding the development of science. While in the field of art, the opinions of ordinary people are even more important, for the goal of art is to satiate their aesthetic demand after all.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-27 at 21:51 ]

mkb57288UID: 2105771

ding

冰阳UID: 201604

我来

wineyreUID: 2106739

一点点建议.
开头的arts不要说了,改到B3说,看上去开头长了一点~~
建议B1扩展一下,B1,B2长短差的有点多~~
另外你说的那个定语从句,我没什么感觉~~如果你真的想改的话,可以分几个简单句写.

冰阳UID: 201604

To determine whether only critical judgment from experts has value in a given field, it is necessary to do a case-by-case analysis, as demonstrated is the fields of art and science. Although non-experts are unlikely to give any meaningful and constructive judgment to the content of science itself, their comment and critical judgment are of more value than experts in the application of science. And when it comes to the field of art, in my observation, it is the judgment from ordinary ones rather than several critics’ bears real value that contribute the appreciation of artistic value, due to the nature and goal of art--to provide the overall human beings with aesthetic value.

Admittedly, when it comes to the science itself or its content, few of critical judgment from ordinary ones can give any value to a given scientific field. After all,（for example） few of us can give constructive judgment on a complicated formulation in mathematics or physics. （after all）Except from a handful of experts in that field, others, lacking certain knowledge, can hardly understand the meaning of such things, let along giving any critical judgment of much value. On the other hand, with suitable background in the field, experts can not only give critical judgment to the given scientific research, but also improve the theory or research in turn. 我觉得我这样改了候逻辑清晰点

When it comes to the judgment of application of science, however, ordinary individuals are more qualified to give comments or critical judgment. After, the chief goal of science is to satisfy the need of overall human beings--that is to say whether the need of human beings, which mainly consist of ordinary ones rather than experts in given field, is satiated act as the ultimate criteria for science. In fact, by leaving such critical judgment of scientific application to a handful experts, who are mainly motivated by their own interests rather the benefit of the whole society, we risk defeating the original goal of science--that is reassurement and illumination. For instance, some technology, whose application would be too controvertible or vague in ethics and mores, such as human cloning, should be banned according to the critical judgment of the mass even when there is only little possibility to success. For, if developing such controvertible technology on the tempering advisement from some experts, who often fail to possess a well-developed sense about the consequence of such scientific application, we are doomed to cope with the birth of a Frankston（这人是？） tomorrow. In short, to ensure the ethic development keeps pace with that of science, we must underscore the importance of critical judgments from the mass. 这段立意很新颖了，我是想不到的，佩服ing
The rationale also applies to the domain of art. Although as a form of self-expression, art need little understanding and critical judgment, either from experts or ordinary people, under most circumstance, the art works can bear their lasting value only by being understood and criticized by ordinary individuals（这句话前面说art不需要judgement，后面又说需要，虽然我可以理解你要表达地意思，但还是觉得有点句子有点矛盾，换一下句式可能表达起来好些，或者前半句就不要了）. Consider, for example, a film's value can be judged more accurately by its performance in box-office, which reflects the attitude of ordinary individuals, than comment by a handful of critics. The case is especially evident when taking art works as an artistic abstract of quotidian life--which can only get its value from the repercussion from its audiences or readers. In that matter, art works are doomed to be exposed to the comment and judgment from ordinary ones to gain their value. Consider a successful novel for an example. I will be hardly pressed to list even one distinguished novel, which refutes the comment of ordinary readers.（我没读懂这句话，能帮我解释解释吗） The fact is just opposite, only repercussion by readers, a form of judgment of the novel, can perpetuate the aesthetic valuing of a masterpiece.

In final analysis, although in the content of science, non-experts are unlikely to give any meaningful and valuable judgment, in the field of application of science, it is the attitudes of the mass rather than a handful of experts that bear meaningful values guiding the development of science. While in the field of art, the opinions of ordinary people are even more important, for the goal of art is to satiate their aesthetic demand after all.
总体来说很不错，尤其是第二段，立意别出心裁，还有对你地语言这的是pfpf

mkb57288UID: 2105771

I will be hardly pressed to list even one distinguished novel, which refutes the comment of ordinary readers---我难以列举出哪怕是一本不需要普通人鉴赏和评论的好的小说