issue36 斧劈斧劈 一定回砍

bugspyUID: 2147560

36.The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries. [18]

36. 一个人是否伟大只能由后人评定，而非由同时代的人。

It goes without saying that how great a person is depends on the evaluation of others. Is it true that only the offspring can evaluate a person but his/her contemporaries cannot? In my opinion, both of them have the rights to address their viewpoints about a person no matter nowadays or in the past. The difference between them is merely which is better.

To give the right to the cotemporaries, I think the person who is evaluated, living in the old time, will be understood better by the contemporaries. They have more information and details about the person. They know much more about their lives, speeches and thinkings, which may be lost in the future. And they understand the background of the time, so they were more likely to draw the whole image of the person with details. And sometimes the critics will receive the response from the person evaluated, so it is possible to modify the evaluation accurately. For example, the politics, especially the president of a nation in the time may deeply influence the whole nation. They decided the destine of his/her nation and even other nations around. And the autographors are more likely to revise their articles by the reply from the president.

On the other hand, the offsprings are able to decide whether a person is great, too. Bcause without the influence of the media and the emotion, such as love or hate, they can evaluate a person of the past more fairly. And they have the advantage to evaluate a person according to his/her whole life, which means that they can make the decisions more comprehensively. And some priceless works are accepted only by the future, such as some super-realism drawings and hard-to-explain theories. In a word, the offsprings have the same right to support their conclusion about a person.

However, knowing whether a person can be evaluated is far from sufficient. We should understand that which is better, by the people live after the person or the contemporaries. Considering all the elements, I agree the offsprings to make the decisions. Admittedly, the contemporaries can see the things happened around the person more clearly and more carefully, but they may be lack of the conditions to explore the things more deeply. As we know, many things are secrets when the things happened and for some interests the witnesses or other people who were involved may lie. They also faced the stress from the society and the political power. On the contrary, offsprings will feel much more free to address their viewpoints, and have more time to study the individuals.

To sum up, I conclude that the people, no matter live in the time of the person or after, have the same rights to evaluate the individuals. They have different knowledge of the backgrounds, stress and the limitation of the time. But these differences only make some effects on the extent of the evaluation, but not the rights. Even the worst evaluation should be permitted. Therefore, I disagree the statement that only the people live after the person can judge the greatness of the person.

[ 本帖最后由 runningpiggy 于 2006-1-26 18:24 编辑 ]

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

注意题目的格式。。方便大家搜索和整理
issuexxx之间不空格

bugspyUID: 2147560

下次一定注意
还一定带上提纲

cpafireUID: 2108905

好，加到x_x小组里面，我的修改意见明天贴出来

cpafireUID: 2108905

It goes without saying that how great a person is depends (depends)on the evaluation of others. Is it true that only the offspring can evaluate a person but his/her contemporaries cannot? In my opinion, both of them have the rights to address their viewpoints about a person no matter nowadays or in the past. The difference between them is merely which is better.

To give the right to the cotemporaries, I think the person who is evaluated, living in the old time, will be understood better by the contemporaries. They have more information and details about the person. They know much more about their lives, speeches and thinkings, which may be lost in the future. And they understand the background of the time, so they were more likely to draw the whole image of the person with details. And sometimes the critics will receive the response from the person evaluated, so it is possible to modify the evaluation accurately. For example, the politics, especially the president of a nation in the time may deeply influence the whole nation. They decided the destine of his/her nation and even other nations around. And the autographors are more likely to revise their articles by the reply from the president.

On the other hand, the offsprings are able to decide whether a person is great, too. Bcause without the influence of the media and the emotion, such as love or hate, they can evaluate a person of the past more fairly. And they have the advantage to evaluate a person according to his/her whole life, which means that they can make the decisions more comprehensively. And some priceless works are accepted only by the future, such as some super-realism drawings and hard-to-explain theories. In a word, the offsprings have the same right to support their conclusion about a person.

However, knowing whether a person can be evaluated is far from sufficient. We should understand that which is better, by the people live after the person or the contemporaries. Considering all the elements, I agree the offsprings to make the decisions. Admittedly, the contemporaries can see the things happened around the person more clearly and more carefully, but they may be lack of the conditions to explore the things more deeply. As we know, many things are secrets when the things happened and for some interests the witnesses or other people who were involved may lie. They also faced the stress from the society and the political power. On the contrary, offsprings will feel much more free to address their viewpoints, and have more time to study the individuals.

To sum up, I conclude that the people, no matter(who) live in the time of the person or after, have the same rights to evaluate the individuals. They have different knowledge of the backgrounds, stress and the limitation of the time（别扭，backgroun\
e differences only make some effects on the extent of the evaluation, but not the rights. Even the worst evaluation should be permitted. Therefore, I disagree the statement that only the people live after the person can judge the greatness of the person.


改完一边死机了，ft，
感觉有些跑题，人家问能否，不是谁更好，结果你把谁更好洋洋洒洒的写了这么多
另外语法错误不少，请注意，还是就是有些句子很单调，例如person，rights,用了很多此

cpafireUID: 2108905

另外每段的ts非常不鲜明

bugspyUID: 2147560

hehe
看见了！
多谢！

lw841107UID: 2163001

issue36 斧劈斧劈 一定回砍

36.The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries. [18]

36. 一个人是否伟大只能由后人评定，而非由同时代的人。

It goes without saying that how great a person is depends on the evaluation of others. (此句话怎讲？)Is it true that only the offspring can evaluate a person but his/her contemporaries cannot? In my opinion, both of them have the rights to address their viewpoints about a person no matter nowadays or in the past.（用有权力来说好么？好像稍微有点偏） The difference between them is merely which is better.

To give the right to the cotemporaries,（换个说法比较好吧？） I think the person who is evaluated, living in the old time, will be understood better by the contemporaries. They have more information and details about the person. They know much more about their lives, speeches and thinkings, which may be lost in the future. And they understand the background of the time, so they were more likely to draw the whole image of the person with details. And sometimes the critics will receive the response from the person evaluated, so it is possible to modify the evaluation accurately. For example, the politics, especially the president of a nation in the time may deeply influence the whole nation. They decided the destine of his/her nation and even other nations around. And the autographors are more likely to revise their articles by the reply from the president.（由本人修改就一定更准确么？）

On the other hand, the offsprings are able to decide whether a person is great, too. Bcause without the influence of the media and the emotion, such as love or hate, they can evaluate a person of the past more fairly. And they have the advantage to evaluate a person according to his/her whole life, which means that they can make the decisions more comprehensively. And some priceless works are accepted only by the future, such as some super-realism drawings and hard-to-explain theories. In a word, the offsprings have the same right to support their conclusion about a person.

However, knowing whether a person can be evaluated is far from sufficient. We should understand that which is better, by the people live after the person or the contemporaries. Considering all the elements, I agree the offsprings to make the decisions. Admittedly, the contemporaries can see the things happened around the person more clearly and more carefully, but they may be lack of the conditions to explore the things more deeply. As we know, many things are secrets when the things happened and for some interests the witnesses or other people who were involved may lie. They also faced the stress from the society and the political power. On the contrary, offsprings will feel much more free to address their viewpoints, and have more time to study the individuals.

To sum up, I conclude that the people, no matter live in the time of the person or after, have the same rights to evaluate the individuals. They have different knowledge of the backgrounds, stress and the limitation of the time. But these differences only make some effects on the extent of the evaluation, but not the rights. Even the worst evaluation should be permitted.（我觉得题目的意思是说前人评价的不准确所以应由后人评价吧，似乎不是前人不能评价） Therefore, I disagree the statement that only the people live after the person can judge the greatness of the person.
（文章整体思路比较清晰，说理也比较清楚，只是例子不够有力，感觉整篇文章都在说理。 ）

bugspyUID: 2147560

多谢啦！狗年汪汪！