issue43 [同主题]领导人 道德 拍拍哦~~

dicmiUID: 183392

留链接。回拍~~~

TOPIC: ISSUE43 - "To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."
WORDS: 680          TIME: -:--:--          DATE: 2006-7-24

1．道德是必要的
2．不是所有情况下都要有道德，有些情况下要违背道德
3．但也不能过度违背。

If we cast a look back at the formation of a nation, it is possible to identify how important a role the leader plays. In this era advocating the ethical and moral standards, should those public officials maintain the highest moral standards as the author claimed? As for me, I contend that the high moral standards should be a necessary requirement for public officials; however, it is impractical, or even impossible, to insist on the highest ones when confronting some special situations.

To begin with, what is obvious is that high ethical and moral standards are indispensable parts for public officials who want to be effective leaders. Common sense proves that, if only the public officials want to be effective, the first concern should be the full charge of his/her subordinates, so that the commands can be carried out effectively. Then how to achieve it? To this question, high moral and ethical standards sever great and excellent assistant enabling leaders take full charge of people. Gandhi, the famous leader of India, guided his people by not only his endeavors but also his high moral standards. The former grants people the right direction, while the latter grants people the infinite courage, both of which contribute to the effective lead. In contrast to those effective leaders, the history witnesses the moral fall-down of some once-effective leaders as well. Bill Clinton, an effective leader who maintained high approval rating for his position, was disclosed to have immoral sexual relationship with his intern. After that, masses began to doubt his behaviors as well as his policies which consequently made him less effective in his work. Throughout the history, taking both positive and negative leaders into account, one common conclusion they reflect is that, the higher moral standards leaders have, the more effective work the leaders could done. In other words, to maintain the high morality is the key to the effective work no matter in any stage, in any countries.

Nevertheless, in some special occasions, the public officials have to sacrifice morality in the sake of the nation, the society as well the people. Simply put, when facing some sensitive matters, the political effective severely contradict the principal of highest ethic. Under that circumstance, the public officials have no other choice but to make the decision beyond the bounds of morality. National security area is replete with such examples. One need not go further but to check counter-terrorists actions, following the principles of moral standards, the officials should put forward the detailed plan of actions to people, which possibly consequently be utilized by enemies, resulting in the failure of the actions; while, following the principles of political effectiveness, the public officials are required to withhold those sensitive information from people until the end of the actions, which seems superficially immoral, but actually reasonable to some extent. Despite some people’s disapproval of such behaviors, after balancing the morality and national security, the leaders make a wise choice, after all the work is their first concern. Therefore, only by withholding some secret information from people, can leaders first reassure the people to avoid falling into chaos and secondly have the commands executed effectively.  

Undoubtedly, it is inappropriate, even terrible, to unduly sacrifice the moral standards without comprehensive consideration. Were there no certain measures to restrain their behaviors, the leaders are more likely to destroy themselves as well as their nations under the cover of political effectiveness. In the history, it is not rare to identify some people of this kind. For example, Stalin, once the leader of Former Soviet Union, unduly discarded his morality by the name of national security, and at last led the execution of thousands of people. Hence, excessively sacrifice of morality is destructive to a nation rather than helpful. It seems that the leaders could temporary preserve power by immoral behaviors; but such behaviors invariably result in the leaders’ degradation.

In conclusion, while conceding the highest moral standards is almost impossible for leaders because of some extreme situations, it is a vital requirement for the leaders to maintain their high morality for effective lead.

:handshake:handshake:handshake
请大家帮忙看看，留连接回拍哦

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

咦？跟偶观点正好相反～seated!
TOPIC: ISSUE43 - "To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."
WORDS: 680          TIME: -:--:--          DATE: 2006-7-24

1．道德是必要的
2．不是所有情况下都要有道德，有些情况下要违背道德
3．但也不能过度违背。

If we cast a look back(这back看似多余) at the formation of a nation, it is possible to identify how important a role the leader plays. In this era advocating the ethical and moral standards, should those public officials maintain the highest moral standards as the author claimed? As for me, I contend that the high moral standards should be a necessary requirement for public officials; however, it is impractical, or even impossible, to insist on the highest ones(ones?指代什么？偶知道，但怕老美不知) when confronting some special situations.观点明确，扣题很好

To begin with, what is obvious is that high ethical and moral standards are indispensable parts for public officials who want to be effective leaders. Common sense proves that, if only the public officials want to be effective, the first concern should be the full charge of his/her subordinates, so that the commands can be carried out effectively. Then how to achieve it? To this question, high moral and ethical standards sever great and excellent assistant enabling leaders take full charge of people. Gandhi, the famous leader of India, guided his people by not only his endeavors but also his high moral standards. The former grants people the right direction, while the latter grants people the infinite courage, both of which contribute to the effective lead.事例分析得很到位 In contrast to those effective leaders, the history witnesses the moral fall-down of some once-effective（有这种用法？偶不知道~） leaders as well. Bill Clinton, an effective leader who maintained high approval rating for his position, was disclosed to have immoral sexual relationship with his intern. After that, masses began to doubt his behaviors as well as his policies which consequently made him less effective in his work. Throughout the history, taking both positive and negative leaders into account, one common conclusion(principle) they reflect is that, the higher moral standards leaders have, the more effective work the leaders could done(do!!!). In other words, to maintain the high morality is the key to the effective work(lead) no matter(no matter 多余) in any stage, in any countries（似乎是单数）. 说实话，逻辑分析上没啥可挑的，8错！

Nevertheless, in some special occasions, the public officials have to sacrifice morality in(for) the sake of the nation,(the interests of the nation) the society as well the people. Simply put, when facing some sensitive matters, the political effective （少名词）severely contradict the principal of highest ethic. Under that circumstance, the public officials have no other choice but to make the decision beyond the bounds of morality. National security area is replete with such examples. One need（s） not go further but to check counter-terrorists actions, following the principles of moral standards, the officials should put forward the detailed plan of actions to people, which possibly consequently be utilized by enemies, resulting in the failure of the actions; while, following the principles of political effectiveness, the public officials are required to withhold those sensitive information from people until the end of the actions（用temporarily不就行了？）, which seems superficially immoral, but actually reasonable to some extent. Despite some people’s disapproval of such behaviors, after balancing the morality and national security, the leaders make a wise choice, after all the work is their first concern. Therefore, only by withholding some secret information from people, can leaders first reassure the people to avoid falling into chaos and secondly have the commands executed effectively.  

Undoubtedly, it is inappropriate, even terrible, to unduly sacrifice the moral standards without comprehensive consideration. Were there no certain measures（不如直接点明是道德标准） to restrain their behaviors, the leaders are more likely to destroy themselves （会伤害到他们自己吗？）as well as their nations under the cover of political effectiveness. In the history, it is not rare to identify some people of this kind. For example, Stalin, once the leader of Former Soviet Union, unduly discarded his morality by the name of national security, and at last led the execution of thousands of people. Hence, excessively sacrifice of morality is destructive to a nation rather than helpful. It seems that the leaders could temporary(temporarily) preserve power by immoral behaviors; but such behaviors invariably result in the leaders’ degradation.

In conclusion, while conceding the highest moral standards is almost impossible for leaders because of some extreme situations, it is a vital requirement for the leaders to maintain their high morality for effective lead.
比我上回看你的那篇进步多了，分析得也很到位。是限时么？思路很清晰。语言上有点小毛病
斯大林那个例子请教一下，偶不明白this event 的来龙去脉~
还有一点，字数太多了吧？考试时不太现实啊，精简一点

[ 本帖最后由 xmbjowl 于 2006-7-24 23:32 编辑 ]

wendynengUID: 2157675

为什么withhold sensitive information就是immoral?文章如果能指明它违背的precept of mores such as honesty or integrity可能更好。不过这的确是个万能例子

糖豆豆UID: 2138427

TOPIC: ISSUE43 - "To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."
WORDS: 680          TIME: -:--:--          DATE: 2006-7-24

1．道德是必要的
2．不是所有情况下都要有道德，有些情况下要违背道德
3．但也不能过度违背。

If we cast a look back at the formation of a nation, it is possible to identify how important a role the leader plays. In this era advocating the ethical and moral standards, should those public officials maintain the highest moral standards as the author claimed? As for me, I contend that the high moral standards should be a necessary requirement for public officials; however, it is impractical, or even impossible, to insist on the highest ones when confronting some special situations.开头简洁生动，用词也灵活，很好

To begin with, what is obvious is that high ethical and moral standards are indispensable parts for public officials who want to be effective leaders. Common sense proves that, if only the public officials want to be effective, the first concern should be the full charge of his/her subordinates, so that the commands can be carried out effectively. Then how to achieve it? To this question, high moral and ethical standards sever serve？great and excellent assistant enabling leaders to？take full charge of people. Gandhi, the famous leader of India, guided his people by not only his endeavors but also his high moral standards. The former grants people the right direction, while the latter grants people the infinite courage, both of which contribute to the effective lead.哇，牛句啊，学习学习 In contrast to those effective leaders, the history witnesses the moral fall-down复数？ of some once-effective leaders as well. Bill Clinton, an effectiveonce-effective leader who maintained high approval rating for his position, was disclosed to have immoral sexual relationship with his intern. After that, masses began to doubt his behaviors as well as his policies which consequently made him less effective in his work. Throughout the history, taking both positive and negative leaders into account, one common conclusion they reflect is that, the higher moral standards leaders have, the more effective work the leaders could done嘿嘿，窃以为这里是一处败笔，既与分论点不符，又没有给出任何论证，应该算是鸡蛋里的骨头吧. In other words, to maintain the high morality is the key to the effective work no matter in any stage, in any countries.

Nevertheless, in some special occasions, the public officials have to sacrifice morality in the sake of the nation, the society as well the people. Simply put, when facing some sensitive matters, the political effective severely contradict the principal of highest ethic. Under that circumstance, the public officials have no other choice but to make the decision beyond the bounds of morality. National security area is replete with such examples. One need not go further but to check counter-terrorists actions, following the principles of moral standards, the officials should put forward the detailed plan of actions to peoplewhy?军事行动不公开是不道德的吗？, which possibly consequently be utilized by enemies, resulting in the failure of the actions; while, following the principles of political effectiveness, the public officials are required to withhold those sensitive information from people until the end of the actions, which seems superficially immoral, but actually reasonable to some extent. Despite some people’s disapproval of such behaviors, after balancing the morality and national security, the leaders make a wise choice, after all the work is their first concern. Therefore, only by withholding some secret information from people, can leaders first reassure the people to avoid falling into chaos and secondly have the commands executed effectively.  

Undoubtedly, it is inappropriate, even terrible, to unduly sacrifice the moral standards without comprehensive consideration. Were there no certain measures to restrain their behaviors, the leaders are more likely to destroy themselves as well as their nations under the cover of political effectiveness. In the history, it is not rare to identify some people of this kind. For example, Stalin, once the leader of Former Soviet Union, unduly discarded his morality by the name of national security, and at last led the execution of thousands of people. Hence, excessivelyexessive sacrifice of morality is destructive to a nation rather than helpful. It seems that the leaders could temporary preserve power by immoral behaviors; but such behaviors invariably result in the leaders’ degradation.

In conclusion, while conceding the highest moral standards is almost impossible for leaders没看懂，不好意思 because of some extreme situations, it is a vital requirement for the leaders to maintain their high morality for effective lead.

写得太好了，看的时候欣赏远多于评价，找半天就找出这么几个问题，拙作恭请LZ指正（这个有点不堪入目的说:L:vomit:）：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

dicmiUID: 183392

once-effective，应该是错了，赫赫，不好意思。不过once有adv词性，我想改成once effective可以么？

其他的你说的都很对哈：）尤其temporarily这个改的真实太好了，我啰里啰唆的~~

destory themselves,我是想说最终是让他们自取灭亡。这个意思不知道该怎么表达？

[ 本帖最后由 dicmi 于 2006-7-25 19:35 编辑 ]

dicmiUID: 183392

几个语法错误谢谢你帮我指出来了~~赫赫，真的没有注意，多谢多谢

结尾那句ms是有问题，我把这句话改成了

while conceding the highest moral standards is completely impossible for leaders to maintain because of some extreme situations

应该清楚点了吧~~
谢谢

糖豆豆UID: 2138427

改后要好些

另外我说得那个败笔，好像不大被赞同的样子。说清楚点以避哗众取宠之嫌：

Throughout the history, taking both positive and negative leaders into account, one common conclusion they reflect is that, the higher moral standards leaders have, the more effective work the leaders could done嘿嘿，窃以为这里是一处败笔，既与分论点不符，又没有给出任何论证，应该算是鸡蛋里的骨头吧.

翻译过来是：纵观历史上所有的领导者，越是道德高尚领导的效能越高。
1 这不符合常识，完全可以写篇A出来。
2 本段论点为

high ethical and moral standards are indispensable parts for public officials who want to be effective leaders.

并没有要比较道德高低对领导力的影响

谢谢回拍~~

dicmiUID: 183392

不会的哈。我只是不知道怎么改，。。。
哪有什么哗众取宠~~~寒。。。。。