Issue31 weixch的，急切求拍，真诚的求拍

weixchUID: 2104033

31"Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial."

研究结果意义重大。
但另一方面，资金毕竟有限，资金在各项研究中的分配，则要考虑到研究的目标和可能带来的效益
研究结果有两面性（知识的两面性）

I generally agree with the speaker's viewpoint that it is worthy to spend money in research, but when it comes to the research of controversial, we should be cautions to make investment when its objective is too vague.

On the one hand, it is our development in research that makes the great progress of modern world. Without the knowledge come from the research, most of the inventions we use nowadays would be not available. Consider, for instance, the history of information technology. If it is not for the money spent on research of electronics, the first computer used to decipher codes with vacuum tube would be unavailable. As we are experiencing the age of IT, we always owe this to the invention of personal computers that make the gadget convenient for any individual. However, without the semiconductor and IC technology that our labs cost investment to research, it is hard for factory to produce a single chip in the circuit of the computer; let alone to surf the web of PC and share good ideas in the Internet. Therefore, generally speaking, the investment on research may be a good one for that the technology out of the labs might eventually have a profound effect on our future life.

On the other hand, when it comes to the controversial research, the speaker's assertion is troubling in two respects.

First of all, the investment made on research is limited after all; without clear objectives and schedule, the money spent on controversial research may be a kind of waste. If the money is saved, we could spend it on other disciplines or toward addressing other social problems. One apt case to support this point involves the project of "Star Wars" invested by the Reagan administration during the 1980s. In retrospect, the plan was controversial at that time, because the objective is too difficult to be implemented with a very speculative potential benefit. And it was at the end proved to be just a waste of taxpayer's dollars. It is popularly believed that the amount of money wasted in the mission could have gone a long way toward addressing other social problems such as AIDS and so forth which later turned out to be serious problems making federal budget deficit.

Secondly, research is a double-edged sword. For every new breakthrough in research that helps to make our life comfortable is another possible crisis that serves to add to our suffering. One appropriate illustration of this view involves the famous "Manhattan Project" in the World War II. The great investment on the project was used to develop a super weapon in order that the tragedy of war could be ended ahead of schedule. Although it had ended the war immediately, the invention of atom bomb gave rise to nuclear arm race which made the crisis of our mankind. In spite of the infinite energy we generate in nuclear power station, the investment made on the nuclear research also gives rise to weapons of mass destruction and leads to the nuclear nightmare of Chernobyl. So without further consideration and following control of the potential aftermath, the money spent on the research might lead to a tragedy of our mankind.

In sum, generally speaking, money spent on research is a good investment. But it may be wrong to extend the assertion to some controversial research. Since the investment is limited and the research is a double-edged sword, we should balance the budget in research avoiding waste in controversial research of vague objective and make further consideration on the possible crisis the new research breakthrough could bring to us.

bao19820714UID: 2258012

我觉得你在使用北美范文时要注意改变，最好不要太过相同；我认为没有必要把过渡句单列一段；另外，结尾在总结原因时不要简单的罗列；最后，结尾段最后一句and后面的句子似乎与题无关？

作文版全体版主UID: 2102351

Issue31 weixch的，急切求拍，真诚的求拍

31"Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial."

研究结果意义重大。
但另一方面，资金毕竟有限，资金在各项研究中的分配，则要考虑到研究的目标和可能带来的效益
研究结果有两面性（知识的两面性）

I generally agree with the speaker's viewpoint that it is worthy to spend money in【on】 research, but when it comes to the research of controversial【the controversial research】, we should be cautions to make investment 【we should make investment cautiously】when its objective is too vague.开门见山式的开头很好，让考官很明白你的观点。

On the 【去掉】one hand, it is our development in research【the developing research】 that makes the great progress of 【our】modern world. Without the knowledge come 【去掉】from the 【去掉】research, most of the inventions we use nowadays would be not available. Consider, for instance, the history of information technology. If it is not for the money spent on research of electronics【if the money is not spent on the research of electronics】, the first computer used to decipher codes with vacuum tube 【tubes】would be unavailable. As we are experiencing the age of IT, we always owe this to the invention of personal computers that make the gadget convenient for any individual. However, without the semiconductor and IC technology that our labs cost 【make】investment to research, it is hard 【impossible】for factory to produce a single chip in the circuit of the computer; let alone to surf the web of PC【on the Internet】 and share good ideas in the Internet【去掉】. Therefore, generally speaking, the investment on research may be a good one for that 【since】the technology out of 【off】the labs might eventually have a profound effect on our future life.

On the other hand, when it comes to the controversial research, the speaker's assertion is troubling in two respects.

First of all, the investment made on research is limited after all; without clear objectives and schedule, the money spent on controversial research may be a kind of waste. If the money is saved, we could spend it on other disciplines or toward addressing【solving】other social problems. One apt 【fit，没必要找一些生僻的词，能确切的表达出意思就好】case to support this point involves the project of "Star Wars" invested by the Reagan administration during the 1980s. In retrospect, the plan was controversial at that time, because the objective is too difficult to be implemented with a very speculative potential benefit. And it was at the end proved to be just a waste of taxpayer's dollars. It is popularly believed that the amount of money wasted in the mission could have gone a long way toward addressing【solving】 other social problems such as AIDS and so forth which later turned out to be serious problems 【which】making federal budget deficit.

Secondly, research is a double-edged sword. For every new 【去掉，breakthrough本身就一定是新的，逻辑错误】breakthrough in research that helps to make【去掉】 our life comfortable is another possible crisis that serves to add to our suffering. One appropriate illustration of this view involves the famous "Manhattan Project" in the World War II. The great investment on the project was used to develop a super weapon in order that the tragedy of【to make the】 war could be ended ahead of schedule. Although it had ended the war immediately, the invention of atom bomb gave rise to nuclear arm race which made the crisis of our mankind. In spite of the infinite energy we generate in nuclear power station, the investment made on the nuclear research also gives rise to weapons of mass destruction and leads to the nuclear nightmare of Chernobyl.【核电站的泄漏产生的问题不能归结到初始研究的投资上，这是个逻辑错误】 So without further consideration and following control of the potential aftermath【result】, the money spent on the research might lead to a tragedy of our mankind.

In sum, generally speaking, money spent on research is a good investment. But it may be wrong to extend the assertion to some controversial research. Since the investment is limited and the research is a double-edged sword, we should balance the budget in research avoiding waste in controversial research of vague objective and make further consideration on the possible crisis the new research breakthrough could bring to us.

说说你关于这片issue立论上的问题。

这个题目主要是讲研究的意义。题目的讨论的关键在于：对于有争议的研究，对科研的投入是否值得。按照逻辑，任何研究的过程都是先进行投入，然后出结果，然后结果产生影响。但对于有争议的研究结果，我们是否认为研究投入是好的投资正是这个topic讨论的焦点。

而你的立论，强调资金有限，需要考虑到研究的目标和可能带来的效益。可以说有些跑题。因为题目是让你就有争议的研究结果做一个判定，这时，题目的先决条件就是研究已经做了，我们现在讨论的关键在于这个投资是否值得。即：关键在于如何在科学研究的社会受益和社会风险之间找平衡。