Issue48 [synergy小组]polymerwufan第七次作业

polymerwufanUID: 2219535

According to the speaker, many historical events and trends actually were created primarily by groups of people rather than the famous few, and the study of history should not focus on individuals. I concede that in many cases the power of masses plays a more crucial role in the change of human history compared to certain famous individuals. However, it is unjustifiable for historians to overlook the importance of great individualsin history while merely attributing the progress of history to the groups ofpeople. In fact, historians should make objective, rational analyses about the historical influences of both individuals and masses.

Admittedly, human history was indeed created by groups of people rather than certain celebrities. Consider somegreat relics such as the Pyramids of Egypt and the Great Wall of China. Both were constructed by hundreds of thousands of unknown people although thein itiators were the monarchs of both conutry. Few would argue that it is impossible to build up such great architectures merely by individuals’ willingness and ambition while without the efforts of the public. Another aptillustration which can bolster this claim involves the fact that the masses usually server as the critical impetus of almost every revolutionary change insociety. Thus, the speaker’s claim is somewhat reasonable with respect to thefunction of the public in societal progress.

Nevertheless, it is unreasonable for historians to overemphasize the importance of groups of people while overlooking some key individuals’ influence in history especially when it comesto the history of science. To some extent, the history of science is composedof certain great scientists’ biographies. For example, the series of experienceof Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein amounts to the history of Physics. Besides, the public often served to bring about counterproductive influence when these elites provided their new ideology. Therefore, the speaker’s claimshow its limitation on certain conditions.

   To sum up, the speaker overestimates the significance of groups of people and overlooks the importance of certain great individuals in the history. In my opinion, it is morereasonable for histarian to combine these two aspects in the study of history.

[ 本帖最后由 polymerwufan 于 2006-12-16 09:42 编辑 ]

三块半UID: 2202025

According to the speaker, many historical events and trends actually were created primarily by groups of people rather than the famous few, and the study of history should not focus on individuals. I concede that in many cases the power of masses plays a more crucial role in the change of human history compared to certain famous individuals. However, it is unjustifiable for historians to overlook the importance of great individualsin history while merely attributing the progress of history to the groups ofpeople. In fact, historians should make objective, rational analyses about the historical influences of both individuals and masses.

Admittedly, human history was indeed created by groups of people rather than certain celebrities. Consider somegreat relics such as the Pyramids of Egypt and the Great Wall of China. Both were constructed by hundreds of thousands of unknown people although thein itiators were the monarchs of both conutry. Few would argue that it is impossible to build up such great architectures merely by individuals’ willingness and ambition while without the efforts of the public. Another aptillustration which can bolster this claim involves the fact that the masses usually server as the critical impetus of almost every revolutionary change insociety. Thus, the speaker’s claim is somewhat reasonable with respect to thefunction of the public in societal progress.(这段写的可以啊，又有足够的例证）

Nevertheless, it is unreasonable for historians to overemphasize the importance of groups of people while overlooking some key individuals’ influence in history especially when it comesto the history of science. To some extent, the history of science is composedof certain great scientists’ biographies. For example, the series of experienceof Copernicus, Galileo, Newton and Einstein amounts to the history of Physics. Besides, the public often served to bring about counterproductive influence（例子？或者扩展分析一下原因） when these elites provided their new ideology. Therefore, the speaker’s claimshow its limitation on certain conditions.

   To sum up, the speaker overestimates the significance of groups of people and overlooks the importance of certain great individuals in the history. In my opinion, it is morereasonable for histarian to combine these two aspects in the study of history.

字少了，不过确实难写