Issue069 【南智小组 Norman第20次作业】

norman518UID: 188582

TOPIC: ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development"


Government, as the representative of common people’s interests, should be incumbent on financial support and oriented guidance to the development and application of scientific research. I concede insofar as certain fields of scientific research, especially in those with more elemental and academic subjects, should be free from restriction of government. However, I totally disagree that government places few restriction on the research of applied science, at least government should rightly guide and supervise the application of these scientific research.

Above all, the purpose of scientific research includes of opening the mind, promoting the productivity, and then benefiting to people, all of which call for government should place more emphasis on support and guidance of scientific development rather than on restriction of it. As we know, the innovative spirit, as the soul of scientific research, is the motivation and spring of scientific research and development, which also call for government should provide scientists and researchers with a relatively free academia. Only with the free and democratic atmosphere, scientists can put their times and energies on researches, unrestrictedly share and communicate with each other, and then go beyond their predecessors or themselves. What is more exigent, without sufficient funds and instruments, many scientific researches, especially in fundamental and purely academic fields, could not be gone in for, let alone got breakthrough. Consider, for instance, the purpose of study on the academic mathematics and physics focus on exploring of methods and hypotheses, upon which many applied scientific research are based. An amount of firms and communities are unwilling to put their money on such academic fields for the sake of pursuing direct profits. In this situation, who could be presumed upon funding those academic fields except for government. Therefore, government should free from restriction on scientific research, and try their best on the support of academic research.

What is more, overemphasis on the restriction of scientific research could result in negative and even deleterious effects on both individual and society. In the personal aspect, the restriction of scientific research could extinguish individual hobbies and enthusiasm, and then snuff out their imagination and creativity. In the original stages, most of genius’s ideas and thoughts could be unaccepted by common people, and even by authority. The aircraft’s experiment on Brother Wright is unacceptable and even ridiculous in their contemporary eyes, so as to the relative theory of Einstein. Had government placed restriction on those inspirations, the tragedy could be occurred not only on both individual and nation but also on the human beings as a whole. When it comes to society, one need look no further than the recently controversial topic, about which Bush-administration soften Greenhouse Gases links to global warming. No matter what purpose of Bush government, the misguidance on the effect of greenhouse gas could not only hamper the progress of scientific research, but also injure the fairness and objectivity of science, all of which are the key factors leading to global warming. This case illuminates that it is harmful for government to misguide and restrict on scientific research, especially in today’s globalization, which negative effects are no longer on a nation or a continent but on the whole globe.

Admittedly, government should rightly guide and necessarily superintend the development and application of applied science. Just as the sharp sword with two edges, scientific research and development can provide human with more convenient and comfortable lives but, on the other hand, it also brings beings with some serious disasters. From assembly line leading to unemployment to High-tech aiding to web’s misdeed, from clone resulting in crisis of privacy to the abuse of nuclear energy. All above negative effects accompanying with development of science and technology call for the national society should place more emphasis on those exploitation and application of applied science, without effective and effectual measures, the globe would be ruined in human hands. On balance, it is through enacting and modifying Acts that government should guide and supervise on both reasonable development and effective application of those applied sciences.

In sum, without a certain amount of freedom, the flower of science would not survive, let alone thrive; without rational supervision on development and application of scientific research, the existence of our globe would be threatened by the misuse of scientific research. Government should make a balance between the freedom and restriction.

[ 本帖最后由 norman518 于 2007-2-4 02:07 编辑 ]

rubenUID: 2163558

第二段讲政府应该支持和引导科研而不是限制它，开头部分论述不错，只是后半部分花不少篇幅讨论科研经费的问题，个人觉得与主体关系不大。
第三段讨论过分强调对科研的限制带来的负面影响，其后从个人与社会两方面展开，结构清晰。不过，文中列举小布什政府的例子稍有不妥：其一，这似乎是个misguide的问题而非overemphasis；其二，不建议举美国政府时政作例子。
第四段论述政府为何应对科研进行必要的引导和管理。
回顾第一段的全文中心句，“基础领域不该限制，应用科学应该施以正确引导和监管”，其后几段的论述结构层次上还有些不太清晰。
尾段好。

强烈建议：每篇文章开头加上提纲，既可以防止别人修改时对内容的误读，也有利于自己理清思路。

[ 本帖最后由 ruben 于 2007-2-9 21:49 编辑 ]

norman518UID: 188582

可以给我个“过分强调对科研的限制带来的负面影响”的例子？
可以针对你指出的“不足”提供点建设性的修改意见吗？

                  谢谢

luckychinaUID: 2131861

先顶一个~~等偶写了这篇再来拜读!

norman518UID: 188582

先谢谢 luckychina了哈！