Issue99 【0706G－LOVEAW小组】第十二次作业 by iq28

iq28UID: 2152875

TOPIC: ISSUE99 - "In any realm of life-whether academic, social, business, or political-the only way to succeed is to take a practical, rather than an idealistic, point of view. Pragmatic behavior guarantees survival, whereas idealistic views tend to be superseded by simpler, more immediate options."
WORDS: 544          TIME: 0:38:28          DATE: 2007-2-27

Oftentimes people have to confront the labyrinth that whether to choose a practical-directed method or an idealistic one in order to better achieve the goal in a certain area. Intricate as the topic is, I fundamentally disagree with the overall attitude of the author towards the way to success, for he generally overlooks the complexity of the proper utilization of both the practical measures and idealistic measures in different fields. To better illustrate my viewpoint, let me discuss in the following details.

There is no denying that in most fields the first and foremost problem is to survive; however, it is usually not the case when it comes to academic, if the supporters of the researchers such as social funds, international companies or governments are enlightened enough to realize that the ultimate academic accomplishments can never be gained unless a lasting and non-pragmatic method is taken. The Department of Material Science and Engineering of University of Moscow has devoted all resources over 30 years to explore the regulations of the metal elements without other research activities which can easily announce much more funds from governments or companies. They finally are rewarded for their far-sight. Nowadays, Russian already has the reputation of 'The father of metal', attributed from the 30 years research. It is hard to imagine the excellent achievement if the department always change their direction to meet the profitable fields just for survival. In a long-term research, administers and scientists can maximize the utilization rate of all the resources, and plans can be well organized to fit the more profound progress in the science. Therefore, undoubtedly the scientists and scholars would better to choose a more idealistic routine to the success in the field of academia.

In terms of politics and social problems, on the other hand, the conclusion may be different or even opposite. Government is often to blame for their flaccid attitude towards the pollution made by industries when they pursue the economic benefits. Although we cannot emphasis the significance of the environment too much, and the behaviors of the human actually has deteriorated the environment seriously, I still agree with the decision of the government to be 'short-sighted', that is to meet the basic material demands of the society first. To sustain the whole nation and its members is the essential task of the government, hence it must sacrifice the environments for the privilege of human beings, though the environments can provide us a lasting prosperity, for the reason that if the fledging basis of the society, such as heavy industry, medical system or so on have not been development yet, even the members of the nation cannot survive, no to say a long-term future. No government and its citizens would like to see that their environment is like Shangri-la but the living standard of the nation is like the slums in New York. That is to say, practical solutions to the basic material demands are usually prior to the idealistic methods when the hard social problems are faced with.

In summary, the author overstates the significance of the practical methods but overlooks the meaning of idealistic measures, which are especially crucial in the realm of academic. Whether we should choose a practical way or an idealistic way should address to a case-to case scrutiny.