issue157 [0710G-summer小组]第十次作业by sanliangmm

sanliangmmUID: 2363921

157"There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires."
[Outline]:
1.       承认所谓纯粹的客观观察是不存在的,否则就是绝对主义
2.       指出作者的理论混淆了观察与理解，由于事实是客观的，对事实的观察也是客观的，而对其结果的理解可能是主观的
3.       指出存在不由人控制的观察（auto-observe by computer），其结果的理解也是客观的

The speaker asserts that there is no such thing as purely objective observation while all observation is subjective—colored by desire and expectation. It might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that absoluteness is an illusion or even a fantasy in the realm of our empirical world. However, as far as I am concerned, the speaker misunderstand the observations as interpretations, and observation should be and can be objective

It might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that there is no such absolute thing as pure objective observation existing in the world. If so, can the clean water be called clean? If we fetch a drop of water from a cup of clean water and then observe it under a microscope, many kinds of impurity can be detected. If all languages should be as accurate to depict things in the world as the initial appearance of them, there might be no language nowadays. "Pure" and "impure", "clean" and "dirty", are just two pairs of relative conceptions. It is impossible to portray degree of the pure so accurate that completely the same with its original shape, as there is no absolute pure in the world at all. Thus, any informed person who believes otherwise is an absolute epistemologist or an existentialist envisioning a mere fantasy.

However, the sorts of subjective “observations” mentioned in the second part of the statement, in my opinion, are actually subjective “interpretations” of what we observe. After all, what we observe is the facts that are stubborn things not rendered any less factual by our human emotions—such as our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions. Thus, the observation itself is objective according to the stubbornness of facts. However, when it comes to making judgments about what we observe and about remembering what we observe, each person’s individual perspective, values, and even emotions help form these judgments and recollections. One apt illustration about this point is that the identification of the relation between earth and sun: up until Galileo’s time the Earth was “observed” to be at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that humankind was the center of God’s creation. Considering to the same astronomical facts Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim by his own expectations to explore the truth. As it turns out, it is crucial to distinguish between interpretations about the observation and observation itself, which is objective with respect to the stubborn facts.

Furthermore, with the progress of increasingly sophisticated science and technology, observations are not necessarily carried out by human beings since there are many "auto-observers" can handle the job as well. Thus, the description of the observation might be objective too, for the reason that the auto-probe could send back the data they observe then computers have the data analyzed, sometimes not even one human being is needed during the whole process. For example, in 1980s US researchers designed the robot "Firewalker" for volcanic exploration, which was made of flame-resistant material and equipped with several free-rotating cameras and microcomputers. With the help of firewalker, researcher could gain the valuable information about active volcano, and the observation included is involved with data collected by the robots and later analysis by the computer, which can exclude the influence by human expectations and desires.

To sum up, although pure objective observation does not exist in a empirical world, the observation itself is objective sticking to the stubborn facts and should be discriminate from interpretation, which the speaker might have confusion. According to the step-up of the technology and science, some observation might operated by machines, the interpretation of which might be objective as well.

[ 本帖最后由 sanliangmm 于 2007-7-28 09:47 编辑 ]

rainyni0812UID: 2186847

1.       承认纯粹的主观（客观还是主观？）观察是不存在的,
2.       指出作者的理论混淆了观察与理解，由于事实是客观的，对事实的观察也是客观的，而对其结果的理解可能是主观的
3.       指出存在不由人控制的观察（auto-observe by computer），其结果的理解也是客观的

The speaker asserts that there is no such thing as purely objective observation while all observation is subjective—colored by desire and expectation. It might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that absoluteness is an illusion or even a fantasy in the realm of our empirical world. However, as far as I am concerned, the speaker misunderstand the observations as interpretations, and observation should be and can be objective

It might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that there is no such absolute thing as pure objective observation existing in the world. If so, can the clean water be called clean? If we fetch a drop of water from a cup of clean water and then observe it under a microscope, many kinds of impurity can be detected. If all languages should be as accurate to depict things in the world as the initial appearance of them, there might be no language nowadays. "Pure" and "impure", "clean" and "dirty", are just two pairs of relative conceptions. It is impossible to portray degree of the pure so accurate that completely the same with its original shape, as there is no absolute pure in the world at all. Thus, any informed person who believes otherwise is an absolute epistemologist or an existentialist envisioning a mere fantasy.(这段有点纠偏字眼了，不妨试试用中国旁观者清的俗语来说明客观观察的例子，纠缠在pure上感觉偏离了。)

However, the sorts of subjective “observations” mentioned in the second part of the statement, in my opinion, are actually subjective “interpretations” of what we observe. After all, what we observe is the facts that are stubborn things not rendered any less factual by our human emotions—such as our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions. Thus, the observation itself is objective according to the stubbornness of facts. However, when it comes to making judgments about what we observe and about remembering what we observe, each person’s individual perspective, values, and even emotions help form these judgments and recollections. One apt illustration about this point is that the identification of the relation between earth and sun: up until Galileo’s time the Earth was “observed” to be at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that humankind was the center of God’s creation. Considering to the same astronomical facts Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim by his own expectations to explore the truth. As it turns out, it is crucial to distinguish between interpretations about the observation and observation itself, which is objective with respect to the stubborn facts.

Furthermore, with the progress of increasingly sophisticated science and technology, observations are not necessarily carried out by human beings since there are many "auto-observers" can handle the job as well. Thus, the description of the observation might be objective too, for the reason that the auto-probe could send back the data they observe then computers have the data analyzed, sometimes not even one human being is needed during the whole process. For example, in 1980s US researchers designed the robot "Firewalker" for volcanic exploration, which was made of flame-resistant material and equipped with several free-rotating cameras and microcomputers. With the help of firewalker, researcher could gain the valuable information about active volcano, and the observation included is involved with data collected by the robots and later analysis by the computer, which can exclude the influence by human expectations and desires.

To sum up, although pure objective observation does not exist in a empirical world, the observation itself is objective sticking to the stubborn facts and should be discriminate from interpretation, which the speaker might have confusion. According to the step-up of the technology and science, some observation might operated by machines, the interpretation of which might be objective as well.
如果第二段改成客观事实存在的话，结尾段就需要随着改动。
如果还是承认客观事实不存在，那么第二段可以写人的观察会不由自主从自己的角度出发。但这并不是有意为之，而是一种潜意识。这样的话在开头段就要和末段呼应，不要单写作者混淆了观察和理解，也要点出纯客观的观察不存在。

niuzhistUID: 2363220

issue157 [0710G-summer小组]第十次作业by sanliangmm 157"There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires."[Outline]: 1.       承认纯粹的主观观察是不存在的,（客观吧）2.       指出作者的理论混淆了观察与理解，由于事实是客观的，对事实的观察也是客观的，而对其结果的理解可能是主观的3.       指出存在不由人控制的观察（auto-observe by computer），其结果的理解也是客观的The speaker asserts that there is no such thing as purely objective observation while all observation is subjective—colored by desire and expectation. It might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that absoluteness is an illusion or even a fantasy in the realm of our empirical world. However, as far as I am concerned, the speaker misunderstand the observations as interpretations, and observation should be and can be objectiveIt might be attempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that there is no such absolute thing as pure objective observation existing in the world. If so, can the clean water be called clean? If we fetch a drop of water from a cup of clean water and then observe it under a microscope, many kinds of impurity can be detected. If all languages should be as accurate to depict things in the world as the initial appearance of them, there might be no language nowadays. "Pure" and "impure", "clean" and "dirty", are just two pairs of relative conceptions. It is impossible to portray degree of the pure so accurate that completely the same with its original shape, as there is no absolute pure in the world at all. Thus, any informed person who believes otherwise is an absolute epistemologist or an existentialist envisioning a mere fantasy.（感觉不应只限于pure这个词，不过分析过程的确很棒）However, the sorts of subjective “observations” mentioned in the second part of the statement, in my opinion, are actually subjective “interpretations” of what we observe. After all, what we observe is the facts that are stubborn things not rendered any less factual by our human emotions—such as our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions. Thus, the observation itself is objective according to the stubbornness of facts. However, when it comes to making judgments about what we observe and about remembering what we observe, each person’s individual perspective, values, and even emotions help form these judgments and recollections. One apt illustration about this point is that the identification of the relation between earth and sun: up until Galileo’s time the Earth was “observed” to be at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that humankind was the center of God’s creation. Considering to the same astronomical facts Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim by his own expectations to explore the truth. As it turns out, it is crucial to distinguish between interpretations about the observation and observation itself, which is objective with respect to the stubborn facts.（感觉分析得挺有道理，但我觉得有些问题，比如一件东西是红的，我用蓝眼镜看，却成了紫的，这似乎是由客观事物变主观观察了。类似的事情还有很多）Furthermore, with the progress of increasingly sophisticated science and technology, observations are not necessarily carried out by human beings since there are many "auto-observers" can handle the job as well. Thus, the description of the observation might be objective too, for the reason that the auto-probe could send back the data they observe then computers have the data analyzed, sometimes not even one human being is needed during the whole process. For example, in 1980s US researchers designed the robot "Firewalker" for volcanic exploration, which was made of flame-resistant material and equipped with several free-rotating cameras and microcomputers. With the help of firewalker, researcher could gain the valuable information about active volcano, and the observation included is involved with data collected by the robots and later analysis by the computer, which can exclude the influence by human expectations and desires.（我好像又觉得有问题，auto-observers本身的程序就使人编的，也许程序就无法保证记录所用真实的数据）To sum up, although pure objective observation does not exist in a empirical world, the observation itself is objective sticking to the stubborn facts and should be discriminate from interpretation, which the speaker might have confusion. According to the step-up of the technology and science, some observation might operated by machines, the interpretation of which might be objective as well. 整个文章立意很新，不容易让人想到，不过我总觉得ISSUE是要从正反两方面写得，这里好像没看出来。用词还是那样丰富，得好好学习了。

sanliangmmUID: 2363921

赫赫 提纲是写错咯。。。应该是指纯粹的客观观察是不可能的
这道题真的很难说阿 我都晕了