issue36 [by dagger_zhang]欢迎大家拍砖

dagger_zhangUID: 2140939

:)36 "The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries."

According to the statement, the greatness of individuals can be recognized only by their offspring. In my view, this statement is too extreme. Provided that it can be revised to "sometimes," rather than "only," I will strongly agree with it. In fact, with a brief historical retrospect, we can effortlessly find the incubation period of greatness varies from case to case. A giant cannot merely be recognized by those who come after him or her, but also can be decided by his or her contemporaries.

The greatness of individuals cannot always be accepted by their contemporaries, but can be recognized by their offspring usually because their contributions have not been completely confirmed, or may be viewed as only of potential merit. Thus, the best way to recognize these potential contributions, at least it seems to me, is to prove their value gradually. This may require a long time. A great number of giants, who include scientists, artists, etc., were not approbated in their lifetimes, but received considerably high appreciation many years after their deaths. Consider, for example, the first modern scientist, Nicholaus Copernicus, who proposed a model of the solar system, but this did not attract much attention during his lifetime. However, his theory intrigued later generations, and gradually it was recognized. Another giant, Vincent Van Gogh, was virtually unknown during his lifetime, but after his death he became one of the most famous painters in history. Thus we see that the comments of later generations are objective to some extent and are no longer influenced by political factors.

Many giants in science and the arts are recognized by their contemporaries because they make a great contribution which exhibits merit immediately to the society. These great people's existence is like a brush-pencil, which endows our colorless world with a beautiful change. Thus we can find and accept their work immediately. An example is the British biologist Francis Crick, who with James D. Watson, proposed a spiral model, the double helix, for the molecular structure of DNA, and shared a 1962 Nobel Prize for advances in the study of genetics. They were recognized as two of the most famous biologists within a few years. Mark Twain won fame as one of America's first and foremost humorists by his contemporaries for his unique humor, excellent expression, and profound insight. In the areas of information technology, democracy, and enlightened government, people are eager to accept new ideas and desire to testify of their value. On these occasions, the greatness of individuals can be recognized by their contemporaries.

Admittedly, it is not uncommon for some people who were recognized as great in their eras to fade with the passage of time. This phenomenon often occurs in the field of politics. Whether these individuals retain the public's respect to some extent depends on their contributions to the public and whether or not the public acknowledges them. A particularly notable case is Hong Xiuquan, a chairman in China. He was recognized as a hero when he launched the Taiping Rebellion, but the test of history demonstrated that he only aggravated the tribulation of the Chinese people. In this aspect, there is justification to judge the greatness of individuals by those who live after them.

In summary, the statement is too extreme that only later generations can judge one's greatness. I concede that the judgment of a person's greatness is more objectively evaluated by his offspring than by his contemporaries. However, it is also irrational to deny the judgment of his contemporaries, who possess a more subject view of the giant. Accordingly, on balance, the greatness of individuals can be decided not only by those who live after them, but also by their contemporaries.

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

建议在段间过度的时候再下点功夫, 现在看上去BODY三个部分相互没有联系, 被孤立了, 第一段说渐渐去了解, 然后举俩没被了解的例子, 一般而言象解决方案这种最后得出比较水到渠成, 第二段生硬的转到一些巨人直接得到尊重, 这个跟上一段是什么关系? 前面没有提到为什么直接能得到认识, 甚至没有说到这种情况, 而第三段又转折向第一时间被认识之后褪色, 这个跟前面的关系是? 补充?　发展？　并列？ 三段的组织最好推敲下，这段转到下一段, 要铺垫, 最后首段有结构预示, 这样能说明你这样写作流程的原因, 从而强化文章逻辑.

段内论证来看已经不错的, 加油把总体规划做好点, 相信能拿个不错的分数. 就不细改了.

dagger_zhangUID: 2140939

谢谢版板，其实我对考试一点信心都没有，希望能有3.5就知足了

MaggeiUID: 2348773

扁之~~~兴冲冲的来看的你文章,竟然说对考试没信心~~

pumpkin9UID: 2345994

Provided that it can be revised to "sometimes," rather than "only," I will strongly agree with it.

我觉得用虚拟好
行文满流畅的 论证同意 版板的

pinerixUID: 2376486

注意语法和用词喔。

lynhuhaUID: 2379651

I agree with BZ,