Issue87--Spring小组 第三次作业

dairuxin512UID: 2178329

Issue 87
"In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important discoveries."
用时约2小时，字数622。大家死命拍啊！一定回拍！

Is it true that the beginner, in any field of inquiry, is more easily to make important discoveries than the expert? Though some examples show that scientists likely gain their most significant achievement in their young ages, I think these so-called talents are just exceptional and most improvements in every field need long time exploitation and hard working.

Certainly, I do not intentionally to avoid mentioning those instances about some brilliant scientists who made greatest discoveries when they were young. One all-known sample is Einstein who began to doubt about classical physical theory when he was merely twenty and built his own physical theory in his thirties. Another good example is the discoverers of the structure of DNA—Wolf and Crick, and they made this important discovery which has a profound effect in biology and medical later when they were about thirty years old. They all must be the most brilliant ones in their living time. And their creativity, enthusiasm and sensitive to science, the features many excellent beginnings share, do help them to get these great successes.

However, the above facts I referred to are not general circumstances. After all, we have only one Einstein and he is a truly talent. Most researchers, I think, usually have higher IQ degree than the averages but not like Einstein. But meanwhile, contemporary researches, regardless in any fields, are becoming more and more complex than ever before. Therefore, doing research and make any progress needs researchers to experience a long time seeking.

Now, let us check the process of making an important discovery first and make a comparison between beginner and expert. At the beginning, generally, is to learn and accumulate backgrounds of one research field. I think no one would deny that experts have superiorities in this aspect because of their longer time research experience. Second step, I consider, is to find a question or skeptical point from previous researches as their own working start point. Maybe creativity and sensitivity of beginners would win on this step. But we have no reason to say that experts have no these abilities. The fact is that most experts have certain creativity and intensive since they have touched research for a period of time and been familiar with what they concerned. Then what they should do? Starting their research is necessary. During this process, they may have some particular guesses or new ideas and they must prove these discoveries in time. This step is so important that it needs more endeavor and longer time, and accumulated experience and abundant knowledge of experts would play an important role in it. So, when comparing the above analysis, we can get a distinct result: experts might have more advantages in making discoveries than beginners.

In addition, some examples will give to prove my view. Most people who honored Nobel Prize after they have became experts in research fields. I remembered, two weeks ago, Floyd Roberts came to my college to give a report, and I knew that he honored Nobel Chemistry Prize for discovering Carbon sixty in 1996 when he was 65 years old. In society or humanities research fields, there are many archeologists and historians make significant discoveries after they have accumulated plenty experience and done adequate researches. All of these show that experts have potential to make important success in research field as well.

In conclusion, superiorities of beginner are obvious: creativity, enthusiasm and sensitivity are necessary to important discoveries; yet the author neglects a fact that expert can also own these features, furthermore, they have something that beginner cannot have--that is experience which they gained by long time hard working, and the dual priorities will assist expert to make great progresses in fields of inquiry.

[ 本帖最后由 dairuxin512 于 2007-11-6 20:42 编辑 ]

julia_tianUID: 2421517

Is it true that the beginner, in any field of inquiry, is more easily to make important discoveries than the expert? Though some examples show that scientists likely gain their most significant achievement in their young ages, I think these so-called talents are just exceptional and most improvements in every field need long time exploitation and hard working.此处观点与下文稍有出入，作者的第一个观点实际上是肯定了新手还是具备获得重大发现的能力。Certainly, I do not intentionally to avoid mentioning those instances about some brilliant scientists who made greatest discoveries when they were young. One all-known sample is Einstein who began to doubt about classical physical theory when he was merely twenty and built his own physical theory in his thirties. Another good example is the structure discoverers (of the structure) of DNA—Wolf Watson and Crick, and they made this important discovery which has a profound effect in biology and medical later when they were both about thirty years old. They all must be the most brilliant ones in their living time. And their creativity, enthusiasm and sensitive to science, the features many excellent beginnings share, do help them to get these great successes.However, the above facts I referred to are not general circumstances. After all, we have（there is） only one Einstein and he is a truly talent. Most researchers, I think, usually have higher IQ degree than the averages but (not like) less than Einstein’s. But meanwhile, contemporary researches, regardless in any fields, are becoming more and more complex than ever before. Therefore, doing research and make any progress (needs) requires researchers to experience a long time seeking.Now, let us check the process of making an important discovery first and make a comparison between beginner and expert. At the beginning, generally, is to learn and accumulate backgrounds of one research field. I think no one would deny that experts have superiorities in this aspect because of their longer time(long-time) research experience. Second step建议去掉, I consider, is to find a question or skeptical point from previous researches as their ones own working 建议去掉start point. Maybe creativity and sensitivity of beginners would win on this step. But we have no reason to say that experts don’t have (no) or are lack of可以选择一个 these abilities. The fact is that most experts have certain creativity and intensive since they (have touched)建议去掉 researched for a period of time and (been去掉) familiar with what they concerned. Then what they should (should they) do next? Starting their research is necessary. During this process, they may have some particular guesses or new ideas (and they) that must be proved (these discoveries) in time. This step is so important that it needs more endeavor and longer time, and accumulated experience and abundant knowledge of experts would play an important role (in it)个人觉得可以不要. So, when comparing the above analysis, we can get a distinct result: experts might have more advantages in making discoveries than beginners.(In addition,)furthermore some examples will give to prove my view. Most people who honored Nobel Prize after they have became experts in research fields. (I remembered,)可省略 two weeks ago, Floyd Roberts came to my college to give a report, and I knew that he honored Nobel Chemistry Prize for discovering Carbon sixty in 1996 when he was 65 years old. In society or humanities research fields, there are many archeologists and historians make significant discoveries after they have accumulated plenty experience and done adequate researches. All of these show that experts have potential to make important success in research field as well.In conclusion, (superiorities of) beginner (are) may(obvious: creativity, enthusiasm and sensitivity are necessary) to important discoveries建议改成新手可能具备以上优点,个人认为这样就与下句衔接更合理; yet the author neglects a fact that expert can also own these features, furthermore, they have something that beginner cannot (have )bear--that is experience which they gained by long time hard working, and the dual priorities will assist expert to make great progresses in fields of inquiry.
小结:整篇文章结构合理，逻辑思维清晰。所用例证能够很好的支持作者的观点。在语言用词上可以稍加注意，特别是动词的使用。从上下文来看，作者的观点应该属于对该ISSUE的补充，并不完全否认该ISSUE。所以第一段的观点的EXCEPTIONAL 例外，可以改成极少数.个人认为例外有否定的意思.:)

希望作者回拍哦...呵呵!下面是我的作业:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=761781&extra=page%3D1

shanxinhpUID: 2311857

Is it true that the beginner, in any field of inquiry, is more easily to make important discoveries than the expert? Though some examples show that scientists likely gain their most significant achievement in their young ages, I think these so-called talents are just exceptional and most improvements in every field need long time exploitation and hard working.Certainly, I do not intentionally to avoid mentioning those instances about some brilliant scientists who made greatest discoveries when they were young. One all-known sample is Einstein who began to doubt about classical physical theory when he was merely twenty and built his own physical theory in his thirties. Another good example is the discoverers of the structure of DNA—Wolf and Crick, and they made this important discovery which has a profound effect in biology and medical (later) when they were about thirty years old. They all must be the most brilliant ones in their living time. And their creativity, enthusiasm and sensitive to science, the features many excellent beginnings share, do help them to get these great successes.However, the above facts I referred to are not general circumstances. After all, we have only one Einstein and he is a truly talent. Most researchers, I think, usually have higher IQ degree than the averages but not like Einstein. But meanwhile, contemporary researches, regardless in any fields, are becoming more and more complex than ever before. Therefore, doing research and make any progress needs researchers to experience a long time seeking.Now, let us check the process of making an important discovery first and make a comparison between beginner and expert. At the beginning, generally, is to learn and accumulate backgrounds of one research field. I think no one would deny that experts have superiorities in this aspect because of their longer time research experience. Second ( step),( I consider,) is to find a question or skeptical point from previous researches as their own working start point. Maybe creativity and sensitivity of beginners would win on this step. But we have no reason to say that experts have no these abilities. The fact is that most experts have certain creativity and intensive since they have touched research for a period of time and been familiar with what they concerned. Then what they should do? Starting their research is necessary. During this process, they may have some particular guesses or new ideas and they must prove these discoveries in time. This step is so important that it needs more endeavor and longer time, and accumulated experience and abundant knowledge of experts would play an important role in it. So, when comparing the above analysis, we can get a distinct result: experts might have more advantages in making discoveries than beginners.In addition, some examples will give to prove my view. Most people who honored Nobel Prize after they have became experts in research fields. I remembered, two weeks ago, Floyd Roberts came to my college to give a report, and I knew that he honored Nobel Chemistry Prize for discovering Carbon sixty in 1996 when he was 65 years old. In society or humanities research fields, there are many archeologists and historians make significant discoveries after they have accumulated plenty experience and done adequate researches. All of these show that experts have potential to make important success in research field as well.In conclusion, superiorities of beginner are obvious: creativity, enthusiasm and sensitivity are necessary to important discoveries; yet (the author neglects a fact that) expert can also own these features, furthermore, they have something that beginner cannot have--that is experience which they gained by long time hard working, and the dual priorities will assist expert to make great progresses in fields of inquiry.

个人意见：

作为早期的练习，这篇文章不错，层次感很好，论点明确，关键词突出。

有一些失误（和我的一样）可以感觉到是在套用句型，有的句子不自然（插入语解释时应注意）。大家都要加紧练习了。