ISSUE26 【Aero小组】第15次作业 by bigyan

bigyanUID: 2382427

In this issue, the speaker asserts that given the ground that could be better used for modern purpose, the modern development should outweigh the preservation of historic building so that contemporary needs can be served. However, I fundamentally disagree with it. In my view, the final decision should strike a balance among the competition between historic value and modern development.
First and foremost, the old building provides us an avenue of research on the civilization, production, and opinion in the past society. In fact, no amount of the old buildings that mirror aspect of human lives can be rebuilt after destroying. One apt illustrationof my contention with the speaker involves the demolishment of the great wall, advocated by certain local government. To satisfy the need of modern building, some country government allow to reconstruct on the site of great wall, which stands for the thought of protection for empire and is a reflection of ancient civilization. As we destroyed the architecture, we human also miss the opportunity to understand ourselves deeply. Similarly, the pyramid, which was built to get ready for the after-life, is a result of the past thought and value. Can we replace them because of the need of modern development? Certainly no. in short, most razing old building can carry undesirable consequence that significantly outweighs the development.
Turning next to the development, it is tempting to think that development can completely elevate our lives to higher standard of living and more comfortable level. Yet many so called developments by no means benefit for the previous sake. One distinct example comes to my mind immediately. The accident in Chernobyl nuclear plant remains a painful memory in the lives of the hundreds of thousands of residents who were affected by the accident. Vast of cropland, forests, river and urban centre were contaminated by environmentally fallout. Myriad of people had to evacuate from these affected areas and resettled elsewhere. In short, query whether the new construction can benefit to us, and whether our measure that breaking old historic building spurs the development is worthwhile.
That is not to say, however, we give up the sense of mission that the society has responsibility for meeting the need of development. For instance, if an additional school is need to address the shortage of educational resource and to enhance the level of local education, or if an additional hospital is needed for medical care about certain patients, through careful analysis and denying  that the old building contain historic value those social needs should take precedence over an old building. Otherwise, the society would trap in chaos, which goes against development. After all, those necessary constructions exert profound effect on not only modern development but also how to proceed in mundane lives. In short, a heightened awareness of practical need serve to stabilization as well as development.
To sum up, whether razing an old building is worthwhile is up to our judgment and value. To balance the varied need we should deeply analyze the historic value and development. To stabilize our society, we should concentrate on pursuing additional avenue to address the need of development without destroying old building containing historic value.