Issue36 【Chasing For "6" Score】第二次作业

xipanlinyuUID: 2300112

1.  人的伟大首先是因为自身对社会的贡献
2.1)杰出的才能超出了同时代人的理解。
  2)当代人envy,或受当时的社会意识形态、舆论传播,道德或政治氛围而导致的公众的偏见的影响。
   3)后人能够通过研究和了解社会发展的历史知道前人当时的行为是否对其后的社会发展产生了影响
3.有的工程在当时看起来很好，随时间推移显出坏处。
4.不能否认，很多伟人在他活着的那个年代就声名雀起

TOPIC: ISSUE 36 - "The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries."
WORDS:589          TIME: 1:00:00          DATE: 2008-3-6

I fundamentally agree with the proposition that it is the later generations who mainly determine the greatness of people living ahead of them. A contrary view would reveal a too-narrow view of the limitation of the cognition of contemporaries. Nevertheless, I would caution that a variety of great persons won their fame during their times instead of many years later.

For the first, whether a person could be regarded as great or not depends radically on one's contribution to society rather than time. If one contributes little to society, hardly does he have the possibility of leaving impression to his contemporaries, not to mention gaining appreciation from them several generations later. In contrast, a person who brings tremendous benefit to society would obtain recognition later or sooner.

The greatness of individuals might not be recognized by contemporaries for three reasons. For the first, their talents are so outstanding that they are beyond the reach of their contemporaries. Their gifts surpass the common cognition of general public that they are considered as unacceptable. One apt example involves Confucius, the great thinker of ancient China, whose Confucianism was unappreciated by the monarchs of his time yet is seen as classic of philosophy now and has won great honor from the descendants. Thus, contemporaries sometimes are not capable to discover those great men of their times due to the limitation of their cognition. For the second, people who live at the same time might be affected by the mass media, envy, ideology of society, prejudice from political climate and the like and therefore cannot hold an objective opinion towards the great persons of their times. For the third, descendants can study the influence of their former generations on the trends of social advancement so as to judge the contribution of them, which is the primary foundation of evaluation. Accordingly, descendants have more evidence to place judgment on a person than one's contemporaries.

On the other hand, some projects might seem beneficial to society at its time, but turn out to be ill-conceived. Time is most convincing in the role of judgment. History is replete with such examples. The Star War defense system initiated by Reagan administration is a typical one. At that time, this program was perceived as worthwhile yet turned out to be ill-conceived as a huge waste of social resources with little benefit to society. History informs us that in order to decide whether a program is appropriate or a person’s positive contribution outweighs the negative, we need to wait until influence automatically reveals.

Notwithstanding the foregoing reasons, there are many great persons in histories who obtained the acknowledgement of society during their times. Consider, Gorge Washington and Jefferson, the founding fathers of America, for instance. They not only earned their esteem by their citizens, were elected as presidents, but also had their statues set up on South Dakota's black hills, which serve as the emblem of reverence from descendants. We can have another look at Rousseau, who published many works, such as the discourse on the science and the arts, the social contract, both of which won great appreciation from his contemporaries. Hence, it is somewhat incorrect to say that the greatness of individuals cannot be decided by contemporaries.

On balance, I agree with the broad assertion that descendants assume an active role in determining the greatness of people living in advance of them. However, they are not the only people who can serve this function. Contemporaries sometimes also have the capability of recognizing the giants of their times.

answer35UID: 2463414

语言不错，结构上我觉得还有改进的空间！～我的能力有限，希望楼主回改！～

liuhuan1117UID: 2466993

I fundamentally agree with the proposition that it is the later generations who mainly determine the greatness of people living ahead of them. A contrary view would reveal a too-narrow view of the limitation of the cognition of contemporaries. Nevertheless, I would caution that a variety of great persons won their fame during their times instead of many years later.

For the first, whether a person could be regarded as great or not depends radically on one's contribution to society rather than time. If one contributes little to society, hardly does he have the possibility of leaving impression to his contemporaries,[he用he/she代替会好些，避免性别歧视] not to mention gaining appreciation from them several generations later. In contrast, a person who brings tremendous benefit[benefits] to society would obtain recognition later or sooner.[sooner or later]

The greatness of individuals might not be recognized by contemporaries for three reasons. For the first, their talents are so outstanding that they are beyond the reach of their contemporaries. Their gifts surpass the common cognition of general public[so] that they are considered as unacceptable. One apt example involves Confucius, the great thinker of ancient China, whose Confucianism was unappreciated by the monarchs of his time yet is seen as classic of philosophy now and has won great honor from the descendants. Thus, contemporaries sometimes are not capable to discover those great men of their times due to the limitation of their cognition. For the second, people who live at the same time might be affected by the mass media, envy, ideology of society, prejudice from political climate and the like and therefore cannot hold an objective opinion towards the great persons of their times. For the third, descendants can study the influence of their former generations on the trends of social advancement so as to judge the contribution of them, which is the primary foundation of evaluation. Accordingly, descendants have more evidence to place judgment on a person than one's contemporaries.[这段总体的意思表达明确了，也能体现词汇的应用水平，可是整体的表达方式并不地道，很大程度上是按照中文的思维组合而成的]

On the other hand, some projects might seem beneficial to society at its time[their times], but turn out to be ill-conceived. Time is [the] most convincing in[as] the role of judgment. History is replete with such examples. The Star War defense system initiated by Reagan administration is a typical one. At that time, this program was perceived as worthwhile yet turned out to be ill-conceived as a huge waste of social resources with little benefit to society. History informs us that in order to decide whether a program is appropriate or a person’s positive contribution outweighs the negative, we need to wait until influence automatically reveals.

Notwithstanding the foregoing reasons, there are many great persons in histories[history] who obtained the acknowledgement of[from] society during their times. Consider, Gorge Washington and Jefferson, the founding fathers of America, for instance. They not only earned their esteem by their citizens, were elected as presidents, but also had their statues set up on South Dakota's black hills, which serve as the emblem of reverence from descendants. We can have another look at Rousseau, who[have] published many works, such as the discourse on the science and the arts, the social contract, both of which won great appreciation from his contemporaries. Hence, it is somewhat incorrect to say that the greatness of individuals cannot be decided by contemporaries.

On balance, I agree with the broad assertion that descendants assume an active role in determining the greatness of people living in advance of them. However, they are not the only people who can serve this function. Contemporaries sometimes also have the capability of recognizing the giants of their times.[你写的几篇文章我都看了，总体感觉水平不错，北美范文看了很多，例子应用的还可以，就是遣词造句还需要提高，我也是四月份考，希望你能回拍，我们共同进步]
我在46楼