零散版友作文互改大贴

nohevenUID: 2447539

Issue73【0906G 文以载道三月四月作文小组】2.21 作业by noheven
TOPIC: ISSUE73 - "In most professions andacademic fields, imagination is more important than knowledge."

WORDS: 510
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2009/2/25 1:19:17


As Francis Bacon who is a famous writer andthinker once said, "Knowledge is power"; and Albert Enistein, one ofthe most significant scientists in the world, also said, "Imagination ismore important than knowledge." So which one is more important? The answeris: "both". In fact, in most professions and academic fields, both ofthem exist at the same time and support each other to develop.



In the aspect of art, without imagination,there is no art any more. Art is more about our external emotion, human natureand the beauty of nature itself rather than something about "what isit" or "how to". Knowledge is something known while art callsfor something felt. For instance, in common sense, there is no green nose orpurple face in human body; however, both of them exist in Henri Matisse’s oilpainting. The oil painter used his imagination to represent his feelings andconcept, over the barrier of common sense or everyday knowledge.


In the aspect of science, including physicalscience, literate science and social science, imagination is the source ofcreativity, and can bring about new ideas even discoveries. But what is should notbe ignored is the fact that knowledge lays the foundation for advanced researchwhich is something supporting imagination. What we known is like a circle; themore we know, the larger the circle is and of course the much more the circlewill touch. And the touched space is something unknown. So how to touch the unknownworld? Like a child, we step by limited knowledge and imagination. Lookingback
to the short history of spacediscovery and tourism, the space ship, the landing on Luna, and the shot of surfaceof earth from outer space, any of them just existed in scientific fantasy
works, as fruits of imagination. However, theimagination encourage people to research and develop, based on solid knowledge.


Last but not least, in the aspect ofprofession fields, knowledge is the foundation of professional skills. Just imaginean architect who can not use autoCAD software, or a doctor who is not familiarwith human body? Without the professional knowledge, people are not able towork. Moreover, imagination could bring more joy and development space. Forexample, if an architect works only by knowledge but no imagination, he or shecould just fulfill the functions and copy the old style but could not create exoterica,which means the new and imaginative ways to combine the elements existing.Imagination is the wings of the bird that we could hold to beyond the old stuffand old life.

As time passes by, we always remind us toour wonderful childhood: an innocent child who does not much about the worldjust felt the world by imagining and touching. It is the origin of ourknowledge as well as it is the way to test our knowledge. In this sense,knowledge is somehow rooted in imagination; however, on the other hand,imagination could not fruit without knowledge because imagination is the newform of old elements.

wanfang36UID: 2500278

占62楼的帖

wanfang36UID: 2500278

As Francis Bacon once said, "Knowledge is power"; and这儿应该是转折吧 Albert Enistein, one ofthe most significant scientists in the world, also said, "Imagination ismore important than knowledge."前面这个句子缺主句 So这个因果关系我觉得不是特明显 which one is more important? The answeris: "both". In fact, in most professions and academic fields, both ofthem exist at the same time and support each other to develop.



In the aspect of art, without imagination,there is no art any more. Art is more about our external emotion, human natureand the beauty of nature itself rather than something about "what isit" or "how to". Knowledge is something known while art callsfor something felt. For instance, in common sense, there is no green nose orpurple face in human body; however, both of them exist in Henri Matisse’s oilpainting. The oil painter used his imagination to represent his feelings andconcept, over the barrier of common sense or everyday knowledge.例子很不错，描述的也特好。就感觉前面说理有点单薄


In the aspect of science, including physicalscience, literate science and social science, imagination is the source ofcreativity, and can bring about new ideas even discoveries. But what is should notbe ignored is the fact that knowledge lays the foundation for advanced researchwhich is something supporting imagination. What we known is like a circle; themore we know, the larger the circle is and of course the much more the circlewill touch.没能理解作者原意 And the touched space is something unknown. So how to touch the unknownworld? Like a child, we step by limited knowledge and imagination. 这个角度挺好的，不过论述似乎不是很明确，不知道作者要表达什么
Looking back to the short history of space discovery and tourism, the space ship, the landing on Luna, and the shot of surfaceof earth from outer space, any of them just existed in scientific fantasy works, as fruits of imagination不知道这么表达对不对……感觉有点Chinglish. However, the imagination encourage people to research and develop, based on solid knowledge.如果能把从imagination到invention之间用到knowledge的这个过程多阐述一下更好


Last but not least, in the aspect of profession fields, knowledge is the foundation of professional skills. Just imagine an architect who can not use autoCAD software, or a doctor who is not familiarwith human body? Without the professional knowledge, people are not able towork. Moreover, imagination could bring more joy and development space. Forexample, if an architect works only by knowledge but no imagination, he or shecould just fulfill the functions and copy the old style but could not create exoterica,which means the new and imaginative ways to combine the elements existing.Imagination is the wings of the bird that we could hold to beyond the old stuffand old life.

As time passes by, we always remind us toour wonderful childhood: an innocent child who does not much about the worldjust felt the world by imagining and touching. It is the origin of ourknowledge as well as it is the way to test our knowledge. In this sense,knowledge is somehow rooted in imagination; however, on the other hand,imagination could not fruit without knowledge because imagination is the newform of old elements.感觉最后一段总结的挺好~~

nohevenUID: 2447539

60# teresa8829
argument 53
In the argument,the author comes up with a conclusion thatincreased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy andshyness continues into later life.To reinforce the conclusion,the author citesa study involving 25 infants ,who showed signs of mild distress when exposed tounfamiliar stimuli and were more likely to have been concieved in earlyautumn.The author also indicates the fact that early autumn is a time whenmothers' production of melatonin naturally increase to support theconclusion.Moreover,results of a follow-up study is provided as well. (这句话好像没有什么实际意义)Theargument  made by the author make sense at first glance,however,itsuffers from several logical fallacies that weaken the reliability.

In the first place, the  statistical reliability of the studyinvolving 25 infants is open to doubt. （我建议直接指出错误之处，比含糊地套一句”open to doubt”要有说服力吧）The author assumes that 25 infants arerepresentative enough for infants as a whole.The assumption, howbeit, lackssufficient evidence to support it.Common sense tells me that 25 accounts for arather small propotion of infants population,which renders the studymeaningless.Unless the author provides sufficent samples,I cannot adopt theconclusion without any suspisions. (这段写的有些空洞：作者看出了问题点，却没能指出到底哪里不对)

In the second place,even if the study mentioned above is valid,the author stillfail to convince me that it is increased levels of melatonin before birth thatcause the infants’ distress when they are exposed to unfamiliar stimuli.Theauthor establishes a fault causal relationship between infancy shyness andmothers' increase of melatonin production only because ofoccurence.However,there are a myriad of other factors may serve to thedistess,such as the weather when they were born,mothers' constitions,and theforth.Neglecting these and other factors,the author fails to justify theconclusion. （和上一段的问题一样）

In the third place,even assuming it is exact the increased levels of melatoninbefore birth that cause the distress ,it doesn't necessarily mean levels ofmelatonin contribute to shyness during infancy,for the distress,which is morelikely a physical response,doesn’t equal to shyness.Failing to provide aprecise defination of shyness,the author undermines the validness of theconclusion. （这段才是logical fallacies，可以使用它因法来充实一下）

Finally,even if increased levels of melatonin before birth give rise to theshyness during infancy,the author still cannot draw a conclusion the effectwill continue in later life.As is well known to us,individuals’ personalitiesrely much on the environment where they are brought up.By simply neglectingthis crucial factors,the author unfairly attributes melatonin to shyness showedby teenagers in the follow-up study.

To sum up,the argument,relying on unsubstantiated assumption and questionableevidence,is unpersuasive as it stands.To reach a more reasonble conclusion,itis necessary for the arguer to provide a more thorough and reliableinvestigation.Moreover,the evidence suggesting the causal relationship betweenincreased levels of melatonin and shyness is needed.Besides,unless the authorrules out other factors which have impact on shyness both during infancy andlater life,the argument cannot make any sound and logical recommendationwhatsoever.

（整体感觉是有些堆砌句子，指出了问题但没能说明问题）

nohevenUID: 2447539

TOPIC: ARGUMENT53 - Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin-a hormone known to affect some brain functions-would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children-now teenagers-who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
WORDS: 439        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009/3/3 1:06:10

In this argument, the author concludes that because of the increased levels of melatonin before birth, children would show signs of distress identified themselves. This conclusion based on a survey including only 25 infants operated 13 years ago. Though it seems to be reliable, this argument turns itself open to doubt for the vague data and standard.

First of all, the samples of the survey which are mentioned as a basement are too limited to get a conclusion. It is entirely possible that the infants in this survey happened to be shy children. On other hand, any factor could influence this experiment which should keep the same during several times of test is not mentioned at all. Did the experimental condition change? Did they just test for one time? Were there any counterparts? If any answer to these questions is no, the survey should not be used as an evidence.

In the second place, there is no any standard of shyness or distress identification among teenagers in this argument. Moreover, the definition or standard of "unfamiliar" or "unusual" which is important to define the infants’ responses’ is neither mentioned. In this case, how to test a person, especially an immature teenager whose emotion is not always steady, is shy or not? Maybe some response which means shy to one is just a kind of polite manner to another; or even one has something wrong with his eyes so that he is not able to get the right message from the researchers, or they were just not adept to the lab conditions. Furthermore, since shyness is a kind of personality which needs time to test, there is no evidence to show the researchers kept observing during the 13 years. Just a follow-up study conducted earlier this year could not offer enough supporting.

Last but not least, even the data of the survey is reliable and the teenagers really shier that “others”, the arguer assumes the relationship between the increased levels of melatonin before birth and the signs of distress identified oneself without ruling out other possible explanations. There are entirely possible that children get shier for the reasons from their educations and surroundings, or some other factor before their birth, such as the amount of sport of their mothers, or the amount of vitamins their mothers got.

To sum up, this argument’s foundation is problematic and the author makes a hasty assertion on it. For better access, more data from much larger amount of samples and the standard to define different reactions should be applied. At the same time, the arguer should also consider other possible alternatives in this research.

雾霏云UID: 2518198

TOPIC: ARGUMENT53 - Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin-a hormone known to affect some brain functions-would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children-now teenagers-who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
WORDS: 439        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2009/3/3 1:06:10

In this argument, the author concludes that because of the increased levels of melatonin before birth, children would show signs of distress identified themselves. This conclusion based on a survey including only 25 infants operated 13 years ago. Though it seems to be reliable, this argument turns itself open to doubt for the vague data and standard.

First of all, the samples of the survey which are mentioned as a basement are too limited to get a conclusion. 可以再接一句套话，诸如数量太小等等，把后面的那句改成从句It is entirely possible that the infants in this survey happened to be shy children. On other hand感觉这个连接的用的不对应该用递进性词, any factor could influence this experiment which should keep the same during several times of test is not mentioned at all. Did the experimental condition change? Did they just test for one time? Were there any counterparts?个人感觉连问句后面再跟进一步具体一些的假设会比较好If any answer to these questions is no, the survey should not be used as an evidence.

In the second place, there is no any（去掉） standard of shyness or distress identification among teenagers in this argument. Moreover, the definition or standard of "unfamiliar" or "unusual" which is important to define the infants’ responses’ is neither mentioned. In this case, how to test a person, especially an immature teenager whose emotion is not always steady, is shy or not? Maybe some response which means shy to one is just a kind of polite manner to another; or even one has something wrong with his eyes so that he is not able to get the right message from the researchers感觉这一句有点牵强, or they were just not adept to the lab conditions. Furthermore, since shyness is a kind of personality which needs time to test, there is no evidence to show the researchers kept observing during the 13 years. Just a follow-up study conducted earlier this year could not offer enough supporting.

Last but not least, even the data of the survey is reliable and the teenagers really shier that “others”, the arguer assumes the relationship between the increased levels of melatonin before birth and the signs of distress identified oneself without ruling out other possible explanations. There are entirely possible that children get shier for the reasons from their educations and surroundings, or some other factor before their birth, such as the amount of sport of their mothers, or the amount of vitamins their mothers got.感觉这一句应该分成两句说，同时不要说这么简略，第一他们的妈妈怀孕他们时的其他影响。第二他们在长大过程中接受到的外部环境的影响。

To sum up, this argument’s foundation is problematic and the author makes a hasty assertion on it. For better access, more data from much larger amount of samples and the standard to define different reactions should be applied. At the same time, the arguer should also consider other possible alternatives in this research.

雾霏云UID: 2518198

我的作文:issue70 "In any profession--business,politics,education,government--those in power should be step down after five years.The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

Every area has its leaders, who stand high and regulate the deeds of others. But as numbers and reports have revealed some existing problems due to the rigidity of authority, an increasing number of people begin to question the authorities by proposing that they should step down after five years to revitalize the system. From my perspective, I deem that we cannot treat all areas by only one standardized criteria, and whether the leaders should step down or not must be decided according to the situation.

First let's focus on the area of business. Looking back at the great histories of the extremely large and successful corporations,  those who have become great and successful company leaders could probably have established great targets and ambitions while possess ample expertise gained through struggles and contrivitions all the way. Five years can never be a satisfying period for a novice to become sophisticated and well-insighted enough to carry out the fateful plans and decisions successfully. Wal-Mart’s former chairman didn’t leave his position until his death, proving his smartness and capacity in managing by expanding his market throughout the world and making profits all the time. The world of business need a leader with more expertise and successful records more than a young and inveterate one, one who may bring disaster to his corporation and even the whole world.

Then let's discuss this proposition's credibility in the area of politics.  On one hand, successful politicians can utilize his power properly in order to defend his people and march towards prosperity and stability. On the other hand, some authorities may abuse his power and become autocracies, robbing his fellow citizens of their deserved freedom and democracy. In order to make a balance between enough experience and tendencies to become autocracies, whether the leader in politics should step down after five years or not should be judged by his people. Possible solutions can be attained by setting a certain tenure. Those who have not only expertise but also passion, always willing to dedicate and sacrifice and totally committed to the common good of all should remain in power for some years. Americans chose Franklin Roosevelt their president for four times, a period much longer than the previously suggested five years, but no one could deny Roosevelt's greatness and ability in handling tough situations and reassuring his people without abusing his great power.

Finally, let's turn to the area of education.  The leaders in education suggest being the greatest scholars or the most famous artists. Aside from their abysmal perceptions of knowledge and pedagogies, they are often noted for their precious virtues and straightforward attitudes. They are chosen leaders, authorities and headmasters partly because they do have the ability to stipulate, manage and regulate, but more because they can serve as the examples and statures who can not only lead a researching team into the fantastic world of knowledge but also do and carry out exactly what they command others to obey.  Five years is too short, too short for us to affirm their splendid achievements, and too short for them to fulfill their future targets in researching or the construction of a school's system. Though there're scholars who have appropriated the money for researching, we cannot treat all the leaders in the area of education with baleful skepticism. Revitalization cannot be carried out unless the educational system proves itself a rigid one, and then we can let the young ones to exert their power to change and innovate.

From what has been discussed above, we can possibly draw the conclusion that five years is just a period, and whether those in power should step down after a certain period of time or not should be depended on many aspects including the situation, the current demands and the people's wills. Simply make such stipulation like forcing the authorities to step down without taking many aspects into consideration could only bring about devastating consequences.

thisismjUID: 2433038

这个帖子不错~改楼上的~

issue70 "In any profession--business,politics,education,government--those in power should be step down after five years.The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

Every area has its leaders, (不用逗号也行)who stand high and regulate the deeds of others（members of the group更好点）. But as numbers and reports have revealed some existing problems due to the rigidity of authority, an increasing number of people begin to question the authorities by proposing that they should step down after five years to revitalize the system. From my perspective, I deem that （已近是from my perspective了，可以省去I deem that）we cannot treat all areas by only one standardized criteria, and whether the leaders should step down or not must be decided according to the situation.
（第一段比较古典，解释了下这个问题，然后提出自己的观点，但是思路还是比较清晰。）
First let's focus on the area of business. Looking back at the great histories（不可数） of the extremely large and successful corporations,  those who have become great and successful company leaders could probably have established great targets and ambitions while possess（ing更好点） ample expertise gained through struggles and contrivitions（有没有拼错？） all the way. Five years can never be a satisfying period for a novice to become sophisticated（出于连贯，用a sophisticated较好） and well-insighted enough to carry out the fateful plans and decisions successfully. Wal-Mart’s former chairman didn’t leave his position until his death, proving his smartness and capacity in managing by expanding his market throughout the world and making profits all the time. The world of business need a leader with more expertise and successful records more than a young and inveterate one, one who may bring disaster to his corporation and even the whole world.

Then let's discuss this proposition's credibility in the area of politics.  On one hand, successful politicians can utilize his power properly in order to defend his people and march towards prosperity and stability. On the other hand, some authorities may abuse his power and become autocracies, robbing his fellow citizens of their deserved freedom and democracy. In order to make a balance between enough experience and tendencies to become autocracies, whether the leader in politics should step down after five years or not should be judged by his people. Possible solutions can be attained by setting a certain tenure. Those who have not only expertise but also passion, always willing to dedicate and sacrifice and totally committed to the common good of all should remain in power for some years. Americans chose Franklin Roosevelt their president for four times, a period much longer than the previously suggested five years, but no one could deny Roosevelt's greatness and ability in handling tough situations and reassuring his people without abusing his great power.

Finally, let's turn to the area of education.  The leaders in education suggest being （suggest do/should do）the greatest scholars or the most famous artists. Aside from their abysmal perceptions of knowledge and pedagogies, they are often noted for their precious virtues and straightforward attitudes. They are chosen leaders, authorities and headmasters partly because they do have the ability to stipulate, manage and regulate, but more because they can serve as the examples and statures who can not only lead a researching team into the fantastic world of knowledge but also do and carry out exactly what they command others to obey.  Five years is too short, too short for us to affirm their splendid achievements, and too short for them to fulfill their future targets in researching or the construction of a school's system. Though there're scholars who have appropriated the money for researching, we cannot treat all the leaders in the area of education with baleful skepticism. Revitalization cannot be carried out unless the educational system proves itself a rigid one, and then we can let the young ones to （let do）exert their power to change and innovate.
（主体讨论了三个领域，结构清晰）
From what has been discussed above, we can possibly draw the conclusion that five years is just a period, and whether those in power should step down after a certain period of time or not should be depended on many aspects including the situation, the current demands and the people's wills. Simply make（making） such stipulation （复数或者a stipulation）like forcing the authorities to step down without taking many（any更好） aspects into consideration could only bring about devastating consequences.（这个结尾不错，真正起到了总结作用。）

文章还是比较中规中矩，合理按照总分总的结构，这样做比较清晰，推荐，包括其主体部分~

但是建议在论述三个领域的时候希望把主题句放在第一句，这样便于考官抓住重点~

有几处语法错误，希望以后尽量避免~

文章的用词采用了较高级的词汇，如果在文章结构紧凑的基础上还是能增添许多色彩的，但是如果要硬搬上去试用，还不如用一些自己有把握的词汇。只是个人意见，希望楼主自行把握~

在内容上不够insightful，但是富兰克林的例子我觉得举得非常敲到好处~

thisismjUID: 2433038

自己的，没有限时，诚邀批改~


Topic: Competition is ultimately more beneficial than detrimental to society.



Some says competition helps enhence the entire level of every fields and places while others holds that it makes poeple do harm to each other and lead to disater consequence. My point of view is simple: either of them is too assertive. Where poeple fully comprehend its meaning and use its power wisely, they get benifits from it; where people abuse it and toward a deviate direction, they probably suffer from it or give others pains.



Most of the time, poeple from all the nations use it smartly and their economy booming. The mechanism of free market is free competition. In the same kind of industry survives several companies who produce similar commodity or provide similar sevices. To be better and gain more profits, each of them try their best to improve the technologies, devolope new products and improve the after services. The result will undoutable be the benifit of our clients. In the case of monoply industry, for instance Microsoft in the industry of OS (Operative System), we can see the slow speed of upgrading of quality. Nine in ten persons who have a computer use their products of Windows or Vista. But a few of us complain them of everyday's bugs and the vulnerability of being attacked by virus. Even when we reported these bugs and leaks, they improved little because we have only one choice of OS.



As it applies in free market, we can see competion servicing other fields well. Now we can understand easily why there is only one champion in every sports game. It requires players or teams to compete for that and through this process, players' skill upgraded, teams' entire solidarity confirmed. We were forced to participate various contests which need hard work and sweat if we want to be in the first class. It is painful and meaningful, after these contests, our knowledge solidified, our qualities advanced and our bodies strengthened. Now the distance between nations is decreasing, so competition is never just within a nation. When a cometition in a nation boosts the level of nation, a competition in the scale of globe boosts level of the whole world.



But when we look back the world's history, we see some places where people abuse the competition and comprehend the wrong meaning of it. Through the Cold War, the world's bigest two nations launched a competition of troops and nuclear weapons that threaten the safty of planet. Because of that, the economy had be set aside which could have been booming more. Even now there are some areas where its government spends countless money to develope nuclear weapons against the pacifists' oppose. Their intention is to be stronger then other nations in the militory power. But their behaviors are doing nothing but threatening the neighbors and also our planet.



Therefore, it is clear that to say the competition is beneficial or not is too assertive. It depends on how  people use it wisely and constrain its abuse. Though the power of free market is unmatched, without a watchful eye it can easily step into a recession.

leo_yhUID: 2605703

改70楼
初来乍到, 请多多关照哦!
70# thisismj

爱上猪的狗UID: 2598667

我也改一下70楼的吧！呵呵！顺便再贴篇自己的！

爱上猪的狗UID: 2598667

48."The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."(1hour)
   对历史的研究把太多的重点放在对某些个人上。而历史上一些重大的事件和发展趋势不是由个别名人决定的，而是由那些已经被人们淡忘的社会群体所创造的。
Nowadays, with the development of science and technology, there is a widespread discussion about the study of research. Those who adovocate the claim, such as the speaker, argue that we should place more emphasis on groups of people who made most important events and trends when studying history. But some people, differing from the former individuals, deem that studying famous few is necessary for history reasearh which will help us rememeber events more cleary . As I perceive the issue, we should regard this staement on differenct cases. Some crucial events and trends finished by famous few and groups of people together, while in term of studying history, paying more attention on individuals is a more reasonable choice than speaker’s recommendation in most cases. Morever, the famous few play an important part in history. My argument for this are listed as follows.
As the threshold matter, most grand hisotories, especially for famous architectures, are accomplished by groups of people. For instance,both Taj Mahal in Indian and Great Wall in china are great constures in the world which almost everyone with commensense know about.  Simulatneously, we all know that they are masterpieces of groups of people who worked hard to the wonder. History should give name to them and we shouldn’t foreget their contributions. Achictecure is just one typical example in history, in fact there are many more remarkable examples, such as the war of liberation in China, the Civil war in America, and the presant war in Russia all of which are finished by groups of people. Shoud we forget them when studying the history. Of course not.
Nevertheless, we must admit that the famous few provide the initial spark for hisotory. Emperor Shah Jahan intended to build Taj Mahal for his queen Mamtaz Mahal, and Emperor Qin planned to construct Great Wall to defence the country. Without the their impulsion, it is entirely possible that we can’t appreiciate the great building today.  Chairman Mao, Abraham Lincon and Lenin provided the motivation and leade the social changes. Consequently, both of them made great efforts to promote the development of the history.
Thus, when we study history we should come up with a good idea to memorize the improtant trends and events. Assumping that we study the groups of people, all of the hisotorical facts are hard to remember and they will be in great confusion without indentical features. This is counterproductive to the aim of studying history. Most people will feel the same way as me. And could we remember all of these groups of people?  It is obviously unpractical .
In addition,If we put more attention on studying the famous few, the shoe is on another foot .I also want to talk about above examples who are engraved on our memory by these famous few. Without the research of them, history will boring to us. In the realm of science and technology, we can blurt out some famous few , such as Eintain, Edison, Curie, Copernicus, and Newton. Their history are individual’s topic, but we are clear that their distinctive deals are the merits of them and groups of people who once helped them.  In term of the studying history, we fundamentally choose the famous few.
Considering all the factors above, when it comes to what we should attach importance on, the key determinant is the research value for modern people. Perhaps it will change at the close of next millenium with the developments of societies. In the final analysis, today we should study the famous few as much as possible
谢谢大家啦！我改的70楼的马上交上！

爱上猪的狗UID: 2598667

Topic: Competition is ultimately more beneficial than detrimental to society.



Some says competition helps enhence the entire level of every fields and places while others hold(s)s去掉 that it makes poeple do harm to each other and leads to disater（改成terrible） consequence. My point of view is simple: either of them is too assertive. Where poeple fully comprehend its meaning and use its power wisely, they get benifits from it; where people abuse it （去掉and） toward a deviate direction, they probably suffer from it or give others pains.



Most of the time, poeple from all （去掉the） nations use it smartly （and ） to make their economy booming. The mechanism of free market is free competition(这句两个free重复吧？). In the same kind of industry survives several companies who produce similar commodity or provide similar sevices. To be better and gain more profits, each of them try their best to improve （去掉the） technologies, devolope new products and improve the after services. The result will （undoutable the benifit of） be undoutedly beneficial to （our） clients. In the case of monopoly industry,（ for instance）such as Microsoft in the industry of OS (Operative System), we can see the slow speed of upgrading （of）in quality. Nine in ten persons who have a computer use their products of Windows or Vista. But a few of us complain （them of）about everyday's bugs and the vulnerability of being attacked by virus. Even when we reported these bugs and leaks, they improved little because we have only one choice of OS（用过去时？）. 这个例子和这一段的论点一样吗？



As it applies in free market, we can see competion servicing other fields as well. Now we can understand easily why there is only one champion in every sports game. It requires players or teams to compete for that and through this process, players' skill upgrades, teams' entire solidarity confirms .We (were) are forced to participate various contests which need hard work and sweat if we want to be in the first class. It is painful and meaningful, after these contests, our knowledge solidified, our qualities advanced and our bodies strengthened. Now the distance between nations is decreasing, so competition is never just within a nation. When a comeptition in a nation boosts the level of nation, a competition in the scale of globe boosts level of the whole world.



But when we look back the world's history, we see some places where people abuse the competition and comprehend the wrong meaning of it. Through the Cold War, the world's bigest two nations launched a competition of troops and nuclear weapons that threaten the safty of planet. Because of that, the economy had been set aside which could have been booming more. Even now there are some areas where its government spends countless money to develope nuclear weapons against the pacifists' oppose. Their intention is to be stronger then other nations in the military power. But their behaviors are doing nothing but threatening the neighbors and also our planet.



Therefore, it is clear that to say the competition is beneficial or not is too assertive. It depends on how  people use it wisely and constrain its abuse. Though the power of free market is unmatched, without a watchful eye it can easily step into a recession.
有一些单词有拼写错误，放到括号里的词是我认为要去掉的……很多名词不是特指可以不用加the……
还有……我觉得第一段competition是抽象名词，用好几个what 感觉有点怪！个人感觉是不是能改一下？嘿嘿！
大体思路没有问题……这一题我觉得在说它的坏处时可以和合作对比一下……我觉得核武器不算是一种竞争,这个是国家防御……也不是没有好处的……
个人观点……希望有所帮助……呵呵！

thisismjUID: 2433038

感谢“爱上猪的狗”，那我占位来改你的作业吧~73#~


48."The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."(1hour)
   对历史的研究把太多的重点放在对某些个人上。而历史上一些重大的事件和发展趋势不是由个别名人决定的，而是由那些已经被人们淡忘的社会群体所创造的。
Nowadays, with the development of science and technology, there is a widespread discussion about the study of research（study和research意义相近）. Those who adovocate the claim, such as the speaker, argue that we should place more emphasis on groups of people who made most important events and trends when studying history. But some people, differing from the former individuals, deem that studying famous few is necessary for history reasearh which will help us rememeber events more cleary（clearly） . As I perceive the issue, we should regard this statement on differenct cases. Some crucial events and trends （were）finished by famous few and groups of people together, while in term of studying history, paying more attention on individuals is a more reasonable choice than speaker’s recommendation in most cases. Morever, the famous few play an important part in history. My argument for this are（is） listed as follows.
（第一段同样采用古典式，有些人...有些人...我认为...。但是我觉得作者的表现意图的句子应该更加明确一点，而且最好不要用太复杂的句式，会让考官摸不着主干。）
As the threshold matter, most grand hisotories, especially for famous architectures, are accomplished by groups of people. For instance,both Taj Mahal in Indian and Great Wall in China are great constures（architectures） in the world which almost everyone with commonsense know about.  Simulatneously, we all know that they are masterpieces of groups of people who worked hard to the wonder. History should give name（give name什么意思？） to them and we shouldn’t foreget their contributions. Achictecure is just one typical example in history, in fact there are many more remarkable examples, such as the war of liberation in China, the Civil war in America, and the presant war（这是什么war?） in Russia all of which are finished by groups of people. Shoud we forget them when studying the history？ Of course not.

Nevertheless, we must admit that the famous few provide the initial spark for hisotory. Emperor Shah Jahan intended to build Taj Mahal for his queen Mamtaz Mahal, and Emperor Qin planned to construct Great Wall to defence the country（exotic tribes）. Without the（去掉） their impulsion, it is entirely（almost） possible that we can’t appreiciate the great building today.  Chairman Mao, Abraham Lincon and Lenin provided the motivation and leade the social changes. Consequently, both of them made great efforts to promote the development of the history.
Thus, when we study history we should come up with a good idea to memorize the improtant trends and events. Assuming that（去掉that） we study the groups of people, all of the hisotorical facts are hard to remember and they will be in great confusion without indentical features. This is counterproductive to the aim of studying history. Most people will feel the same way as me. And could we remember all of these groups of people?  It is obviously unpractical .
In addition,If we put more attention on studying the famous few, the shoe is on another foot .I also want to talk about above examples who are engraved on our memory by these famous few. Without the research of them, history will （be）boring to us. In the realm of science and technology, we can blurt out some famous few , such as Eintain, Edison, Curie, Copernicus, and Newton. Their history are individual’s topic, but we are clear that their distinctive deals are the merits of them and groups of people who once helped them.  In term of the studying history, we fundamentally choose the famous few.
Considering all the factors above, when it comes to what we should attach importance on, the key determinant is the research value for modern people. Perhaps it will change at the close of next millenium with the developments of societies. In the final analysis, today we should study the famous few as much as possible

说实话我读作者的文章有点吃力，可能是由于作者的中文思维太重了，还有用词方面也要更加确切。我认为首先是把话说清楚，然后是写一些长句和复杂句。

在结构方面，一开始做得很好，但是后面三段我不知道作者的用意是什么。希望能并成一段，稍加削减。总分总的方式固然老套却很实用。

内容方面我觉得写这种文章最忌讳的就是什么都想照顾到，其实你只说其中的一方面，尽管你不是很赞成，但是至少文章看起来中心思想明确。希望作者有时候也要变得更加“偏激”一点。（个人意见）

thisismjUID: 2433038

我的，限时，诚邀批改~


TOPIC: ISSUE239 - "Much of the information that people assume is 'factual' actually turns out to be inaccurate. Thus, any piece of information referred to as a 'fact' should be mistrusted since it may well be proven false in the future."
WORDS: 399          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2009/3/1 21:10:01

One of the scientists' work is to pursue truth of nature principles and philosophy laws. The work never stop until they find enough rational evidence to reason that law. But the nature is so complex that it needs several generations of scientists' hard work to reveal its myth. Therefore the truth in a certain era used to be regarded true may be found having some flaws or even fallacious by the sequent researchers and the thought that truth which is not always true should be proven in all realm has gradually emerged in people's mind. However, in my opinion, people have made a mistake at this point.

We can see examples which reflect the overthrow of old theory either in history or in modern society. Old western citizens once believed that the earth is core of the university and all the other stars revolve around it. This theory had not been suspect because it is drawn by one of the greatest philosopher Aristotle whose thought was regarded as perpetual truth. And this idea had never been doubt until another excellent scientist Kepler who finally prove the center is the sun and our world is revolving around it. Should we dig out all the Aristotle's theories and thoughts just because one of his fault? The answer is obviously no because most of his achievements are reasonable and helped human a lot. Proven all his theories could both be a large project and no result.

Now we can safely draw the conclusion that the process of scientific development is a same one of overthrow outdated faculty and constitute new theory. If we agree with it first, then it is a simple to commit the truth is also not always true.

Even though, people would suggest review most factual thing to assure all of them are not out of style. This seem also unacceptable and impossible, first to some fundamental laws it is unnecessary check them one by one because they are the basic fact of science. Second we still have no such enough time to prove them all and even if we have there are probably no outcomes. And the last, the contemporary theory will not be over throw until new technology or revolutionary theory occurs.

In conclusion, it is normal that we can see some fundamentals are proved to be untrue, but to check them all seem so unacceptable and unnecessary.