0910AW 同主题写作第二期 ISSUE157 by Ga-ROW Sleepingboy

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

可能写得有点偏了~
提纲如下： observation是否是objective 我的观点是：目前承认，但是将来很难说。另外purely objective observation 对生活没多大意义，而且我们自身的存在是一种永恒客观的observation，只有理解了它，我们才能truely embrace life。



TOPIC: ISSUE157 - "There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires."
DATE: 2009/6/12 19:11:45

Whether observation is subjective or objective is in fact a philosophical predicament argued for and against by many great philosophers in history. In my view, science might support the speaker’s assertion by possibly proving from a biological perspective in the future. What is more, pure objective observation of our world is meaningless to life, and it is the subject interpretation that vividly enriches life. Finally, there is, however, one observation that holds eternal truth ------- the existence of man. Only by understanding and appreciating it, can we truly embrace life.

Turning to the definition of observation, if we define it as what we perceive sensually on the spatial universe, it would seem to be objective. After all, we can not perceive a red apple as a blue one, or deny the happening of the events that took place. However, researches in medicine have already demonstrated that by injecting hallucinatory drugs, we can get a distorted observation of the so called "reality". Furthermore, the school of generic engineering asserts that human behavior and function (including sensual perception) is actually determined by our neuro-structure, which is more closed related to our genes. Therefore, as generic advances take place in the future, I query whether we can directly prove the above assertion by altering our genes as well as our neuro-cells. It is possible that what we define as objective observation turned out to be the manipulation of individual's neuro-cells, certainly subjective.

Nevertheless, in the present time, we can well accept the notion that observation as we define it is objective, and what is subjective is our interpretation of it. Yet in my views, purely objective observation means little to life. Empirical examples tend to support my view. For instance, sociologists may have different notions on the same social phenomenon (strikes, demonstrations, politician's scandals or downfalls, change of institution, and so forth), and it is through the debate and argument on these subjective notions that a society takes for granted and develop. Juries in legal process do not only objectively record down legal scenes, but also subjectively interpret by comprehending factors like the criminal’s psychological minds. In this way, legal judgments can be both even-handed and flexible. In addition, the objective observation of an art work provides nothing meaningful but a viable object. Lastly, consider the scientific progress in history. Isn't it by the clash of different understands of the same universe of physics law that our greatest scientific figures propelled the development of science and technology? From the old Greek's law of physics to Newton's principle of gravity, and further to Einstein's relativity, all scientific observations make to support was ones that we share in the same world in all times. Therefore, we ascribe our wisdoms, inspiration, justices and other qualities that make a meaning life and a better society not to our objective observation, but largely to our subjective interpretation of it.

Critics opposing to my above assertion might point out that by denying the importance of objective observation, human runs the risk of losing the hope of searching for the absolute truth in life. After all, since all could be turn subjective in the future and subjectivity contributes much more to humanity, it would apprear to indicate that human can seek for truth according to individuals' own expectation and desires. However, such notion violates the ultimate meaning of life. In my observation, we already have the absolute truth in life. That is our own existence, which is also the observation that holds eternal objective, because by no means can one deny he lives or have lived. What a really meaningful life gives to us before our death are our experience, ideas and spirits, passions and feelings and so forth, all of which are subjective. Yet, all these based on perceptual witness serves to strength our existence by adding nutriments to it. We can fully embrace such truth of life while create those nutriments according to individuals. Finally, what is more true and important than the objective existence of us?

草木也知愁UID: 2487572

这个也简单说吧 不具体改了~

ISSUE的所谓模板化毕竟比argument要少很多 你的文章里不是很明显

但是还要注意几个问题

对于首段，列出的那三点，是文字的脉络和简要概述吧，力求简洁，一两个词概括一点最好，尤其是首段写太多了效果反倒不好。多看看我的那个关于effective writting系列的东西吧。

对于body段 写的挺好的 时间紧 没有仔细琢磨 不过能写成这样说明你的基础已经挺好的 等以后吧 你大概定好形态之后 挑一篇我给你好好改

wildrose800331UID: 2602131

1# Neptune2010
Whether observation is subjective or objective is in fact a philosophical predicament argued for and against by many great philosophers in history. In my view, science might support the speaker’s assertion by possibly proving from a biological perspective in the future.(支持666的强硬态度，这里的might, possibly是否考虑换掉？ What is more, pure objective observation of our world is meaningless to life, and it is the subject interpretation that vividly enriches life. Finally, there is, however, one observation that holds eternal truth ------- the existence of man. Only by understanding and appreciating it, can we truly embrace life.（看完全篇看这2句 才明白意思 作者思想很深刻）

Turning to the definition of observation, if we define it as what we perceive sensually on the spatial universe, it would seem to be objective. After all, we can not perceive a red apple as a blue one, or deny the happening of the events that took place. （这里的让步更反衬了之后的可能主观）However, researches in medicine have already demonstrated that by injecting hallucinatory drugs, we can get a distorted observation of the so called "reality". Furthermore, the school of generic engineering asserts that human behavior and function (including sensual perception) is actually determined by our neuro-structure, which is more closed related to our genes. Therefore, as generic advances take place in the future, I query whether we can directly prove the above assertion（是哪一个呢？因为我还没觉得讲到expectations or desires) by altering our genes as well as our neuro-cells. It is possible that what we define as objective observation turned out to be the manipulation of individual's neuro-cells, certainly subjective.

Nevertheless, in the present time, we can well accept the notion that observation as we define it is objective, and what is subjective is our interpretation of it. Yet in my views, purely objective observation means little to life. Empirical examples tend to support my view. For instance, sociologists may have different notions on the same social phenomenon (strikes, demonstrations, politician's scandals or downfalls, change of institution, and so forth), and it is through the debate and argument on these subjective notions that a society takes for granted(这里有点不明白） and develop. Juries in legal process do not only objectively record down legal scenes, but also subjectively interpret by comprehending factors like the criminal’s psychological minds. In this way, legal judgments can be both even-handed and flexible. In addition, the objective observation of an art work provides nothing meaningful but a viable object.（就这么一句不能支撑美学方面的主观意义，觉得需要补充） Lastly, consider the scientific progress in history. Isn't it (by） the clash of different understandings of the same universe of physics law that our greatest scientific figures out that propelled the development of science and technology? From the old Greek's law of physics to Newton's principle of gravity, and further to Einstein's relativity, all scientific observations make to support was ones that we share in the same world in all times（ 句式结构有点不懂）. Therefore, we ascribe our wisdoms, inspiration, justices and other qualities that make a meaning life and a better society not to our objective observation, but largely to our subjective interpretation of it.

Critics opposing to my above assertion might point out that by denying the importance of objective observation, human runs the risk of losing the hope of searching for the absolute truth in life. After all, since all could be turn subjective in the future and subjectivity contributes much more to humanity, it would apprear to indicate that human can seek for truth according to individuals' own expectation and desires. However, such notion violates the ultimate meaning of life. In my observation, we already have the absolute truth in life. That is our own existence, which is also the observation that holds eternal objective（objectivity）, because by no means can one deny he lives or have lived. What a really meaningful life gives to us before our death are our experience, ideas and spirits, passions and feelings and so forth, all of which are subjective. Yet, all these based on perceptual witness serves to strength our existence by adding nutriments to it. We can fully embrace such truth of life while create those nutriments according to individuals. Finally, what is more true and important than the objective existence of us?
不知楼上的花了多久写完，语言好的没话说，论证结构缜密，层层击中要害。就是最后一句算是总结么? 不知道是否必须要结论这一段？还是可以像楼主这样不拖泥带水的结尾？问斑竹先。。。
自愧不如。改的第一篇文章让我有变客观24小时为主观的48小时的冲动 谢谢强人：）

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

1# Neptune2010  
Whether observation is subjective or objective is in fact a philosophical predicament argued for and against by many great philosophers in history. In my view, science might support ...
wildrose800331 发表于 2009-6-13 16:37

拜谢拜谢~~  哈
我没想太多、、其实就是借用了点存在主义哲学+自己乱说一些、、
你的那篇我也改了。话说我本来也想写客观和主管不可分，人的思维是一次完成的、、、有机会讨论一下吧~

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

这个也简单说吧 不具体改了~

ISSUE的所谓模板化毕竟比argument要少很多 你的文章里不是很明显

但是还要注意几个问题

对于首段，列出的那三点，是文字的脉络和简要概述吧，力求简洁，一两个词概括一点最好， ...
草木也知愁 发表于 2009-6-13 14:47

谢谢草木啦~~~
我也觉得开头很囧的、、、最近在大删累赘的字数、、看来第一段也要开刀……
现在开始练习努力脱离模板、、、、、

icyviolaUID: 2597126

专程来膜拜一下。看了楼主的提纲就猜想你是不是在借用存在主义的视角。
可惜我大学里虽然写过萨特啦里尔克啦冯至啦的论文，却断然无法像楼主那样用英文论述很philosophical的观点……我还是继续先努力把简单直观的逻辑描述清楚吧，555

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

专程来膜拜一下。看了楼主的提纲就猜想你是不是在借用存在主义的视角。
可惜我大学里虽然写过萨特啦里尔克啦冯至啦的论文，却断然无法像楼主那样用英文论述很philosophical的观点……我还是继续先努力把简单直观的逻 ...
icyviola 发表于 2009-6-16 22:03

…………这么深奥、、其实我是看的《苏菲》、、很浅显的一本哲学史。 不过大致有点眉目了~~

icyviolaUID: 2597126

这个头像很可爱呀，虽然我也一直很喜欢你之前的那个帅哥，赫赫。

蘅芜雪UID: 2646650

为什么我连地板都没有了……来晚的坏处……对不起，考完六级以后我就疯了两天，改晚了~

TOPIC: ISSUE157 - "There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires."
DATE: 2009/6/12 19:11:45

Whether observation is subjective or objective is in fact a philosophical predicament argued for and against by many great philosophers in history. In my view, science might support the speaker’s assertion by possibly proving from a biological perspective in the future. What is more, pure objective observation of our world is meaningless to life, and it is the subject interpretation that vividly enriches life. Finally, there is, however, one observation that holds eternal truth ------- the existence of man.这句可以不要放在第一段了~因为不是你的重要论点。你的论点很长，中间加这一句容易冲散集中性。 Only by understanding and appreciating it, can we truly embrace life.

Turning to the definition of observation, if we define it as what we perceive sensually on the spatial universe, it would seem to be objective. After all, we can not perceive a red apple as a blue one可能是我太鸡蛋里面挑骨头~看到这句就想起来色盲的问题……建议换个吧，例子有的是呢~（别打我）, or deny the happening of the events that took place. However, researches in medicine have already demonstrated that by injecting hallucinatory drugs, we can get a distorted observation of the so called "reality". Furthermore, the school of generic engineering asserts that human behavior and function (including sensual perception) is actually determined by our neuro-structure, which is more closed related to our genes. Therefore, as generic advances take place in the future, I query whether we can directly prove the above assertion by altering our genes as well as our neuro-cells. It is possible that what we define as objective observation turned out to be the manipulation of individual's neuro-cells, certainly subjective.额……可能是我太浅薄了~这段有些没看懂~首先可能是因为你后面论证的和你的第一句是冲突的（ps，第一句是主题句么……？），其次是这个论证。迷幻药导致眼前出现幻景，这个倒罢了。人类行为和功能由基因决定，因为基因不同，所以行为和功能不同，所以可能带有主观性。这就有点奇怪了。第一这个例子有点过于高深和偏，与论点联系不是那么紧密。其次因为定义里面有了一个”行为“，表达的我认为更倾向于“反应”而不是“观察”。再次你的第一句里已经声明，这里的观察指“接受行为”。你想论证连这个接受行为都可能带着主观性，但我觉得这会不会有点苛刻。毕竟你也说过了，不能把没发生过的事情当作发生过。这种基因上的影响会不会太轻微？是不是值得我们去讨论其的主观性？我认为这里有些把问题复杂化了。

Nevertheless, in the present time, we can well accept the notion that observation as we define it is objective, and what is subjective is our interpretation of it. Yet in my views, purely objective observation means little to life.主题句提前~~~ Empirical examples tend to support my view. For instance, sociologists may have different notions on the same social phenomenon (strikes, demonstrations, politician's scandals or downfalls, change of institution, and so forth), and it is through the debate and argument on these subjective notions that a society takes for granted and develop. Juries in legal process do not only objectively record down legal scenes, but also subjectively interpret by comprehending factors like the criminal’s psychological minds. In this way, legal judgments can be both even-handed and flexible. In addition, the objective observation of an art work provides nothing meaningful but a viable object. Lastly, consider the scientific progress in history. Isn't it by the clash of different understands of the same universe of physics law that our greatest scientific figures propelled the development of science and technology? From the old Greek's law of physics to Newton's principle of gravity, and further to Einstein's relativity, all scientific observations make to support was ones that we share in the same world in all times. Therefore, we ascribe our wisdoms, inspiration, justices and other qualities that make a meaning life and a better society not to our objective observation, but largely to our subjective interpretation of it.中间俩例子……有点联系不是很紧密。另这一段应该属于意义延伸段~放后面好一些

Critics opposing to my above assertion might point out that by denying the importance of objective observation, human runs the risk of losing the hope of searching for the absolute truth in life. After all, since all could be turn subjective in the future and subjectivity contributes much more to humanity, it would apprear to indicate that human can seek for truth according to individuals' own expectation and desires. However, such notion violates the ultimate meaning of life. In my observation, we already have the absolute truth in life. That is our own existence, which is also the observation that holds eternal objective, because by no means can one deny he lives or have lived. What a really meaningful life gives to us before our death are our experience, ideas and spirits, passions and feelings and so forth, all of which are subjective. Yet, all these based on perceptual witness serves to strength our existence by adding nutriments to it. We can fully embrace such truth of life while create those nutriments according to individuals. Finally, what is more true and important than the objective existence of us?
真的有点偏……

蘅芜雪UID: 2646650

补充一下~仅是个人意见~GRE有些题目，在进行深入挖掘以后，往往在一些虚幻的定义上，我们发现需要诉求哲学来寻找解释。但是那么多哲学家和哲学流派，给出的往往又不是一个答案。所以我们莫名其妙，于是按照自己最容易理解的一个定义写进文章中——我的疑问是，这样会不会太“兴师动众”了呢？对于这些争论了那么些年的定义，诉求哲学我认为很容易让脑子混乱（对于大部分没有深入接触哲学的来讲）。在自己一知半解的情况下，往上给别人解释有什么说服力呢？更何况，从功利角度来讲，就算写了，能让考官认为会很有文化很有深度么？或者干脆，他们能看懂么？毕竟在高压批改作文的情况下，考官必然不会为了一个深奥的论点耗费时间，很可能会一扫而过，或者更糟，当作自己看不懂的而最后影响印象。
我个人认为，自己写作文写得爽，还要考虑考官实际操作情况。在那种批改作文的强度下，GRE作文要求的最高境界可能就是精炼，明白，逻辑严谨。当然论点可以有深度，可以新颖，但是不要太过分。维持在一个比平常纬度稍高一点，又不至于高处不胜寒的，就可以了。至于对于哲学问题，自己感兴趣研究就好。不必要为了一篇文章，把各种主义搬出来研究一顿。
个人意见~欢迎拍~

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

补充一下~仅是个人意见~GRE有些题目，在进行深入挖掘以后，往往在一些虚幻的定义上，我们发现需要诉求哲学来寻找解释。但是那么多哲学家和哲学流派，给出的往往又不是一个答案。所以我们莫名其妙，于是按照自己最容易 ...
蘅芜雪 发表于 2009-6-22 21:17

]

雪的批改真是犀利、、受教了~
很同意雪的观点，写大多数I不应该首先下很深刻的定义，然后围绕自己的定义出发的那种clannish的文章
不过这一篇我觉得很肯定要下个定义的，对于observation不同人的定义是不同的，如果不下的话就完全没有客观性可以谈了，因为定义都是主观的。（就像我们bs的时候我和雪&小cc一开始想到的就完全是不同的方面、、）除非是想一边倒的证明主观性，不过我想很少有人会这么写的。
如果只是回答作者的问题的话第二段就回答完了，和之前写那篇other culture和own culture是一样的情况。
I query whether只是说出一种可能性，不是要论证什么什么。可能用I太主观的，改成 it is possible 不知道会不会好些？
而且第一句显然不是开头句啊、、雪同学开头句中毒太深了额、、、（I seems肯定之后是要转折的）
我想Issue应该还是发挥自己想法的地方，只是不能强加什么高深的理论。那个哲学的纯属冤枉、、、我只能说写的时候什么也不知道，苏菲是去年暑假看的、、不过我觉得至少我没有去花大篇幅去解释+强加存在主义，只是希望能收个尾吧了，不然这一篇我真的不知道能写什么了、、、、
最后我们对"观测"的定义都是起源于哲学的，。不管你站在那边，如果不涉及一点哲学，这篇文章从逻辑上肯定是扯不清楚的~~
个人的想法，继续互拍吧~

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

这个头像很可爱呀，虽然我也一直很喜欢你之前的那个帅哥，赫赫。
icyviola 发表于 2009-6-20 00:48

呵呵、这个好，之前的那个有人说很可怕、、

蘅芜雪UID: 2646650

11# Neptune2010
额，关于开头句的问题……
我还是建议开头句就是主题句。话说回来GRE作文批改和高考作文批改没有太大区别，时间紧，任务大，考官就是想尽快看明白文章的内容。当然你这样写从造势上面来讲很好，没问题。但是从功利角度来讲，还是尽量开头为主题句，保证考官别到时候一扫而过看不清楚，就好了~

Neptune2010UID: 2626044

我无以回驳、、