Issue40 By WDI小组 snail

snail8843UID: 2516929

我的观点：承认科研人员的成果确实对社会进步作出巨大贡献，但对科研人员的评价不能取决于对当今社会的贡献，更应该于取决于其最终是否对社会作出贡献（from the standpoint of historical development）。科学家的选题要在自己的兴趣和社会的需要更应该关注自己的兴趣，但不能对社会造成伤害。

1：科学家的研究要基于自己的兴趣，兴趣是最好的老师，是科研的强大动力。
Eg. 飞机的诞生，Wright Brothers 对飞行的梦想 才有了飞机的发明。

2：但不能一味强调兴趣，因为有时兴趣会对社会造成伤害。科学家的兴趣要建立在不危害社会的基础上;
Eg. 对克隆技术的研究，引发了伦理道德的争论，对人类的定义构成了冲击；

对病毒的研究，用于制造生化武器，用于战争中，给人类带来巨大的痛苦。

3：承认科研人员的成果确实对社会进步作出巨大贡献;
Eg. 应社会的需要，医学的科学研究受到了政府的大力支持，并对人类的健康做出了巨大的贡献；
    科技领域：能源问题，致使很多国家研究新能源：风能、太阳能。在一定程度上缓解了能源危机。如丹麦（Denmark）：新能源发电占很大的比例，对经济发展和环境保护贡献巨大。

4：但对科研人员的评价不能取决于对当今社会的贡献，更应该于取决于其最终是否对社会作出贡献。因为有很多科学研究虽然不能对当时的社会有任何贡献，但从发展的角度来看，对之后的社会可能会有巨大贡献，对于这样的科学研究，不能以是否其对当代社会是否有贡献来评价。
Eg. 约翰纳什：博弈论—对现代经济的贡献；
爱因斯坦：相对论---对后人进一步了解宇宙打下了坚实的理论基础；

The author asserts that scholars and researchers should be evaluated by the degree of their pursuing individual interests, even unusual or idiosyncratic rather than the contributions made to society. In my view, I concede that for the selection of scientific topic, scholars and researcher should pay more attention to their interests in comparison with the contributions made to society; however, their interests should be harmful to society. The value of scholars and researchers should be dominated by whether they make contributions, from standpoint of historical development, to society eventually.

I concede that for the selection of scientific topic, interests play a dominating role in deciding what scientists should research. Einstein said: "The interest is the best teacher.” It is, in most cases, interests rather than the demands of society that inspire scientists and make them devote themselves to scientific research. Consider Wright Brothers, the inventors of plane. What inspire them and excite their creativity? Anyone would agree that it is ascribed to their interests rather than demands of society. In short, in most cases, interests of scientists play a more significant role in promoting the development of science and technology.

However, overemphasizing the effects of interests in development of science while ignoring demerits of interest might do harm to the development of science, even the development of society and human beings, since the interests of scientists, in some cases do harm to society and human beings. For example, consider biological engineering, some scientists are interested in create the virus which is used to produce chemical and biological weapons; as a result, these weapons bring great agony to the public involved in the war. How should we evaluate this kind of interests that eventually do harm to society and human beings? I consider, admittedly, the research of scientists should rely on individuals’ interest, but their interests must based on the fact that theirs’ research results do harmless to society and human beings.

Facing the issue that how to evaluate the value of scholars and researchers, in the first place, I concede that we should put a premium on those scholars and researchers who make great contributions to the today's world. For example, in realm of energy, facing the global crisis of energy, scientists all around the world take great efforts solve this problem through exploiting new energy such as wind energy, solar energy. In Denmark, Wind energy nearly account for half of the total new installed capacity of electric energy. How should we evaluate these scientists who make such great contributions to solve global energy crisis? I consider that they deserve our high praise.

However, I consider that in order to evaluate the value of scientist fairly, we should from the stand of historical development, identify whether they make contributions to mankind and later generations. Because, in some cases, many scientists whose research is not direct relevant to the contemporary society cannot benefit the society; however, the result of research might benefit the later generations. For example, in areas of math, consider John Nash. He founded game theory when he was a professor in Princeton University and at that time this theory is of no value for to society of then. However, with the development of history, game theory plays a significant role in realm of economy. Einstein, who developed the theory of relativity, is another example. In short, when we assess the value of scientists, we should from the standpoint of historical development give a fair evaluation to these scientists.

In sum, in my view, I concede that interests play a more significant role than demands of society in promoting the development of society and society; however, overemphasizing the interests while ignoring its demerits to some extent do harm to society. As for evaluating the value of scientists, I consider that we should evaluate them from the standpoint of historical development relying on whether they make contributions to the world eventually.

bloodbobUID: 2627007

The author asserts that scholars and researchers should be evaluated by the degree of their pursuing individual interests, even unusual or idiosyncratic rather than the contributions made to society. In my view, I concede that for the selection of scientific topic, scholars and researcher should pay more attention to their interests in comparison with the contributions made to society; however, their interests should be harmful to society. The value of scholars and researchers should be dominated (determined) by whether they make contributions, from standpoint of historical development, to society eventually (in the long run).

I concede that for the selection of scientific topic, interests play a dominating role in deciding what scientists should research. Einstein said: "The interest is the best teacher.” It is, in most cases, interests rather than the demands of society that inspire scientists and make them devote themselves to scientific research. Consider Wright Brothers, the inventors of plane. What inspire them and excite their creativity? Anyone would agree that it is ascribed to their interests rather than demands of society. In short, in most cases, interests of scientists play a more significant role in promoting the development of science and technology.

However, overemphasizing the effects of interests in development of science while ignoring demerits of interest might do harm to the development of science, even the development of society and human beings, since the interests of scientists, in some cases do harm to society and human beings. For example, consider biological engineering, some scientists are interested in create the virus which is used to produce chemical and biological weapons; as a result, these weapons bring great agony to the public involved in the war. How should we evaluate this kind of interests that eventually do harm to society and human beings? I consider, admittedly, the research of scientists should rely on individuals’ interest, but their interests must (be) based on the fact that theirs’ research results do
(is) harmless to society and human beings.

Facing the issue that how to evaluate the value of scholars and researchers, in the first place, I concede that we should put a premium on those scholars and researchers who make great contributions to the today's world. For example, in realm of energy, facing the global crisis of energy, scientists all around the world take great efforts solve this problem through exploiting new energy such as wind energy, solar energy. In Denmark, Wind energy nearly account for half of the total new installed capacity of electric energy. How should we evaluate these scientists who make such great contributions to solve global energy crisis? I consider that they deserve our high praise.

However, I consider that in order to evaluate the value of scientist fairly, we should from the stand of historical development, identify whether they make contributions to mankind and later generations. Because, in some cases, many scientists whose research is not direct relevant to the contemporary society cannot benefit the society (at present); however, the result of research might benefit the later generations. For example, in areas of math, consider John Nash.(好例子) He founded game theory when he was a professor in Princeton University and at that time this theory is of no value for to society of then (at that time). However, with the development of history, game theory plays a significant role in realm of economy. Einstein, who developed the theory of relativity, is another example. In short, when we assess the value of scientists, we should from the standpoint of historical development give a fair evaluation to these scientists.
In sum, in my view, I concede that interests play a more significant role than demands of society in promoting the development of society and society; however, overemphasizing the interests while ignoring its demerits to some extent do harm to society. As for evaluating the value of scientists, I consider that we should evaluate them from the standpoint of historical development relying on whether they make contributions to the world eventually.

结构清晰，先讨论（1）interest的作用，过度纵容interest的害处，再讨论（2）research对社会作用的评估。例子也不少。只是两大部分看似关系不大，Snail可以考虑用其他方法来过度两大部分，使之更自然。如用设问句（既然research是individual的，社会应当如何看待它？）。