Issue48 留链接回拍

kay8815UID: 2668603

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 famou
s few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
48． 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，而可能是由那些已经被人们淡忘的人制造的。

观点：部分同意，确实人民的力量不可忽视，但是研究的重点放在少数人身上的正确的。
提纲：1，在讲述历史事件的时候，人们更多关注起决定作用的少数人。

2，历史中有时对英雄过于强调，也应看到人民的力量必不可少

3，但是，我们把famous few作为代表是明智的

3,1 历史难记载大众的作用,amous few 是大众的代表，是其中起决策或起代表性的人。


3,2没有必要这样做，历史的真正作用是，，，，
Admittedly, it is true that most evens in history were due to the contribution of groups of people instead of the famous few. However, one should not go too far to deny the rationality of historians' method to study history by focusing on the few people who played a key role in the whole event. In many cases, it is the most effective way to detect into the past.

Primarily, I have to concede that, in most cases, people concern more about the famous people such as the sponsor of an influential movement, the leader of a revolution which advanced the progress of history, or even some effective presidents who has made great contribution to the society. It is true that these famous people had a great impact on the development of the historical event. For insurance, during the American Revolution, George Washington formed the Continental Army and led Americans fight against the Great Britain, at last the Americans won the war and started an independent life. History has treat George Washington fairly for his great effort and contributions. Without the essential leader, Americans would not be united together to fight for freedom. Hence, the outstanding individuals played a vital role in the historical events like I said.

However, one may say that, how could the famous few achieve their goal merely by themselves? It cannot be overlooked that the multitude’s power is a significant factor which brings about success. Obviously, without the masses' effort, Gorge Washington could not fight the Great Britain, not to mention the great contribution had made. Therefore, we may say that most historical events are created by the multitude under the leadership of few outstanding individuals.

From the discussion above, can we draw a conclusion that historians should study every individual of the masses involved in the evens? Of course it is impossible. Study historical evens through the groups of people, which means a larger amount of accurate records, more effective recorders and more money will surely lay a deadweight load to the society. Hence, from my point of view, the emphasis on famous few might be the only way to study the historical event effectively. As a general rule, the famous few are chosen from the public who shared the same ideal owning to their outstanding personal power. Thus, studying these people who are representative of the whole group can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.

Moreover, we don't have the necessary to take every individual into consideration for it runs counter to the intent of history. From my point of view, the purpose of studying history is for the reason that history enables us to learn from experiences of the past reflected by the historic events and figures for a better future instead of reconstructing the past accurately. Thus, study history does not mean to record every individual and detail of the event but rather the profound meanings under the surface.

In conclusion, the analysis above is not intend to deny the importance of the groups of people in historical evens, but to point out the disadvantage of this method in studying historical events. However, this does not mean we can ignore the contribution of them, only by seeking a balance between the research on few and the groups of people can we discover the genuine truth and learn the spirit from the all-sides consideration of history events.

kay8815UID: 2668603

字怎么这么小的。。。。

网兜妮妮UID: 2612538

Admittedly,（啊，开头是让步？有点怪怪的） it is true that most evens（events ）in history were due to the contribution of groups of people instead of the famous few. However, one should not go too far to deny the rationality of historians' method （好像差连接词）to study history by focusing on the few people who played a key role in the whole event. In many cases, it is the most effective way to detect into the past.

Primarily, I have to concede that, in most cases, people concern more about the famous people such as the sponsor of an influential movement, the leader of a revolution which advanced the progress of history, or even some effective presidents who has made great contribution to the society. It is true that these famous people had a great impact on the development of the historical event. For insurance, during the American Revolution, George Washington formed the Continental Army and led Americans fight against the Great Britain, at last the Americans won the war and started an independent life. History has treat George Washington fairly for his great effort and contributions. Without the essential leader, Americans would not be united together to fight for freedom. Hence, the outstanding individuals played a vital role in the historical events like I said.

However, one may say that, how could the famous few achieve their goal merely by themselves? It cannot be overlooked that the multitude’s power is a significant factor which brings about success. Obviously, without the masses' effort, Gorge Washington could not fight the Great Britain, not to mention the great contribution had made. Therefore, we may say that most historical events are created by the multitude under the leadership of few outstanding individuals.(这一段的论证很充分）

From the discussion above, can we draw a conclusion that historians should study every individual of the masses involved in the evens? Of course it is impossible. （这里的问答有点奇怪，“我们应不应该...？当然这是不可能的”，不太顺）Study historical evens through the groups of people, which means a larger amount of accurate records, more effective recorders and more money will surely lay a deadweight load to the society. Hence, from my point of view, the emphasis on famous few might be the only way to study the historical event effectively. As a general rule, the famous few are chosen from the public who shared the same ideal owning to their outstanding personal power. Thus, studying these people who are representative of the whole group can avoid unnecessary duplication of effort.

Moreover, we don't have the necessary（直接用it is unnecessary 比较好） to take every individual into consideration for it runs counter to the intent of history. From my point of view, the purpose of studying history is for the reason that history enables us to learn from experiences of the past reflected by the historic events and figures for a better future instead of reconstructing the past accurately. Thus, study history does not mean to record every individual and detail of the event but rather the profound meanings under the surface.

In conclusion, the analysis above is not intend to deny the importance of the groups of people in historical evens, but to point out the disadvantage of this method in studying historical events. However, this does not mean we can ignore the contribution of them, only by seeking a balance between the research on few and the groups of people can we discover the genuine truth and learn the spirit from the all-sides consideration of history events.

lz段内的论证都挺好的。
但总的来说，提纲好像不够清晰，每段的衔接也不是很好，段与段之间的转折太多，意思不是很清楚。
个人见解，加油~

网兜妮妮UID: 2612538

我的文章，谢谢~
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-996553-1-1.html