- 最后登录
- 2012-4-4
- 在线时间
- 60 小时
- 寄托币
- 342
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2003-7-15
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 2
- 积分
- 245
- UID
- 140417

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 342
- 注册时间
- 2003-7-15
- 精华
- 2
- 帖子
- 1
|
我来拍拍,今天也写了这篇 真是巧!厚厚
Issue47
Society does not place enough emphasis on the intellect—that is, on reasoning and other cognitive skills.
syllabus: 1.adimittedly, technologies impede out reasoning and cognitive
2.query the purpose of more emphesis on the intellect
3.there are other emergencies than intellect
Nowadays, with rapid development of technology and mass accumulation of information, our lives turns out to be increasingly complex. Whether our society stop short(这个是 “突然停止”的意思吗?还是有别的什么意思呢?这个用的合适吗?) of stress on intellect in the form of reasoning and other cognitive skills becomes controvertrial. However, in my point of view, I cannot agree with the speaker's assertion that emphasis that focused on the intellect is not enough. In fact, many empirical evidence shows the opposite.
Admittedly, the progress of knowledge and technology does render us less intellect. For instance, in the post-Internet-bubble world, one tend to assimlilate more information at will; student could experience a different one-bred of method of education--the TeleEducation; people could bargin through the internet for online shopping, were it rainy or long distance to reach(虚拟,这个好!); and telecommuting makes bussiness more efficient and time-saving. So what's lost?(这个句子感觉还可以推敲一下吧,是不是转折however呢?) Human contact, deep thought, or other cognitive skills, perhaps. We communicate each other without hostile visiting, just greedily absorb knowledge for those which have been digested by others, devour great number of information with no attention to their connotation. Such lives, be they rich, lend us only superficial minds. Thus, advocating more attention to intellect should be a problem to be rechoned(这个是?) with.
However, to draw the conclusion that our society should place more stress on the intellect has to be put through other inspectations. There should be much more questions to be answered(可否改改open to answer) . First of all, what is the purpose for humans to be more reasonaing and cognitive. If we aim at mastering more knowledge or information, then it would be needless and impossible. In each special field, there are a bundle of excellent and intellectual specialists or scientists who provide human a systemetic and in-depth results of their investagation or theories. A layman only needs to grab the headlines through the mass media, such as internet, television or magzines. Meanwhile, the task of assimilating all the information or conquering all disciplines of knowledge must be mission impossible. Given one has the number of IQ as high as Einstein, pursueing after the increasingly accelerating era would turn out to be exhaustation and futility. (感觉这段中心不是很集中呢?)
Secondly, whether gaining emphasis the intellect should be the impending problem for our society? I believe not. Starvation, envrionmental deterioration, public health and terrorism are all but critical than increasing the intellect. Last month at Maradi, Niger, infants, some near death(可否改dying的表达呢?), and their mothers await aid provided by Doctors Without Borders. And, one child in five is dying according to the recent statistic. International officials and charity workers say that the world’s dilatory reaction to Niger’s woes is hard to excuse. Unseen on television, however, are the shrunken infants who die all but unnoticed in numbers that dwarf any other emergencies. In short, for gaining focus on the intellect is not imminent than other social problems, our society should put them for a long-lerm plan.(这点扩展比较我没有想到)
In sum, it is arguably that technologies surely take us some side effects which counter the intellect and society should pay much attention on it. However, through the chains of analysis above, we could be hard-pressed to put this problem the first-place to solve, for somewhere on the earth, there still are people suffering from tearing anguishes.
写的挺好的,特别是用词上面很有G的气势
[ Last edited by nancy1213 on 2005-8-10 at 00:05 ] |
|