Issue4 寄托4人组11日作业

哥哥家有二师兄UID：2124390

No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分4秒     537 words
从2005年8月11日12时4分到2005年8月11日12时45分
------题目------
No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.

提纲:
观点:反对
1.承认借助某一领域外的人的经验和知识可以促进学科发展,文科,理科,交叉学科
2.但是也有少量学科外界知识和经验是很难有重大促进的
3.绝大多数学科的巨大进步是由本学科内的专家通过艰苦的工作,贯通本学科内知识和学科外知识来完成的,而并非本学外的outsiders
结语
------正文------
With the rapid development of modern science and technology, a large number of fields of study in the present day are interrelated to each other. Quite often the outsiders could bring their knowledge and experience to a particular discipline and promote its development significantly. However, it would be too hasty to claim the sole responsibility of progress lies on the outsiders and their experience and knowledge, instead of the hard work of the experts and professionals within that field.

Admittedly, it is true that nowadays, different disciplines are closely related to each other and quite often the researchers of different fields can shed light on each other. This is true not only in the science subjects, but also the liberal ones. The subjects of computing science and mathematics, the physics and astronomy, etc., are closely related, scientists in one field could employ theories or research methods in the other to help analyze their own problems. In recent years, some marginal disciplines like biochemistry and physiology are just hybrids of the interacting subjects.  In liberal arts, historians, political researchers and sociologists quite often need to refer to and enlighten each other to yield in rewarding findings.  

However, not all of the subjects could borrow knowledge and experience from each other and then it would be hard for the outsiders to give insightful observations. Some of the disciplines, especially the basic ones, like pure mathematics and basic physics are isolated brainwork of men's logic and reasoning, which is inaccessible not only to any experience, but any other field of study as well. Knowledge and experience brought from outside contribute nothing to the progress of the study, let alone to significant advancement.

In fact, most of the significant progress in any field of study is brought by those “inside” people on the ground of tremendous work. Within a particular field, people who have been researching it have laid a solid foundation on its basic knowledge and know what the pressing issues are. Based on their own experience and knowledge, they can make full of sources available. When necessary, they would borrow knowledge and experience from other subjects. For instance, when Einstein was working on the theory of Relativity, he once consulted some physicists in some key issues. It is true that this outside knowledge contributes to the founding of the theory, but if Einstein has not been clear what he needs to find in physics and how to make use of the outside knowledge. As outsides, for lack of fundamental knowledge and the speculation of overall development of the subject, it would be hard for them to make significant contributions.


The prosperity of a field of study benefits from the experience and knowledge brought by the outsiders. However, it benefits more from the hard work of the insiders, who not only have a deep insight in the field but clearly understand how to make the best use of all the related resources. It is the latter that makes the biggest contribution to the development of a certain discipline.

[ Last edited by 哥哥家有二师兄 on 2005-8-11 at 17:19 ]

littleprinceUID：2116833

4 "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study." W h
The speaker asserts that only when outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to the field of study can a certain field of study advance significantly. I agree insofar as that the development of a certain field need knowledge and experiences, ideals of outsiders. However, in some cases , a study may develop well without the help of outsiders and ,even ,under extreme circumstances too much materials brought by outsiders can  impede the advancement  of the study.
I concede that knowledge and experiences of outsiders often play a positive role in fields of study. To understand this point of view, one need look no further than the curriculums of university biology, students major in biology are required  to study genetics ,botany, zoology, and so on, they have to learn physics which prepare them for the technological respects of a certain biological study , they have too learn biochemistry too, a bound subject of chemistry and biology, this subject prepare the essential knowledge to study the chemical reaction in the cell . The example of the psychological study substantiate this view too: in the field of psychological study, the knowledge of sociology is often employed to reveal the root of certain psychological diseases, we need help of biologist ,who can provide the biological causal and therapy ,too; even experiences of  historian are important ,which can help find past solution .
However, I find the assertion problematic in following 2 respects. Firstly  some fields of study can advance significantly even without knowledge and experience of outsiders , for example ,painting, the function and objective of it is find release and express the deep feeling and emotion of human being ,thus finally express humanity. In the progress of painting ,without the knowledge of physics ,biology , psychology ,history the artist can still feel can have strong emotional pulse which root in the nature of human., so the study of painting can still survive and develops  well .Admittedly，the information of other fields of human endeavor may have a positive influence on the art of painting , but this still do not equal to the speakers assertion  .
Secondly, there will be a chilling effect on the development of certain fields of human endeavor if take the assertion too seriously. In a physical study if we employ too much chemist who overstate the importance of chemical factor in this problems then this study risk place undue emphasis on chemistry factor which is a relatively small respect , this will lead to ignorance of  the important physical respects .Not long ago a university began a study of a certain biological problem because they want to get a comprehensive understand of that problem they employed many experts from various fields, after a year’s study there is no improvement ,finally the leader of the study dismiss some outsiders and put great emphasis on biology, the study group soon became more efficient, now they have already finish the first step of study . The experience substantiate that overstate the importance of outsiders could have a chilling effect on fields of study which we should take care to avoid.
The assertion has great merits, nowadays it is necessary to use knowledge of other fields in studying of a certain field. however ,in my view , there are certain field of study which can develops well depend on insiders and I think take the speaker’s word too seriously and extremely will impede the proceed of the field.

bridgewalkerUID：208595

Issue4 寄托4人组11日作业

No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：45分4秒     537 words
从2005年8月11日12时4分到2005年8月11日12时45分
------题目------
No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.

提纲:
观点:反对
1.承认借助某一领域外的人的经验和知识可以促进学科发展,文科,理科,交叉学科
2.但是也有少量学科外界知识和经验是很难有重大促进的
3.绝大多数学科的巨大进步是由本学科内的专家通过艰苦的工作,贯通本学科内知识和学科外知识来完成的,而并非本学外的outsiders
结语
------正文------
With the rapid development of modern science and technology, a large number of fields of study in the present day (能简就简at present) are interrelated to each other. Quite often the outsiders could bring their knowledge and experience to a particular discipline and promote its development significantly. However, it would be too hasty to claim the sole responsibility of progress lies on the outsiders and their experience and knowledge (可否用with接?), instead of the hard work of the experts and professionals within that field.

Admittedly, it is true that nowadays, different disciplines are closely related to each other and quite often第二次使用 the researchers of different fields can shed light on each other. This is true not only in the science subjects, but also the liberal ones. The subjects of (去掉可以不?) computing (computer啦!) science and mathematics, the physics and astronomy, etc., are closely related, scientists in one field could employ theories or research methods in the other to help analyze their own problems.这里应该跟一个例子的！比如，现代分子生物学介入到古人类学研究中，是对传统测量方法的有力补充，相互佐证，结论更科学，云云！（我只是结合我熟悉的领域enlighten你一下，不可照搬。）In recent years, some marginal disciplines like biochemistry and physiology are just hybrids of the interacting subjects.（这个只能说明它们结合了，外来者的好处在哪？你没有讲！）  In liberal arts, historians, political researchers and sociologists quite often need to refer to and enlighten each other to yield in rewarding findings.  
最后两句作用不大。而且你如果是要从science和liberal分开谈的话，后者完全属于夭折！

However, not all of the subjects could borrow knowledge and experience from each other and then it would be hard for the outsiders to give insightful observations. Some of the disciplines, especially the basic ones, like pure mathematics and basic physics are isolated brainwork of men's logic and reasoning, which is inaccessible not only to any experience, but any other field of study as well. Knowledge and experience brought from outside contribute nothing to the progress of the study, let alone to significant advancement.
不是吧？mathematics还可借鉴哲学呢！即使是pure logic的研究好要借助不同的现象入手。现在很少学科是自给自足的了，所以你这个观点写起来很难让人信服。也不好写！这段展开得不够，support就更不足了。

In fact, most of the significant progress in any field of study is brought (强调内部，用这个词是不是不合适？)by those “inside” people on the ground of tremendous work. Within a particular field, people who have been researching it have laid a solid foundation on its basic knowledge and know what the pressing issues are.提纲中你说：贯通本学科内知识和学科外知识。这里没有体现！ Based on their own experience and knowledge, they can make full of sources available. When necessary, they would borrow knowledge and experience from other subjects. For instance, when Einstein was working on the theory of Relativity, he once consulted some physicists in some key issues. It is true that this outside knowledge (指的是什么？) contributes to the founding of the theory, but if Einstein (这个家伙已经是通才了，连哲学家都算得上。到底怎样界定他是insider or outsider呢?) has not been clear what he needs to find in physics and how to make use of the outside knowledge. As outsides, for lack of fundamental knowledge and the speculation of overall development of the subject, it would be hard for them to make significant contributions.(前面那个大牛例子说服力就有问题，这里很有必要来个反例对比一下！)

The prosperity of a field of study benefits from the experience and knowledge brought by the outsiders. However, it benefits more from the hard work of the insiders, who not only have a deep insight in the field but clearly understand how to make the best use of all the related resources. It is the latter that makes the biggest contribution to the development of a certain discipline.

总结一下：
实话说，这个题目反驳起来真的不容易。没有有说服力的例子，不建议走这条路。最稳妥的办法还是分几个领域case by case的分析吧 ！

我可能有说得不对的地方，仅供参考！

[ Last edited by bridgewalker on 2005-8-11 at 20:39 ]

ladzhUID：2105328

我可以加入你们小组吗？

哥哥家有二师兄UID：2124390

恩，有道理。才在论坛里搜索了一下，几乎全部是赞同的。看来我是得接受它才比较稳妥

bridgewalkerUID：208595

今天又结合同主题想了一下issue4。
我想这样写：

1.Outsider有助于学科的发展，提供新的知识、理念、技术、方法和视野。催生创造性的思考，进而取得巨大advance。

2.外来的东西不可能automatically reorgnized with 本学科的。举一些生搬硬套的学科交叉计划。结果弄得非驴非马，谁都不懂。

3.要想实现advance，必须内外通力合作。这个就随便举了，那个研究项目不是有N多领域专家的说~