ISSUE185 [越洋农场站队]pewcg8包含修改,思路,提纲,别人的范文

pewcg8UID: 2143213

185. "Scandals—whether in politics, academia, or other areas—can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could."
丑闻——无论是政治、学术还是其他领域——可能会是有用的。丑闻可以用演说家或者改革家无法使用的手段让我们注意到某些问题。
我的行文提纲：
中心：虽然丑闻可以反映一些不为人知的潜在的社会问题，但是过多的丑闻和人们对丑闻的过多的关注会给我们的生活（包括丑闻的主角）和社会的法律以及政府造成巨大的压力。
正文段一：叙述丑闻的作用。可以揭露一些幕后的事情。
论证：丑闻可以揭露出一些幕后的事情，政治上的幕后交易，不公证的选举等等。这些事情是演说家和改革者所不敢说或不知道的。丑闻的出现可以吸引大众的注意力，同时给政府和法律机构以及丑闻的主角施加压力，促使问题得到解决。而如果这些事情不被丑闻揭露的话，也许就会一直潜伏下去，成为社会的潜在危险。
正文段二：但是丑闻也会给我们的法律和政府的正常运转和工作带来灾难性的后果。丑闻吸引了过多的大众的目光，这就会给政府带来巨大的压力，在媒体的参与和抄做下，政府的工作以及法律的实施都会造成巨大的影响。
正文段三：同时，丑闻给个人的压力是巨大的。对丑闻的主角，也许有的丑闻是捏造的，或者是大家对他的误解，但是可能会造成本人众叛亲离。压力巨大。同时，我们的生活也会变的充满猜疑和不安全感。
结尾：所以，我们不应该过多的受丑闻的影响，把决断权留给政府和法律，而我们应该更多的关心自己的生活。同时，媒体也应该对自己的报道负责任。
特别注意，以后在让步的时候一定要把让步放在最后一段！这样才符合欧美人的写作习惯！
把要强调的重点放在前面两段去写！
修改提纲：
中心：诚然，丑闻可以反映一些不为人知的潜在的社会问题，但是过多的丑闻和人们对丑闻的过多的关注会给我们的生活（包括丑闻的主角）和社会的法律以及政府造成巨大的压力，同时也会使我们把注意力过多的从其他更重要的事情中转移出来。
之前可以先对丑闻下定义论述。
正文段一：丑闻会给我们的法律和政府的正常运转和工作带来灾难性的后果。丑闻吸引了过多的大众的目光，这就会给政府带来巨大的压力，在媒体的参与和抄做下，政府的工作以及法律的实施都会造成巨大的影响。
正文段二：同时，丑闻给个人的压力是巨大的。对丑闻的主角，也许有的丑闻是捏造的，或者是大家对他的误解，但是可能会造成本人众叛亲离。压力巨大。同时，我们的生活也会变的充满猜疑和不安全感。
正文段三：让步一下：叙述丑闻的作用。可以揭露一些幕后的事情。
论证：丑闻可以揭露出一些幕后的事情，政治上的幕后交易，不公证的选举等等。这些事情是演说家和改革者所不敢说或不知道的。丑闻的出现可以吸引大众的注意力，同时给政府和法律机构以及丑闻的主角施加压力，促使问题得到解决。而如果这些事情不被丑闻揭露的话，也许就会一直潜伏下去，成为社会的潜在危险。
结尾：所以，我们不应该过多的受丑闻的影响，把决断权留给政府和法律，而我们应该更多的关心自己的生活。同时，媒体也应该对自己的报道负责任。

Scandals, although focus our attention on certain social problems,  are too much today.（不要重复题目的话，核心的表达要用自己的话说） You have to agree that we are surrounded by scandals and it makes people care too much on those faults of famous people and forget about their own life.（既然是主题句，后边就要围绕主题句去写）
开头段重写如下：
Nowadays, with a dramatic change in the media and people’s concerning about and participating in political affairs, we have witnessed an increase in the number of scandals in politics and other fields as well. But too much scandal can be harmful to both the person in center of the scandal and other people and government department with reference to the scandal itself.

In the first place, after years of hard work, we have built up an integral system of law. We have ways to solve vital social problems and our society and government can work efficiently in front of those kinds of things. If we need scandals to help the government and the courts, our social system will be destroyed. Just like a computer, a computer has its laws of computing and processing. 这里应该进一步解释病毒和计算机的关系When a computer need a virus to help it operate itself, it is clear that the problem of it is vital. Too much scandals in the society can be seen as viruses.（总之本例子举的不是十分恰当，注意，类比一定要合理）With thousands of people concerning about a scandal, neither the government can examine the case efficiently nor the jury and the court can make their decision independently. The prosecutors and jury can not do their work freely as they wish, because their action will be magnified through media and any neglect in their work will be criticized by the public thereby brings tension to them that they are not likely to make a proper decision.

Another important factor that we can't overlook（忽视的其他说法：overlook  ignore  neglect要注意词汇的替换） is the pressure a scandal plays on the people involved. Just imagine that someday you wake up to see newspapers full of your pictures and stories about yourself, is it horrible? Maybe not because they talk only about your feats. But if not, instead they are scandals about you, you would feel like it's the last day/end/doomsday of your life, the sun disappears, the people used to be your friends now leave you, you walk on the street only to find thousands of people around you are talking about you, even laugh about you......And maybe it is just a mistake改为misunderstanding/misapprehending.(此句表意不清) It is clear that the pressure/tension is unbearable. It does not help solve the problem, instead raises a lot of troubles. With so many people concerned about a certain scandal, the government is unable to work independently 用词要贴切且避免重复because they have to care about people's reaction. And when people become surrounded by scandals, their life will absolutely be ruined. They may feel unsafe in society and do not trust their friend for they are afraid those scandals may one day happen to them.

Admittedly, scandals might be good to some extent, because they remind us of things behind the stage behind the scenes/behind the curtain/或者说backstage deals(幕后交易). A case in point is that of a famous Korean cloner, who claims that he has achieved something significant in stem cell cloning. The whole world paid great attention to the two paper published in Science after his declaring his research and the Korean government agreed to give him big financial support for his project as well as many individuals and companies.Then a researcher told the public and the whole world that he was told to take fake photograph to cheat in the experiment. This researcher not only saved his reputation but also saved Korean government; otherwise the government would have wasted thousands of dollars on Hwang’s project. In this case, sandal saves the society. It makes people know about lies. After all, lies can't bear any light.分析不足，例子的叙述不够精彩！Without this scandal, people may know about the Hwang had fabricating data later but not this soon. People’s concern about the issue also give the government enough tension for them to take sufficient care of the scandal as well as other people involved in it, so great that they can not bear and offer evidence to help we solve the problem.

As discussed above, we may conclude that the main influence of scandals is absolutely destructive to both society and people, though few of them really work to help we solve the problem. What we should do is not letting the scandal distract us from our usual life and participate in politics in other accepted ways.  (该句总结的很无力和荒唐！！)

另外要说明，这篇文章如果要按照网上和新东方流传的分领域去写，会显得很没有深度。
下面是老外的范文：
Are scandals useful in calling our attention to important problems, as this statement suggests? I agree that in many cases scandals can serve to reveal larger problems that a community or society should address. On the other hand, scandals can sometimes distract us from more important societal issues. （先说自己的观点再让步！）
On the one hand, scandals can sometimes serve to call our attention to pervasive（充满的，遍布的） social or political problems that we would otherwise neglect. Perhaps the paradigmatic modern example is the Watergate scandal. Early in that scandal it would have been tempting to dismiss it as involving one isolated incidence of underhanded campaign tactics. But, in retrospect the scandal forever increased the level of scrutiny and accountability to which our public officials are held, thereby working a significant and lasting benefit to our society. More recently, the Clinton-Gore fundraising scandal sparked a renewed call for campaign-finance reform. In fact the scandal might result in the passage of a congressional bill outlawing private campaign contributions altogether, thereby（因此，从而） rendering presidential candidates far less susceptible to undue influence of special-interest groups. Our society would be the dear beneficiary of such reform. Surely, no public speaker or reformer could have called our nation's collective attention to the problem of presidential misconduct unless these two scandals had surfaced.

On the other hand, scandals can sometimes serve chiefly to distract us from more pressing community or societal problems. At the community level, for example, several years ago the chancellor of a university located in my city was expelled from office for misusing university funds to renovate his posh personal residence. Every new development during the scandal became front-page news in the campus newspaper. But did this scandal serve any useful purpose? No. The scandal did not reveal any pervasive problem with university accounting practices. It did not result in any sort of useful system-wide reform. Rather, it was merely one incidence of petty misappropriation. Moreover, the scandal distracted the university community from far more important issues, such as affirmative action and campus safety, which were relegated to the second page of the campus newspaper during the scandal.
Even on a societal level, scandals can serve chiefly to distract us from more important matters. For example, time will tell whether the Clinton sex scandal will benefit our political, social, or legal system. Admittedly, the scandal did call our attention to certain issues of federal law. It sparked a debate about the powers and duties of legal prosecutors, under the Independent Counsel Act, vis-i-vis the chief executive while in and out of office. And the various court rulings about executive privilege and immunity WIU serve useful legal precedents for the future. Even the impeachment proceedings will no doubt provide useful procedural precedent at some future time. Yet on balance, it seems to me that the deleterious effects of the scandal in terms of the financial expense to taxpayers and the various harms to the many individuals caught up in the legal process---outweigh these benefits. More importantly, for more that a year the scandal served chiefly to distract us from our most pressing national and global problems, such as the Kosovo crisis, our social-security crisis, and health-care reform, to name just a few.
In sum, I agree that scandals often serve to flag(to mark or identify with or as if with a flag  如：flagged potential problems in the proposal) important socio-political problems more effectively than any speaker or reformer can. However, whether a scandal works more benefit than harm to a community or society must be addressed on a case-by-case basis/situation.

相关的资料和例证：
之一： 国际学术界腐败案例
　　 首先要说明的是，由於中国学术界具有“不学好”的本性，喜好学习外国人干的坏事
，而不努力学习人家好的东西，并且他们倾向于拿国外的脏东西来当成自己的护身符，所
以，我原本不想写这一部分，免得给这帮败类提供精神食粮。但转念一想，有比较才有鉴
别。把外国人最肮脏的东西亮一亮，再拿它们与中国的脏东西比一比，不就更能说明中国
的学术腐败是世界罕见的么？退一万步说，即使是中国的腐败分子真的能够从国外的粪便
中找出几颗豆子吃，难道他们还能成仙得道不成？於是就有了下面的文字。
　　
　　1 哈佛大学：达西丑闻(主要参考文献：舸昕：《从哈佛到斯坦福》)
　　
　　约翰•达西(John Roland Darsee)是哈佛大学医学院一个附属医院的博士后研究
人员，他的导师尤金•布劳恩瓦尔德(Eugene Braunwald)是哈佛大学教授、也是美国
科学院当时心脏科学的唯一院士。在八十年代以前，由布劳恩瓦尔德指导过的130多名研究
人员中，已经有40多人在美国的大学里获得了正教授和系主任的职位，而达西则被布劳恩
瓦尔德认为是这一百多人中最优秀的。在1978-1981年间，达西作为主要作者，已经发表了
一百多篇论文(其中绝大部分是论文摘要)。1981年春，布劳恩瓦尔德为达西争取到了哈佛
医学院助理教授的职位。
　　
　　就在达西准备上任之际，他的三个同事发现了他伪造试验数据的证据。哈佛大学马上
收回了给他的聘书，但允许他继续在布劳恩瓦尔德的实验室工作。五个月后，美国国家卫
生研究院(NIH)发现达西提供的试验数据与其他人的数据有极大的出入，达西丑闻这才走出
了哈佛大学。最终，达西发表的17篇论文、53篇摘要被撤销。NIH禁止达西在十年内申请或
参加NIH的科研项目。
　　
　　不过，达西丑闻的名气之大主要还是因为哈佛大学在这件事情的处理上出现了过失。
达西从事的研究项目来自NIH，达西作假是在1981年5月被发现的，可是哈佛大学在NIH发现
数据离谱之后，也就是半年之后，才正式通知NIH。在此之后，哈佛大学自己成立了一个调
查委员会，八名成员中，有五名是哈佛的教授，尽管主任由约翰•霍普金斯大学教授
担任。这个调查委员会在两个月内只开了两次会，没有与任何检举人面谈，就在1982年1月
下结论说，达西作假仅限於已经发现的那几例。可是在1982年年底，由NIH组织的调查却表
明，达西的论文几乎篇篇有假，他的作假历史可以上溯到他的本科时代。NIH的调查报告直
言不讳地批评了哈佛大学处理达西事件不当。
　　
　　哈佛大学很可能是从这个事件中吸取了一些教训。1988年，哈佛大学教授、暴力心理
学权威弗拉兹尔(Shervert Frazier)涉嫌剽窃。哈佛大学果断地迫使这名教授退休。
　　
　　评论：达西事件是最早受到美国政府全面系统地调查的科学作假案件之一，其影响非
常大。美国学术界目前处理此类学术腐败案的一些习惯规则，如由外界主持调查，就是根
据这个案例的最终结果形成的。如果用这个案件与中国科学院的水稻基因组物理全图案相
比较，人们不难发现，中国科学院连最基本的、表面的调查都不肯做，更不用说什么深入
调查了。其实，就个体学术行为腐败来说，伪造试验数据是中国学术界最大的祸根，其危
害何止是抄袭剽窃的百倍千倍。也就是因为如此，那些当权的根本不敢去查：一旦这个盖
子被揭开，暴露出来的就是一个无底的黑洞。
　　
　　2 麻省理工学院：巴尔第摩事件(主要参考文献：舸昕：《从哈佛到斯坦福》)
　　
　　巴尔第摩(David Baltimore)是美国生物医学界的传奇性人物。他26岁获得博士学位，
36岁成为美国科学院院士，37岁获得诺贝尔奖，52岁时(1990年)回到母校洛克菲勒大学任
校长。在此之前，他一直在麻省理工学院工作。可以说，他是世界生物学界的权威，是美
国学术界的领袖。但在1991年，巴尔第摩被迫辞去了洛克菲勒大学校长之职，并且在很长
一段时间内，他以“巴尔第摩事件”的主角而闻名国际学术界。
　　
　　那么，“巴尔第摩事件”到底是怎么一回事呢？原来，巴尔第摩的一位同事在发表一
篇论文时，由於使用了巴尔第摩实验室的数据，因此也把他的名字署上了。后来有人揭发
这篇文章的部分内容有假。此事惊动了美国国会，它的一个委员会并且举行特别听证会，
要调查这个事件。本来，有问题的那部分内容不是来自巴尔第摩的实验室，因此这个作假
案与巴尔第摩没有太大的关系。但少年得志的巴尔第摩却在关键时刻发表了一封措辞严厉
的公开信，说美国“一小部分外界人士要利用这个小小不言、正常的科学争执作为催化剂
，另立新法来管制美国的科学。”这封信惹恼了美国国会和公众，这个事件也就从此被打
上了“巴尔第摩事件”的烙印。
　　
　　整个“巴尔第摩事件”的内容非常繁杂，加州理工学院的历史教授Daniel J. Kevles
曾写有一本厚达400多页的专著，名字就叫《巴尔第摩事件》(The Baltimore Case)。长话
短说，NIH和国会的调查最后都得出结论说，巴尔第摩的那位同事确实造假，那个人也受到
了与达西相似的处分。而巴尔第摩也被迫辞去了洛克菲勒大学校长的职位。不过，在1996
年，巴尔第摩的那位同事上诉成功，NIH撤销了五年前的结论，并取消了对她的制裁。巴尔
第摩现在是加州理工学院的校长。
　　
　　评论：学术界是整个社会的一部分，所以理应受到社会，包括政府的制约。“巴尔第
摩事件”之所以成为“巴尔第摩事件”，实际就是科学家的自高自大，结果引起了公愤。
美国联邦众议员丁吉尔在驳斥巴尔第摩的那封公开信时就说，“你说国会不懂科学上的事
情，却要插手科学，可是科学家在要求国会拨款时从来就不曾怀疑国会对你们的要求到底
懂不懂。”不过，巴尔第摩自高自大自有他的本钱，而中国学阀学霸的自高自大则是一点
本钱都没有。巴尔第摩最终为他的失误付出了代价，可中国的院士们却没有一人为自己的
腐败行为损失一根毫毛。
　　
　　3 斯坦福大学：“间接费用”丑闻(主要参考文献：舸昕：《从哈佛到斯坦福》)
　　
　　1990年，就在“巴尔第摩事件”的硝烟在波士顿上空弥漫之际，在美国的西海岸爆发
出了更大的学术丑闻：有“西部的哈佛”之称的斯坦福大学被联邦政府的一个会计揭发，
说他们利用所谓的“间接费用”欺骗联邦政府的钱财。据这位会计估计，斯坦福大学在八
十年代从联邦政府多索取了2-4亿美元。
　　
　　什么是“间接费用”呢？“间接费用”是政府在发放科研经费时给予研究者所在单位
的费用，用于房屋、水电、文秘等开支。一般来说，美国联邦政府规定的间接费用率占科
研经费的40-60%，超过上限，要签订“谅解备忘录”。在整个八十年代，斯坦福大学与联
邦政府签订了90多个这样的备忘录，涉及金额二亿多美元，而名列第二和第三的加州理工
学院和麻省理工学院总共才签订了20个“谅解备忘录”。不仅如此，斯坦福大学拿到联邦
政府报账的项目包括该校校长卧室的装修，他的婚礼招待会，斯坦福一家的墓地，甚至一
艘豪华游艇的折旧费。
　　
　　1991年3月，美国国会举行听证会，调查斯坦福大学的这个案件。美国的新闻媒体也一
拥而上，连篇累牍地报道此事。最后，斯坦福大学校长辞职，斯坦福大学向联邦政府退还
了100万元间接费用，外加120万美元罚款，尽管它拒绝承认自己犯法。
　　
　　评论：斯坦福大学的“间接费用”丑闻是典型的集团腐败，但斯坦福大学也为此付出
了惨重的代价：斯坦福大学后来专门请来公关专家来改善自己在美国社会的形象，外加其
他费用，这个丑闻使斯坦福大学“直接损失”了3700万美元。这个丑闻很自然地使人联想
到中国的北大清华：这两所大学的校长和党委书记不惜使用说谎和欺骗的手段，打着建设
世界一流大学的幌子，向zgzf索取巨款。我之所以把北大清华欺诈案放到了学术界系统腐
败这个层次，主要是因为他们代表了中国学术界的整体行为，并且打着“学术”的幌子。
而斯坦福大学只代表了自己。其实，北大清华的校长们之所以敢肆无忌惮地搞欺骗，是因
为他们知道自己不会为这个欺骗负道义和法律责任。
　　
　　4 贝尔实验室：舍恩事件(主要参考文献：Anonymous. Scandal Rocks Scientific C
ommunity; Service, R. F. Bell Labs Fires Star Physicist Found Guilty of Forgin
g Data；Service：More of Bell Labs Physicist’s Papers Retracted)
　　
　　从2001年起，国际物理学界出现了一颗闪亮的明星，他就是贝尔实验室的舍恩(Jan H
endrik Schön)。在短短的两年间，他发表了90余篇论文，绝大多数是在国际权威杂
志上，如《科学》和《自然》。有一段时间，舍恩每八天就发表一篇论文。他被誉为爱因
斯坦第二，被视为诺贝尔奖的当然得主。不过，在2002年的9月，舍恩建立的这座科学大厦
顷刻间土崩瓦解，他发表的论文被所刊载的杂志整批整批地撤销。仅在11月份，《科学》
杂志就一次撤销了舍恩的八篇论文。
　　
　　舍恩是德国人，事发时只有32岁。他的倒台，实际是早晚的事情。2002年春天，有人
发现舍恩的试验结果根本就重复不出来，而普林斯顿大学和康乃尔大学的物理学教授分别
发现舍恩的三篇互不相关的论文却含有完全相同的图表。贝尔实验室马上开始了对舍恩的
调查。尽管舍恩把原始记录彻底地销毁了，调查组还是得出了结论：他的试验结果多数是
伪造的或经过篡改。贝尔实验室在调查结束后马上把他解雇，而德国的一个世界著名的研
究机构，德国马克思•普朗克研究所(Max Planck Institute)，撤销了给他的聘书。
贝尔实验室的董事长欧西发表声明说，我们为这一科学不端行为发生在贝尔实验室而感到
深切地悲痛。在它77年的历史中，这是第一次。
　　
　　评论：舍恩事件是21世纪以来世界上最大的科学作弊案，受到影响的不仅是他个人，
并且包括在世界学术界享有盛誉的贝尔实验室、马克思•普朗克研究所、以及《科学
》和《自然》杂志。科学界的权威都能够被一个“小青年”胡弄得团团转，可想而知，在
科学研究中伪造数据、弄虚作假的危害有多么严重。据说，国内有些大学钱多得花不完，
於是悬出以下赏格：在《科学》和《自然》杂志上发表一篇文章，奖金一百万人民币。不
知道这个悬赏是在鼓励学者呢，还是在刺激骗子。重赏之下，必有勇夫。如果能让中国学
术界的骗子在世界上曝光，花个一百万人民币，值！
　　
　　5 印度库曼大学：校长剽窃案(主要参考文献：Maylie, D. Physics prof’s articl
e found plagiarized; Raj, G. Plagiarism scandal brewing; Pande, S. Academic Sc
andal Rocks Kumaon University)
　　
　　2002年春天，斯坦福大学物理学教授卡拉什收到了一个匿名电子邮件，邮件的内容是
告诉她印度库曼大学(Kumaon University)的校长拉吉普(Balwant Singh Rajput)剽窃了她
1996年发表的一篇论文，而与拉吉普一同剽窃的一个学生还要因为这篇剽窃的论文获得一
项国际奖项。卡拉什在最初没想对此采取什么行动，但她后来听说库曼大学物理系主任被
突然解雇，她决定插手。因为她认为这位主任是由於调查这桩剽窃案而丢掉工作的。
　　
　　卡拉什在这年10月起草了一封给印度总统的信件，该信有七名斯坦福大学物理学教授
(其中三名是诺贝尔奖得主)签名。在这封信中，卡拉什写到：“一代极有天赋的印度物理
学家已经得到国际物理学界的广泛认可，并且为印度物理学带来了极大的荣誉。如果印度
科学的这个崇高的声誉被少数几个剽窃者所败坏，那真是太可惜了。”虽然这封信没有能
够直接到达印度总统的手中，但通过互联网络和权威学术刊物的报道，印度总统得知了这
个事情，他於是组织了一个调查委员会。经过两个月的调查，这个委员会认定拉吉普剽窃
案成立。2003年2月，拉吉普被印度政府撤了库曼大学校长的职务。
　　
　　评论：库曼大学剽窃案与东南大学校长顾冠群剽窃案有很多相似之处，比如主角都是
大学校长，操刀剽窃的都是他们的学生，最后两个大学校长都把责任推给了自己的学生。
但这两个案子的最大不同点是结局：印度的剽窃校长被解雇，而中国的剽窃校长则纹丝不
动。zgzf在等什么呢？难道在等洋人教授写控告信？难道还需要诺贝尔奖得主的签名？顾
冠群案不处理，中国科学的声誉，如果还有的话，就一定会败坏在这些学术小偷的手中。

　　
　　6 迟到的惩罚(主要参考文献：Starr, D. Revisiting a 1930s Scandal, AACR to R
ename a Prize；Hagmann, M. Researcher Rebuked for 20-Year-Old Misdeed.)
　　
　　康乃琉斯•罗兹(Cornelius Rhoads，1898-1959)是美国著名癌症专家。在癌症
研究领域，以他的名字命名的一个青年科学家大奖，Cornelius P. Rhoads Memorial Awa
rd，具有极高的地位。2003年，主持这个奖项的美国癌症研究学会(AACR)决定把康乃琉斯
•罗兹的名字从这项有二十多年历史的大奖中去掉，理由是他不再适于充当青年科学
家的楷模。为什么呢？
　　
　　原来，在2002年，波多黎各大学的一位生物学教授偶然发现了康乃琉斯•罗兹在
三十年代写的一封信。在这封信中，罗兹咒骂波多黎各人是世界上最脏、最懒、最下流、
最好偷盗的民族。“这个岛屿需要的不是公共卫生事业，而是滔天的海浪或能够把这个种
族彻底灭绝的灾难。”罗兹在这封信中还说，“我已经尽了自己的最大努力来使这个灭绝
进程向前推进：我杀了八个人，并且把癌细胞植入了另外几个人的身体。”虽然美国癌症
研究学会组织的调查没有发现罗兹杀人或转移癌细胞的证据，但它得出的结论是，这封信
本身就足够把他的名字从这项大奖中剔除。AACR接受了这个建议。
　　
　　1999年，德国马克思•普朗克学会(The Max Planck Society)主席发出了一项正
式“谴责”(censure)，被谴责的对象是著名生物学家、马克思•普朗克医学研究所
(Max Planck Institute for Medical Research)的主任彼得•西伯格(Peter Seebu
rg)。原来，西伯格在20多年前曾任美国加利福尼亚大学教授，参与了人类生长激素基因的
克隆。1998年，加利福尼亚大学与一家生物技术公司就这项发明专利打起了官司，西伯格
在法庭作证时说，他在1978年加入这家公司时，把这个基因的克隆也从加州大学带了过去
。而且，他们后来在Nature上发表论文时，还伪造了这个克隆的来历。
　　
　　这篇证词一经公布，马克思•普朗克学会的主席马上组织了调查。后来，由於那
家生物技术公司向加州大学交纳了两亿美元赔款，这个官司在庭外和解，马克思•普
朗克学会的调查才终止。最后的处理决定是针对西伯格坦白的在发表论文时伪造数据，而
不是“偷窃”基因克隆，因为在当时，加州大学尚没有这方面的明确规定。西伯格后来决
定把自己从专利赔偿中所得的数百万美元捐献给慈善机构。
　　
　　评论：从上面这两个例子来看，国际学术界中，尽管存在一些问题，但由於它的自我
调控机制比较好，所以最终总能够伸张正义，铲除邪恶。也就是说，国际学术界存在一个
向好的方向发展的进化机制。这个机制在中国目前的学术界根本就不存在，所以说，中国
学术界是在向坏的方向发展，并且是在加速发展。从另一方面讲，罗兹的丑恶面目在他死
去四十多年后终於暴露于世，他也受到了相应的惩罚。而中国那些踩着工农大众的脑袋往
上爬的学者是否也能够被死后鞭尸呢？善有善报，恶有恶报，不是不报，时候未到。

之二：黄禹锡丑闻：
Seoul National University disciplinary committee announced on 20 March that it would dismiss disgraced(丢脸的，不光彩的) cloner Woo Suk Hwang, a professor at its Veterinary College, for his involvement in fabricating data. Six other professors and co-authors on the two papers on embryonic stem cell cloning, which were published in 2004 and 2005 and later retracted from Science, receive lighter sentences.
主要罪证：伪造数据: fabricate data/ In particular(=SPECIFICALLY特别，尤其), he admitted to ordering a junior researcher to take photographs of two stem cell lines in the 2005 article so that it would look as if the team had created 11 customized stem cell lines.
大学名称：Seoul University
研究课题：embryonic stem cell cloning
处罚：dismiss is the harshest punishment the committee could impose
Hwang will be banned from working in a public position for 5 years after his dismissal and will receive only half of his retirement money.
Hwang was the leader of the cloning project
人们的评价：The professor went back on the values of integrity and honesty that should have been kept as an academic and professor of a national university.
The prosecutors are also examining how Hwang spent state funds and private donstions.

beabletoUID: 2200352

不错,路过,谢谢楼主,找了点能用的.

wryoungUID: 2224706

顶一下
思路写得很好，提供的资料也十分有价值

pewcg8UID: 2143213

感谢支持.

panegyricUID: 2218502

很好啊，狂支持！再支持！
呵呵，真的很好:)

monkeycolaUID: 2206472

Scandals, although focus our attention on certain social problems,  are too much today.（不要重复题目的话，核心的表达要用自己的话说） You have to agree that we are surrounded by scandals and it makes people care too much on those faults of famous people and forget about their own life.[我不知道你想表达的意思，你表达的不妥当，做好是forget to focus on sth。]（既然是主题句，后边就要围绕主题句去写）
开头段重写如下：
Nowadays, with a dramatic change in the media and people’s concerning about(with) and participating in political affairs, we have witnessed an increase in the number of scandals in politics and other fields as well. But too much scandals can be harmful to both the person in the center of the scandals and other people (in the) government department with reference to(去掉)（who also have involved into） the scandal itself.

In the first place, after years of hard work, we have built up an integral system of law. We have diversified ways to solve vital social problems and our society and government can work efficiently in front of(in front of是在前面的意思，你这句话是什么意思？我没有明白) those kinds of things. If we need scandals to help the government and the courts, our social system will be destroyed. Just like a computer, a computer has its laws of computing and processing. 这里应该进一步解释病毒和计算机的关系When a computer need a virus to help it operate itself, it is clear that the problem of it is vital. Too much scandals in the society can be seen as viruses.（总之本例子举的不是十分恰当，注意，类比一定要合理，说的对！！！）With(when) thousands of people concerning about（with） a scandal, neither the government can examine the case efficiently nor the jury and the court can make their decision independently. The prosecutors and jury can not do their work freely as they wish, because their action will be magnified through media and any neglect in their work will be criticized by the public thereby brings tension to them that they are not likely to make a proper decision.

Another important factor that we can't overlook（忽视的其他说法：overlook  ignore  neglect要注意词汇的替换） is the pressure a scandal plays on the people involved. Just imagine(imaging) that some day you wake up to see newspapers full of your pictures and stories about yourself, is it horrible? Maybe not because they talk only about your feats. But if not, instead they are scandals about you, you would feel like it's the last day/end/doomsday of your life, the sun disappears, the people used to be your friends now leave you, you walk on the street only to find thousands of people around you are talking about you, even laugh about you......And maybe it is just a mistake改为misunderstanding/misapprehending.(此句表意不清) It is clear that the pressure/tension is unbearable. It does not help solve the problem(解决什么问题), instead raises a lot of troubles. With so many people concerned about a certain scandal, the government is unable to work independently 用词要贴切且避免重复because they have to care about people's reaction. And when people become surrounded by scandals, their life will absolutely be ruined. They may feel unsafe in society and do not trust their friends for they are afraid those scandals may one day happen to them.

Admittedly, scandals might be good to some extent, because they remind us of things behind the stage behind the scenes/behind the curtain/或者说backstage deals(幕后交易). A case in point is that of a famous Korean cloner(用scientist 好一些), who claims that he has achieved something significant in stem cell cloning. The whole world paid great attention to the two paper published in Science after his declaring his research and the Korean government agreed to give him big financial support for his project as well as many individuals and companies.Then a researcher told the public and the whole world that he was told to take fake photograph to cheat in the experiment. This researcher not only saved his reputation but also saved Korean government; otherwise the government would have wasted thousands of dollars on Hwang’s project. In this case, sandal saves the society（太夸大了吧，这个丑闻就挽救了社会？）. It makes people know about lies. After all, lies can't bear any light.分析不足，例子的叙述不够精彩！Without this scandal, people may know about the Hwang had fabricating data later but not this soon. People’s concern about the issue also give the government enough tension for them to take sufficient care of the scandal as well as other people involved in it, so great that they can not bear and offer evidence to help we solve the problem.

As discussed above, we may conclude that the main influence of scandals is absolutely destructive to both society and people, though few of them really work to help we solve the problem. What we should do is not letting the scandal distract us from our usual life and participate in politics in other accepted ways.  (该句总结的很无力和荒唐！！)

另外要说明，这篇文章如果要按照网上和新东方流传的分领域去写，会显得很没有深度。
修改总结：
你的思路是好的，但是你的论证并没有很好的支撑你的观点，尤其是第三段。
Scandal在韦氏字典中的解释有两个 1 disgrace dishonor 2 malicious gossip 恶毒的闲话
语言流畅，但是有点语法错误。
建议多看范文！我的水平有限，请多指教！

nostrumUID: 2124189

东西很多的说~~~