Issue48 【0706G－LOVEAW小组大贴】第十次作业 by aic00

aic00UID: 2277302

Issue48
"The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."

Concerning the emphases of historical study and status of famous individuals, the author asserts that the study of history spends too much time and energy on individuals. Actually, the author thinks, it is mainly the groups of people, whose identities have long been forgotten unfortunately, but not the famous few who made it possible to the most significant events and trends in history. I partly agree with both aspects of this claim. That is, both individuals and groups of people should be emphasized in different situations in the study of history. Moreover, history follows a path which no individual can decide in its real case. To better present my viewpoint let me illustrate it in details.
Individuals do indeed influence history. But they cannot influence society or history in any direction they so choose. In certain historical circumstance, there is no doubt that some famous individuals play an important role. Focusing the research on them, we can clearly realize the significant effects they made in accelerating the progress of history or in reforming society. George Washington, Lenin, Robespierre--these men shaped history, and the actions of the masses of people in those revolutions helped them to to achieve the great accomplishment. Only putting emphasis on groups of peoples can be a tool in education students in history, but students will not get a central figures in history in helping them to remember specific events, thus, the famous individuals will not give students specific figures that can be emulated as role models as they should be.
Even so, however, I agree with the author of the statement that there is too much emphasis on individuals and that groups of people who are equally important are forgotten. For examples, Abraham Lincoln is often memorialized as the central figure in the Civil War and the liberation of American slaves. Only emphasizing Lincoln as a central figure in this large movement fails to acknowledge the actions of thousands of other individuals, including the slaves had great effect in that time. In addition, placing emphasis on a single individual may cause students to ignore the importance of the history itself. They may remember Lincoln and his name, but fail to understand the slave situation that occurred at that time. Famous individuals could be leaders or decision-makers, but nothing will be done by themselves without the performances of groups of people.
In addition, we should not neclect the essential fact that history follows a path which no individual can dicide--"great men" are merely agents for its realization. According to this view, individuals and their actions are purely products of historical conditions. Individuals cannot exert their will independently of the social conditions in which they find themselves. "Individuals can influence the fate of society," wrote the Russian Marxist George Plekhanov, "by virtue of definite traits in their nature. Their influence is sometimes very considerable, but the possibility of its being exercised and its extent are determined by society’s organization and the alignment of its forces.
In sum, from all the discussions above, we can safely draw the conclusion that the author's assertion in
is partly reasonable in that groups of people should be pay more emphasis in dealing with some most significant events and trends in the study of history. Moreover, history follows a path which no individual can decide in its real case.

小猫儿UID: 2297873

Concerning the emphases of historical study and status of famous individuals, the author asserts that the study of history spends too much time and energy on individuals. Actually, the author thinks, it is mainly the groups of people, whose identities have long been forgotten unfortunately, but not the famous few who made it possible to the most significant events and trends in history. I partly agree with both aspects of this claim. That is, both individuals and groups of people should be emphasized in different situations in the study of history. Moreover, history follows a path which no individual can decide in its real case. To better present my viewpoint let me illustrate it in details.(第一段写得有点长，前面很大部分都可以去掉,直接拿出观点)
Individuals do indeed influence history. But they cannot influence society or history in any direction they so choose. In certain historical circumstance, there is no doubt that some famous individuals play an important role. Focusing the research on them, we can clearly realize the significant effects they made in accelerating the progress of history or in reforming society. George Washington, Lenin, Robespierre--these men shaped history, and the actions of the masses of people in those revolutions helped them to to achieve the great accomplishment. Only putting emphasis on groups of peoples can be a tool in education students in history(这句没有看懂), but students will not get a central figures in history in helping them to remember specific events, thus, the famous individuals will not give students specific figures that can be emulated as role models as they should be.没有具体的论证观点,感觉太空泛了
Even so, however, I agree with the author of the statement that there is too much emphasis on individuals and that groups of people who are equally important are forgotten. For examples, Abraham Lincoln is often memorialized as the central figure in the Civil War and the liberation of American slaves. Only emphasizing Lincoln as a central figure in this large movement fails to acknowledge the actions of thousands of other individuals, including the slaves had great effect in that time. In addition, placing emphasis on a single individual may cause students to ignore the importance of the history itself. They may remember Lincoln and his name, but fail to understand the slave situation that occurred at that time. Famous individuals could be leaders or decision-makers, but nothing will be done by themselves without the performances of groups of people.这段感觉不错
In addition, we should not neclect the essential fact that history follows a path which no individual can dicide--"great men" are merely agents for its realization. According to this view, individuals and their actions are purely products of historical conditions. Individuals cannot exert their will independently of the social conditions in which they find themselves. "Individuals can influence the fate of society," wrote the Russian Marxist George Plekhanov, "by virtue of definite traits in their nature. Their influence is sometimes very considerable, but the possibility of its being exercised and its extent are determined by society’s organization and the alignment of its forces.引用过后最好利用来论证一下
In sum, from all the discussions above, we can safely draw the conclusion that the author's assertion in
is partly reasonable in that groups of people should be pay more emphasis in dealing with some most significant events and trends in the study of history. Moreover, history follows a path which no individual can decide in its real case.
感觉文章的论证没有展开,不够有说服力