Issu36【07-10G Superstar大帖】第四次作业 by Huaxinluobo

huaxinluoboUID: 2326780

Can the greatness of individuals only be decided by those who live after them as the speaker asserts ? I tend to agree with it insofar as in the realm of art but in politics the greatness can be determine immediately and in science , invention situation varies .

First turn to art where I strongly agree with the assertion that only who lives after can determine whether one is truly great. I concede that creative inspiration and excellent skills of an  artist can be soon recognized by contemporaries such as critics ,people and be given  fame , honor and popularity. History is full of examples like Mozart, Beethoven , Mark Twain, Shakespeare ,they are all popular in their times.. But , can we get the conclusion that their greatness have be decided? No. For in their times there were other famous artists , some of which were more popular and more highly evaluated than those I mentioned above but later be forgotten. Then we ask :how does it happen and the answer is not complex. As it is known that the greatness of an work do not only lie in skills but mainly in its hidden lasting value which can hardly be recognized by the creator’s contemporaries and can only wait to be judged by later peoples . Van Gogh can serve as a good example and even those talked above receive evaluation and admire much higher than in their own times. Thus, it is clear that only who live behind can decide certain individual’s place in history.

When looking into the arena of politics and social transmission , those figures’ greatness can immediately be recognized by their contemporaries. My reason for this is simple : although one individual’s influence may last very long , his/her contribution and achievement can quickly be realized by most people at the same period . Even if what he/she leaded or established may fail in future , their fame and greatness can never be diminished. Take a look at Jorge Washington, Lincoln, Gandhi , Mating Luther King ,etc , their greatness were affirmatively decided before their death. And turn to Lenin , although he made many mistakes and the Soviet Union he established has collapsed , his contribution of liberating people from tyranny will never be forgotten and he soundly take his place in the history of mankind .  

In the fields of science , invention and technology, it is unreasonable to generalize because conditions varies from case to case. Sometimes when a scientist creates or improves one theory or assumption which can do better in explaining phenomenon than former ones and be supported by mathematics and experiments , it is all right for contemporaries to guarantee he/she greatness . Take Einstein for example , many of his theories have been proved right in many ways and although we are not sure whether his theories are absolute right and may not be diminished in future ,people at his time have rightly considered him one of greatest physicists in history. On the other hand , if science and technology in one individual’s time is incapable of justifying his/her discovery, only those who lives later and have more knowledge and tech can determine whether one is great or not. So in my opinion who decides one’s greatness has little to do with time but with the ability to prove or disprove.

To sum up, the speaker unfairly generalizes . To fair judge artist and some scientist it needs time but to rightly evaluate politicians , reformers and other scientists it does not take much time .

laura001UID: 2295927

Can the greatness of individuals only be decided by those who live after them as the speaker asserts ? I tend to agree with it insofar as in the realm of art but（怎么突然转折了，不是ＡＳ．．ＡＳ．．结构吗？） in politics the greatness can be determine immediately and in science , invention situation varies .

First turn to art where I strongly agree with the assertion that only who lives after can determine whether one is truly great. I concede that creative inspiration and excellent skills of an  artist can be soon recognized by contemporaries such as critics ,people and be given  fame , honor and popularity. History is full of examples like Mozart, Beethoven , Mark Twain, Shakespeare ,they are all popular in their times.. But can we get the conclusion that their greatness have be decided? No. For in their times there were other famous artists , some of which were more popular and more highly evaluated than those I mentioned above but later be forgotten. Then we ask :how does it happen and the answer is not complex. As it is known that the greatness of an work do not only lie in skills but mainly in its hidden lasting value which can hardly be recognized by the creator’s contemporaries and can only wait to be judged by later peoples . Van Gogh can serve as a good example and even those talked above receive evaluation and admire much higher than in their own times. Thus, it is clear that only who live behind can decide certain individual’s place in history.

When looking into the arena of politics and social transmission , those figures’ greatness can immediately be recognized by their contemporaries. My reason for this is simple : although one individual’s influence may last very long , his/her contribution and achievement can quickly be realized by most people at the same period . Even if what he/she leaded or established may fail in future , their fame and greatness can never be diminished. Take a look at Jorge Washington, Lincoln, Gandhi , Mating Luther King ,etc , their greatness were affirmatively decided before their death. And turn to Lenin , although he made many mistakes and the Soviet Union he established has collapsed , his contribution of liberating people from tyranny will never be forgotten and he soundly take his place in the history of mankind .  

In the fields of science , invention and technology, it is unreasonable to generalize because conditions varies from case to case. Sometimes when a scientist creates or improves one theory or assumption which can do better in explaining phenomenon than former ones and be supported by mathematics and experiments , it is all right for contemporaries to guarantee he/she greatness . Take Einstein for example , many of his theories have been proved right in many ways and although we are not sure whether his theories are absolute right and may not be diminished in future ,people at his time have rightly considered him one of greatest physicists in history. On the other hand , if science and technology in one individual’s time is incapable of justifying his/her discovery, only those who lives later and have more knowledge and tech can determine whether one is great or not. So in my opinion who decides one’s greatness has little to do with time but with the ability to prove or disprove.


To sum up, the speaker unfairly generalizes . To fairly judge artists and some scientists it needs time but to rightly evaluate politicians , reformers and other scientists it does not take much time .




写的不错啊！例子也挺多的.加粗的是你这段的关键词．层次还是挺清楚的

但是你的例子都只是点了一下，没有什么阐述．例子多但不精，不知道可以否．具体说的几个例子，感觉套在谁身上都可以，没有突出这个人所特有的东西．

晚安～～:rolleyes:

[ 本帖最后由 laura001 于 2007-6-1 02:46 编辑 ]

liurenciUID: 2328629

Can the greatness of individuals only be decided by those who live after them as the speaker asserts ? I tend to agree with it insofar as in the realm of art but in politics the greatness can be determine immediately and in science , invention situation varies .感觉有点混乱

First turn to art where I strongly agree with the assertion that only who lives after can determine whether one is truly great. I concede that creative inspiration and excellent skills of an  artist can be soon recognized by contemporaries such as critics ,people and be given  fame , honor and popularity. History is full of examples like Mozart, Beethoven , Mark Twain, Shakespeare ,they are all popular in their times.. But , can we get the conclusion that their greatness have be decided? No. For in their times there were other famous artists , some of which were more popular and more highly evaluated than those I mentioned above but later be forgotten. Then we ask :how does it happen and the answer is not complex. As it is known that the greatness of an work do not only lie in skills but mainly in its hidden lasting value which can hardly be recognized by the creator’s contemporaries and can only wait to be judged by later peoples . Van Gogh can serve as a good example and even those talked above receive evaluation and admire much higher than in their own times. Thus, it is clear that only who live behind can decide certain individual’s place in history.

When looking into the arena of politics and social transmission , those figures’ greatness can immediately be recognized by their contemporaries. My reason for this is simple : although one individual’s influence may last very long , his/her contribution and achievement can quickly be realized by most people at the same period . Even if what he/she leaded or established may fail in future , their fame and greatness can never be diminished. Take a look at Jorge Washington, Lincoln, Gandhi , Mating Luther King ,etc , their greatness were affirmatively decided before their death. And turn to Lenin , although he made many mistakes and the Soviet Union he established has collapsed , his contribution of liberating people from tyranny will never be forgotten and he soundly take his place in the history of mankind .  

In the fields of science , invention and technology, it is unreasonable to generalize because conditions varies from case to case. Sometimes when a scientist creates or improves one theory or assumption which can do better in explaining phenomenon than former ones and be supported by mathematics and experiments , it is all right for contemporaries to guarantee he/she greatness . Take Einstein for example , many of his theories have been proved right in many ways and although we are not sure whether his theories are absolute right and may not be diminished in future ,people at his time have rightly considered him one of greatest physicists in history. On the other hand , if science and technology in one individual’s time is incapable of justifying his/her discovery, only those who lives later and have more knowledge and tech can determine whether one is great or not. So in my opinion who decides one’s greatness has little to do with time but with the ability to prove or disprove. 觉得有点不对劲，能不能改成这样？So in my opinion the determinant factors of greatness of  scientist have more to do the ability of people who decides the greatness rather than the time.


To sum up, the speaker unfairly generalizes . To fair judge artist and some scientist it needs time but to rightly evaluate politicians , reformers and other scientists it does not take much time .

写得不错，层次感很强，例子也很多。不过我还是对issue比较头疼，所以也提不出什么中肯的建议，等我这两周认真把issue解决了，再给你提些建议。:loveliness: