【Chasing For "6" Score】第二次作业

longstUID: 2433232

36 "The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries."
36． 只有后来人评价以前的人，而不应该同时代的人相互评价。
The way of decision greatness-individuals has long been a staple topic. And there has been some controversy about this topic. Somebody said that the greatness of individual should be decided only by people who live follow them rather than their contemporaries. But there are many facts recently telling us could not follow that point of views. The following hand script would provide more detail to illustrate the statement that greatness-person should be evaluate by both who live after them and who live with them basing on two folds: time and valuation.
Firstly, the time could be considered as one of the best ruler to evaluate the greatness-individuals. That means the real greatness-individual should be considered by both past people and contemporaries. There are varieties of examples telling us that although some individuals could be considered as greatness by those who live after them, they had not been identified as greatness because of the people who live with them. One of the mayors of my hometown could be served as a typical example. During the time as he was mayor of my hometown, he started variety of projects at the same time, such as the project of many express ways and high ways, the project of enlarging railway station, and the project of enlarging the airport. During that time my hometown was as the same as a huge building site, all the citizen were busy on the project. Many project really caused bad living environment and inconvenience transportation. So, that mayor totally had been named the extreme bad reputation by the people during the building site-time. And variety of people who could not bear the bad environment caused by the mayor’s project had organized lots of marches. And that major fell out of power in the end. But we should admit that his project really had bought benefits gradually after ten or more than ten years. At present, around thirty years is past, but our citizen still consider that mayor had bad reputation basing on the people as his contemporaries.
So, someone who is considered as a greatness individual should have high standard request that means the evaluation should be base on who live after him/ her and his or her contemporaries.  If not, perhaps that example above, the past mayor of my hometown probably could be considered as a high reputation governor by those who live after him. That is to say, to evaluation greatness, the opinion for the people who live with them should be considered as well.
In addition, valuation of different generation is also an important factor.  General speaking, different generation has almost the exactly different valuation, a person could be considered as a famous should be evaluated basing on the past valuation and present valuation. If judged the greatness-individual just basing on the preset valuation or just basing the past valuation, it would have various convictions between the people who hold the past judgment and the judgment of contemporary.
To sum up, many factors above bring us a statement that, in case any convictions, not only the opinion from people who level after the famous people but from the famous people’s contemporary should be involved when the famous individuals are evaluated.

147. The following appeared in an editorial in a business magazine.
"Although the sales of Whirlwind video games have declined over the past two years, a recent survey of video-game players suggests that this sales trend is about to be reversed. The survey asked video-game players what features they thought were most important in a video game. According to the survey, players prefer games that provide lifelike graphics, which require the most up-to-date computers. Whirlwind has just introduced several such games with an extensive advertising campaign directed at people 10 to 25 years old, the age-group most likely to play video games. It follows, then, that the sales of Whirlwind video games are likely to increase dramatically in the next few months."


The article appeared in a business magazine was trying telling us Whirlwind (W) video games company would have an increase in their sales basing on the reasons below: 1 video-game players love the game with lifelike graphics which would be released by W video games company, 2 perfect advertisement strategy that focus on the people 10-25 years old had been performed. Despite the article had provided some evidence, however, that evidence still had some confusion. Basically, the confusion could be defined as 2 categories, mistaken deduction and fallacy of missing evidence. The following hand script would pass more detail to illustrate the confusion had been pointed out above.
Firstly, mistaken deduction, the article said that W company had introduced several lifelike games and released the advertisement directly at people 10 to 25 years old. Although the age-group could be the video game favorers, this information could not consider having any relationship with the increase of W company. For example, those 10 to 25 people who W company focuses on could have variety of video game copy already, so that they perhaps pay any attention on W company’s advertisement even their new products. In addition, 10-25 people also could lack of money to buy W company’s product. So, that statement, making relationship with increase of W company and advertisement strategy with 10-25 people, could not be established.
Secondly, the article also has some fallacy of missing evidence. For instance, the article had not provided any evidence that the lifelike game could link increase of company. Because of the high requirement of the computer hard ware for running the lifelike game, the customs’ computer could not have ability to run the game which the W company would release. Moreover, the survey that W company had made just provided the general information that lifelike game could be famous in the following years. But the article still could not provide any precise information to identify which kind of lifelike would be hot, it could be a possible that a particular kind of lifelike game would be hot and others would be not. So that both of the statements above have pointed out the article had some information having missing evidence.
To sum up, the article published by business magazine had lack of evidence to convince reader that the W company would have an increase.

[ 本帖最后由 longst 于 2008-3-7 13:38 编辑 ]