impulse作文小组 个人成功 技术类 周六作业

迷茫者UID: 2514662

independent: agree or disagree: observing or studying animals can help us to understand human nature（周六作业 ）

It has long been a controversial issue that whether observing or studying can help us to understand human nature. Different people hold different opinions. Some, with the first impression, assert that observing or studying animals is really beneficial to learn human nature for us. From my point of view, I can hardly agree with this statement after deep consideration. I will explain my opinion based on the following reasons

First of all, compared with nature of other animals, the human nature is greatly complicated. Nearly all animals will take escape as their first choice when they feel scared or dangerous because of instinct. But human beings are not. At some especial circumstance, human could conquer these negative instincts and confront tough or hazardous situation bravely. For example, if a wolf encounters a tiger in the forest, the wolf could less possibly have an idea to fight with the tiger due to the inherent scare to tiger even when there is not hope to flee. If the same situation happens to a person, the person probably will do his or her utmost to combat the tiger when he or she feels running away is hopeless although he or she is also filled with scare.

In the next place, the human nature is changeful while the nature of most animal is stable. In other words, as the situation changes, the human nature also alter while the nature of animal will not. Take the dog as an example. As we know, the dog is the synonym of the loyalty. Whether its owner is well off enough to feed it, the dog will never leave its owner because of its inborn nature of loyalty even if it will starve to death.

Ironically, most people actually can not keep their loyalty all the time. Once encountering some serious problems that will tremendously influence their benefit, they are more likely to betray their colleagues, friends or even relatives.

Of course, I do not totally deny the function of the observing or studying the animals. Admittedly, the research, to some extent, contributes to the understand of human nature, but the effect is quiet limited. After all, human beings, in a sense, do not belong to any kind of animals. We are more advanced whether in the thought, affection or language. So the simple nature from animals is inappropriate to speculate the complex and changeful human nature.

Taking all above-reasons into consideration, we can see observing or studying the animals will not contributes the understand of human nature greatly. Because there exist enormous distinction between human beings and animals

xuliang3178UID: 2331868

It has long been a controversial issue that whether observing or studying can help us to understand human nature. Different people hold different opinions. Some, with the first impression, assert that observing or studying animals is really beneficial to learn human nature for us. From my point of view, I can hardly agree with this statement after deep consideration. I will explain my opinion based on the following reasons.

First of all, compared(ing) with nature of other animals, the human nature is greatly complicated. Nearly all animals will take escape as their first choice when they feel scared or dangerous because of instinct. But human beings are not. At some especial circumstance(s), human could conquer these negative instincts and confront tough or hazardous situation bravely. For example, if a wolf encounters a tiger in the forest, the wolf could less possibly have an idea to fight with the tiger due to the inherent scare to tiger even when there is not hope to flee. If the same situation happens to a person, the person probably will do his or her utmost to combat the tiger when he or she feels running away is hopeless although he or she is also filled with scare.(这是human nature吗？to combat with the tiger is the result of education? it may be better to point out the nature of braveness of human in this paragraph. And animals such as wolf don't have such brave nature. So it is not suitable to help know about our human beings by observing the wolfs.会不会好点？)

In the next place, the human nature is changeful while the nature of most animal is stable. In other words, as the situation changes, the human nature also alter while the nature of animal will not. Take the dog as an example. As we know, the dog is the synonym（symbol) of the loyalty. (No matter) Whether its owner is well off enough to feed it, the dog will never leave its owner because of its inborn nature of loyalty even if it will starve to death.（...这一段和下一段合起来意思更完整些）Ironically, most people actually can not keep their loyalty all the time. Once encountering some serious problems that will tremendously influence their benefit, they are more likely to betray their colleagues, friends or even relatives.

Of course, I do not totally deny the function of the observing or studying the animals. Admittedly, the research, to some extent, contributes to the understand of human nature, but the effect is quiet limited. After all, human beings, in a sense, do not belong to any kind of animals. We are more advanced whether in the thought, affection or language. So the simple nature from animals is inappropriate to speculate the complex and changeful human nature.

Taking all above-reasons into consideration, we can see observing or studying the animals will not contributes（contribute) the understand of human nature greatly. Because there exist enormous distinction between human beings and animals

小结：楼主写得挺好的，我也学习提高了。字数挺多的。理由阐述得充分，coherently and effectively.我也写了这一篇，不过我是同意。感觉没有写得你这么好。你有时间的话，期待你可以帮我改改。谢谢。

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=869852&page=1&extra=page%3D1#pid1771971448

迷茫者UID: 2514662

谢了~~~相互学习~~~~
要是可以的话~~~可以把作文跟在这篇下~~

gabby19832004UID: 2461820

It has long been a controversial issue that whether observing or studying can help us to understand human nature. Different people hold different opinions. Some, with the first impression, assert that observing or studying animals is really beneficial to learn human nature for us (delete "for us"). From my point of view, I can hardly agree with this statement after deep consideration. I will explain my opinion based on the following reasons

(开头抓得很好．学习了．楼主能否传授一下如何将万能模版灵活运用？)

First of all, compared with nature of other animals, the human nature is greatly complicated. Nearly all animals will take escape as their first choice when they feel scared or dangerous because of instinct. But human beings are not. At some especial circumstance, human could conquer these negative instincts and confront tough or hazardous situation bravely. For example, if a wolf encounters a tiger in the forest, the wolf could less possibly have an idea to fight with the tiger due to the inherent scare to tiger even when there is not hope to flee. If the same situation happens to a person, the person probably will do his or her utmost to combat the tiger when he or she feels running away is hopeless although he or she is also filled with scare.

（不错，很扣主题．人和动物本能完全不一样）

In the next place, the human nature is changeful while the nature of most animal is stable. In other words, as the situation changes, the human nature also alter while the nature of animal will not. Take the dog as an example. As we know, the dog is the synonym of the loyalty. Whether its owner is well off enough to feed it, the dog will never leave its owner because of its inborn nature of loyalty even if it will starve to death.Ironically, most people actually can not keep their loyalty all the time. Once encountering some serious problems that will tremendously influence their benefit, they are more likely to betray their colleagues, friends or even relatives.

（我觉得这段说理有点牵强．这个理论性的东西都难讲清楚，因为没有科学根据是很难有说服力的．而且楼主考过Ｇ作文也知道的，狗的例子可能有点牵强，比如猫就很多变．因此不能说明所有动物都是这样．但是整段还是紧扣主题）

Of course, I do not totally deny the function of the observing or studying the animals. Admittedly, the research, to some extent, contributes to the understand of human nature, but the effect is quiet limited. After all, human beings, in a sense, do not belong to any kind of animals. We are more advanced whether in the thought, affection or language. So the simple nature from animals is inappropriate to speculate the complex and changeful human nature.

（让步，依然紧紧围绕主题，赞！～）

Taking all above-reasons into consideration, we can see observing or studying the animals will not contributes the understand of human nature greatly. Because there exist enormous distinction between human beings and animals

关于对human　nature的理解，我把它放在一个比较宽的环境下理解．我的理解是，包括生活习惯，心理，文化．．．因为之前做过longman的一道阅读理解，说的是social　construction．同意替换，我当时选的是社会阶层．结果答案出来是包括文化，宗教，还有社会构成的．所以，我看见human　nature就把它定义得比较宽．当然我没有查过专门的资料，所以也许我的理解是错的．只是提出来大家探讨吧．

另外，关于开头我提出的问题，还望楼主多多指教！～

kturyUID: 2274868

independent: agree or disagree: observing or studying animals can help us to understand human nature（周六作业 ）

It has long been a controversial issue that whether observing or studying[animals] can help us to understand human nature. Different people hold different opinions. Some, with the first impression, assert that observing or studying animals is really beneficial to learn human nature for us. From my point of view, I can hardly agree with this statement after deep consideration. I will explain my opinion based on the following reasons

First of all, compared with nature of other animals, the human nature is greatly complicated. Nearly all animals will take escape as their first choice when they feel scared or dangerous because of instinct. But human beings are not. At some especial circumstance, human could conquer these negative instincts and confront tough or hazardous situation bravely. For example, if a wolf encounters a tiger in the forest, the wolf could less possibly have an idea to fight with the tiger due to the inherent scare to tiger even when there is not hope to flee. If the same situation happens to a person, the person probably will do his or her utmost to combat the tiger when he or she feels running away is hopeless although he or she is also filled with scare.

In the next place, the human nature is changeful while the nature of most animal is stable. In other words, as the situation changes, the human nature also alter while the nature of animal will not. Take the dog as an example. As we know, the dog is the synonym of the loyalty. Whether its owner is well off enough to feed it, the dog will never leave its owner because of its inborn nature of loyalty even if it will starve to death.Ironically, most people actually can not keep their loyalty all the time. Once encountering some serious problems that will tremendously influence their benefit, they are more likely to betray their colleagues, friends or even relatives.

Of course, I do not totally deny the function of the observing or studying the animals. Admittedly, the research, to some extent, contributes to the understand of human nature, but the effect is quiet limited. After all, human beings, in a sense, do not belong to any kind of animals. We are more advanced whether in the thought, affection or language. So the simple nature from animals is inappropriate to speculate the complex and changeful human nature.

Taking all above-reasons into consideration, we can see observing or studying the animals will not contributes [to] the understand of human nature greatly. Because there exist enormous distinction between human beings and animals

牛! 又学习了,好的没话说.
如果说要挑错误的话,感觉上4段后半部分的内容与二三段有些重复