Issue190 【0706G－LOVEAW小组】第14次作业

小猫儿UID: 2297873

190. "As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money."


1、  it is our instinct to feed ourselves to live on, so that it is cruel to use public resources to support arts when there are people starving
2、  however, the arts can edify people’s thought so that they can be more inspired to create more social wealth
3、  in addition, arts can be a way of earning one’s living. A lot of people who are starving are potential artists. If the poor with genius are supported to found their own career, they can not only feed themselves, but they can also help others.

TIME:55min   words:580
It is arguer whether the society should contribute public resources to support the arts when there are people who are still starving, out of work or lacking the basic skills for living. However, in my point of view, although it seems cruel to spare money for arts in such case, the deed is good for the society including the poor.

Admittedly, it is our instinct to feed ourselves to survive, so that using public resources to support arts when some people are suffering seems rather cruel. Human beings are fundamentally animals that need basic conditions to continue our lives. It has been proved by the psychologist Abraham. h. Maslow that the foundation in different levels of human needs is the physical needs, including need for food, water, air, and home. Only if one’s physical need is met would he have other needs of higher levels. On the other hand, the form of art is a kind of need for self-achieving for human beings, which is in much higher a level than the physical needs. Therefore, if a person are still starving without food provision or have no certain place to live in, he would treat art as redundant things so that he would consider it as cruel that the society spares money to support art.

However, the art can edify people’s thoughts so that they can be more inspired to create more social wealth. As is know to all, the art, as an appreciation in one’s spare time, not only helps to relax oneself from hard and intense work, it can also inspire people’s wisdom by adjusting their minds. As the Canadian paint Agnes Martin said and I cite, art restimulates inspirations and awakens sensibilities. That's the function of art. Under such stimulation, people think more clearly and create more social wealth. For example, the preeminent physicist Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, who is one the founder of the quantum theory, was good at playing the piano. Even though he did not choose pianist as his career, the avocation accompanied him throughout his life. He once said and I cite that the music not only helps to eliminate the tire, it also helps his scientific meditation on the physical quantum. It can be imagined that if there is not the piano as his companion and assistant, he may not have brought forward the outstanding quantum theory.

In addition, art can also be a way of earning one’s living. A lot of people who are starving are potential artists. If the poor with talent are supported to found their own career, they can not only feed themselves, but they can also help others. For example, the outstanding composer Xinghai Xian was rather poor in his childhood. His father was a poor worker who hardly had money to feed the family. However, when Xinghai Xian grew older and was supported by the society after a while, he finally became the great composer whose work is still playing frequently now. After he became famous, he taught in a school and helped a lot of people become outstanding. Causal support to the art achieves great fruition.

To sum up, it is reasonable and understandable that the society use public resources to support art even though there are people who are starving, out of work or lacking the skills for living. The poor should try their best to dig out the talent and potential in themselves under the help of the support of the government.

iq28UID: 2152875

It is arguer (什么情况...) whether the society should contribute public resources to support the arts when there are people who are still starving, out of work or lacking the basic skills for living. However, in my point of view, although it seems cruel to spare money for arts in such case, the deed is good for (一旦限时了估计都用小词了呵呵) the society including the poor.

Admittedly, it is our instinct to feed ourselves to survive, so that using public resources to support arts when some people are suffering seems rather cruel. Human beings are fundamentally animals that need basic conditions to continue our lives. It has been proved by the psychologist Abraham. h. Maslow that the foundation in different levels of human needs is the physical needs, including need for food, water, air, and home. (这句话真的没有必要的说|||,人要什么物理条件用这种生物角度来证明跟本段要论证的内容关系真的不大|||) Only if one’s physical need is met would he have other needs of higher levels. (nice) On the other hand, (我怎么觉得下面的话就是重复前面的...需要用on the other hand么...) the form of art is a kind of need for self-achieving (和前面的紫色字内容基本相同,只是细化) for human beings, which is in much higher a level than the physical needs. Therefore, if a person are still starving without food provision or have no certain place to live in, he would treat art as redundant things so that he would consider it as cruel that the society spares money to support art. (这段论证不令人满意,比较空,而且例子也糟糕,加油)

However, the art can edify people’s thoughts so that they can be more inspired to create more social wealth. As is know to all, the art, as an appreciation in one’s spare time, not only helps to relax oneself from hard and intense work, it can also inspire people’s wisdom by adjusting their minds. As the Canadian paint Agnes Martin said and I cite, art restimulates inspirations and awakens sensibilities. That's the function of art. Under such stimulation, people think more clearly and create more social wealth. (前面论证很nice!) For example, the preeminent physicist Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck, who is one the founder of the quantum theory, was good at playing the piano. Even though he did not choose pianist as his career, the avocation accompanied him throughout his life. He once said and I cite that the music not only helps to eliminate the tire, it also helps his scientific meditation on the physical quantum. (这个例子不是很好,更加符合艺术陶冶是个人成功的必备,而不是对于艺术的投资可以使得社会得到更多物质财富,普朗克的例子本身不存在投资的问题.) It can be imagined that if there is not the piano as his companion and assistant, he may not have brought forward the outstanding quantum theory. (其实本段不错,对于例子的挑剔要求是比较严格的呵呵)

In addition, art can also be a way of earning one’s living. A lot of people who are starving are potential artists. (题目中的意思可能是社会已经starving成风了...大家都starve,谁来买艺术...本文题目应该着重于社会问题的解决而非个人) If the poor with talent are supported to found their own career, they can not only feed themselves, but they can also help others. For example, the outstanding composer Xinghai Xian was rather poor in his childhood. His father was a poor worker who hardly had money to feed the family. However, when Xinghai Xian grew older and was supported by the society after a while, he finally became the great composer whose work is still playing frequently now. After he became famous, he taught in a school and helped a lot of people become outstanding. Causal support to the art achieves great fruition. (这段从ts来看就有点偏,后面论证都还好)

To sum up, it is reasonable and understandable that the society use public resources to support art even though there are people who are starving, out of work or lacking the skills for living. The poor should try their best to dig out the talent and potential in themselves under the help of the support of the government.

论点选择有问题,从个人着手了(第二个body也有这个毛病),本题应该属于一个社会类型的问题.
加油

[ 本帖最后由 iq28 于 2007-3-7 23:47 编辑 ]