issue141 决战830tm，拍必回

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

Most people recognize the benefits of individuality, but the fact is that personal economic success requires conformity.
------正文------
Which is more important to one's economic success, individuality or conformity? The speaker claims to be the later. While as far as I am concerned, conformity is to survive, and individuality is to thrive. Probably individuality in the bounds of conformity is the best choice.

In the first place, conforming to the laws, basic scientific and social rules and needs of the customers is vital for people to survive in the society. Law, as a set of universal rules to regulate people’s behavior, should be obeyed by any individual. On the contrary, if somebody pursuits wealth through illegal ways, either by stealing, robbery, drug dealing, or cheating, the things that await him or her is the punishment from the law, or even the jail. The story of Enron Cooperation can be a telling example. By creative accounting, the company made up a mirage of a successful traditional energy business in the computer age, and the share price once reached 90$ per share. Yet when the scandal broke out, the price shrank to less than a dollar. As for the greedy managers, they lost most of their properties in the landslide in the stock market, one of the vice presidents of the board committed suicide, and some were put into jails. Thus, law is the basic line for people to attain economic success.

What is more, the basic scientific and social rules should be obeyed; otherwise, people would be punished by the rules. Many people have dreamt of a perpetual motion machine, by which means a machine that needs not any kind of energy input yet can exert energy, usually in the form of kinetic energy, out. Attractive this machine seems, against the Second Law of Thermodynamics it is. Ironically, many people, some of whom are well educated, still want to invent such machines. While enormous money, time and energy have been spent; the results are failure after failure. And the social rules are just like the scientific ones, to disobey them only leads one to defeat. For example, if somebody acts against the rule of nature price, and charges much more than the nature price for his or her product or service, it is unlikely that he or she can get money from the customers' pocket, since there are lots of competitors who have a more reasonable price. Thus, conforming to both scientific and social rules is vital for one's economic success.

Additionally, one must stay with the needs of the customers to be able to sustain one, either by selling one's products, services, or resources to the ones who need them. If one fails to meet the customers' need, he or she is unlikely to get the goods sold. The failure of Motorola in the "Iridium World Plan" would be a telling example. Seemingly attractive is the technology to enable us to contact with others at any point of the earth, yet the majority of customers just do not have the need to phone others in some remote areas that are not covered by the traditional mobile phone networks. As a result, Motorola only sold out only a few thousand Iridium mobiles before the announcement of the failure of the plan. Thus, to attain personal economic success without conforming to the needs of customers is impossible.

Of equal importance is individuality, the absence of which renders an individual unable to thrive. One needs to distinguish himself or herself among competitors, and to have innovative ideas to make real progress. In this information booming era, only those who can draw the eyes of customers have the change to win big success, Andy Grove, the former chairman of board of Intel, even concluded that this is an "Attention Economics Era". Yet conformity can hardly be the focus of the customers, only those who have distinguished features can. For example, in the electronic industry, when most MP3s look alike and have similar functions, the few ones, which look peculiar, provide extra functions, or charge much lower, have the chance to attract the customers to buy the products.

In sum, individuality in the bounds of conformity is vital for one's personal economic success.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-24 at 22:50 ]

cruiserjiaUID: 2102784

见附件！
下回别这么粘了， 我改起来太不方便了。呵呵！

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

Which is more important to one's economic success, individuality or conformity? The speaker claims to be the later. While as far as I am concerned, conformity is to survive, and individuality is to thrive. Probably individuality in the bounds of conformity is the best choice.

Before attaining economic success, one needs to at least be able to survive. And conforming to the laws, basic scientific and social rules and needs of the customers is vital for people to survive in the society.

Law, as a set of universal rules that regulate people’s behavior, should be obeyed by any individual. If somebody pursuits wealth through illegal ways, either by stealing, robbery, drug dealing, or cheating, the things that await him or her is the punishment from the law, or even the jail. The story of Enron Cooperation can be a telling example. By creative accounting, the company made up a mirage of a successful traditional energy business in the computer age, and the share price once reached 90$ per share. Yet when the scandal broke out, the price shrank to less than one dollar. As for the greedy managers, they lost most of their properties in the landslide in the stock market, one of the vice presidents of the board committed suicide, and some were put into jails. Thus, law is the basic line for people to attain economic success.

What is more, the basic scientific and social rules should be obeyed; otherwise, people would be punished by the rules. Many people have dreamt of a perpetual motion machine, by which means a machine that needs not any kind of energy input yet can exert energy, usually in the form of kinetic energy, out. Attractive this machine seems, against the Second Law of Thermodynamics it is. Ironically, many people, some of whom are well educated, still want to invent such machines. While enormous money, time and energy have been spent; the results are failure after failure. And the social rules are just like the scientific ones, to disobey them only leads one to defeat. For example, if somebody acts against the rule of nature price, and charges much more than the nature price for his or her product or service, it is unlikely that he or she can get money from the customers' pocket, since there are lots of competitors who have a more reasonable price. Thus, conforming to both scientific and social rules is vital for one's economic success.

Additionally, one must stay with the needs of the customers to be able to sustain, either by selling one's products, services, or resources to the ones who need them. If one fails to meet the customers' need, he or she is unlikely to get the goods sold. The failure of Motorola in the "Iridium World Plan" would be a telling example. Seemingly attractive is the technology to enable us to contact with others at any point of the earth, yet the majority of customers just do not have the need to phone others in some remote areas that are not covered by the traditional mobile phone networks. As a result, Motorola only sold out only a few thousand Iridium mobiles before the announcement of the failure of the plan. Thus, to attain personal economic success without conforming to the needs of customers is impossible.

Of equal importance is individuality, the absence of which renders an individual unable to thrive. One needs to distinguish himself or herself among competitors, and to have innovative ideas to make real progress. In this information booming era, only those who can draw the eyes of customers have the chance to win big success, Andy Grove, the former chairman of board of Intel, even concluded that this is an "Attention Economics Era". Yet conformity can hardly be the focus of the customers, only those who have distinguished features can. For example, in the electronic industry, when most MP3s look alike and have similar functions, the few ones, which look peculiar, provide extra functions, or charge much lower, have the chance to attract the customers to buy the products.

In sum, there are two steps in the way to personal economic success. The first one is to be able to survive in the competition world, which requires us to conform to the laws, basic scientific and social rules and needs of the customers. Only after fulfilling the first step, can we pursuit the higher goal: thrive, in which individuality is a necessity. Thus, individuality in the bounds of conformity is the optional choice in the pursuit of wealth.
后面加了一段论证，似乎就不跑题了。那个句子好像是可以的吧。标点可以那么用。