issue40 0906G三月底AW“永不言弃”互改小组第二周第一次作业 by MYcolting 2#

MYcoltingUID: 2563080

40"Scholars and researchers should not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society. It is more important that they pursue their individual interests, however unusual or idiosyncratic those interests may seem."

TS 1 部分同意，应该是看情况而论的
   2 对于少数拥有惊人天赋的学者 应该给与他们这种特权和资金
   3 当然这种非比寻常的兴趣也应该是符合事务本质规律的
   4 另一方面 其他的学者应该多关注下社会问题 最大化自身的价值
   5 总之 对于这个问题不能一概而论 应该建立相应的社会体制进行监管



  Should scholars and researchers not be concerned with whether their work makes a contribution to the larger society? Is it more important that they pursue their individual interests? The speaker claims so. However, in my view when coming to these complicated questions, the discussion of the issue should be determined on a case-by-case situation. Accordingly, we should take different measures according to the ability of scholars and researchers.

To begin with, when facing the small portion of scholars and researchers who hold on so stunning ingenious ability that may make breakthrough in his or her field, we should not concerned with their work, for their ideologies are always transcend the their ages decades or even hundreds which lead the problem the other people usually misunderstand them. Consider, for example, Galois, the founder of group theory, who was not accepted by the other scholars and researchers of his age due to his ahead of time theory, finally died in a duel under shadowy circumstances. Most contemporary mathematicians who have recognize the importance of Galois's theory share a brief that this is a tragedy that a talent mathematician died in the age of twenty-one or he may contributed much more to
the advance of mathematics. Simply put, due to potential misunderstand of the talent, our government ought to give them more privilege and fund for their idiosyncratic interests.

Of course, the so-called unusual or idiosyncratic interests must in accordance with the law of nature. If the unusual interest is some nonsense and irrational aspects such as the mediaeval theologists who involved themselves in the debate of the nonsense question on how many angles can stand on a pin or if the rose in heaven has spins, obviously it is ridiculous and wasteful to concentrate on these researches. Our government should stop the supply of fund for the scholar who would waste the recourse of society.

On the other hand, the other common scholars and researchers should pay more attention to society which can maximize their individual values. For instance, the common scholars and researchers whose field in natural environment can spend more time on the global warming for the phenomenon can cause many serious problems in the future, for example, the sea level rise, the endemic change of climate that may endanger human survival, if these potential problems were solved, the dangerous factors would be reduced. And the financial crisis in 2008 is another case to illustrate the point and the relevant common scholars can explore the approach of the immediate crisis to supply more chances for jobs.

On the whole, it is arbitrary to conclude as the speaker only according to the interests of scholars and researchers. We should judge the scholars' and reseaerchers' interests through evaluation of their abilities. So our society can build up a system that evaluates the ability of scholars and researchers to give truly ingenious ones more privilege and fund and another system to oversee their idiosyncratic researches to prevent wasting social recourses.