【Big Fish】3月8日Issue69-By rachelwang712

rachelwang712UID: 2757860

Issue No.069

"Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.

--------------------------
1科研无论是长期的短期的，成功或者失败，都会为科技的进一步更新做出贡献，应该得到支持。即使失败的科研，也是一种收获，爱迪生
2政府如果限制科研，会科学家无法对自己感兴趣的或者他们认为有前景的科研题目做出研究，而是只对政府有利，NAZI
3也有些科研是毫无意义或者鲜有意义的，政府在资金分配上的轻重缓急依然需要考虑。aids和研究人的头发的颜色


It has been a long-held belief that the attitude government takes towards scientific research affects the development of science and technology and even the improvement of human welfare greatly. It seems to me, however, government should not place any specific restriction on scientific studies but it also needs to allocate fund for science researches properly according to public interest and social problems.

To begin with, researches on various aspects of science, whether long-term or shor-term, ending in success or failure will be of great benefit for overal accelartion of science. Even those failed mean a lot. Edison, after thousands of failures in trying to invent the bulb, considered these experiences valuable as they taught him in what way it could not be worked out. All these failures have led right up to his final success. If a government inhibits a research simply because it will not produce any siginficant results in short term or it has long been mired in failure, scientists will have to give up further exploration that will bring about prominent achievenment beyond expectation. Actually, almost all the scientific researches as long as they stick to the improvement of human welfare are worthy of support and should not be restricated.

Furthermore, government's requirements on scientific researches may tailor science to their own interests, perhaps invading ordinary people's rights. The choice as to which research to support and which to prohibited, made by government, if allowed, may end up in notorious demands that science work for their ruling and their own interest. Nazi's horrifying scientific researches serve to be the best example to illustrate. Back then, the goverment asked scientists to conduct studies for their own goal such as to develop an effective way for mass murder. In the studies, these scientists were even encouraged to experiment on prisoners in concentration camps, treating them as animals with no human rights. Therefore, government should not be allowed to place its own will on scientific research so that the tragedy in Nazi time would not occur again.

Finally, however, although government is not expected to set rules for scientific studies, it is suggested that it allocate scientific funds in an adequate way so that the immediate social problems are in priority to be tackled and public interest is well-served. Since the funds for scientific researches are usually limited in budget, governments often need to consider which one to invest and how much investment it should make. When judging legions of studies, what governments have to taken into their criteria is urgency of existing problems that call for immediate attention as well as benefits these studies will be likely to produce for public welfare. That is, when put before the choice of studies on anti-AIDS medicine and on people's haircolor, the government is expected to allocate more funds in the former than the latter. After all, scientific development should be conducive for people's improvement in living standard.

In conclusion, concerning scientific researches, it is not only beneficial but also necessary that government leave them to scientists and scholars without imposing any restrictation. However, it is still government's responsibility to use funds for supporting scientific researches in a reasonble and sensible way.

BobbieZZUID: 2756583

1# rachelwang712

It has been a long-held belief that the attitude government takes towards scientific research affects the development of science and technology and even the improvement of human welfare greatly. It seems to me, however, government should not place any specific restriction on scientific studies but it also needs to allocate fund for science researches properly according to public interest and social problems.观点很好~~

To begin with, researches on various aspects of science, whether long-term or short-term, ending in success or failure will be of great benefit for overall accelartion(acceleration) of science. Even those failed mean a lot. Edison, after thousands of failures in trying to invent the bulb, considered these experiences valuable as they taught him in what way it could not be worked out(最好不要用爱迪生的例子，太老了，而且很容易雷同哦). All these failures have led right up to his final success. If a government inhibits a research simply because it will not produce any siginficant(significant) results in short term or it has long been mired in failure, scientists will have to give up further exploration that will bring about prominent achievenment(achievement) beyond expectation. Actually, almost all the scientific researches as long as they stick to the improvement of human welfare are worthy of support and should not be restricated(restricted).

Furthermore, government's requirements on scientific researches may tailor science to their own interests, perhaps invading ordinary people's rights. The choice as to which research to support and which to prohibited, made by government, if allowed, may end up in notorious demands that science work for their ruling and their own interest. Nazi's horrifying scientific researches serve to be the best example to illustrate. Back then, the government asked scientists to conduct studies for their own goal such as to develop an effective way for mass murder. In the studies, these scientists were even encouraged to experiment on prisoners in concentration camps, treating them as animals(beast/livestock) with no human rights(no humanitarian). Therefore, government should not be allowed to place its own will on scientific research so that the tragedy in Nazi time would not occur again.

Finally, however, although government is not expected to set rules for scientific studies, it is suggested that it allocate scientific funds in an adequate way so that the immediate social problems are in priority to be tackled and public interest is well-served. Since the funds for scientific researches are usually limited in budget, governments often need to consider which one to invest and how much investment it should make. When judging legions of studies, what governments have to taken into their criteria is urgency of existing problems that call for immediate attention as well as benefits these studies will be likely to produce for public welfare. That is, when put before the choice of studies on anti-AIDS medicine and on people's haircolor(hair color), the government (is expected)expects to allocate more funds in the former than the latter. After all, scientific development should be conducive for people's improvement in living standard.

In conclusion, concerning scientific researches, it is not only beneficial but also necessary that government leave them to scientists and scholars without imposing any restrictation(restriction). However, it is still government's responsibility to use funds for supporting scientific researches in a reasonble(reasonable) and sensible way.

逻辑清晰，例子爱迪生的那个不太好，有些词汇的拼写要检查一下哦~~
你的语言确实挺不错的，而且写得字数也挺多的，限时能写成这样，真的很厉害~~