issue4 fantacy互改小组,内付提纲和一点其他思路,必回拍!!~

batterflyUID: 196681

No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study.

提纲
1 引进外人的知识可以使一个领域比较容易取得突破
2 但是，光是引入是不够的，这个要建立在本学科的发展上面，为了引入而引入无异于东施效颦
3 而且，其他很多因素也很重要

正文
As the voluminous amounts of information are produced daily, it is impossible for us to focus on one field of study. Thus, I tend to agree that by introducing knowledge and experience of outsiders, a field of study can be improved significantly. At the same time we should not ignore the field itself. Only though using knowledge from other fields cannot we undergo breakthrough.

To begin with, if outsiders bring their experience and knowledge to a field of study, the area may be easier to advance significantly. After all, making best use of others’ achievements is wisdom. The accomplishments of archeology help historian to know more about the condition when the significant events happened. The methods of mathematics make economics become more facile to be analyzed. The information of biology let engineer to use animal structure for reference. Moreover, on occasion, an area could not have magnificent breakthrough until another field developed to some degree. There are a number of illustrations full with history. Take the theory of relativity for example. Although Einstein had the idea about the theory already, the mathematics tool which could be used to represent this idea was not to be found. It is until the tool was put forward that Einstein advanced his theory. Thus the relationship of each discipline is closed and it is better for a field to use others’ knowledge and experience for reference.

However, people must master their own knowledge and experience when they attempt to introduce others’ information. Or else, applying the theory outsider mechanically amount to blind imitation with ludicrous effection. Think about it, if Einstein who are in pursue physical science do not understand knowledge in the field, it is less likely for him to have critical use of knowledge in the realm of math. Besides, introducing other fields’ information blindly is no use and even harmful. For example, if people of literature area place emphasize on the attempt for using the knowledge of physical science to enhance the quality of their articles, they will not achieve a lot. Therefore, people need to learn others’ knowledge according to their demands.（自己都觉得这个文学和物理的例子有点问题，我还在找更合适的，大家又什么想法呢？？）

Finally, whether a field of study can advance significantly depend on many other factors such as their foundation, finance, foreground of future and so on. We should take all of these factors into account because no matter lacking of any of them cannot we succeed. Take finance for example, if a field of study could not attract sponsor in finance, it is hard for it to be improved. After all, all of researches need the support in capital. For example, without the money from Engels, Marx might not accomplish his masterpieces. From this illustration, we can learn that some outer factors are of importance in the process of progress.

In sum, from what has been discussed above, we may finally draw the conclusion that without the internal development of a field, only bringing outsider’s knowledge and experience in cannot the field be progress significantly. Of course, we need to consider other factor that may affect this process.

batterflyUID: 196681

其实我本来想从学科发展的角度来写。学科经历了单独发展（自给自足）—综合发展（需要引入别人的成果）的过程，我想说明这个过程是一个客观的过程，是由社会发展引起的，毕竟现在越来越多的问题靠一个学科是没有办法解决的。想从题目的客观必要性上面说。但是，最终觉得语言把握不了，很可能写出来不能表达这个意思。不过也算是一个思路，大家可以看看

foreveraUID: 202035

As the voluminous amounts of information are produced daily, it is impossible for us to focus on one field of study好象没有因果关系. Thus, I tend to agree that by introducing knowledge and experience of outsiders, a field of study can be improved significantly. At the same time we should not ignore the field itself. Only though using knowledge from other fields cannot we undergo 啥意思？breakthrough. 最后一句说的太简单了。。。

To begin with, if outsiders bring their experience and knowledge to a field of study, the area may be easier to advance significantly. After all, making best use of others’ achievements is wisdom. The accomplishments of archeology help historian to know more about the condition when the significant events happened 考古和历史本来就是一家. The methods of mathematics make economics become more facile to be analyzed. The information of biology let engineer to use animal structure for reference这句没说明白。。虽然我也能看懂你的意思. Moreover, on occasion, an area could not have magnificent breakthrough until another这个another用的太不好了。。。这样这个句子前后一点关联性也没有 field developed to some degree. There are a number of illustrations        full with history啥意思？. Take the theory of relativity for example. Although Einstein had the idea about the theory already, the mathematics tool which could be used to represent this idea was not to be found. It is until the tool was put forward that Einstein advanced his theory. Thus the relationship of each discipline is closed ？？？and it is better for a field to use others’ knowledge and experience for reference.最后这个句子读起来感觉很别扭。。。
However, people must master their own knowledge and experience when they attempt to introduce others’ information这里还是有点不清楚。。introduce。。to。。. Or else, applying the theory outsider mechanically amount to  blind imitation with ludicrous effection这个句子看了好几遍就是没看懂什么意思。。。而且也没找到主语. Think about it, if Einstein who are时态和单复数 in pursue physical science do not understand knowledge in the field, it is less likely for him to have critical use of knowledge in the realm of math. Besides, introducing other fields’ information blindly is no use and even harmful. For example, if people of literature area place emphasize on the attempt for using the knowledge of physical science to enhance the quality of their articles, they will not achieve a lot. Therefore, people need to learn others’ knowledge according to their demands.（自己都觉得这个文学和物理的例子有点问题，我还在找更合适的，大家又什么想法呢？？） 这段感觉总体来说不是很好。。首先在思路上，对一个学科没有很充足了解的人本身就是outsider了，而题目中是学科内的人引入outside的东西。在语言上很多地方没有很有说服力的因果联系，总感觉是把2个不相关的事情强行联系起来，这点很大程度上是由于用词的不准确造成的。


Finally, whether a field of study can advance significantly depend on many other factors such as their foundation, finance, foreground of future and so on. 这点虽然也可以做原因。。但是我觉得并不是最重要的。。个人以为这个题目从学科内部分析会更好一点。。。We should take all of these factors into account because no matter lacking of any of them cannot we succeed. Take finance for example, if a field of study could not attract sponsor in finance, it is hard for it to be improved. After all, all of researches need the support in capital. For example, without the money from Engels, Marx might not accomplish his masterpieces. 这个例子有点问题。。。marx自己并不是一个学科啊。。。From this illustration, we can learn that some outer factors are of importance in the process of progress.

In sum, from what has been discussed above, we may finally draw the conclusion that without the internal development of a field, only bringing outsider’s knowledge and experience in cannot the field be progress significantly. Of course, we need to consider other factor that may affect this process.这句不太好。。

总体来说语言和词汇还不错，不过一些句子之间的逻辑关系上最好多推敲一下。。。我个人觉得你的另一个思路比这个insightful多了。。。可以考虑写以下。。

有时间看看我的138
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=328194

carrollUID: 2101274

語言上沒什麽大的問題，詞彙和句子結構也很好
就是我覺得可以把第二段分成兩個小段來寫，因爲好像moreover這裏和前面的意思有點遞進，然後在加強一下遞進感，
我覺得最好是通過各學科之間的内在聯係和社會學科的普遍聯係來寫，這樣不會顯得很空洞，因爲你現在的感覺好像在引入方面突出了引入后的成果，對原因的挖掘不是很有力。
你的例子還挺好的，你自己覺得有問題的那個離子我也覺得挺牽強的，等我想到好地告訴你八

batterflyUID: 196681

1 因果关系的问题，当时一直在想搞个什么背景引出话题，看来效果不好啊！！:(

2 undergo 接近experience 的意思

3 恩，考古和劳力士确实太接近了，换一个，生物学和考古吧，生物学可以分析古董的化学物质

4 想说工程师借鉴生物学家对动物的研究，运用到机械结构上，比如说飞机

5  applying the theory outsider mechanically amount to  blind imitation with ludicrous effection有点语法问题applying the theory outsider mechanically amounts to be blindly imitation with ludicrous effection机械的模仿无疑与东施效颦

6 可能是我语言的问题，但是不能说对一个学科没有很充足了解的人本身就是outsider吧，我的意思是不如说学物理的借鉴学数学的必须是在自己比较了解自己搞的东西，才能有效地借鉴。再说学物理的即使学得不好也是学物理的，不能说他是outsider阿，outsider是相对于学科说的吧，不是相对于一个领域的专家和这个领域的一般人说的吧:confused:

7 马克思的例子确实是，写得时候我就在考虑是不是把学科转换成人了呢？？看来确实有问题啊！！继续找例子！！:(

再次感谢forevera,:p
觉得这个题目看着好些，但是好像不容易写深入进去！！另外一个思路我没有把握，啥时候试一下吧
:)

[ Last edited by batterfly on 2005-8-29 at 18:58 ]

batterflyUID: 196681

To carroll
通過各學科之間的内在聯係和社會學科的普遍聯係來寫
不是很明白呢，能多给点思路吗??:p

关于那个例子！！唉，头都想大了，呵呵，想好了告诉我哈:)

再次感谢！:victory:

[ Last edited by batterfly on 2005-8-29 at 19:02 ]

foreveraUID: 202035

to batterfly:
修改文章更重要的是文章中的logic的东西。。。比如说段落之间的逻辑关系。。。句子之间的连接性的问题。。。还有段落的结构问题。。。而不是一开始就说思路的问题。。。其实AW无论你什么思路。。。只要很好的reasoning和logical organization。。。论证很insightful就可以了。。。。

batterflyUID: 196681

to forevera
没有好的思路，有好的逻辑的希望很小的哦，其实你不觉得写文章的思路就是你对文章整体逻辑的把握吗？？
而且，即使思路不好——这个当然是仁者见仁的事情，那文章真的自圆其说了吗？？
我看到你的思路就记下我的疑惑，然后带这个疑惑去看其实更能够发现问题，更何况看完文章以后，我这个疑惑并没有被你的insight消除。你的结论是建立在我并没于看全文仅仅看了你的思路的错误前提下的，不可信哦。何况对思路的看法是在我看完全文以后修改过的

呵呵，最近准备argument，看看这段论证的怎样？
而且关于指出我具体修改的问题，我已经一一作出回答，不过如果觉得这种形式不好，下次我会把这段放在最后说

:)不过讨论归讨论，不要产生什么情绪的好

foreveraUID: 202035

思路无所谓好坏。。。这是看文章的大前提。。。如果我有足够好的理由和论证说明地球是方的也是很好的。。。思路完全不等同于逻辑。。。。逻辑更多的和reasoning相关。。。只要说的有理有据就是很好的逻辑。。。

foreveraUID: 202035

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... p;page=1#pid1799481