[YB2] 7-15作业 by lossingzone

lossingzoneUID: 2519545

继续检讨，A写得真不像样，I结尾也很马虎。


Only through mistakes can one make discoveries and progress.
1．
Mistakes是什么
2．
为什么mistakes能使人取得发现和进步？
3．
什么情况下不用mistakes也能取得进步和发现的呢？
4．
什么情况下mistakes并没导致发现？
5．
发现和进步的过程：
开始时对一件事物了解不深——>尝试——>成功或者失败——>失败再总结——>再尝试
Mistakes是一种信息，是在我们对某件事物了解不多时，自然界泄漏的额外的信息。这就像我们要解一道题，方法有好多，老师不断告诉我们这种方法是错的，这种方法是错的，最后不断尝试，终于找到正确的方法。
这是外界信息量少时的有效方法，若我们知道的信息量很大呢？

此外，过分强调不怕失败的负面后果：不顾一切实际，例如永动机之类的

To begin with, I concede that the truth is intricate and slippery, and it always hides itself among the mistakes. Thus many discoveries come after eliminating mistakes around them, maybe a fairly big amount of mistakes.

1、
开篇，同意这种观点，无论对于个人来说还是对于整个人类，唯有通过不断尝试，不断犯错，然后从错误中总结经验教训，才能提高认知水平，发现未知，取得进步。（通过举例，爱迪生发明灯泡，莱特兄弟发明飞机(wright brothers invented the plane)，居里夫人(Madame Curie)夫妇经过四年的不断失败终于发现了镭(radium)
2、
首先，尽管有很多看起来不用经历错误失败就成功的例子，例如比尔盖茨好像从一个普通大学生到IT巨人，世界首富的过程中一帆风顺，但是实际上他中间和何尝没遇过挫折犯错误呢，如windows me; 发现X射线的伦琴(rongten) 看起来是偶然发现这种射线的，那么他根本不用经历失败就意外得到了。实际上，在他之前有无数的人遇到这种射线而没发现，而伦琴本人也做了无数的实验才得到这种偶然发现的；The discovery of penicillin, Fleming discovered it occasionally. However, before his discovery, many scientists failed to recognize it.
3、
分析为什么mistakes lead to discoveries and progress. It can view as extra information. Things are complicate in this world. It’s hard to know exactly what a matter is at first.
4、
More complements. Point out we are not advocate commit as much mistakes as possible. Actually, what we should do is to avoid as many mistakes as possible by learning lessons. Moreover, excess emphasis on …










TOPIC: ISSUE138 - "Only through mistakes can there be discovery or progress."
WORDS: 602
TIME: 00:55:00
DATE: 2009-7-15 23:22:04

Edison invented bulb after hundreds of failures of experiments, it was after many mistakes the Wright brother committed did they created plane, and Madam Curie would not discover radium if she gave up for any failures of her and her husband's four years hard work. In a word, we human being cannot make any progress and discoveries without mistakes.

It seems that there are many examples to illuslate a phenomena that many discoveries can be made without committing errors. As we know, there are many occasional findings in human history. For example, Fleming found Penicillin by chance; he was not intentional to search for such a substance before. Roentgen’s discovery of X-ray was just a Para-product of his experiment. Many other scientific discoveries, such as the observation of stars, the discovery of many mathematical theories, were discovered occasionally. As a result, it seems reasonable to argue that we can succeed without setbacks. This is superficial! Actually, before the great discovery of Fleming, many scientists had seen Penicillin yet they failed to identify it. Similarly, many people tried hard to find an element such as radium but failed. Moreover, the discoveries of many perfect theorems of mathematics found by chance seemed to be achieved without committing errors, however, they are basing on many other discoveries which were found through untold tests. In sum, those progresses which seem to be achieved easily are actually due to hard work of our precedents.

Why mistakes can lead to discoveries and progresses? As we know, we are living in a complicate world. There are many things unknown to us. For example, the outer space, we have little knowledge of it. How can we know more about it? There is no way except endless exploration. However, we can not get to know anything if we don't have enough information about it. Moreover, the information won't appear except we try hard to find it and we don't know what is helpful for us at all. Only after we learn lessons from mistakes do we get to know more information about the mystery things we are probing. At the very beginning, we knew nothing about the status our earth is in the universe. And then some people imagined that the Earth is the center of the universe. Later on, Copernicus rectified it to the hypothesis that the sun is the center of the cosmic and the earth is moving around the sun. At last we get to know that the sun is no more than a common star in the galaxy! Through the ignorance to the final cognition of the status of the earth, how many mistakes do us committed? We can get the truth in the end only after we extract useful information from our mistakes and try more and more.


However, the fact that we can make progress only through mistakes doesn't mean that we should commit mistakes as many as possible. Actually, we should avoid as many mistakes as we can. We won't have discoveries without failures. However, we can achieve our goal without fewer mistakes if we consider carefully and try our best. If we can learn as many as possible from the former mistakes we or our precedents commit, more mistakes may be avoided. Moreover, sometimes it’s fatal to commit mistakes and therefore we should avoid it. For example, suppose that a man gets a serious disease which is new to the doctors. Though we can get precious experience from the cure of such disease even it doesn’t save the patient in the end, however, it cost the life of a person after all.

In sum, we won’t make any progresses and make discoveries without committing any mistakes. To promote the human civilization, we should explore the unknown world bravely and learn from our mistakes.

TOPIC: ARGUMENT186 - The following is a recommendation from the director of personnel to the president of Professional Printing Company.

"In a recent telephone survey of automobile factory workers, older employees were less likely to report that having a supervisor present increases their productivity. Among workers aged 18 to 29, 27 percent said that they are more productive in the presence of their immediate supervisor, compared to 12 percent for those aged 30 or over, and only 8 percent for those aged 50 or over. Clearly, if our printing company hires mainly older employees, we will increase productivity and save money because of the reduced need for supervisors."
WORDS: 454
TIME: 00:40:00
DATE: 2009-7-16 0:50:43

The arguer concluded that supervisors' presence would not increase the passion of older workers and hence increase their productivity according to the result of a recent telephone survey. As a result, the arguer suggested their printing company to hire fewer supervisors if it hires more older employees. It sounds reasoning at a first glance. However, some fatal flaws can be found by careful analysis and hence the conclusion is not convincing.

For the first reason, we can't even guarantee that older workers in automobile factory would be more productive without the presence of their immediate supervisor. It's true that the new workers would work hard with the presence of supervisors, while it doesn't affect the old workers much. However, this not means that the old workers would be more productive without any supervisors' presence. There are some alternatives. Maybe some of the old workers are always hard working, they always try their best and hence they are equally productive with or without the presence of their supervisors. While some old workers are a little lazy, they would work hard if they find that their supervisors are watching at him and refuse to work hard if no one is supervising him. Obviously, for most automobile factories, both of these two kinds of workers would exist. And hence it's hard to determine whether without the presence of supervisors would lead to a incensement in the old workers' productivity. The most possibility is that, from the psychology angle, without the presence of supervisors the workers would be lazier and hence less productive.

Second, even the survey can show that older workers in automobile factory would be more productive without the presence of supervisors; it not sufficed to conclude that this would be true for the printing company. They are different kind of industries, and hence things can be much different. For example, it probable that the automobiles sell well these years and hence the boss of automobile factories rewards the workers who work hard. As a result, new workers try to give a good expression to their supervisors in order to get more awards, while older workers have relative high salary and good welfare so that they have fewer motives to work hard. However, printing industries are much different. The work is hard and tired, while the salary is low, therefore they are complained with it and want to rest as much as possible. The presence of the supervisors would spur them work a little hard, especially the young employees, since they are afraid to lose the job. However, if the supervisor leaves, they are too lazy to work at all.

In sum, the conclusion is logically flawed and the suggestion could not be accepted. To draw substantial conclusion, the arguer should provide more statistics include the productivity of the older workers with and without supervisors.