E．哲学类：25、127、136、147、157、183、240
25. Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction-in other words, to make things as simple as possible.\"
1.hehui’s outline:
1.I believe to assert it easy to amplify and complicate whereas difficult to simplify is unfair. Actually these two sides are nothing more than solutions to various problems. Advanced and intelligent as us human beings, we may choose either according to the specific situations. Whether to make things more complex or simpler may be a challenge and requires human ability and courage. A truly wise person knows when to make things bigger and complicated and when to head for the reverse.
2.On the one hand, it is true that making things simpler and easier demonstrates human intelligence, knowledge and exertion. Taking a retrospect into the history of evaluation, we see what makes human differ from other intelligent animals is not the usage of natural tools such as stones and branches but that we create more sophisticated tools and further we try every means to make our life more convenient and comfortable. That man grows stronger and brighter to large extent attributes to its continuous attempt to make things simpler.
3.We have many achievements of pride of such simplification. Thousands of examples lies in the high-tech area. Consider a century ago, computer, household appliance- as simple as a click or a press. All these cases of simplification are great which bring our life stand to an unprecedentedly high level
4. on the other hand, to look further into an issue and dig out its inner complexity and potential meanings also needs profound insights and great effort. It is, in many cases, through such complication that we give birth to some great theories. Newton,Sir Isaac
5.moreover, sometimes we need to make things bigger and burdensome. Exercise and it also require patience and effort
2.singapore
'I found myself on a cross-road, one road was marked and paved and trampled on. I chose the less trampled one', or says goes a famous aphorism.
I consent with the author when she points out that it does not take much of an effort to blow things out of proportion, burgeoning newer problems, or exacerbating existing ones. In fact it is easier to muddle up a contentious issue and make things more problematic than to do the exact opposite: to work out lasting and profound solutions, paving way for a simpler existence. However to reach this 憇implicity?requires a thorough diagnosis of the problem, and its surgical rather than cosmetic cure, so to turn it into a non-entity. It most often requires one to
stand up and swagger on against the full force of the current, but the fruits for doing so are sweet and rewarding.
While creating or aggravating problems does not require one to be painstaking or even creative, trying to make things simpler by solving them does demand real effort or prudence. The example of Nelson Mandela should serve as an elaborate case study in this regard. Here is the real life story of one man who chose to move against the tide of the times, standing up to the 'Apartheid' and challenging the status quo. Racial oppression and discrimination in South Africa did not dissolve overnight; rather it has been the result of decades of profound structural changes in the South African society. As a consequence we see today a South African society where everyone has learned to live in mutual co-existence, a much simpler existence than the old hate-driven years of welter.
Individuals, societies, nations, and governments all choose to take the seemingly-easy road, the beaten course. Over a short term this strategy might help reap some benefits and provide some boon, but over the long term, it more often than not turns out to be detrimental. I do not need to go far than my own country to quote an example of such. It has been more than half a century now since Pakistan and India have been at blows. While I am not old enough to have witnessed that animosity venting itself out in the various wars that have taken place between the two, this is what I do see: the prosperity of more than one billion people being held hostage to acrimony. It might be easy for each side to ignore the other, to keep relations deluged in rancor and suspicion. But it would require courage, vision, real effort and dedication to break the ice. Why don't we
see the prosperity, the simplicity, the peace that awaits us at the end of that tunnel?
Palestine proves to be another example. Measures, roadmaps, 'Camp Davids', all have at best, proven to be merely cosmetic. They might have provided temporary peace, momentary lapse in the violence, but history has shown all of that to be ephemeral. Since none of the past measures have targeted the root causes of the conflict, the Middle East situation has remained volatile and precarious. To bring an everlasting peace, a lot more will have to be done than just talks. Compromises will have to be made. The economic disparity of the two sides will have to be bridged. An efficient Palestine security mechanism will have to be built. Only then the directions of the winds will change. Peace, bliss, mutual coexistence, mutual respect, and a simpler life devoid of any threat of violence - that would be the product of those endeavors.
Our every day social and national life can provide us with a plethora of examples where we choose to take the trampled path, simply because it is more convenient. In our social life, all too often we are reminded of tall promises during election campaigns, promises meant to seemingly appeal to the voters. As Economist commented on Chancellor Schroeder抯 economic recovery plan for Germany: 'Even though promising an economic turn-about, Schroeder does not really have the political strength to carry out such a task, one that would involve liberalizing the labor laws and cutting down on social welfare'. The prediction has turned out to be quite accurate. The point I am trying to drive home is that with these antics, politicians try to latch on to quick-hit solutions for long term
problems. The result is that problems actually grow out of proportion, and remain problems.
To sum up, it is my contention that treading on the trampled path is something that does not require much effort. What requires real effort and courage is to move off the beaten course, to break status quos, to find lasting and profound solutions to problems rather than remedial and cosmetic measures.
127. Facts are stubborn things. They cannot be altered by our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions.
1. india
The debate whether facts are stubborn things has never stop for centuries. Some one hold the view that facts are after all actual existence and objective information that can't be altered by people's subjective emotion. On the other hand, some people advocate that since we learn through observations which usually affected by our wish or desire, facts can never be stubborn things. Actually, when get down to the fundamental and find the basis of facts, we will have to accept the idea that facts are not inflexible but alternative things. It is true that many people define facts as stubborn existence and information, however, they ignore that facts are derived by human's observation, a subjective action. Different from machines, we human beings, emotional creatures, can never see and think things from a completely objective aspect. For instance, history events are facts and people always say no one can change history. We surely can neither prevent
the Depression in 1920s nor stop the 2nd World War. Nevertheless, since history could only be viewed from the record by its descendents in different periods and people hold various moral standard during this time, history can undoubtedly be viewed from different aspects and lead to alternation. Even in different countries people usually describe history in opposite way. Many people in Asia will never forgive the invasion of Japanese soldier during 1930s and 1940s. On the contrary, Japanese now honor these soldiers as their heroes and martyr for their country. Facts still can’t avoid the influence by people’s emotion.
Philosophy tells us nothing in the world is absolute; facts are not absolutely rigid either. For example, large number of theories in science and society fields used to be regarded as eternal truth, however, proved to be limited or totally wrong later. Three hundred years ago, when Adam Smith first pointed out the famous theory about the function of market, invisible hand, people were exhilarated for the eternal truth for maximize the well-being of human. Unfortunately, two hundred years latter, when people were still indulge in the prosperity this theory brought to them, the Depression waked them up and warn people, the failure of market also exist, the fact that market is panacea was improved by another theory afterward.
Admittedly, many facts in the world can't be changed by our desire or wish. Since the technology is not developed enough, people who caught AIDS are sentenced to death for this disease. However, this should never be the excuse for us to stop finding new treatment to help these patients and change this fact. Human beings have achieved the society which was unbelievable for our ancestors
because we dare to alter the facts already existed.
In sum, nothing in the world is absolutely stubborn things. Facts can not be avoided affected by human's feeling and wish, therefore, they are flexible. Even some facts can't be altered now, they will not stop us the pace for progress, since we have the ability to change one day.
2.fm sample
Can we alter facts according to our wishes or inclinations? If by \"facts\" the speaker means such phenomena as political, economic, social, or legal status quo, then I concede that we can alter facts. The reason for this is that such systems are abstract constructs of our inclinations, wishes, and passions to begin with. Otherwise, I strongly agree with the speaker that we cannot alter facts. When it comes to certain aspect of our personal lives, and to historical events and scientific truths, no measure of desire or even passion can change external reality.
On an individual level, we all engage in futile attempts to alter facts--by pretending that certain things are not the way they are because they are inconsistent with our wishes or personal interests. Psychologists refer to this psychological defensive mechanism, which seems to be part of human nature, as \"denial.\" Consider curious pastimes such as mind-reading, psychic healing, rituals that purportedly impart immortality, and other such endeavors, which seems to transcend all cultures and periods of human history. Understandably, we would all like to have the ability to alter the physical world, including ourselves, as we see fit,
or even to live forever by means of the sheer force of our will. Yet, not one iota of scientific evidence lends support to the claim that any human being has ever had any such ability. Nor can we alter facts by virtue of our inclinations or passions when it comes to history.
Admittedly, no person can truly know any particular past that the person did not experience firsthand. In this sense history is a construct, created for us by reporters, archivists, and historians. Historical facts are therefore susceptible to interpretation, characterization, and of course errors in commission and omission. This is not to say, however, that historical facts can be altered by our inventing versions that suit our inclinations or wishes. In short, an historical
event is not rendered any less factual by either our ignorance or
characterization of it. Similarly, when it comes to science our wishes and desires ultimately yield to the stubbornness of facts--by which I mean empirical scientific evidence and the laws and principles of the physical world. Admittedly, in many cases it is difficult to distinguish between scientific \"fact\" and mere \"theory.\" History is replete with examples of what were considered a one time to be facts, but later disproved as incorrect theories. Yet it is telling that many such obsolete theories were based on the subjective inclinations, desires, and wishes of theorists and of the societies in which the theorists lived. For example, the notions of an Earth-centered tmiverse and of linear time and space were both influenced by religious notions--that is, by human wishes and passions. As our factual knowledge increased such theories ultimately give way.
In sum, I agree that facts are indeed \"stubborn things.\" Understandably, all humans are guilty of ignoring, overlooking, and misunderstanding facts--at least to some extent. After all, human passion, desire, and individual bias and
perspective are powerful influences when it comes to what we believe to be true and factual. Moreover, the statement carries deep epistemological implications regarding the nature of knowledge and truth, which I cannot begin to adequately address here. Nevertheless, on a less abstract level the speaker is correct that neither inclination, desire, nor passion, no matter how fervent, can alter that which is past or beyond our physical control.
136.The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare. (490 / 70’’)
BY HEHUI
Before giving my opinion, I want to emphasize that the word absence should be considered a relative state, instead of the rigid meaning of completely nil for the following two reasons. One is that the world, from its primitive time, has been offering an unlimited number of possibilities, which ensure that we are out of the question without any choice. The other is that we human beings have our own wills, in other words, have authority to decide on anything with regard to ourselves; we can accept, reject, compete compromise and do whatever helping lead our good lives. Thus the assertion that the absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare is strongly reasonable.
Admittedly, there are things, though very rare, we cannot decide on, things in relation to the so-called destiny. For example, we cannot choose which family to born into; we cannot choose our blood parents; we cannot choose our inborn natures though the new genetic technology suggests that we may to some extent reform or change them. Also on some extreme occasions, certain groups of people may be bereft of their power to make choices, such as life-long prisoners or people who suffer severe mental disability.
More often, it is ourselves who bring the various degrees of diminished choices. As social members we can never escape the fates to be confined to limited choices, because in any type of societies, the available choices will not be equitably distributed among all people. When we build up our society, we also automatically orient ourselves in it, that is to fit ourselves into certain positions and classes within it. Obviously, the top class of the society, including the rich, influential politicians and bureaucrats and business magnates enjoy a relatively wide range of choices while the lower classes face a narrow one.
However in most cases, there is a multiplicity of choices in front of us, but we sometimes tend to neglect them. Then why we always hear people claim that life's circumstances leave them with \"no choice\". A young graduate may receive only one job offer among his tens of interviews so that he may complain that he has no choice but to go to that job. Nevertheless, actually it is the gap between reality and his own expectation that prevents him to discover those potential choices. If he keeps on searching instead of staying put to wait for a decent job to hit him, he will be exposed to more choices. Choices will not be there unless we try our best to
find them all.
In sum, based on a flexible understanding of the absence of one's choice, I agree to the above assertion. Though there are cases that we would face circumstances without choice, most often we have plenty of possibilities to make our decisions, though sometimes an imperfectly limited number of choices.
147. Tradition and modernization are incompatible. One must choose between them. (490, 50’’)
BY HEHUI
简要提纲:
1. 引言(小故事)+转折后提出主题:传统与现代相互影响\\相互依赖,共同为人类服务
2. 现代化由不断累积传统知识而来(现代化依赖传统):例子-天文学
3. 现代化帮助保护传统文化遗产(现代手段作用于传统):例子-中国的云冈石窟与网上博物馆
4. 传统与现代因素共同作用为人类服务:小排比
5. 简单总结
There is an interesting Chinese popular story of \"coffee or tea\": a grandpa and
his grandson both like to drink something in the morning to keep them alert. The grandpa favor Chinese traditional tea while the grandson prefers western style coffee. Neither of them is willing to try the other's choice. At the first glance, the little story demonstrate us a picture of the incompatibility of the grandfather who represents the tradition and the grandson standing for the modern world. However, the true relationship between tradition and modernization is, on the contrary, interactive and interdependent, and most importantly, they both serve the same master, that is mankind.
On the one hand, modernization is not a concept which abruptly comes into this world from nil; it is actually originated or transformed from the relative tradition. The great amount of accumulative knowledge is strong support to the point. How we now know so deeply about the celestial world, the stars, galaxies, space and universe. We know them through traditional documents handed down for generations. Admittedly, today we have extremely advanced tools and methods to discover the outer space, and most of the traditional ways are no longer come into use. But without those old records, even the most sophisticated telescope and the most accurate computer can tell us nothing but ungrounded postulations. In brief, we cannot acquire today's modernization without the achievements of formal people, in another word, modernization, in some sense, depends on tradition.
On the other hand, modern technology helps to protect and elongate the traditional heritages. One of the world heritages in China, the Yungan Grottoes, has been endangered by the damage from the increasing number of tourists these
years. Now, scientists and computer experts provide a new way to appreciate the spectacular work without going to it, the computer-based Grottoes Museum. You can inspect every detail of each grotto, from each angle, as if you are walking in it by yourself. All you need to do are only simple clicks and drags of your mouse. Thus by encouraging tourists to visit the on-line museum, the great heritage may be well preserved for the following generations.
One thing I want to emphasize is that we do not have to choose between tradition and modernization because they are here both to serve us. On the aesthetic phase, whether a traditional style or a modern one is not the real concern, what is important is that we gain entertainment through them. On a more practical phase, say in scientific areas, a traditional way of observation and a modern one can be combined to pursue the same goal. It is not tradition or modernization that distinguishes itself from the other, it is our attitudes towards them which do it.
In sum, tradition and modernization are not only compatible, but also interactive and interdependent; they work together to serve us human beings.
157.\"There is no such thing as purely objective observation. All observation is subjective; it is always guided by the observer's expectations or desires.\"
From samples The speaker claims that all observation is subjective--colored by desire
and expectation. While it would be tempting to concede that we all see things differently, careful scrutiny of the speaker's claim reveals that it confuses observation with interpretation. In fact, in the end the speaker's claim relies entirely on the further claim that there is no such thing as truth and that we cannot truly know anything. While this notion might appeal to certain existentialists and epistemologists, it runs against the grain of all scientific discovery and knowledge gained over the last 500 years.
It would be tempting to afford the speaker's daim greater merit than it deserves. After all, our everyday experience as humans informs us that we often disagree about what we observe around us. We've all uttered and heard uttered many times the phase \"That's not the way I see it!\" Indeed, everyday
observations--for example, about whether a football player was out of bounds, or about which car involved in an accident ran the red light--vary depending not only on one's spatial perspective but also on one's expectations or desires. If I'm rooting for one football team, or if the player is well-known for his ability to make great plays while barely staying in bounds, my desires or expectations might influence what I think I observe. Or if I am driving one of the cars in the accident, or if one car is a souped-up sports car, then my desires or expectations will in all likelihood color my perception of the accident's events.
However, these sorts of subjective \"observations\" are actually subjective \"interpretations'' of what we observe. Visitors to an art museum might disagree about the beauty of a particular work, or even about which color predominates in that work. In a court trial several jurors might view the same videotape evidence
many times, yet some jurors might \"observe\" an incident of police brutality, will others \"observe\" the appropriate use of force to restrain a dangerous individual. Thus when it comes to making judgments about what we observe and about remembering what we observe, each person's individual perspective, values, and even emotions help form these judgments and recollections. It is crucial to distinguish between interpretations such as these and observation, which is nothing more than a sensory experiene. Given the same spatial perspective and sensory acuity and awareness, it seems to me that our observations would all be essentially in accord--that is, observation can be objective.Lending credence to my position is Francis Bacon's scientific method, according to which we can know only that which we observe, and thus all truth must be based on empirical observation. This profoundly important principle serves to expose and strip away all subjective interpretation of observation, thereby revealing objective scientific truths. For example, up until Bacon's time the Earth was \"observed\" to lie at the center of the Universe, in accordance with the prevailing religious notion that man (humankind) was the center of God's creation. Applying Bacon's scientific method Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim. Similarly, before Einstein time and space were assumed to be linear, in accordance with our \"observation.\" Einstein's mathematical formulas suggested otherwise, and his theories have been proven empirically to be true. Thus it was our subjective interpretation of time and space that led to our misguided notions about them. Einstein, like history's other most influential scientists, simply refused to accept conventional interpretations of what we all observe.
In sum, the speaker confuses observation with interpretation and recollection.
It is how we make sense of what we observe, not observation itself, that is colored by our perspective, expectations, and desires. The gifted individuals who can set aside their subjectivity and delve deeper into empirical evidence, employing Bacon's scientific method, are the ones who reveal that observation not only can be objective but must be objective if we are to embrace the more fundamental notion that knowledge and truth exist.
183.As we acquire more knowledge, things do not become more comprehensible, but more complex and more mysterious.(from sample)
Does knowledge render things more comprehensible, or more complex and mysterious? In my view the acquisition of knowledge brings about all three at the same time. This paradoxical result is aptly explained and illustrated by a number of advances in our scientific knowledge.
Consider, for example, the sonar system on which blind bats rely to navigate and especially to seek prey. Researchers have learned that this system is startlingly sophisticated. By emitting audible sounds, then processing the returning echoes, a bat can determine in a nanosecond not only how far away its moving prey is but also the prey's speed, direction, size and even specie! This knowledge acquired helps explain, of course, how bats navigate and survive. Yet at the same time this knowledge points out the incredible complexity of the auditory and brain functions of certain animals, even of mere humans, and creates a certain mystery and wonder about how such systems ever evolved organically.
Or consider our knowledge of the universe. Advances in telescope and space-exploration technology seem to corroborate the theory of a continually expanding universe that began at the very beginning of time with a \"big bang.\" On one level this knowledge, assuming it qualifies as such, helps us comprehend our place in the universe and our ultimate destiny. Yet on the other hand it adds yet another chapter to the mystery about what existed before time and the universe.
Or consider the area of atomic physics. The naked human eye perceives very little, of course, of the complexity of matter. To our distant ancestors the physical world appeared simple--seemingly comprehensible by means of sight and touch. Then by way of scientific knowledge we learned that all matter is comprised of atoms, which are further comprised of protons, neutrons, and electrons. Then we discovered an even more basic unit of matter called the quark. And now a new so-called \"string\" theory posits the existence of an even more fundamental, and universal, unit of matter. On the one hand, these discoveries have rendered things more comprehensible, by explaining and reconciling empirical observations of how matter behaves. The string theory also reconciles the discrepancy between the quantum and wave theories of physics. On the other hand, each discovery has in turn revealed that matter is more complex than previously thought. In fact, the string theory, which is theoretically sound, calls for seven more dimensions---in addition to the three we already know about! I'm hard-pressed to imagine anything more complex or mysterious.
In sum, the statement overlooks a paradox about knowledge acquired, at least when it comes to understanding the physical world. When through knowledge a
thing becomes more comprehensible and explainable we realize at the same time that it is more complex and mysterious than previously thought.
240. Although it is easy to respond positively to the work of another person or group, it is far more worthwhile to give negative feedback.
1. from sonali, India
I admit that it is easy to give positive appreciation for someone抯 work rather than criticizing it. But sometimes it is worthwhile to respond negatively, since that will withhold that person from performing the same mistake. As per my opinion, undue praise or criticism can attribute to deleterious effects. Thus appropriate feedback should be given as per requirement.
Indisputably, positive admiration is an indispensable need for enhancing confidence and morale for performing task more accurately and positively. But, sometimes it is the case that people starts adulating the work even though they hardly possess knowledge about it. Thus even if the work has any flaws, it will never be determined and the person or group performing that work will assume themselves to be genius. Always, one should aware of such sycophants.
Moreover, negative feedback can be proved fruitful if it is given in positive manner and without hurting someone抯 feelings. Negative feedback sometimes plays cardinal role in boosting up one抯 spirit. Because accepting the negation as challenge, one can try to perform the opus with more efforts and attention so that
it will be perfect and flawless. However, sometimes few people quote their harsh criticism for some person抯 work because of their hostile feelings about him. Such undue carping can prove to discourage that person and lower down his spirit to perform any work.
Undoubtedly, it is far easier to react with positive response to someone抯 work. At the same time it seems hard enough to find out the error in the task along with appropriate reasoning, because consequences of such criticism can be positive or negative. Hence to avoid such conflicts negative feedbacks should be given as mildly and positively as possible and with a solution. Otherwise such feedbacks prove futile. A severe negative remark with no alternatives might put the person at a disadvantage. If the negative remarks involve insignificant setbacks they need not be mentioned at all.
In sum, it is essential to achieve equilibrium between positive and negative feedback. It is sure that responding positively is much easier that quoting negative opinion about the work performed by a person or any group of people. Sometimes it is beneficial for that person or for the company to point out mistakes in the work rather than accepting positively the faults in the work.
2.from a u.s. student
Proponents of negative feedbacks have long touted the advantages of harsh criticizms.However a closer examination of such negative feedbacks reveal that they can be an impediment to a person's morale and severely curb his enthusiasm
and confidence.Thus a negative feeedback is worthwhile depending on the nature of the person or work.
First of all,children are the most sensitive to negative feedbacks.There are a few precocious ones who might take it in the right sense.Unfortunately most youngsters are very sensitive.Hence a negative feedback would definitely hamper the progress and confidence of a child.It is imperative that guardians,elders and teachers provide any negative remaks in the most subtle manner to avoid demotivating the child.The same is applicable for a tenager who is even more sensitive to such negative remarks.Of course one is not trying to imply that the child should be praised no matter what mistakes it makes.But it is worthwhile to give a more positive feedback than a negative one.
In the case of a working professional the situation changes completely.Here there are a number of factors which are at stake.They include company reputation and finance.As a result providing a more negative feedback is better for the individual.Admittedly an important factor cannot be overlooked,which is encouragement.Support at the work-place is very essential.Sadly man has more ego that humility.As a worker he is aware of his misgivings and assets .With harsh negative feedbacks his work and output might get effected.When a balanced feedback is recieved,there are bound to be improvements.However a negative feedback becomes inevitable when the member of a group is truly useless.Such cases are quite rare.But when a company repuation is involved it might be more worthwhile to give a negative feedback.
Undoubtedly it is far easier to react positively to the work of another individual.It is very difficult to point out fallacies and specious resoning in a persons argument.However,the individual providing such insight needs to be conservative in his feedback.At the work-place relationships are neutral.It is important that they remain that way for a better working environment.Hence to prevent confrontations negative feedbacks should be given as mildly as possible and with a solution.Otherwise such feedbacks prove futile.A severe negative remark with no alternatives might put the person at a disadvantage.If the negative remarks involve insignificant setbacks they need not be mentioned at all.
The entire concept of providing negative feedback changes depending on the proximity of the people involved.The closer the indivdiuals are the more negative the remarks can be.But such encounters are not worthwhile in a workplace.Although the the real advantages of negative feedbacks are apparent,they prove to be more damaging in the long run.The psychological barriers and low self-esteem it can create can be catastrophic.A more diplomatic approach is not only beneficial but it also provides stronger outputs.
因篇幅问题不能全部显示，请点此查看更多更全内容