| ²é¿´: 593 | »Ø¸´: 3 | |||
| µ±Ç°Ö÷ÌâÒѾ´æµµ¡£ | |||
edlesmileÌú³æ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
|
[½»Á÷]
¸ú×ŰßÖñд×÷ÎÄ£Issue48&argu65-ÏÞʱ
|
||
|
ÏÞʱдµÄ °Ñµ¥´ÊºÍÓï·¨´íÎó¸ÄÁËһ϶øÒÑ Ð´µÃÒ»ËúºýÍ¿... ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten." ÀúÊ·Ñо¿¹ýÓÚ¹Ø×¢¸öÈË¡£ÀúÊ·ÉÏ×îÓÐÒâÒåµÄʼþºÍ³±Á÷Äܹ»³ÉΪ¿ÉÄܲ»ÊÇÒòΪ¼¸¸öÉÙÊýµÄÃûÈ˶øÊÇһЩÉí·ÝÔç¾Í±»µÍüµÄÈËȺ¡£ History is full of shining stars, Washington, Roosevelt, Churchill, Mao Zedong...Not only historians but also common people would like to research them to know the past or the key to their success. Admittedly without efforts of groups of people behind these famous individuals, nothing can be changed in history. Take a general for instance, thousands of common soldiers died in a war but the winning of the was is attributed to the general only. No one can deny the truth that the war will definitely lose without those soldiers. The general gives out commands, but commands themselves do not work automatically. The winning of a war depends on a wise and brave general, and the general depends on his army including every ordinary soldiers. The most significant events and trends could not happen due to the power of one hero no matter how powerful he/she is. The same is true not only in the army, but also for leaders in political field, scientific field and so forth. However, if we scrutiny the evolution of history to find out the most original reason for those most significant events and trends, we will not blame that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. It is the famous few, not the majority who are waiting for orders to conquer tough situations, give the right commands or make out right policies at the right place and the right time. Without their resolution and wisdom--how can people pass through economic depression in a few years without Roosevelt? How can people gradually diminish race discrimination without Lincoln or Martin Luther King? It is those famous individuals exerted more important influence on the history events and trends. What's more, it is difficult to do research on those groups of people behind such heroes. Or we can say, the value of the majority of people is less significant compare to those famous few. There are millions of soldiers of an army, every single of them is almost useless to the war, but when they combined together, the power is frightful. Such scene happens in every field. Each single people plays like a small part of a giant machine, without thousands of these small parts, there will be no scope to display the ability of "those famous few", however, without the maneuver of "the famous few", the machine is definitely of no use at all. Advisable suggestion is: just let historians to study the person who know how to assemble a machine and manipulate it not numerous parts of it. The research of history does not wrongly place too much emphasis on those famous individuals, because without them, only through groups of people can we gain nothing of today's society and history is probably another vision. ARGUMENT65 - The following appeared in a memo from the president of a chain of cheese stores located throughout the United States. "For many years all the stores in our chain have stocked a wide variety of both domestic and imported cheeses. Last year, however, the five best-selling cheeses at our newest store were all domestic cheddar cheeses from Wisconsin. Furthermore, a recent survey by Cheeses of the World magazine indicates an increasing preference for domestic cheeses among its subscribers. Since our company can reduce expenses by limiting inventory, the best way to improve profits in all of our stores is to discontinue stocking many of our varieties of imported cheese and concentrate primarily on domestic cheeses." ºÜ¶àÄêÀ´ÎÒÃǵÄËùÓÐÁ¬Ëøµê¶¼´¢±¸Á˺ܶàÖÖÀàµÄ¹ú²úÄÌÀҺͽø¿ÚÄÌÀÒ¡£È»¶øÈ¥ÄêÎÒÃǵÄ×îеêÀïÎåÖÖÏúÁ¿×î¸ßµÄÄÌÀÒ¶¼ÊÇÍþ˹¿µÐdzö²úµÄcheddarÄÌÀÒ¡£¶øÇÒ£¬×î½üÒ»´ÎÓÉCheese of the WorldÔÓÖ¾Ëù¾ÙÐеĵ÷²éÏÔʾ£¬Æä¶©ÔÄÕß¶ÔÓÚ¹ú²úÄÌÀÒµÄÇãÏòÐÔÔ½À´Ô½¸ß¡£ÓÉÓÚÎÒÃǹ«Ë¾¿ÉÒÔͨ¹ýÏÞÖÆ¿â´æÀ´¼õÉÙ¿ªÖ§£¬ÔÚÎÒÃÇËùÓÐÁ¬ËøµêÔö¼ÓÓ¯ÀûµÄ×îºÃ·½Ê½¾ÍÊÇÍ£Ö¹Öü±¸ºÜ¶à½ø¿ÚÄÌÀÒ¶øÖ÷Òª¼¯ÖÐÓÚ¹ú²úÄÌÀÒ¡£ In this argument, the arguer recommends to stop stocking all the imported cheese and concentrate primarily on domestic cheeses. To substantiate his conclusion, the arguer cited the example of their newest store in which the five best-selling cheeses are all domestic cheeses. What's more, he also cited a survey from Cheeses of the World magazine to prove that people are more and more like to buy domestic cheeses. This argument is unconvincing for several critical flaws. First of all, one reason that the arguer recommends to stock only domestic cheeses is because the five best-selling cheeses at their newest store were all domestic cheddar cheeses from Wisconsin. It is unacceptable to support the conclusion that people all over the country like to buy domestic cheeses. The arguer does not provide any information about the newest store. What if the store in just in Wisconsin and cheddar is the most favorite kind of cheeses for people there not for people in other states? Or maybe there was a sails promotion activity of the five kinds of cheeses. What's more, they sells more do not mean that they make the higher profits. Thus one example is insufficient to establish a general relationship between the selling situation of some specific cheeses of the newest store and people's tendency to buy domestic cheeses all over the nation. Second, the arguer cited a survey of Cheeses of the World magazine, which indicates that and increasing preference for domestic cheeses among its subscribers. But neither the arguer mentions how the survey is conducted, nor does he indicates the number of the surveyed people. Maybe only a small number of people who prefer domestic cheeses respond to the survey. Or we also do not know whether the subscribers are the consumers of our stores. And no evidence shows that people all over the country would like to buy domestic cheeses rather than imported ones. And the number of selling does not have direct relationship with the profits at all. Finally, the arguer recommends to stop stocking many of their varieties of imported cheese and concentrate primarily on domestic cheeses to reduce expenses by limiting inventory and to improve profits. Even if people are more like to buy domestic cheeses all over the country, how about those people who like to buy imported ones? Maybe the profits caused by the imported cheeses are far higher than domestic kinds but the reducing expense by limiting inventory is very low. Or maybe people want to buy some imported cheeses and domestic cheeses at the same time, but after all the stores stop selling imported cheeses, consumers will choose other cheese stores because those stores have adequate kinds of cheeses to choose. This argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer should demonstrate that the profits of domestic cheeses is far more than imported cheeses and after stocking imported cheeses, the profits of the all the stores will rise. |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
¡¾Çóµ÷¼Á¡¿ÐÂÄÜÔ´²ÄÁϱ¾¿Æ£¬Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211£¬³õÊÔ321
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
²ÄÁÏ¿¼Ñе÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
²ÄÁϵ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
Ó¢Ò»ÊýÒ»408£¬×Ü·Ö284£¬¶þÕ½Õæ³ÏÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
085410 Ò»Ö¾Ô¸211 22408·ÖÊý359Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
271Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
385·Ö ÉúÎïѧ£¨071000£©Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
Ò»Ö¾Ô¸°²»Õ´óѧ¼ÆËã»ú¿ÆÑ§Óë¼¼Êõѧ˶£¬331·ÖÇóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
318Çóµ÷¼Á£¬¼ÆËã²ÄÁÏ·½Ïò
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
291Çóµ÷¼Á
ÒѾÓÐ25È˻ظ´
torino
½ð³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 837
- Ìû×Ó: 63
- ÔÚÏß:
- ³æºÅ: 256969
- ×¢²á: 2006-06-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ʯÓÍÌìÈ»Æø¿ª²É
|
History is full of shining stars, Washington, Roosevelt, Churchill, Mao Zedong...ÕâÀïÓÃand so onÕý¹æÒ»Ð©Not only historians but also common people would like to research them to know the past or the key to[maybe=>of]their success. [¸öÈ˸оõ¶ÎÊ×Ëä·Ç¼òµ¥Í¬Òâ»ò²»Í¬Ò⵫Ӧ¸ÃÃ÷È·µã»ØÓ¦Ö÷Ì⣬½Ó×Å¿´¡£¡£¡£] Admittedly without efforts of groups of people behind these famous individuals, nothing can be changed in history. Take a general for instance, thousands of common soldiers died in a war but the winning of the was[war,ÔÙ¼Ó¸öÖú¶¯´ÊºÃµã] is attributed to the general only. No one can deny the truth that the war will definitely lose without those soldiers. The general gives out[ÓÐÏ´ïµÄÒâ˼ô£¬·¢³ö·Ò·¼ÎÒµ¹ÊÇÖªµÀ] commands, but[Ò»¶ÎÀﲻҪǿתÕÛ´Ê£¬yet¿ÉÒÔ¿¼ÂÇ] commands themselves do not work automatically. The winning of a war depends on a wise and brave general, and the general depends on his army including every ordinary soldiers. The most significant events and trends could not happen due to the power of one hero no matter how powerful he/she is[ÄãÊÇÏë˵½ö¿¿Ò»ÈËÖ®Á¦ÎÞ·¨ÊµÏÖô£¿]. The same is true not only in the army, but also for leaders[¸úǰ¶ÔÓ¦µÄ»°for leaderÒ²Ðí¿ÉÒÔÈ¥µô] in political field, scientific field and so forth. However, if we scrutiny[Ãû´Ê] the evolution of history to find out the most original reason for those most significant events and trends, we will[¿´ÄãºóÃæµÄÒâ˼ÓÃshould¸üºÃ] not blame that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. It is the famous few, not the majority who are waiting for orders to conquer tough situations, give the right commands or make out right policies at the right place and the right time. Without their resolution and wisdom--how can people pass through economic depression in a few years without Roosevelt?[Ç°Ãæ¼Ófor intanceÒýµ¼Ï£¬¸Ð¾õתµÄÌ«¿ìÁË£¬»¹ÄÜÔö¼Ó×ÖÊý£¬HOHO~~] How can people gradually diminish race discrimination without Lincoln or Martin Luther King? It is those famous individuals exerted more important influence on the history events and trends.[Thereby....»ØÓ¦ÏÂTS] What's more, it is difficult to do research on[STUDY¾ÍÍêÁË£¬±ð¸úËûÂÞàÂÁË] those groups of people behind such heroes. Or [¿ÚÓï¸Ð¾õ£¬in other word]we can say, the value of the majority of people is less significant compare to those famous few. There are millions of soldiers of an army, every single[Ç°ÃæÁ©ÊDz»ÊÇÓÖÖØµþÁËmaybe each] of them is almost useless to the war, but when they combined[ÈËÒ²ÓÃÕâ¸ö´ÊºÏô£¬Ì½ÌÖÏÂgroup] together, the power is frightful. Such scene happens in every field. Each single people plays like a small part of a giant machine, without thousands of these small parts, there will be no scope to display the ability of "those famous few", however[¶ÎÖÐǿת´Ê²»ÍƼö], without the maneuver of "the famous few", the machine is definitely of no use at all. Advisable suggestion is: just let historians to study the person who know how to assemble a machine and manipulate it not numerous parts of it.[ÉԸоÙÂÛÖ¤ºÍTS²»·û] The research of history does not wrongly place too much emphasis on those famous individuals, because without them, only through groups of people can we gain nothing[Ì«¾øÁË£¬ÃñÖÚÒª¸úÄãÆ´ÃüµÄ] of today's society and history is probably another vision. ÄãµÄÌá¸ÙÒ²Ò»Æð·¢³öÀ´¸üÈÝÒ×Àí½âºÍѧϰ 1£©´óÖÚÖØÒªÐÔ 2£©¾«Ó¢ÖØÒªÐÔ 3£©Ñо¿´óÖÚÀ§ÄÑ ±¾È˲ËÄñÒ»¸ö½ö¹©²Î¿¼¡£ ³¤¶Ì½áºÏ ÄãÀïÃæÓÐЩ´Ê»¹ÊǺܲ»´íµÄ£¬Ñ§Ï°¡£¡£¡£»¹ÓиöÅűȾ䡣¡£¡£Ë§~~~ ÏÞʱÄÜдµ½ÕâÖ̶ֳȲ»´í£¬¼ÓÓÍ~£¡ дÌá¸ÙÈ¥ÁË [ Last edited by torino on 2006-7-19 at 23:46 ] |
2Â¥2006-07-19 23:40:51
william98
Ìú³æ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 51.7
- Ìû×Ó: 25
- ÔÚÏß: 3.9Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 261617
- ×¢²á: 2006-06-24
- רҵ: inorganic chemistry
1
|
History is full of shining stars, Washington, Roosevelt, Churchill, Mao Zedong...Not only historians but also common people would like to research them to know the past or the key to their success.[¿ªÍ·²»ÊǺÜÃ÷È·¡£Ñо¿µÄÊÇÀúÊ·¶ø²»ÊÇËûÃǵÄsuccess£¬½¨Òé¿ÉÒÔÈ¥µô£¬Ö»±£Áôthe past] Admittedly without efforts of groups of people behind these famous individuals, nothing can be changed in history. Take a general for instance, thousands of common soldiers died in a war but the winning of the was [of the war ¿ÉÒÔÈ¥µô] is attributed to the general only. No one can deny the truth that the war will definitely lose without those soldiers. [´Ótake a general for instanceµ½ÕâÀïµÄÁ½¾ä£¬½¨ÒéÁ½¾äÖ®¼ä¼ÓÉÏÒ»¸ö±íתÕÛµÄÁ¬½Ó´Ê£¬ÕâÑù²ÅÄÜÍ»³öÄã¾ÙÀýµÄÄ¿µÄÊÇҪͻ³öÊ¿±øµÄ×÷ÓÃ] The general gives out commands, but commands themselves do not work automatically. The winning of a war depends on a wise and brave general, and the general depends on his army including every ordinary soldiers. The most significant events and trends could not happen due to the power of one hero no matter how powerful he/she is. The same is true not only in the army, but also for leaders in political field, scientific field and so forth. However, if we scrutiny the evolution of history to find out the most original reason for those most significant events and trends, we will not blame that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. It is the famous few, not the majority who are waiting for orders [¼Ó¸ö¶ººÅ] to conquer tough situations, give the right commands or make out right policies at the right place and the right time. Without their resolution and wisdom--how can people pass through economic depression in a few years without Roosevelt? How can people gradually diminish race discrimination without Lincoln or Martin Luther King? It is those famous individuals [¼Ó¸öthat] exerted more important influence on the history events and trends. What's more, it is difficult to do research on those groups of people behind such heroes. Or we can say, the value of the majority of people is less significant compare to those famous few. There are millions of soldiers of an army, every single of them is almost useless to the war, but when they combined together, the power is frightful. Such scene happens in every field. Each single people plays like a small part of a giant machine, without thousands of these small parts, there will be no scope to display the ability of "those famous few", however, without the maneuver of "the famous few", the machine is definitely of no use at all. Advisable suggestion is: just let historians to study the person who know how to assemble a machine and manipulate it not numerous parts of it. The research of history does not wrongly place too much emphasis on those famous individuals, because without them, only through groups of people can we gain nothing of today's society and history is probably another vision. ¿ªÍ·½áβûÓÐ֮ǰ»ªÀöÁË£¬ÖмäµÄÂÛÊöÓÐЩ¼òµ¥£¬Ã¿¸ö·Ö¶Î²ã´Î¸Ð²»×ã°¡ |
3Â¥2006-07-20 19:30:56
1
|
4Â¥2006-07-22 10:11:44














»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥