2. 职称英语
  3. In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution wi

In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution wi

游客2024-01-12  3
问题 In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
选项
答案     Is it possible to make a significant contribution in any field of study without ever being strongly influenced by the achievements made by one’s predecessors first? Some may argue that the influence from past achievements is not a strict prerequisite for any new advancement in a specific field. However, I beg to differ, with the only exception of being in an entirely new field of study where there are no such past achievements to begin with. In all other fields, it is almost inevitable that significant contributions are shaped by the influence of the past achievements within those fields including, quite counter-intuitively, creative fields such as painting and music.
    To begin with, it should be acknowledged that in those emerging fields where any new discovery can be regarded as breakthroughs, one does not need to be influenced by past achievements to make significant contributions. The logical justification of this argument is self-evident: if a field is completely new, there is few established achievements to begin with. One of such fields for example is machine learning and artificial intelligence, a rapidly developing field in which new exciting discoveries are being made each day. In this particular field, which is still in its infancy, past achievements are so few that researchers are almost stepping into uncharted territories. In such very specific scenarios, therefore, significant contributions do not necessarily rely upon past achievements, which are absent by nature.
    Nevertheless, in other fields where human beings have accumulated a considerable amount of knowledge, substantial progresses cannot be made without the influence of past achievements. Here, my point of view applies to both natural and social sciences. First, for natural science and engineering, breakthroughs and innovations are built upon our cumulative knowledge. Step by step, researchers test new, bold hypotheses by adopting existing methodologies, which are the fruition of past achievements. On the other hand, it is hardly conceivable nowadays that a scientist would be able to make astonishingly new findings without any training in that field. Similarly, in social science past achievements still deeply influence how scholars think. For example, John Nash, who came up with the original idea of governing dynamics that later became game theory, was first under the influence of classic economic theory by Adam Smith. It is through critically evaluating the past achievements that John Nash refined the theories of human behaviors and laid the foundation of behavior economics.
    Of course, some people would argue that my previous reasoning only applies to the field of science, with the realization that progresses must be made in an incremental fashion. However, they challenge that in fields that appreciate and are driven by human creativity, especially arts, one can make great contributions without any past influence. One example, French Impressionism was hailed as "The New Painting" by critics in the late 19th century. Bold and expressive, impressionist painters created a new form of art that audaciously illustrated the natural scene through a lucid brush. Clearly, as a new painting, Impressionism leaped forward to open up a whole new realm of artistic style that is not influenced by previous painters.
    Such a criticism may seemingly be reasonable at first glance, but nevertheless it overlooks the importance of past achievements and their influence on human creativity. Contrary to popular belief, creativity does not stem from a vacuum; instead, in order to come up with something original, one still needs to look back and understand what has been achieved by his or her predecessors. Let’s take a closer look at the example of French Impressionism quoted above. While it is true that today we regard Impressionism as a new form of art, before its emergence many painters outside France have already innovated painting techniques and philosophies that eventually became the signature styles adopted by French Impressionists. In other words, Impressionism was indeed influenced by previous achievements, although people today would mostly only appreciate the eventuality of a movement materialized by Impressionist painter: the Impressionism itself.
    To summarize, I concede that in certain occasions significant contributions can be made without past achievements, when such achievements are absent. However, in all other fields it is certainly not the case. Even in fields such as arts, contributions that are seemingly creative and original at first sight actually have a deeper connection to what has been achieved in the past. (720 words)
解析     本文讨论的问题是一个领域的新发展与过去成就之间的关系，与之类似的题目还包括“一个领域无法在不吸纳其他领域知识和经验的前提下取得显著进步”，其背后涉及的根本问题是：人类社会的知识进步究竟是如何实现的?
    面对这个问题，本文提出了一个偏务实和保守的观点，即在任何一个颇有建树的领域里，新的发展必须受到过去成就的影响。这背后的哲学思想是“渐变论”与“突变论”(或“灾变论”)的争执。虽然这两种概念首先出现于地质学，但如今它们已经广泛深入到了人类社会不同的学科之中。探究其哲学根本，核心问题在于事物的变化究竟是连续的还是非连续的，显然本文采取了前一种“渐变论”的立场。与此同时，请格外注意“颇有建树”这一前提条件，它的对立面就如同本文第一主旨段(让步段)中提到的新生领域，因为这些领域的知识太新，以至于尚未出现重量级的以往成就，这在逻辑上是说得通的。
    本文首先提出，不论是自然科学还是社会科学，新的成就都需要受到过去成就影响，究其根本是我们扩展知识边界的方法论，终究是要基于前人贡献的。在这里，本文重点举了约翰.纳什的博弈论作为例子，以突出在人文领域过去成就的重要性。
    对于本文观点真正有挑战的点在于艺术等需要创造力的学科，因为乍看之下一般人会认为这些需要人天马行空的学科里，人们不需要受到过去的成就影响就可以做出成就。但本文认为这是一种流于表面的看法，一个敌方观点将其引出，并且在随后进行了深刻的辩驳。如果仔细观察并思考，我们会发现艺术领域中的新人仍然要认真学习以往的成就，就像当代作曲家会学习古典主义和浪漫主义大师的杰作、后现代派的画家仍然会受到前人作品的影响。值得一提的是，本文举出了印象派画家的例子，并指出看起来像是全新的画派其实也有前人的影响。这其实源自于一篇GRE的阅读题。在GRE和TOEFL的考试当中，有很多ETs用来考我们的素材可以被“拿来我用”，我们备考的过程其实也是一个累积知识的过程。
    本文有着精巧但有序的论证结构，第一主旨段给出让步(抑)，随后引出己方观点(扬)，第三主旨段马上提出对于己方观点的反驳(敌方观点；抑)，但随着第四主旨段对于敌方观点的驳斥进一步巩固己方观点(扬)，全文读下来酣畅淋漓，大快人心。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3356929.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)