GRE考试写作范文Issue整合
想要提高GRE写作水平，需要多仿照优秀的范文，我整理了一些范文，下面我就和大家共享，来观赏一下吧。
sample什么意思 GRE考试写作范文Issue compassionate
impress的用法
People who are the most deeply committed to an idea or policy are the most critical of it.
The speaker claims that people who are the most firmly committed to an idea or policy are the same people who are most critical of that idea or policy. While I find this claim paradoxical on its face, the paradox is explainable, and the explanation is well supported empirically. Nevertheless, the claim is an unfair generalization in that it fails to account for other empirical evidence rving to discredit it.
会计电算化是什么 A threshold problem with the speakers claim is that its internal logic is questionable. At first impression it would em that firm commitment to an idea or policy necessarily requires the utmost confidence in it, and yet one cannot have a great deal of confidence in
an idea or policy if one recognizes its flaws, drawbacks, or other problems. Thus commitment and criticism would em to be mutually exclusive. But are they? One possible explanation for the paradox is that individuals most firmly committed to an idea or policy are often the same people who are most knowledgeable on the subject, and therefore are in the best position to understand and appreciate the problems with the idea or policy.
远大前程 Lending credence to this explanation for the paradoxical nature of the speakers claim are the many historical cas of uneasy marriages between commitment to and criticism of the same idea or policy. For example, Edward Teller, the so-called father of the atom bomb, was firmly committed to Americas policy of gaining military superiority over the Japane and the Germans; yet at the same time he attempted fervently to dissuade the U.S. military from employing his technology for destruction, while becoming the most visible advocate for various peaceful and productive applications of atomic energy. Another example is George Washington, who was quoted as saying that all the worlds denizens should abhor war wherever they may find it. Yet this was the same military gene
ral who played a key role in the Revolutionary War between Britain and the States. A third example was Einstein, who while committed to the mathematical soundness of his theories about relativity could not reconcile them with the equally compelling quantum theory which emerged later in Einsteins life. In fact, Einstein spent the last twenty years of his life criticizing his own theories and struggling to determine how to reconcile them with newer theories.
In the face of historical examples supporting the speakers claim are innumerable influential individuals who were zealously committed to certain ideas and policies but who were not critical of them, at least not outwardly. Could anyone honestly claim, for instance, that Elizabeth Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, who in the late 19th Century paved the way for the womens rights movement by way of their fervent advocacy, were at the same time highly critical or suspicious of the notion that women derve equal rights under the law? Also, would it not be absurd to claim that Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, historys two leading advocates of civil disobedience as a means to social reform, had rious doubts about the ideals to which they were so demonstrably committ
ed? Finally, consider the two ideologues and revolutionaries Lenin and Mussolini. Is it even plausible that their demonstrated commitment to their own Communist and Fascist policies, respectively, belied some deep personal suspicion about the merits of the policies? To my knowledge no private writing of any of the historical figures lends any support to the claim that the leaders were particularly critical of their own ideas or policies.
ting
To sum up, while at first glance a deep commitment to and incisive criticism of the same idea or policy would em mutually exclusive, it appears they are not. Thus the speakers claim has some merit. Nevertheless, for every historical ca supporting the speakers claim are many others rving to refute it. In the final analysis, then, the correctness of the speakers asrtion must be determined on a ca-by-ca basis.
sty GRE考试写作范文Issue
英语26个字母大小写
排放英文 Tradition and modernization are incompatible. One must choo between them.
Must we choo between tradition and modernization, as the speaker contends? I agree that in certain cas the two are mutually exclusive. For the most part, however, modernization does not reject tradition; in fact, in many cas the former can and does embrace the latter.
suck my dick是什么意思 In the first place, oftentimes so-called modernization is actually an extension or new iteration of tradition, or a variation on it. This is especially true in language and in law. The modern English language, in spite of its many words that are unique to modern Western culture, is derived from, and builds upon, a variety of linguistic traditions--and ultimately from the ancient Greek and Latin languages. Were we to insist on rejecting traditional in favor of purely modern language, we would have esntially nothing to say. Perhaps an even more striking marriage of modernization and tradition is our system of laws in the U.S., which is deeply rooted in English common-law principles of equity and justice. Our system requires that new, so-called modern laws be consistent with, and in fact build upon, tho principles.
