15. "Since science and technology are becoming more and more essential to modern society, schools should devote more time to teaching science and technology and less to teaching the arts and humanities."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.(不同领域间的交流)
Because scientific knowledge is increasingly important in our technological world and in the practical world of jobs and careers, schools should devote sufficient time to teaching mathematics and science. This is not to say, however, that schools should devote less time to the arts or humanities. To the contrary, in a technological age the study of arts and humanities is probably more important than ever-for three reasons.
First of all, studying the arts and humanities can help students become better mathematicians and scientists. For example, recent studies of cognitive development show that studying music at an early age can strengthen a child's later grasp of mathematics. And understanding philosophical concepts has helped scientists recognize their own presuppositions, and frame their central questions more accurately.
Secondly, studying the creative and intellectual achievement of others helps inspire our own creativity and intellectual questioning. This is particularly important in an era dominated by technology, where we run a serious risk of becoming automatons who fit neatly into the efficient functioning of some system.
Finally technology is valuable as an efficient means to our important goats. But neither technology, nor the science on which it is founded, decides which goals are best, or judges the moral value of the means we choose for their attainment. We need the liberal arts to help us select worthwhile ends and ethical means.
In conclusion, schools should not devote less time to the arts and humanities. These areas of study augment and enhance learning in mathematics and science, as well as helping to preserve the richness of our entire human legacy while inspiring us to further it. Moreover, disciplines within the humanities provide methods and contexts for evaluating the morality of our technology and for determining its proper direction.
16. "It is difficult for people to achieve professional success without sacrificing important aspects of a fulfilling personal life."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion slated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. (理想和现实)
Are professional success and a fulfilling personal life mutually exclusive? Probably not, although it is more difficult today to achieve both.
Undeniably, today's professionals must work long hours to keep their heads above water, let alone to get ahead in life financially. This is especially true in Japan, where cost of living, coupled with corporate culture, compel professional males to all but abandon their families and literally to work 'themselves to death. While the situation here in the states may not be as critical, the two-income family is now the norm, not by choice but by necessity.
However, our society's professionals are taking steps to remedy the problem. First, they are inventing ways such as job sharing and telecommuting to ensure that personal life does not take a back seat to career. Second, they are setting priorities and living those hours outside the workplace to their fullest. In fact, professional success usually requires the same time-management skills that are useful to find time for family, hobbies, and recreation. One need only look at the recent American presidents-Clinton, Bush, Reagan and Carter- to see that it is possible to lead a balanced life which includes time for family, hobbies, and recreation, while immersed in a busy and successful career. Third, more professionals are changing careers to ones which allow for some degree of personal fulfillment and self-actualization. Besides, many professionals truly love their work and would do it without compensation, as a hobby. For them, professional and personal fulfillments are one and the same.
In conclusion, given the growing demands of career on today's professionals, a fulfilling personal life remains possible-by working smarter, by setting priorities, and by making suitable career choices.
17. "The most effective way for a businessperson to maximize profits over a long period of time is to follow the highest standards of ethics. "
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. (各个领域间的交流)
Some people claim that following high ethical standards is the best way to maximize profits in the long run. However, this claim seems to be more of a normative statement than an empirical observation. The issue is more complex than the speaker suggests. In my observation, the two objectives at times coincide but at other times conflict.
In many ways behaving ethically can benefit a business. Ethical conduct will gain a company the kind of good reputation that earns repeat business. Treating suppliers, customers and others fairly is likely to result in their reciprocating. Finally, a company that treats its employees fairly and with respect will gain their loyalty which, in turn, usually translates into higher productivity.
On the other hand, taking the most ethical course of action may in many cases reduce profits, in the short run and beyond. Consider the details of a merger in which both firms hope to profit from a synergy gained thereby. If the details of the merger hinge on the ethical conviction that as few employees as possible should lose their jobs, the key executives may lose sight of the fact that a leaner, , less labor-intensive organization might be necessary for long-term survival. Thus, undue concern with ethics in this case would result in lower profits and perhaps ultimate business failure.
This merger scenario points out a larger argument that the speaker misses entirely-that profit maximization is per se the highest ethical objective in private business. Why? By maximizing profits, businesses bestow a variety of important benefits on their community and on society: they employ more people, stimulate the economy, and enhance healthy competition. In short, the profit motive is the key to ensuring that the members of a free market society survive and thrive. While this argument might ignore implications for the natural environment and for socio-economic justice, it is a compelling argument nonetheless.
Thus the choice to follow high ethical standards should not be made by thinking that ethical conduct is profitable. While in some cases a commitment to high ethical standards might benefit a company financially, in many cases it will not. In the final analysis, businesses might best be advised to view their attempts to maximize profits as highly ethical behavior in itself.
18. "Everywhere, it seems, there are clear and positive signs that people are becoming more respectful of one another's differences. "
In your opinion, how accurate is the view expressed above? Use reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading to develop your position. (统一和分歧)
In determining whether we are becoming more respectful of one another's differences, one must examine overt actions and underlying motives, as well as examining whether our differences are increasing or decreasing. The issue, therefore, is quite complex, and the answer is unclear.
Disrespect for one another's differences manifests itself in various forms of prejudice and discrimination. Since the civil rights arid feminist movements of the 60s and 70s, it would seem that we have made significant progress toward eliminating racial and sexual discrimination. Antidiscriminatory laws in the areas of employment housing, and education, now protect all significant minority groups-racial minorities and women, the physically challenged and, more recently, homosexuals. Movies and television shows, which for better or worse have become the cynosure of our cultural attention, now tout the rights of minorities, encouraging acceptance of and respect for others.
However much of this progress is forced upon us legislatively. Without Title 10 and its progenies, would we voluntarily refrain from the discriminatory behavior that the laws prevent? Perhaps not. Moreover, signs of disrespect are all around us today. Extreme factions still rally around bigoted | demagogues; the number of "hate crimes" is increasing alarmingly; and school-age children seem to ^flaunt a disrespect toward adults as never before. Finally, what appears to be respect for one another's differences may in fact be an increasing global homogeneity-mat is, we are becoming more and more Hike.
In sum, on a societal level it is difficult to distinguish between genuine respect for one another's differences on the one hand and legislated morality and increasing homogeneity on the other. Accordingly, the claim that we are becoming more respectful of one another's differences is somewhat dubious.
19. "What is the final objective of business? It is to make the obtaining of a living- the obtaining of food, clothing, shelter, and a minimum of luxuries-so mechanical and so little time-consuming that people shall have time for other things."--A business leader, circa 1930
Explain what you think the quotation above means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the view of business it expresses. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
The arguer suggests that the ultimate purpose of business is to streamline and mechanize work, thereby minimizing it, so that people can make a living but still have time for other things in life. The assumptions behind this view of business are that the value of work is entirely instrumental, and that our work lives are distinct from the rest of our lives. I disagree with both assumptions.
Admittedly, work is to a large extent instrumental in that we engage in it to provide for our basic needs while leaving time and resources for other activities-raising families, participating in civic life, traveling, pursuing hobbies, and so forth. And these activities normally take place away from the workplace and are distinct from our work. However, for most people, work is far more than a means to these ends. It can also be engaging, enjoyable and fulfilling in itself. And it can provide a context for expressing an important part of one's self. However, work will be less of all these to the extent that it is streamlined and mechanized for quick disposal, as the quotation recommends. Instead, our jobs will become monotonous and tedious, the work of drones. And we might become drone-like in the process.
In addition, work can to some extent be integrated with the rest of our lives. More and more companies are installing on-site daycare facilities and workout rooms. They are giving greater attention to the ambiance of the breakroom, and they are sponsoring family events, excursions and athletic activities for employees as never before. The notion behind this trend is that when a company provides employees with ways to fulfill outside needs and desires, employees will do better work. I think this idea has merit.
In conclusion, I admit that there is more to life than work, and that work is to some extent a means to i provide a livelihood. But to suggest that this is the sole purpose of business is an oversimplification that ignores the self-actualizing significance of work, as well as the ways it can be integrated with other aspects of our lives.
20. "What education fails to teach us is to see the human community as one. Rather than focus on the unique differences that separate one nation from another, education should focus on the similarities among all people and places on Earth."
What do you think of the view of education expressed above? Explain, using reasons and/or specific examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. (同一与分歧)
This view seems to recommend that schools stress the unity of all people instead of their diversity. While I agree that education should include leaching students about characteristics that we all share, doing so need not necessarily entail shifting focus away from our differences. Education can and should include both.
On the one hand, we are in the midst of an evolving global community where it is increasingly important for people to recognize our common humanity, as well as specific hopes and goals we all share. People universally prefer health to disease, being nourished to starving, safe communities to crime-riddled ones, and peace to war. Focusing on our unity will help us realize these hopes and goals. Moreover, in ear pluralistic democracy it is crucial to find ways to unify citizens from diverse backgrounds. Otherwise, we risk being reduced to ethnic, religious or political factions at war with one another, as witnessed recently in the former Yugoslavia. Our own diverse society can forestall such horrors only if citizens are educated about the democratic ideals, heritage, rights and obligations we all have in common.
On the other hand, our schools should not attempt to erase, ignore, or even play down religious, ethnic or cultural diversity. First of all, schools have the obligation to teach the democratic ideal of tolerance. And the best way to teach tolerance is to educate people about different religions, cultures and so on. Moreover, educating people about diversity might even produce a unifying effect-by promoting understanding and appreciation among people from all backgrounds.
In conclusion, while it may appear paradoxical to recommend that education stress both unity and diversity, it is not- Understanding our common humanity will help us achieve a better, more peaceful world. Toward the same end, we need to understand our differences in order to better tolerate them, and perhaps even appreciate them. Our schools can and should promote both kinds of understanding by way of a balanced approach.
21. "The goal of business should not be to make as big a profit as possible. Instead, business should also concern itself with the well-being of the public."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
I agree that business has some obligation to the community and society in which it operates. But should this obligation take precedence over the profit objective? My answer is no.
The primary reason why I agree business should have a duty to the public is that society would be worse off by exonerating business from social responsibility. Left entirely to their own self-interest, businesses pollute the environment, withhold important product information from consumers, pay employees substandard wages, and misrepresent their financial condition to current and potential shareholders. Admittedly, in its pursuit of profit business can benefit the society as well-by way of
more and better-paying jobs, economic growth, and better yet lower-priced products. However, this point ignores the harsh consequences-such as those listed earlier-of imposing no affirmative social duty on business,
Another reason why I agree business should have a duty to serve the public is that business owes such a duty. A business enters into an implied contract with the community in which it operates, under which the community agrees to permit a corporation to do business while the business implicitly promises to benefit, and not harm, the community. This understanding gives rise to a number of social obligations on the part of the business-to promote consumer safety, to not harm the environmental, to treat employees and competitors fairly, and so on.
Although 1 agree that business should have a duty to serve the pubic, i disagree that this should be the primarily objective of business. Imposing affirmative social duties on business opens a Pandora's box of problems-for example, how to determine, (1) what the public interest is in the first place, (2) which public interests are most important, (3) what actions are in the public interest, and (4) how business duty to the public might be monitored and enforced. Government regulation is the only practical way to deal with these issues, yet government is notoriously inefficient and corrupt: the only way to limit these problems is to limit the duty of business to serve the public interest.
In sum, I agree that the duty of business should extend beyond the simple profit motive. However, its affirmative obligations to society should be tempered against the pubic benefits of the profit motive and against the practical problems associated with shouldering business with an affirmative duty to ensure the public's well-being.
22. "So long as no laws are broken, there is nothing unethical about doing whatever you need to do to promote existing products or to create new products."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
The arguer asserts that in creating and marketing products, companies act ethically merely by not violating any laws. Although this position is not wholly insupportable, far more compelling arguments can be made for holding businesses to higher ethical standards than those required by the letter of the law.
On the one hand, two colorable arguments can be made for holding business only to legal standards of conduct. First, imposing a higher ethical duty can actual harm consumers in the long term. Compliance with high ethical standards can be costly for business, thereby lowering profits and, in turn, impeding a company's ability to create jobs (for consumers), keep prices low (for consumers), and so forth. Second, limited accountability is consistent with the "buyer beware" principle that permeates our laws of contracts and torts, as well as our notion in civil procedure that plaintiffs carry the burden of proving damage. In other words, the onus should be on consumers to protect themselves, not on companies to protect consumers.
On the other hand, several convincing arguments can be made for holding business to a higher ethical standard. First, in many cases government regulations that protect consumers lag behind advances in technology. A new marketing technique made possible by Internet technology may be unethical but nevertheless might not be proscribed by the letter of the laws which predated the Internet. Second, enforceability might not extend beyond geographic borders, Consider, for example, the case of "dumping." When products fail to comply with U.S. regulations, American companies frequently market-or "dump" such products in third-world countries where consumer-protection laws are virtually nonexistent. Third, moral principles form the basis of government regulation arid are, therefore, more fundamental than the law.
In the final analysis, while overburdening businesses with obligations to consumers may not be a good idea in the extreme, our regulatory system is not as effective as it should be. Therefore, businesses should adhere to a higher standard of ethics in creating and marketing products than what is required by the letter of the law.
23. People often give the following advice: "Be yourself. Follow your instincts and behave in a way that feels natural."
Do you think that, in general, this is good advice? Why or why not? Develop your point of view by giving reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading. (统一和分歧)
The advice to act naturally or follow one's instincts can, admittedly, be helpful advice for someone torn between difficult career or personal choices in life. In most situations, however, following this advice would neither be wise nor sensible. Following one's own instincts should be tempered by codes of behavior appropriate to the situation at hand.
'First of all, doing what comes naturally often amounts to impulsive overreaction and irrational behavior, based on emotion. Everyone experiences impulses from time to time, such as hitting another person, quitting one's job, having an extramarital affair, and so forth. People, who act however they please or say whatever is on their mind without thinking about consequences especially without regard to social situation, may offend and alienate others. At the workplace, engaging in petty gossip, sexual harassment, or backstabbing might be considered "natural," yet such behavior can be destructive for the individuals at the receiving end as well as for the company. And in dealings with foreign business associates, what an American might find natural or instinctive, even if socially acceptable here, might be deeply insulting or confusing to somebody from another culture.
Second, doing what comes naturally is not necessarily in one's own best interests. The various behaviors cited above would also tend to be counterproductive for the person engaging in them. "Natural" behavior could prove deadly to one's career, since people who give little thought before they act cannot be trusted in a job that requires effective relationships with important clients, colleagues and others.
Third, the speaker seems to suggest that you should be yourself, and then act accordingly in that order. But we define ourselves in large measure by our actions. Young adults especially tack a clear sense of self. How can you be yourself if you don't know who you are? Even for mature adults, the process of evolving one's concept of self is a perpetual one. In this respect, then, the speaker's recommendation does not make much sense.
In sum, one should not follow the speaker's advice universally or too literacy. For unless a person's instincts are to follow standard rules of social and business etiquette, natural behavior can harm others as well as constrain one's own personal and professional growth.
24. "The people we remember best are the ones who broke the rules. "
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.(统一和分歧)
I strongly agree that rule-breakers are the most memorable people. By departing from the status quo, iconoclasts call attention to themselves, some providing conspicuous mirrors for society, others serving j as our primary catalysts for progress.
In politics, for example, rule-breakers Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King secured prominent places in history by challenging the status quo through civil disobedience. Renegades such as Ghengu Khan. Stalin, and Hussein, broke all the human rights "rules," thereby leaving indelible marks in f historical record. And future generations will probably remember Nixon and Kennedy more clearly than Carter or Reagan, by way of their rule-breaking activities-specifically, Nixon's Watergate debacle and Kennedy's extra-marital trysts.
In the arts, mavericks such as Dali, Picasso, and Warhol, who break established rules of composition, ultimately emerge as the greatest artists, while the names of artists with superior technical skills are relegated to the footnotes of art-history textbooks. Our most influential popular musicians are the flagrant rule breakers-for example, be-bop musicians such as Charlie Parker and Thelonius Monk, who broke all the harmonic rules, and folk musician-poet Bob Dylan, who broke the rules for lyrics.
In the sciences, innovation and progress can only result from challenging conventional theories, i.e., by breaking rules. Newton and Einstein, for example, both refused to blindly accept what were perceived at their time as certain "rules" of physics. As a result, both men redefined those rules, and both men emerged as two of the most memorable figures in the field of physics.
In conclusion, it appears that the deepest positive and negative impressions appear on either side of the same iconoclastic coin. Those who leave the most memorable imprints in history do so by challenging norms, traditions, cherished values, and the general status quo, that is, by breaking the rules.
25. Although "genius" is difficult to define, one of the qualities of genius is the ability to transcend traditional modes of thought and create new ones.
Explain what you think the above statement means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with this definition of genius. In your discussion, be sure to include at least one example of someone who, in your opinion, exemplifies genius or a particular characteristic of genius. (统一和分歧)
I strongly agree that true genius is the ability to see beyond conventional modes of thinking and to suggest new and better ones. This definition property sets genius apart from lesser instances of critical acumen, inventiveness or creativity. Under this definition, a true genius must successfully (I) challenge the assumptions underlying a current paradigm, and (2) supplant the old paradigm with a new, better, and more fruitful one.
This two-pronged standard for true genius is aptly illustrated by examining the scientific contribution of the century astronomer Copernicus. Prior to Copernicus, our view of the universe was governed by the Ptolemaic paradigm of a geocentric universe, according to which our earth was in a fixed position I at the center of the universe, with other heavenly bodies revolving around it. Copernicus challenged | this paradigm and its key assumptions by introducing a distinction between real motion and motion that \s merely apparent. In doing so, he satisfied the first requirement of a true genius.
|ad Copernicus managed to show only that the old view and its assumptions were problematic, we would not consider him a genius today. Copernicus went on, however, to develop a new paradigm; he ' claimed that the earth is rotating while hurtling rapidly through space, and that other heavenly bodies only appear to revolve around the earth. Moreover, he reasoned that his view about the earth's real motion could explain the apparent motion of the sun, stars and other planets around the earth. It turned out he was right; and his theories helped facilitate Galileo's empirical observations, Kepler's laws of planetary motion, and Newton's gravitational principle.
To sum up, I find the proposed definition of true genius incisive and accurate; and the example of Copernicus aptly points up the two required elements of true genius required by the definition.
26. Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes.
In your opinion, which is more important-preserving historic buildings or encouraging modern development? Explain your position, using reasons and examples based on your own experiences, observations, or reading. (新与旧)
The issue of whether to raze an old, historic building to make way for progress is a complex one, since it involves a conflict between our interest in preserving our culture, tradition, and history and a legitimate need to create practical facilities that serve current utilitarian purposes. In my view, the final judgment should depend on a case-by-case analysis of two key factors.
One key factor is the historic value of the building. An older building may be worth saving because it uniquely represents some bygone era. On the other hand, if several older buildings represent the era just as effectively, then the historic value of one building might be negligible. If the building figured centrally into the city's history as a municipal structure, the home of a founding family or other significant historical figure, or the location of important events, then its historic value would be greater than if its history was an unremarkable one.
The other key factor involves the specific utilitarian needs of the community and the relative costs and benefits of each alternative in light of those needs. For example, if the need is mainly for more office space, then an architecturally appropriate add-on or annex might serve just as well as a new building. On the other hand, an expensive retrofit may not be worthwhile if no amount of retrofitting would permit it to serve the desired function- Moreover, retrofitting might undermine the historic value of the old building by altering its aesthetic or architectural integrity.
In sum, neither modernization for its own sake nor indiscriminate preservation of old buildings should guide decisions in the controversies at issue. Instead, decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis) considering historic value, community need, and the comparative costs and benefits of each alternative
27. "No one can possibly achieve any real and lasting success or get rich in business by conforming to conventional practices or ways of thinking. "
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
Whether a conformist can achieve lasting success or "get rich" in business depends primarily on the type of business involved. Iconoclasts rise to the top in newer industries and in those where consumer demand is in constant flux. Conformists ultimately prevail, however, in traditional service industries ensconced in systems and regulations.
In consumer-driven industries, innovation, product differentiation, and creativity are crucial to lasting success. In the retail and media sectors, for example, unconventional products and advertising are necessary to catch the attention of consumers and to keep up with the vagaries of consumer tastes. Those who take an iconoclastic approach tend to recognize emerging trends and to rise above their peers- For example, Ted Turner s departure from the traditional format of the other television networks, and the responsiveness of Amazon.com to burgeoning Internet commerce propelled these two giants to leadership positions in their industries. And in technology, where there are no conventional practices or ways of thinking to begin with, companies that fail to break away from last year s paradigm are soon left behind by the competition.
However, in traditional service industries-such as finance, accounting, insurance, legal services, and health care-lasting success and riches come not to non- conformists but rather to those who can deliver services most effectively within the confines of established practices, policies, and regulations. Of course, a clever idea for structuring a deal, or a creative lega
28. "We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us. "
Explain what you think this statement means and discuss the extent to which you do or do not agree with it. Support your views with reasons and/or specific examples from your experience, observations, or reading. (技术进步对人类的影响)
We are influenced by the exterior shape of buildings, as well as by the arrangement of multiple buildings and by a building s various architectural and aesthetic elements. While I doubt that buildings determine our character or basic personality trails, I agree that they can greatly influence our attitudes, moods, and even life styles.
On the structural and multi-structural scales, the arrangement of numerous buildings can shape us in profound ways. High-density commercial districts with numerous skyscrapers might result in stressful commuting, short tempers, a feeling of dehumanization, and so on. A "campus" arrangement of smaller, scattered buildings can promote health, well-being, and stress reduction by requiring frequent brisk outdoor jaunts. Buildings with multiple floors can also "shape" us, literally, by requiring exercise up and down stairs.
As for floor plans and internal space, physical arrangement of workspaces can shape workers attitudes toward work and toward one another. Sitting in small, gray cubicles lined up in militaristic rows is demoralizing, leaving workers with the feeling that they are little more than impersonal cogs of some office machine. But creative design of workspaces in varied
arrangements can create feelings of uniqueness and importance in each employee. Workspace relationships that suggest some sort of hierarchy may breed competitiveness among coworkers, and may encourage a more bureaucratic approach to work.
Finally, as for aesthetic elements, the amount of light and location of windows in a building can shape us in significant psy
29. "Whether promoting a product, an event, or a person, an advertising campaign is most effective when it appeals to emotion rather than So reason. "
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.(理性和感性)
There are two traditional advertising tactics for promoting a product, event, candidate, or point of view One is to provide reasons: the other is to bypass reasons altogether and appeal strictly to emotion. Considered in isolation, emotional appeals are far more effective. But many of the most influential ads combine slim reasons with powerful appeals to emotion.
To appreciate the power of emotional appeals we need only consider the promotion of sodas, beer, cigarettes, cosmetics and so on. This advertising is the most successful in the industry: and it trades almost exclusively on the manipulation of our desires, fears and senses of humor. In fact, it wouldn't make sense to offer up arguments, because there really aren't any good reasons for consuming such products.
Even so, some of these products are advertised with at least superficial reasoning. For instance, in the promotion of facial moisturizers it has become popular to use the image of a youthful woman with fresh, unlined skin along with the claim that the product "can reduce the signs of aging."
This is indeed a reason, but a carefully couched one that never really states that product users will look younger. Still, countless middle-aged women will pay twice as much for products that add this claim to the expected image of youthfulness that trades on their fears of growing old. One of the most clever and ironic combined uses of reason and emotion is seen in the old Volvo slogan, "Volvo, the car for people who think." The suggested rea
30. "The study of history is largely a waste of time because it prevents us from focusing on the challenges of the present. "
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.(新与旧)
Is studying history is a waste of time because it distracts us from current challenges? Does the study of history have any bearing on present problems or their possible solutions? In my opinion, history can provide examples, perspectives and insights that are directly relevant to contemporary challenges.
One way that studying history can help us face new challenges is by showing us inspirational examples f success. For instance, we can learn from the experience of the great inventor Thomas Edison that sometimes a series of apparent failures is really a precursor to success. Also consider the journey of Lewis and dark into the Northwest Territory. Understanding the motivations needed to overcome adversities they faced can help to inspire modem-day explorers and scientists.
Studying history can also help us avoid repeating mistakes. For instance, we can learn from the failure of Prohibition during the 1930s that it can be a mistake to legislate morality. And future generations might learn from the 1997 indictment of the tobacco industry that it is bad policy to trade off the well-being of consumers in order to secure profits.
Finally, the study of history is important because we cannot fully appreciate our present challenges without understanding their historical antecedents. Consider the issue of whether California should be officially bilingual. The treaty that transferred California from Mexico to the United States stipulated that California must embrace both Spanish and English as official languages. Those who view th