GREAWA范文Issue整合
GRE的写作部分对于不少考生来说都挺头痛的，今天小编搜集了一些GRE AWA范文,下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
GRE AWA范文 ——Issue
Government must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive,because it is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.
The speaker's claim is actually threeflod:(1)ensuing the survival of large cities and ,in turn,that of cultural traditions ,is a proper function of government;(2) government support is needed for our large dries and cultural traditions to survive and thrive;and (3) cultural traditions are preserved and generated primarily in our large cities.I strongly disagree with all three claims.
First of all, subsidizing cultural traditions is not a proper role of government.Admittedly, certain objectives ,such as public health and safety,are so essential to the survival of large dries and of nations that government has a duty to ensure that they are met.However,these objectives should not extend tenuously to preserving cultural traditions.Moreover,government cannot possibly play an evenhanded role as cultural patron.Inadequate resources call for restrictions,priorities,and choices.It is unconscionable to relegate nomative decisions as to which cities or cultural traditions are more deserving,valuable,or needy to a few legislators, whose notions about culture might be misguided or unrepresentive of those of the general populace.Also,legislators are all too likely to make choices in favor of the cultural agendas of their home towns and states,or of lobbyists with the most money and influence.
Secondly,subsidizing cultural traditions is not a necessary role of government.A lack of private funding might justify an exception.However,cultural-by which i chiefly mean the fine arts-has always depended primarily on the patronage of private individuals and businesses, and not on the government . The Medics ,a powerful banking family of Renaissance iltaly,supported artists Michelangelo and Raphael,During the 20th Century the primarily source of cultural support were private foundations established by industrial magnates Carnegie, Mellon,Rockefeller and Getty.And tomorrow cultural support will come from our new technology and media moguls-including the likes of Ted Turner and Bill Gates, In short,philanthropy is alive and well today,and so government need not intervene to ensure that our cultural traditions are preserved and promoted.
Finally,and perhaps most importantly ,the speaker unfairly suggests that large cities serve as the primarily breeding ground and sanctuaries for a nation's cultual traditions.Today a nation's distinct cultural tradition-its folk art,crafts,traditional songs,customs and ceremonies-burgon instead in small towns and rural regions.Admittedly, our cities do serve as our centers for "high art"; big cities are where we deposit,display,and boast the world's preeminent art ,architecture,and music,But big-city culture has little to do any-more with one nation's distinct cultural traditions.After all,modern cities are essentially mutilcultural stew pots; accordingly, by assisting large cities a government is actually helping to create a gobal culture as well to subsidize the traditions of other nation's cultures.
In the final analysis,government cannot phiosophically justify assisting large cities for the purpose of either promoting or preserving the nation's cultural traditions; nor is government assistance necessary toward these ends.Moreover ,assisting large cities would have little bearing on our distinct cultural traditions ,which abide elsewhere.
GRE AWA 范文——Issue
All nations should help support the development of a global university to engage students in the process of solving the world's most persistent social problems.
I agree that it would serve the interest of all nations to establish a global university for the purpose of solving the world's most persistent social problems.Nevertheless ,such a university poses certain risks which all participating nations must be careful to minimize -or risk defeating the university's purpose.
One compelling argument in favor of a golbal university has to do with fact that its faculty and students would bring diverse cultural and educational perspectives to the problems they seek to solve.It seems to me that nations can only benefit from a global university where sutdents learn ways in which other nations address certain soda problems-successfully or not. It might be tempting to think that an overly diversified academic community would impede communication among students and faculty. However,in my view any such concerns are unwarranted,especially considering the growing awareness of other peoples and cultures which the mass media,and especially the internet, have created .Moreover,many basic principle used to solve enduring social problems know no national boundaries;thus a useful insight or discovery can come from a researcher or student from any nation.
Another compelling argument for a global university involves the increasingly global nature of certain problems.Consider,for instance, the depletion of atmospheric ozone,which has wanned the Earth to the point that it threatens the very survival of the human species.Also ,we are now learning that dear-cutting the world's rainforests can set into motion a chain of animal extinction that threatens the delicate balance upon which all animas-including humans -depend .Also consider that a financial crisis-or a political crisis or natural disaster in one country can spell trouble for foreign companies,many of which are now multination in that they rely on the labor forces,equpment,and raw material of other nations.Environmental,economic,and political problems such as these all carry grave social consequences-increased crime,unemployment,insurrection,hunger,and so forth.Solving these problems requires global cooperation-which a global university can faciliate.
Notwithstanding the foregoing reasons why a global university would help solve many of our most pressing social problems,the establishment of such a university poses certain problems of its own which must be addressed in order that the university can achieve its objectives.First, participant nations would need to overcome a myriad of administrative and political impediments .All nations would need to agree on which problems demand the university's attention and resources,which areas of academic research are worthwhile,as well as agreeing on policies and procedures for making ,enforcing ,and amending these decisions. Query whether a functional global university is politically feasible,given that sovereign nations naturally wish to advance their own agendas.
A second problems inherent in establishing a global university involes the risk that certain intellectual and research avenues would become officially sanctioned while others of equal or greater potential value would be discouraged ,or perhaps even proscribed .A telling example of the inherent danger of setting and enforcing official research priorities involves the Soviet government's attempts during the 1920s to not only control the direction and the goals of its scientists' research but also to distort the outcome of that research -ostensibly for the greatest good of the greatest number of people.Not surprisely,during this time period no significant scientific advances accurred under the auspices of the Soviet government.The Soviet lesson provides an important caveat to administrators of a global university; Significant progress in solving pressing social problems requires an open mind to all sound ideas,approaches,and theories-krespecitve of the ideologies of their propoents.
A final problems with a global university is that the world's preeminent intellectual talent might be drawn to the sorts of problems to which the university is charged with solving,while parochial social problem go unsolved.While this is not reason enough not to establish a global university,it nevertheless is a concern that university administrators and participant nations must be aware of in allocating resources and intellectual talent.
To sum up,given the increasingly global nature or the world's social problems,and the escalating costs of addressing these problems, a global university makes good sense.And , since all nations would have a common interest in seeing this endeavor succeed,my intuition is that participating nations would be able to overcome whatever procedual and political obstacles that might stand in the way of success .As long as each nation is careful not to neglect its own unique social problems,and as long as the university's administartors are careful to remain open-mind about the legitimacy and potential value of various avenues of intellectual inquury and research ,a global university might go along way toward solving many of the world's pressing social problems.
GRE AWA 范文 ——Issue
Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as fewer and fewer people speak them.The government of countries in which these languages are spoken should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct.
The speaker asserts that government of countries where lesser-known languages are spoken should intervene to prevent these languages from becoming extinct.I agree in so far as a country's indigenous and distinct languages should not be abandoned and forgot ten altogether.At some point ,however ,i think cultural identity should yield to the more practical considerations of day-to-day life in a global society.
On the one hand,the indigenous language of any geographical region is part-and-parcel of the cultural heritage of the region's natives.In my observation we humans have a basic psychological need for individual identity,which we define by way of our memebership in distinct cultural groups.A culture defines itself in various ways-by its unique traditions ,rituals ,mores attitudes and beliefs ,but especially language.Therefore, when a people's language becomes extinct the result is a diminished sense of pride ,dignity ,and self-worth.
One need look no further than continental Europe to observe how people cling tenaciously to their distinct languages,despire the fact that there is no practical need for them anymore. And on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean, the French Canadians stubbornly insist on French as their official language,for the sole purpose of preserbing their distinct cultural heritage.Even where no distinct language exists,peolple will invent one to gain a sense of cultural identity ,as the emergence of the distinct Ebonic cant among today's Afircan American aptly illustrates .In short.people resist language assimilation because of a basic human need to be part of a distinct cultural group.
Another important reason to prevent the extinction of a language is to preserve the distinct ideas that only that particular language can convey.Certain Naive American an Oriental language,for instance,contain words symbolizing spiritual and other abstract concepts that only these cultures embrace.Thus,in some cases to lose a language would be to abandon cherished beliefs and ideas that can be conveyed only throught language.
On the other hand,in today's high-tech world of satellite communications.global mobility,and especially the Internet,language,language barriers serve primarily to impede cross-cultural communication,which in turn impedes international commerce and trade.Moreover.language barriers naturally breed misunderstanding,a certain distrust and ,as a result,discord and even war among nations.Moreover,in my view the extinction of all but a few major language is inexorable-as supported by the fact that the Internet has adopted English as its official language.Thus by intervening to preserve a dying language a government might be deploying its resources to fight a losing battle,rather than to combat more pressing social problems-such as hunger ,homelessness,disease and ignorance-that plague nearly every society today.
In sum, preserving indigenous language is ,admittedly ,a worthy goal;maintaining its own distinct language affords a people a sense of pride,dignity and self-worth.Moreover,by preserving languages we honor a people's heritage,enhance our understanding of history,and preserve certain ideas that only some languages properly convey.Nevertheless,the economic and political drawbacks of languages barriers outweigh the benefits of preserving a dying language.In the final analysis,government should devote its time and resources elsewhere,and leave it to the people themselves to take whatever steps are needed to preserve their own dinstinct languages
GRE AWA 范文 ——Issue
Although many people think that the luxuries and conveniences of contemporary life are entirely harmless, they in fact,prevent people from developing into truly strong and independent individuals.
Do modern luxuries serve to undermine our true strenghth and indepedence as individuals? The speaker believes so ,and i tend to agree.Consider the automobile,for example .Most people consider the automobile a necessarity rather than a luxury;yet it is for this very reason that the automobile so aptly supports the speaker's point.To the extent that we depend on cars as crutches,they prevent us from becoming truly independent and strong in character as individuals.
Consider first the effect of the automobile on our independence as individuals.In some respects the automobiles serves to enhances such independence .For example,cars make it possible for people in isolated and depressed areas without public transportation to become more independent by pursing gainful employment outside their communities.And teenagers discover that owning a car,or even borrowing one on occasion,affords them a needed sense of independence from their parents.
However,cars have diminished our independence in a number of more significant respects.We've grown dependent on our cars for commuting to work .We rely on them like crutches for short trips to the corner store, and for carting our children to and from school.Moreover,the car has become a means not only to our assorted physical destinations but also to the attainment of our socioeconomic golas,insofar as the automobile has becoming a symbol of status.In fact ,in my observation many,if not most, working professionals willingly undermine their financial security for the sake of being seen driving this year's new SUV might afford a person a feeling and appearance of strength ,or machismo.But this feeling has nothing to do with a person's true character.
In contrast,there is a certain strength of character that comes with eschewing modern conviences such as cars,and with the knowledge that one is contributing to a cleaner and quieter environment,a safer neighborhood,and arguably a more genteel society.Also ,alternative modes of transportation such as bicycling and walking are forms of exercise which require and promote the virtue of self-discipline.Finally ,in my observation people who have forsaken the automobile spend more time at home,where they are more inclined to prepare and even grow their own food ,and to spend more time with their families.The former enhances one's independence; the latter enhances the integrity of one's values and the strength of one's family.
In sum up ,the automobile helps illustrate that when a luxury becomes a necessity it can sap our independence and strength as individuals.Perhaps our society is better off , on balance,with such "luxuries"; after all, the automobile industry has created countless jobs,raised our standard of living ,and made the world more interesting .However ,by becoming slaves to the automobile we trade off a certain independence and inner strength.
GRE AWA范文 Issue相关文章：
