GREIssue写作范文详细解析
该如何备考GRE作文呢，小编给大家带来了Issue写作范文详细解析，我们一起学习一下吧，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。
Issue写作范文详细解析
Issue
"Humanity has made little real progress over the past century or so. Technological innovations have taken place, but the overall condition of humanity is no better. War, violence and poverty are still with us. Technology cannot change the condition of humanity."
Sample Essay
The discussion of this statement turns on what is meant by "little real progress" from the first sentence, "the overall condition of humanity" in the second sentence, and "the condition of humanity" from the third sentence. To be sure, war, violence and poverty are still with us and we as mankind are probably more aware of these problems worldwide than ever before thanks to advances in technology and communication. But depending upon the definition of progress and the condition of humanity, this would appear to be an incorrect statement.
First of all, the phrase "little real progress" from the first sentence must be defined. If the author defines progress as elimination of death, war, violence and poverty, then perhaps it could be stated that humankind has not made much improvement over the past one hundred years. People are still dying, wars are still being fought, violence is present almost everywhere and there are most likely people in every country in the world living in poverty. However, if the term "progress" is defined not as elimination of these problems but rather a reduction in them, then great progress has been made over the past century. Life expectancies are up in nearly every country of the world due to improvements in medicine and the scientific study of the human body. War and violence, although still present, has been reduced and to a large part confined to certain areas of the world rather than the global wars of the past such was World Wars I and II. Poverty has also been reduced as international trade has lead to economic improvements in many formerly impoverished nations. Very real progress has been made in these areas over the past one hundred years.
Secondly, the phrases "the overall condition of humanity" and "the condition of humanity" must be defined. If the terms mean that we are all still born into pain, suffer many tragedies during our lives, and still die in the end, then of course the overall condition of humanity is no better than it was one hundred or even one hundred thousand years ago. Life is still life, and no matter what technological innovations come along, it is unlikely that the basic facts of living as a member of the human race will ever change. However, if the term means how we are able to live our lives during the time that we are given, then again tremendous progress has been made during the past century. Cures have been found for many diseases, some of which have officially been completely eliminated. Medical treatments for other diseases have made them less deadly or less debilitating. For example, many cancer victims that would have died in the past can now go on living comfortably and cancer-free after treatment. Diabetics who would have died in the past can now live nearly normal lives. Even poor eyesight can be effectively eliminated through laser surgery. It would seem to be beyond argument that overall, the condition of humanity is much better now than it was one century ago.
If one takes a very narrow definition of "progress" and "the condition of humanity", it could be fairly stated that mankind has made little in the way of advancement over the past century. Millions of people worldwide still live in poverty. Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) is killing millions of people with no cure in sight. War and violence continues in the Middle East, Africa and Afghanistan. But to take this narrow point of view would be to ignore the obvious tremendous advances that have been made over the past one hundred years by the human race. As mankind continues on into the twenty-first century, it would be preferable to consider all that has been accomplished over the past one hundred years and to look ahead to future advances over the next century instead of ignoring mankind's obviously improved circumstances today.
(696 words)
观点陈述型作文/[题目]
"在过去约一个世纪的时间中，人类几乎没有实现真正的进步。技术创新确实发生了，但人类的总体状况毫无改观。战争、暴力，以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们。技术无法改善人类的生存状况。"
[范文正文]
上述陈述中的探讨所围绕的是这样三个概念的含义，即第一句中的"little real progress"，第二句中的"the overall condition of humanity"，以及第三句中的"the condition of humanity".毫无疑问，战争、暴力以及贫穷仍然伴随着我们，并且，作为人类，由于技术与通信的进步，我们可能比以往任何时候都更深切地意识到了这些问题。但除非将"progress"和"the condition of humanity"这样的概念进行清晰界定，否则，上述陈述将是相当谬误的。
首先，第一句中的"little real progress"必须予以界定。如果作者将"progress"定义为祓除死亡、战争、暴力以及贫穷，那么或许可以这样说，人类在过去的100多年中并未取得太大的进展。人们仍在不断死亡，战争仍在进行，暴力几乎到处存在，世界每个国家都有人生活于贫困之中。但是，如果"progress"这一术语并非被定义为对上述问题的消除，而是对这些问题的削减，那么，过去一个世纪中人类确实取得了重大进步。由于医学和对人体科学研究水平的提高，全世界几乎每个国家中人类寿命都呈上升趋势。战争与暴力，虽然仍然存在，却已被减少，且在很大程度上都被限制在世界的某些地区，而再也不是像第一、第二次世界大战那样波及全球。随着国际贸易在许多以前的贫穷国家导致了经济改善，贫困也得以减轻。在过去的100年中，这些领域中已取得了极为真实的进步。其次，"the overall condition of humanity"以及"the condition of humanity"必须予以界定。如果这些术语指的是我们所有人仍然降生于痛苦之中，一生中蒙受着许多悲剧，并最终仍然死去，那么，毫无疑问，人类的总体状况丝毫不比100年或甚至10万年之前来得更好。生活依然是生活，无论产生怎样的技术创新，作为人类的一员，生活的某些基本事实依旧不变。如果该术语指的是我们是如何在被赋予的生存时间中得以生活的，那么我们可以再一次说，人类在过去的世纪中取得了巨大的进步。对许多疾病，人类已找到了治愈方法，某些疾病已正式被彻底消除。对某些疾病的医治已使这些病症变得不再那么致命，不再那么毁灭性。例如，在过去有可能死去的许多癌症患者，现在经治疗之后可继续舒服地生活下去，摆脱癌症的折磨。在过去可能会死去的糖尿病患者，现在也能过上几乎正常的生活。即使视力障碍也能通过激光手术被有效去除。总体而言，人类状况现在远好于一个多世纪之前，这似乎应是不争的事实。 如果从狭义上去理解"progress"和"the condition of humanity"，则人们可以甚为合理地说，人类在过去的一个多世纪中几乎没有取得任何进步。全球数以百万计的人仍生活在贫困之中，爱滋病正在夺走无数人的生命，而治愈方法遥遥无期。战争与暴力在中东,非洲以及阿富汗持续不断。然则，持此狭隘的观点则有可能使人无视人类在过去一百年中业已取得的昭然若揭的巨大进步。随着人类继续迈进21世纪，较为可取的做法应该是，我们应充分意识到在过去100年中人类业已取得的全部成就，并展望人类在下一个世纪中所可能取得的未来进步，而不是对人类今日显著改善的生存状况视而不见，置若罔闻。
Issue写作范文详细解析
A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.
In this argument, the arguer cites a study showing that North Americans suffer from an amazingly higher rate of chronic fatigue and chronic depression than people living in Asia. From an unknown source, the arguer states that Asians eat much more soy than North Americans, who eat almost none, and that soy contains disease-preventing properties. The arguer then concludes his or her argument by stating that North Americans should consider regularly eating soy as a means of battling fatigue and depression. This argument suffers from at least four critical fallacies.
For the sake of this argument, we will assume that the studies and the statistics about North Americans' and Asians' soy eating habits are correct, and that isoflavones have been found to have disease-fighting properties. Given that, there is still a problem with the arguer directly correlating the eating of soy with the prevention of disease and depression. First of all, simply because soy may have disease-preventing properties, that does not mean that it can therefore fight chronic fatigue and chronic depression. Fatigue and depression may not actually even be considered as "diseases", therefore even given the fact that soy has disease-fighting properties, it would have no effect on the "nondiseases" of fatigue and depression. Secondly, even assuming that fatigue and depression are diseases, they are not specifically mentioned as diseases that soy or isoflavones are able to prevent. Perhaps soy can help prevent osteoporosis (bone loss), mumps or even chicken pox, but that does not mean that it can specifically address the problems of chronic fatigue and chronic depression. These two critical weaknesses alone make the argument unconvincing.
Furthermore, the arguer's conclusion is based on the idea that diet alone can prevent fatigue and depression by comparing the diets of North Americans and Asians. It is highly unlikely that diet alone is responsible for the tremendous difference in the rates of fatigue and depression between the two populations. Other factors such as lifestyles, occupations, residence in city or rural areas and levels of stress may play a much bigger factor than diet. Additionally, the arguer states that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which supposedly have disease-preventing properties. What is not stated, however, is whether these isoflavones are contained in a form in soy that is usable by the human body. It is possible that the particular configuration of the phytochemicals found in soy products is not usable by the human body, thereby producing no beneficial effects by people eating more soy products. In and of themselves, isoflavones may prevent certain diseases, but perhaps those found in soy are of no benefit to humans. By failing to address these possibilities, the arguer has presented an unconvincing argument.
In summary, the argument fails due to four major flaws in logic. First, "disease-preventing" properties does not mean "fatigue and depression" preventing properties. Secondly, fatigue and depression may not even be considered as diseases. Thirdly, the arguer ignores the probability that diet alone is not the sole reason behind the increased rates of fatigue and depression for North Americans as opposed to Asians. Finally, isoflavones as found in soy may not produce the same beneficial effects as when it is found in other forms. To strengthen the argument and conclusion, the arguer should present evidence that directly links diet to fatigue and depression as well as evidence that shows that soy can specifically prevent chronic fatigue and chronic depression in North Americans.
(576 words)
[题目]
一项最近的研究表明，居住在北美大陆上的人们要比居住在亚洲大陆上的人们患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例分别超出9倍和31倍。有意思的是，亚洲人平均每天只吃20克的大豆，而北美洲人却几乎一点都不吃。研究表明，大豆含有被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，这些植物化学物经科学家研究，发现拥有防病特性。因此，北美洲人应该考虑经常性地吃大豆，以此作为一种防止疲劳和压抑的方法。
[范文正文]
在本段论述中，论述者援引了一项研究来证明，北美洲人患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例要比居住在亚洲的人令人惊讶地高。从一项来源不明的资料中，作者陈述道，亚洲人所吃的大豆要远多于北美人，而北美人则几乎一点都不吃，而大豆却含有防病的特性。论述者在其论述的结束处陈述首，北美人应考虑经常性地吃些大豆，以此作为一种抗疲劳和抗忧郁的方法。本段论述至少犯下了四个关键性的逻辑谬误。
为了论述的缘故，我们假定关于北美人和亚洲人吃大豆的习惯这方面的研究和数据是完全正确的，并且异黄酮确实被科学家发现具有防病功效。即使在承认这些条件的情况下，论述者将食用大豆与防止疾病和抵抗忧郁直接联系起来，这一做法本身仍存在着问题。首先，即使大豆有可能具备防病特性，但这并非意味着它因此就能抵抗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。疲倦和忧郁实际上甚至还不可能被视作"疾病"，因此，尽管大豆具有防病作用属实，但它对于疲倦和忧郁这些"非疾病"可能毫无作用。其次，即使我们假定疲倦和忧郁可被视为疾病，但它们没有被具体提到是属于大豆或异黄酮所能预防的那类病症。或许，大豆可以预防骨质疏松症，流行性腮腺炎或甚至是水痘，但这并非意味着它能具体地治疗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症这样一些问题。这二个关键性的弱点本身就足以使得该论述缺乏可信度。
进而言之，论述者的结论所依据的是这样一个理念，即通过比较北美人和亚洲人的饮食，饮食本身可以来防止疲倦和忧郁。但很难想象饮食本身造成了两类人口之间患上疲倦和忧郁症比例方面的巨大差异。其他诸多因素，如生活方式，职业，居住在都市还是乡村，以及压力程度所产生的影响可能要比饮食大得多。此外，论述者陈述道，大豆含有一种可被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，据称具有防病功效。但论述者没有作出陈述，即这些异黄酮是否是以一种被人体使用的方式被包含在大豆中。有可能是，大豆产品中所发现的植物化学物，其特定的结构并不能为人体所利用，从而对食用较多大豆产品的人并不能产生任何益处。就其本身而言，异黄酮或许可能预防某些疾病，但大豆中所发现的异黄酮对人类毫无益处，这也是有可能的。由于没有探究这些可能性，论述者所摆出的这段论述便失去了说服力。
总的说来，本段论述因为四大逻辑缺陷而难以站得住脚。首先，"防病"特性并不能等同于"疲倦和忧郁症"预防特性。其次，疲倦和忧郁甚至还不能被视为疾病。第三，论述者忽视了这样一种可能性，即饮食本身并不是造成北美人相对于亚洲人疲倦与忧郁症比例上升的唯一原因。最后，大豆中所被发现的异黄酮可能并不能产生与在其他形式中所发现的异黄酮相同的益处。若要增强其论点和结论的力度，论述者应该拿出证据，将饮食与疲倦及忧郁直接联系起来，且提供证据来证明大豆能具体地防止北美人的慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。
Issue写作范文详细解析
A recent study shows that people living on the continent of North America suffer 9 times more chronic fatigue and 31 times more chronic depression than do people living on the continent of Asia. Interestingly, Asians, on average, eat 20 grams of soy per day, whereas North Americans eat virtually none. It turns out that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which have been found to possess disease-preventing properties. Thus, North Americans should consider eating soy on a regular basis as a way of preventing fatigue and depression.
In this argument, the arguer cites a study showing that North Americans suffer from an amazingly higher rate of chronic fatigue and chronic depression than people living in Asia. From an unknown source, the arguer states that Asians eat much more soy than North Americans, who eat almost none, and that soy contains disease-preventing properties. The arguer then concludes his or her argument by stating that North Americans should consider regularly eating soy as a means of battling fatigue and depression. This argument suffers from at least four critical fallacies.
For the sake of this argument, we will assume that the studies and the statistics about North Americans' and Asians' soy eating habits are correct, and that isoflavones have been found to have disease-fighting properties. Given that, there is still a problem with the arguer directly correlating the eating of soy with the prevention of disease and depression. First of all, simply because soy may have disease-preventing properties, that does not mean that it can therefore fight chronic fatigue and chronic depression. Fatigue and depression may not actually even be considered as "diseases", therefore even given the fact that soy has disease-fighting properties, it would have no effect on the "nondiseases" of fatigue and depression. Secondly, even assuming that fatigue and depression are diseases, they are not specifically mentioned as diseases that soy or isoflavones are able to prevent. Perhaps soy can help prevent osteoporosis (bone loss), mumps or even chicken pox, but that does not mean that it can specifically address the problems of chronic fatigue and chronic depression. These two critical weaknesses alone make the argument unconvincing.
Furthermore, the arguer's conclusion is based on the idea that diet alone can prevent fatigue and depression by comparing the diets of North Americans and Asians. It is highly unlikely that diet alone is responsible for the tremendous difference in the rates of fatigue and depression between the two populations. Other factors such as lifestyles, occupations, residence in city or rural areas and levels of stress may play a much bigger factor than diet. Additionally, the arguer states that soy contains phytochemicals called isoflavones, which supposedly have disease-preventing properties. What is not stated, however, is whether these isoflavones are contained in a form in soy that is usable by the human body. It is possible that the particular configuration of the phytochemicals found in soy products is not usable by the human body, thereby producing no beneficial effects by people eating more soy products. In and of themselves, isoflavones may prevent certain diseases, but perhaps those found in soy are of no benefit to humans. By failing to address these possibilities, the arguer has presented an unconvincing argument.
In summary, the argument fails due to four major flaws in logic. First, "disease-preventing" properties does not mean "fatigue and depression" preventing properties. Secondly, fatigue and depression may not even be considered as diseases. Thirdly, the arguer ignores the probability that diet alone is not the sole reason behind the increased rates of fatigue and depression for North Americans as opposed to Asians. Finally, isoflavones as found in soy may not produce the same beneficial effects as when it is found in other forms. To strengthen the argument and conclusion, the arguer should present evidence that directly links diet to fatigue and depression as well as evidence that shows that soy can specifically prevent chronic fatigue and chronic depression in North Americans.
(576 words)
[题目]
一项最近的研究表明，居住在北美大陆上的人们要比居住在亚洲大陆上的人们患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例分别超出9倍和31倍。有意思的是，亚洲人平均每天只吃20克的大豆，而北美洲人却几乎一点都不吃。研究表明，大豆含有被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，这些植物化学物经科学家研究，发现拥有防病特性。因此，北美洲人应该考虑经常性地吃大豆，以此作为一种防止疲劳和压抑的方法。
[范文正文]
在本段论述中，论述者援引了一项研究来证明，北美洲人患慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症的比例要比居住在亚洲的人令人惊讶地高。从一项来源不明的资料中，作者陈述道，亚洲人所吃的大豆要远多于北美人，而北美人则几乎一点都不吃，而大豆却含有防病的特性。论述者在其论述的结束处陈述首，北美人应考虑经常性地吃些大豆，以此作为一种抗疲劳和抗忧郁的方法。本段论述至少犯下了四个关键性的逻辑谬误。
为了论述的缘故，我们假定关于北美人和亚洲人吃大豆的习惯这方面的研究和数据是完全正确的，并且异黄酮确实被科学家发现具有防病功效。即使在承认这些条件的情况下，论述者将食用大豆与防止疾病和抵抗忧郁直接联系起来，这一做法本身仍存在着问题。首先，即使大豆有可能具备防病特性，但这并非意味着它因此就能抵抗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。疲倦和忧郁实际上甚至还不可能被视作"疾病"，因此，尽管大豆具有防病作用属实，但它对于疲倦和忧郁这些"非疾病"可能毫无作用。其次，即使我们假定疲倦和忧郁可被视为疾病，但它们没有被具体提到是属于大豆或异黄酮所能预防的那类病症。或许，大豆可以预防骨质疏松症，流行性腮腺炎或甚至是水痘，但这并非意味着它能具体地治疗慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症这样一些问题。这二个关键性的弱点本身就足以使得该论述缺乏可信度。
进而言之，论述者的结论所依据的是这样一个理念，即通过比较北美人和亚洲人的饮食，饮食本身可以来防止疲倦和忧郁。但很难想象饮食本身造成了两类人口之间患上疲倦和忧郁症比例方面的巨大差异。其他诸多因素，如生活方式，职业，居住在都市还是乡村，以及压力程度所产生的影响可能要比饮食大得多。此外，论述者陈述道，大豆含有一种可被称为异黄酮的植物化学物，据称具有防病功效。但论述者没有作出陈述，即这些异黄酮是否是以一种被人体使用的方式被包含在大豆中。有可能是，大豆产品中所发现的植物化学物，其特定的结构并不能为人体所利用，从而对食用较多大豆产品的人并不能产生任何益处。就其本身而言，异黄酮或许可能预防某些疾病，但大豆中所发现的异黄酮对人类毫无益处，这也是有可能的。由于没有探究这些可能性，论述者所摆出的这段论述便失去了说服力。
总的说来，本段论述因为四大逻辑缺陷而难以站得住脚。首先，"防病"特性并不能等同于"疲倦和忧郁症"预防特性。其次，疲倦和忧郁甚至还不能被视为疾病。第三，论述者忽视了这样一种可能性，即饮食本身并不是造成北美人相对于亚洲人疲倦与忧郁症比例上升的唯一原因。最后，大豆中所被发现的异黄酮可能并不能产生与在其他形式中所发现的异黄酮相同的益处。若要增强其论点和结论的力度，论述者应该拿出证据，将饮食与疲倦及忧郁直接联系起来，且提供证据来证明大豆能具体地防止北美人的慢性疲倦和慢性忧郁症。
Issue写作范文详细解析
Issue
"It is primarily through identification through social groups that we define ourselves."
Sample Essay
As primarily social animals, human beings naturally seek out different groups to which they feel they have a certain sense of belonging. But there are two different aspects of this issue involved: identifying oneself with a social group for its social implications and identifying oneself with a social group for internal needs. A person can have two different identities, one that involves an individual's self-perception and the way that others see that particular individual. There is a natural dichotomy between the two sides of one's personality that is usually displayed between the different types of social groups with which an individual may identify oneself.
Self-definition can either be honest or dishonest. A person may join a social group because he or she thinks that the people that belong to this type of group are the same as he or she, whether it is true or not. The important detail to the individual is that he or she would like to be the same as the people that belong to this particular social group. As one example, consider a person who grew up poor and poorly educated, but became wealthy through the luck of the lottery or an inheritance from an unknown but wealthy relative. This individual then joins a wine-tasting club and buys season tickets to the local Philharmonic Orchestra and opera house. Although this individual knows nothing about wine, orchestras or opera, he or she is seeking to identify him or herself as a culturally literate person simply because the person is now wealthy. Through joining these social groups, the individual is seeking to define him or herself as socially elite, although the only difference now is that the person has great wealth and in reality probably does not fit in with the other members of the groups. In this case, one's self-definition by identifying with social groups does not match up with how society still identifies the individual.
On the other hand, there are individuals that very clearly demonstrate who they are by their identification with certain social groups. At a very basic level, younger people may join gangs based on a sense of identification with certain gang members or gang ideas. By displaying different identifying tattoos or certain colors, these people clearly identify who they are and what they stand for by the particular to which they belong. Certain religious groups also give a clear identity to their members. Joining an Islamic fundamentalist group such as the Taliban or an Orthodox Jewish organization indicates a certain identity that is common to all of its members. Political organizations such as Greenpeace and the National Organization for Women also make a certain statement about the identity of an individual member. In all of these cases, an individual's self-perception and how others view that individual are probably very similar. These types of organizations speak to a person's very fundamental values and joining one is probably that person's way of saying to the world "this is who I am".
Joining other types of groups may or may not indicate a person's self-identification. Being a Republican or a Democrat, for example, may just be a matter of whichever party your parents belong to. Spending time with a particular group of friends may only mean that you like only one of the people in the group or you have nothing better to do, it may have nothing to do with your self-identification. People that belong to these groups do not necessarily belong to any one social group for identification purposes; it may be only a matter of convenience.
It depends on the individual and the particular social group under discussion as to whether we primarily identify ourselves through association with social groups. Once the individual or the social group has been identified, a determination must still be made as to whether the individual has joined for self-identification purposes or to impress upon others a certain image of that individual.
(656 words)
[题目]
"我们主要通过与社会群体的认同而来界定我们自身。"
[范文正文]
作为具有显著社会性的动物，人类自然会去寻觅某些他们觉得与其存在某种归属感的不同群体。但这个问题涉及两个方面：基于某一社会群体的社会含义而认同该群体，以及出于某些内在需要而认同某一社会群体。一个人可以拥有两个不同的身份，一种身份涉及到个人的自我感受，另一个所涉及的是他人对这个特定个人的看法。在一个人性格的这两方面之间，存在着一种自然的两分法。个人的性格一般就体现在这一个人所可能认同的不同社会群体之间。
自我界定可以是诚实的，亦可以是不诚实的。一个人之所以加入某一社会群体，可能是因为他(她)认为属于这一群体的那些人与他(她)相同，无论这是真还是假。对于这个个人具有重要性的一个细节是，他(她)希望与属于这一特定社会群体的人们相同。例如，我们不妨考虑一下这样一个人，他出身贫穷，没能受过良好的教育，但通过彩票的运气或由于继承了一位无名但却有钱的亲戚的遗产而一夜暴富。此人然后加入一个品酒俱乐部，并购买当地爱乐乐团和歌剧院的季票。虽然此君对酒、乐队或歌剧一窍不通，但他(她)却竭力将自己表现为有文化修养的人，仅仅因为他(她)现在很有钱。通过介入这些社会群体，此人力图将自己界定为社会精英，虽然现在唯一的区分是，这人极其有钱，而实际上他(她)与这些群体内的其他成员格格不入。在此情形中，通过认同某些社会群体而来进行自我界定，这与社会如何看待这个人仍然相去甚远。
另一方面，有些人则通过他们与某些社会群体的认同而明白无误地来表明他们是何种人。在某个甚为基本的层面上，青少年会基于他们与某些帮派成员或帮派理念的认同感而参加某些帮派。通过展示与众不同的认别性纹身图案或某些颜色，这些人明确表明他们是谁，以及他们代表着什么。某些宗教团体也会赋予其成员以某个明白无误的身份。加入诸如塔利班一类的伊斯兰原教旨主义团体或者正统派犹太教组织标志着其成员普遍共有的某种身份。像"绿色和平"以及"全国妇女组织"等政治团体也在就某个个体成员的身份作出某种陈述。在所有这些情形中，个体的自我感受，以及他人对其所形成的看法，二者可能甚为近似。这些类型的组织诉诸于一个人极为基本的价值观，而加入这样的一种组织可能就成为这个人向世界表明"我就是这样一个人"的一种方式。
加入其他类别的组织可能表明，但也不一定表明一个人的自我认同。例如，成为共和党还是民主党成员，这可能只与你父母属于哪个政党有关。与特定一群朋友在一起，这可能只意味着你只喜欢该群体中的一个人，或者因为你除此之外无所事事。这与你的自我认同毫无关系。属于这些群体的人并非必定出于认同的目的而属于任一社会群体。这可能只是一种权宜之计而已。
至于我们是否主要通过与社会群体的联系而来表明我们的身份，这取决于个人以及所涉及的特定社会群体。即使个人或社会群体得以被判明，我们还有待于去确定，一个人加入某一社会群体，究竟是出于自我认同的内在目的呢，还是为了将其个人形象烙在他人心头。
GRE Issue写作范文详细解析相关文章：
