《2.北美范文issue.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《2.北美范文issue.doc（189页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、Issue 1We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. Do we learn more from people whose ideas we share in common than from those whose ideas contradict ours? The speaker claims so,
2、for the reason that disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning. I concede that undue discord can impede learning. Otherwise, in my view we learn far more from discourse and debate with those whose ideas we oppose than from people whose ideas are in accord with our own. Admittedly, under some
3、 circumstances disagreement with others can be counterproductive to learning. For supporting examples one need look no further than a television set. On todays typical television or radio talk show, disagreement usually manifests itself in meaningless rhetorical bouts and shouting matches, during wh
4、ich opponents vie to have their own message heard, but have little interest either in finding common ground with or in acknowledging the merits of the opponents viewpoint. Understandably, neither the combatants nor the viewers learn anything meaningful. In fact, these battles only serve to reinforce
5、 the predispositions and biases of all concerned. The end result is that learning is impeded. Disagreement can also inhibit learning when two opponents disagree on fundamental assumptions needed for meaningful discourse and debate. For example, a student of paleontology learns little about the evolu
6、tion of an animal species under current study by debating with an individual whose religious belief system precludes the possibility of evolution to begin with. And, economics and finance students learn little about the dynamics of a laissez-faire system by debating with a socialist whose view is th
7、at a centralized power should control all economic activity. Aside from the foregoing two provisos, however, I fundamentally disagree with the speakers claim. Assuming common ground between two rational and reasonable opponents willing to debate on intellectual merits, both opponents stand to gain m
8、uch from that debate. Indeed it is primarily through such debate that human knowledge advances, whether at the personal, community, or global level. At the personal level, by listening to their parents rationale for their seemingly oppressive rules and policies teenagers can learn how certain behavi
9、ors naturally carry certain undesirable consequences. At the same time, by listening to their teenagers concerns about autonomy and about peer pressures parents can learn the valuable lesson that effective parenting and control are two different things. At the community level, through dispassionate
10、dialogue an environmental activist can come to understand the legitimate economic concerns of those whose jobs depend on the continued profitable operation of a factory. Conversely, the latter might stand to learn much about the potential public health price to be paid by ensuring job growth and a l
11、ow unemployment rate. Finally, at the global level, two nations with opposing political or economic interests can reach mutually beneficial agreements by striving to understand the others legitimate concerns for its national security, its political sovereignty, the stability of its economy and curre
12、ncy, and so forth. In sum, unless two opponents in a debate are each willing to play on the same field and by the same rules, I concede that disagreement can impede learning. Otherwise, reasoned discourse and debate between people with opposing viewpoints is the very foundation upon which human know
13、ledge advances. Accordingly, on balance the speaker is fundamentally correct. Issue 4No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study. I strongly agree with the assertion that significant advances in knowledge require expertise
14、from various fields. The world around us presents a seamless web of physical and anthropogenic forces, which interact in ways that can be understood only in the context of a variety of disciplines. Two examples that aptly illustrate this point involve the fields of cultural anthropology and astronom
15、y. Consider how a cultural anthropologists knowledge about an ancient civilization is enhanced not only by the expertise of the archeologist-who unearths the evidence-but ultimately by the expertise of biochemists, geologists, linguists, and even astronomers. By analyzing the hair, nails, blood and
16、bones of mummified bodies, biochemists and forensic scientists can determine the life expectancy, general well-being, and common causes of death of the population. These experts can also ensure the proper preservation of evidence found at the archeological site. A geologist can help identify the source and age of the materials used for tools, weapons, and structures-thereby enabling the anthropologist to extrapolate about the civilizations economy, trades and
