|
很负责的说，这个资料不是一般的烂
如下：
Students should wear uniforms to school. Do you agree or not? Use specific reasons and examples to support your idea.
Uniforms is a controversial issue nowadays, for more and more schools force their students to wear uniforms every day. When seeing a sea of students all with tiring expressions and exactly the same clothes, I can’t help but ask, is uniform really a sign of unification as its name suggests? What do students truly benefit from this “compulsory sense of unity”?
It’s indisputable that middle school students are experiencing the most fascinating period of life, a time when the consciousness of beauty should have been promoted. What they really want is a stage to display their individuality and to demonstrate their unique existence, but not to be treated like machinery which was brought about by institutionalization. It’s their unalienable right to choose what to wear and realize their own values within effective guidance, but not to be misled to a wrong conception that being even a little bit different from others is uneasy.
Secondly, wearing the same uniform curtails the freedom of these young people. In this modern and civilized society, democracy and freedom are being discussed in every corner of the world. Isn’t it a paradox that we are trying to liberate all humans, while confining our children? Let’s learn to accept the fact that they are actually victimized by our unnecessary concerns.
Finally, some people may argue that wearing uniforms to school helps to break down the barriers between different socio-economic groups. But the point is that, we can prevent them from being hurt when they are at school, then how will they react when learning inequalities later in life? So it’s no use finding an excuse any more, for the policy of wearing the same clothes is absolutely not the real solution to this problem.
The sense of commitment, affiliation and responsibility for one’s school is deeply rooted in heart. Uniform is a certain product of a certain age. As the society progressed, it’s sensible to desert school uniforms, all for good of our next generation.
Environment: In your country, is there more need for land to be left in its natural condition or to be developed for housing and industry?
Land problem is currently of great concern to the nation, to the world, and to human beings. Because of the scarcity of the land, it is a difficult issue for any government to decide, whether to leave it in its natural condition, or to develop it for housing and industry.
The first thing we have to pay attention is that: the era. In the 15th century, the discovery of the new continent was definitely a brilliant victory for human history. In the 18th century, the Western Movement was a landmark for the constructions of early America. It represents the core spirit of a nation to exploit the unknown and to conquer the desolation. Even in the early days of new China, people who moved to the northeast all had a great devotion and self-sacrifice for their beloved motherland.
However, the old conviction of boldness fails to apply to today’s practical conditions, for everything has changed. In China, it is no doubt that more land should be left in its natural condition rather than developed for housing and industry no matter how the population has expanded. There might be a growing need for more land with the increase of population, but we should never destroy the scarce remaining land which is the foundation for the future.
To solve this problem essentially, all of us feel obliged to control the population. And at the same time, we must use the exploited land sensibly and effectively. Only in this way, can we achieve our historical task to inherit this precious gift from our ancestors and pass it on to our next generation successfully.
Media pay too much attention on the privacy of famous people. Do you agree or disagree? Use specific reasons and illustrations to support your idea.
Oscar Wilde once said, “Modern journalism justifies its own existence by the great Darwinian principle of the survival of the fittest. It might contain a little bit of subjectiveness and sarcasm in this generalization, but it reflects the true phenomenon to a certain extent for a simple reason that we do get much more interesting stuff than useful intelligence from what we daily see and hear.
Any time we turn on television or unfold a newspaper, the first series of pictures probably are programs of the current affairs of celebrities. Even the illness of a star’s daughter’s cat will be “sensational” news on tomorrow’s front page. What for?
Media are by all means the bridge which connects the public to the world around. They are of vital importance, for it’s the essential and direct way we acquire general information. As the anchor of spiritual construction in modern society, it is their unshirkable responsibility to guide people to pursue higher mental satiation. In this sense, it’s meaningless and truly vulgar to peep into the privacy of famous people.
On the other hand, we multitude have to bear in mind: if we showed no interest in the affairs of celebrities, if there weren’t a human nature called an aimless curiosity about the few elites we ultimately worship, then it would be totally pointless for the media to capture the privacy with a vain attempt.
In conclusion, the attitudes of spectators and the misleading function of media both bring about the shameful condition that certain groups of people are losing their sacred privacy. It’s reasonable to have admiration in a sensible way which symbolizes our positive gesture towards life, but we might as well get rid of this “peeping” habit and finally, obtain the authentic tranquility from our own souls and life.
When famous people give their opinions, many people listen. Should we pay attention to those remarks?
When Tom Cruise once appeared in a TV program, he was too excited so he jumped up and down the couch. Later “jump the couch” was adopted in the American dictionary for slang. This is a bit exaggerating, but it definitely reflects the fact that when famous people give their opinions, many people listen. But, should we pay attention to these remarks or actions?
Firstly, famous people are “famous”, for they have one or few aspects that exceed common people. Like Albert Einstein once said, “I think and think for months, for years, ninety-nine times the conclusion false, but the hundredth time I am right.” As a brilliant scientist, he speaks of the right attitudes towards science and inspires countless people to fight for the truth. Hollywood actors or actresses, they may talk about their dressing styles or skin cares on magazine. These are all advice that we might as well take, for real life is not just serious academic things but also the satisfaction of living.
But the point is that, celebrities are not perfect role models for the public. Once I heard a story about Einstein, saying that he nearly got into the water when he once harass ed a young lady and got refused when they were in a boat in a park. Is Einstein evil somehow? No! He’s just being human. Then is it wrong to harass ladies? Yes. But all humans make mistakes. Celebrities are experts in certain areas but not all. In some other fields, they should even learn from us.
Generally, there are two extremes when talking about celebrities: the public are either too critical or too superstitious. Objectively, both of the attitudes are unnecessary. As a Chinese saying which generalizes this situation the best goes: to take in the good, while to get rid of the bad.
When you move to another country, you prefer to follow the customs or keep your own? Use specific reasons and details to explain your choice.
For most of the time, immigrants are always on the arduous journey in seeking for the sense of cultural belongings. When you move to thoroughly new surroundings, you may be so perplexed where food, language even moral values have changed that the nostalgia in your deepest heart increases ultimately. Or, you may be so curious by this exotic and stimulating environment that you just happily forget about your roots. From my personal angle alone, either is fatal.
For the former situation, you can never get involved in the new society. Like a few Pakistanis I saw in Australia. They are salesmen and all their vocabulary of English is less than fifty. Yes they can earn a living by their perspiration, but they never get the chance to enjoy the privilege of British society.
Secondly, if you are over “socially-adaptable”, you forget about your origins and backgrounds the day you step into the new world. Then it’ll be a truly loss, like a tree without roots or a man without soul.
A widely-respectable director, newly Oscar prize winner, An Lee sets up an excellent example in this aspect. He demonstrates the maximum a Chinese can achieve from abroad. As a person from the Far East, he now stands in the very centre of American film industry. This is a legendary story. When being asked what is the key to his success, surprisingly, he said, “Never forget about your roots.”
I have always held the belief that the appreciation of hard work and talent is the common character of any tolerant national identity. Therefore, it is not a paradox to follow the customs while keeping your own in your heart
|
发帖
雷达卡
328776.doc
(39 KB, 需要: 10 个论坛币)
扫码
京公网安备 11010802022788号
论坛法律顾问：王进律师
知识产权保护声明
免责及隐私声明
