【正文】 s attempts during the 1920s to not only control the direction and the goals of its scientists39。s cultural traditions。 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 cities 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 normative 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 unrepresentative 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, cultureby which I chiefly mean the fine artshas always depended primarily on the patronage of private individuals and businesses, and not on the government. The Medicis, a powerful banking family of Renaissance Italy, supported artists Michelangelo and Raphael. During the 20th Century the primary source of cultural support were private foundations established by industrial magnates Carnegie, Mellon, Rockefeller and Getty. And tomorrow cultural support will e from our new technology and media mogulsincluding 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 primary breeding ground and sanctuaries for a nation39。s health and safety would be promised as a result. Withholding information might also be necessary to avoid public panic. While such cases are rare, they do occur occasionally. For example, during the first few hours of the new millennium the . Pentagon39。s youngsters would be worse off as a result of their ignorance about the traditions, values, and cultural contributions of all the people whose citizenship they share. Finally, it seems to me that imposing a uniform national curriculum would serve to undermine the authority of parents over their own children, to even a greater extent than uniform state laws currently do. Admittedly, laws requiring parents to ensure that their children receive an education that meets certain minimum standards are well justified, for the reasons mentioned earlier. However, when such standards are imposed by the state rather than at the munity level, parents are left with far less power to participate meaningfully in the decisionmaking process. This problem would only be exacerbated were these decisions left exclusively to federal regulators. In the final analysis, homogenization of elementary and secondary education would amount to a doubleedged sword. While it would serve as an insurance policy against a future populated with illiterates and ignoramuses, at the same time it might serve to obliterate cultural diversity and tradition. The optimal federal approach, in my view, is a balanced one that imposes a basic curriculum yet leaves the rest up to each stateor better yet, to each munity. Issue 7 The video camera provides such an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life that it has bee a more important form of documentation than written records. According to the speaker, the video recording is a more important means of document hag contemporary life than a written record because video recordings are more accurate and convincing. Although I agree that a video provides a more objective and accurate record of an event39。s legitimate concerns for its national security, its political sovereignty, the stability of its economy and currency, 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 knowledge advances. Accordingly, on balance the speaker is fundamentally correct. Issue 4 No 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 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 astronomy. Consider how a cultural anthropologist39。 `4 g Good luck to those who will take GRE tommorow. _39。 ( r: U, \ u) ( Zamp。 | j 。其他的文章就照我下面的方法來(lái)進(jìn)行，學(xué)其思想，背精華句子。但是這畢竟是北美人寫(xiě)出的，里面的 語(yǔ)言 是地道的書(shū)面語(yǔ)言，對(duì)于沒(méi)有思想的同志還可以直接借鑒它的思想。 k4 ~ f 我敢說(shuō)，用我這版本的北美范文可以大大節(jié)省大家學(xué)北美范文的時(shí)間，直接把握它的精華思想，精華語(yǔ)言和精華例子。） 學(xué)北美范文學(xué)什么，怎么學(xué)？ 一句話(huà)，借其思想，學(xué)其表達(dá)。尤其注意當(dāng)看到它精彩的名詞或動(dòng)詞短語(yǔ)后自己要順手在一草稿文檔里敲一遍。 \( b4 c! Damp。s claim. Assuming mon ground between two rational and reasonable opponents willing to debate on intellectual merits, both opponents stand to gain much from that debate. Indeed it is primarily through such debate that human knowledge advances, whether at the personal, mun