下面是小编整理的GREIssue优秀，本文共12篇，欢迎您阅读分享借鉴，希望对您有所帮助。本文原稿由网友“wiselyjs”提供。
篇1：GREIssue优秀
Most cultures encourage individuals to sacrifice a large part of their own personalities in order to be like other people.Thus ,most people are afraid to think or behave differently because they do not want to be excluded.
The speaker claims that most cultures encourage conformity at the expense of individuality, and as a result most people conform for fear of being excluded.While i find the second prong of this dual claim well support overall by empirical evidence,I take exception with the first prong;aside from the cultures created by certain oppressive political regimes,no culture need “encourage” its members to conform to prevailing ways of thought and behavior;in fact ,all the evidence shows that cultures attempt to do just the opposite.
As a threshold matter ,it is necessary to distinguish between conformity that an oppressive ruling state imposes on its own culture and conformity in a free democratic society.In the former case , people are not only encouraged but actually coerced into suppressing individual personality; and indeed these people are afraid to think and behave differently-but not for fear of being excluded but rather for fear of punishment and persecution by the state.the modern Communist and Fascist regimes are fitting examples.With respect to free democratic societies, it might be tempting to dismiss the speaker's dual claim out of hand .After all ,true democratic states are predicted on individual freedoms-of choice ,speech,expression,religion,and so forth.Ostensibly ,these freedoms serve to promote individuality,even non-conformity,in our personas,our lifestyles ,and our opinioons and attitudes.
Yet,one look at any democratic society reveals a high degree of conformity among its members.Every society has its own bundle of values,customs ,and mores which most of its members share.Admittedly,within any culture springs up various subcultures which try to distinguish themselves by their own distinct values,customs, and mores.In the U.S,for instance, African-American have developed a distinct dialect,known as Ebonics,and a distinct body language and attitude which affords them a strong sub-cultural identity of their own.Yet , the undeniable fact is that humans,given the actual freedom to either conform or not conform, choose to think and behave in ways similar to most people in their social group-however we define that group.
Nor is there much empirical evidence of any cultural agenda,either overt or covert, to encourage conformity in thought and behavior among the members of any culture.To the contrary,the predominant message in most cultures is that people should cultivate their individuality.Consider,for example,the enduring and nearly ubiquitous icon of the ragged individualist,who charts his or her own course,bucks the trend,and achieves notoriety through individual creativity,imagination, invention,or entrepreneurship.Even our systems of higher education seem to encourage individualism by promoting and cultivating critical and independent thought among its students.
Yet,all the support for forging one's one unique persona,career,lifestyle,opinions ,and even belief system,turns out to be hype.In the final analysis,most people choose to conform. And understandably so ;after all ,it is human nature to distrust,and even shun,others who are too difference from us .Thus to embrace rugged individualism is to risk becoming an outcast,the natural consquence of which is to limit one's socioeconomic and career opportunities.This prospect suffices to quell our yearning to be different ;thus the speaker is correct that most of us resign ourselves to conformity for fear of being left behind by our peers.Admittedly ,few cultures are without rugged individualists-the exceptional aritsts ,inventors,explorers,social reformers,and entrepreneurs who embrace their autonomy of thought and behavior,then test their limits.And paradoxically,it is the achievements of these notable non-conformists that are responsible for most cultural evolution and progress.Yet such notables are few and far between in what is otherwise a world of insecure,even fearful,cultural conformists.
To sum up,the speaker is correct that most people choose to conform rather than behave and think in ways that run contraty to their culture's norms,and that fear of being exduded lies at the heart of this choice.Yet, no culture need encourage conformity;most humans recognize that there is safety of numbers ,and as a result freely choose conformity over the risks,and potential rewards ,of non-conformity.
篇2：GREIssue优秀
“There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.”
According to this statement, each person has a duty to not only obey just laws but also disobey unjust ones. In my view this statement is too extreme, in two respects. First, it wrongly categorizes any law as either just or unjust; and secondly, it recommends an ineffective and potentially harmful means of legal reform.
First, whether a law is just or unjust is rarely a straightforward issue. The fairness of any law depends on one's personal value system. This is especially true when it comes to personal freedoms. Consider, for example, the controversial issue of abortion. Individuals with particular religious beliefs tend to view laws allowing mothers an abortion choice as unjust, while individuals with other value systems might view such laws as just.
The fairness of a law also depends on one's personal interest, or stake, in the legal issue at hand. After all, in a democratic society the chief function of laws is to strike a balance among competing interests. Consider, for example, a law that regulates the toxic effluents a certain factory can emit into a nearby river. Such laws are designed chiefly to protect public health. But complying with the regulation might be costly for the company; the factory might be forced to lay off employees or shut down altogether, or increase the price of its products to compensate for the cost of compliance. At stake are the respective interests of the company's owners, employees, and customers, as well as the opposing interests of the region's residents whose health and safety are impacted. In short, the fairness of the law is subjective, depending largely on how one's personal interests are affected by it.
The second fundamental problem with the statement is that disobeying unjust laws often has the opposite affect of what was intended or hoped for. Most anyone would argue, for instance,that our federal system of income taxation is unfair in one respect or another. Yet the end result of widespread disobedience, in this case tax evasion, is to perpetuate the system. Free-riders only compel the government to maintain tax rates at high levels in order to ensure adequate revenue for the various programs in its budget. 14
Yet another fundamental problem with the statement is that by justifying a violation of one sort of law we find ourselves on a slippery slope toward sanctioning all types of illegal behavior, including egregious criminal conduct. Returning to the abortion example mentioned above, a person strongly opposed to the freedom-of-choice position might maintain that the illegal blocking of access to an abortion clinic amounts to justifiable disobedience. However, it is a precariously short leap from this sort of civil disobedience to physical confrontations with clinic workers, then to the infliction of property damage, then to the bombing of the clinic and potential murder.
In sum, because the inherent function of our laws is to balance competing interests, reasonable people with different priorities will always disagree about the fairness of specific laws. Accordingly, radical action such as resistance or disobedience is rarely justified merely by one's subjective viewpoint or personal interests. And in any event, disobedience is never justifiable when the legal rights or safety of innocent people are jeopardized as a result.
篇3：GREIssue优秀
“Anyone can make things bigger and more complex. What requires real effort and courage is to move in the opposite direction---in other words, to make things as simple as possible.”
Whether making things simple requires greater effort and courage than making them bigger and more complex depends on the sort of effort and courage. Indisputably, the many complex technological marvels that are part-and-parcel of our Lives today are the result of the extraordinary cumulative efforts of our engineers, entrepreneurs, and others. And, such achievements always call for the courage to risk failing in a large way. Yet, humans seem naturally driven to make things bigger and more complex; thus refraining from doing so, or reversing this natural process, takes considerable effort and courage of a different sort, as discussed below.
The statement brings immediately to mind the ever-growing and increasingly complex digital world. Today's high-tech firms seem compelled to boldly go to whatever effort is required to devise increasingly complex products, for the ostensible purpose of staying ahead of their competitors. Yet, the sort of effort and courage to which the statement refers is a different one--bred of vision, imagination, and a willingness to forego near term profits for the prospect of making lasting contributions. Surely, a number of entrepreneurs and engineers today are mustering that courage, and are making the effort to create far simpler, yet more elegant, technologies and applications, which will truly make our lives simpler in sharp contrast to what computer technology has delivered to us so far.
Lending even more credence to the statement is the so-called “big government” phenomenon. Human societies have a natural tendency to create unwieldy bureaucracies, a fitting example of which is the U.S. tax-law system. The Intemal Revenue Code and its accompanying Treasury Regulations have grown so voluminous and complex that many certified accountants and tax attorneys admit that they cannot begin to understand it all.
Admittedly, this system has grown only through considerable effort on the part of all three branches of the federal government, not to mention the efforts of many special interest groups.
Yet, therein lies the statement's credibility. It requires great effort and courage on the part of a legislator to risk alienating special interest groups, thereby risking reelection prospects, by standing on principle for a simpler tax system that is less costly to administer and better serves the interests of most taxpayers.
Adding further credibility to the statement is the tendency of most people to complicate their personal lives--a tendency that seems especially strong in today's age of technology and consumerism. The greater our mobility, the greater our number of destinations each day; the more time-saving gadgets we use, the more activities we try to pack into our day; and with readier access to information we try to assimilate more of it each day. I am hard-pressed to think of one person who has ever exclaimed to me how much effort and courage it has taken to complicate his or her life in these respects. In contrast, a certain self-restraint and courage of conviction are both required to eschew modern conveniences, to simplify one'sdaily schedule, and to establish and adhere to a simple plan for the use of one's time and money.
In sum, whether we are building computer networks, government agencies, or personal lifestyles, great effort and courage are required to make things simple, or to keep them that way. Moreover, because humans na~traUy tend to make things big and complex, it arguably requires more effort and courage to move in the opposite direction. In the final analysis, making things simple---or keeping them that way--takes a brand of effort born of reflection and restraint rather than sheer exertion, and a courage character and conviction rather than unbridled ambition.
篇4：GREIssue优秀
“Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on the ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purpose. In such situation, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that comtemporary needs can be served;”
The speaker asserts that wherever a practical, utilitarian need for new buildings arises this need should take precedence over our conflictiong interest in preserving historic buildings as a record of our past. In my view, however, which interest should take precedence should be determined on a cast-by-cast basis-and should account not only for practical and historic consideration but also aethetic ones.
In determing whether to raze an older building, planners should of course consider tht community's current and anticipated utilitarain needs. For example, if an additional hospital is needed to adequately serve the health-care needs of a fast-growing community, this compelling interest might very well outweigh any interest in preserving a historic building that sits on the proposed site. Or if additional parking is needed to ensure the economic servival of a city's downtown district, this interest might take precedence over the historic value of an old structure that stands in the way of a parking structure. On the other hand, if the need is mainly for more office space, in some cases an architecturally appropriate add-on or annex to an older building might serve just as well as razing the old building to make way for a new one. Of course, an expensive retrofit might not be worthwhile if no amount of retrofitting would meet the need.
Competing with a community's utilitarian needs is an interest preserving the historical record. Again, the weight of this interest should be determined on a case-by-case basis. Perhaps an older building uniquely represents a bygone area, or once played a central role in the city's history as a municipal structure. Or perhaps the building once served as the home of a founding family or other significant historical figure, or as the location of an important historical event. Any of these scenarios might justify saving the building at the expense of the practical needs of the community. On the other hand, if several older buildings represent the same historical era just as effectively, or if the building's history is an unremarkable one, then the historic value of the building might pale in comparison to the value of a new structure that meets a compelling practical need.
Also competing with a community's utilitarian needs is the aesthetic and architectural value of the building itself-apart from historical events with which it might be associated. A building might be one of only a few that represents a certain architectural style. Or it might be especially beautiful, perhaps as a result of the craftsmanship and materials employed in its construction-which might be cost-prohibitive to replicate today. Even retrofitting the building to accommodate current needs might undermine its aesthetic as well as historic value, by altering its appearance and architectural integrity. Of course it is planners should strive to account for aesthetic value nonetheless.
In sum, whether to raze an older building in order to construct a new one should never be determined indiscriminately. Instead, planners should make such decision on a case-by-case basis, weighing the community's practical needs against the building's historic and aesthetic value.
篇5：GREIssue高分
“Students should memorize facts only after they have studied the ideas, trends, and concepts that help explain those facts. Students who have learned only facts have learned very little.”
The speaker makes a threshold claim that students who learn only facts learn very little, then condudes that students should always learn about concepts, ideas, and trends before they memorize facts. While I wholeheartedly agree with the threshold claim, the condusion unfairly generalizes about the learning process. In fact, following the speaker's advice would actually impede the learning of concepts and ideas, as well as impeding the development of insightful and useful new ones.
Turning first to the speaker's threshold daim, I strongly agree that ifwe learn only facts we learn very little. Consider the task of memorizing the periodic table of dements, which any student can memorize without any knowledge of chemistry, or that the table relates to chemistry. Rote memorization of the table amounts to a bit of mental exercise-an opportunity to practice memorization techniques and perhaps learn some new ones. Otherwise, the student has learned very little about chemical dements, or about anything for that matter.
As for the speaker's ultimate claim, I concede that postponing the memorization of facts until after one leams ideas and concepts holds certain advantages. With a conceptual framework already in place a student is better able to understand the meaning of a fact, and to appreciate its significance. As a result, the student is more likely to memorize the fact to begin with, and less likely to forget it as time passes. Moreover, in my observation students whose first goal is to memorize facts tend to stop there--for whatever reason. It seems that by focusing on facts first students risk equating the learning process with the assimilation of trivia; in turn, students risk learning nothing of much use in solving real world problems.
Conceding that students must learn ideas and concepts, as well as facts relating to them, in order to learning anything meaningful, I nevertheless disagree that the former should always precede the latter--for three reasons. In the first place, I see know reason why memorizing a fact cannot precede learning about its meaning and significance--as long as the student does not stop at rote memorization. Consider once again our hypothetical chemistry student. The speaker might advise this student to first learn about the historical trends leading to the discovery of the elements, or to learn about the concepts of altering chemical compounds to achieve certain reactions--before studying the periodic table. Having no familiarity with the basic vocabulary of chemistry, which includes the informarion in the periodic table, this student would come away from the first two lessons bewildered and confused in other words, having learned little.
In the second place, the speaker misunderstands the process by which we learn ideas and concepts, and by which we develop new ones. Consider, for example, how economics students learn about the relationship between supply and demand, and the resulting concept of market equilibrium, and of surplus and shortage. Learning about the dynamics of supply and demand involves (1) entertaining a theory, and perhaps even formulating a new one, (2) testing hypothetical scenarios against the theory, and (3) examining real-world facts for the purpose of confirming, refuting, modifying, or qualifying the theory. But which step should come first? The speaker would have us follow steps 1 through 3 in that order. Yet, theories, concepts, and ideas rarely materialize out of thin air; they generally emerge from empirical observations--i.e., facts. Thus the speaker's notion about how we should learn concepts and ideas gets the learning process backwards.
In the third place, strict adherence to the speaker's advice would surely lead to illconceived ideas, concepts, and theories. Why? An idea or concept conjured up without the benefit of data amounts to little more than the conjurer's hopes and desires. Accordingly, conjurers will tend to seek out facts that support their prejudices and opinions, and overlook or avoid facts that refute them. One telling example involves theories about the center of the universe.
Understandably, we ego-driven humans would prefer that the universe revolve around us.
Early theories presumed so for this reason, and facts that ran contrary to this ego-driven theory were ignored, while observers of these facts were scorned and even vilified. In short, students who strictly follow the speaker's prescription are unlikely to contribute significantly to the advancement of knowledge.
To sum up, in a vacuum facts are meaningless, and only by filling that vacuum with ideas and concepts can students learn, by gaining useful perspectives and insights about facts. Yet,since facts are the very stuff from which ideas, concepts, and trends spring, without some facts students cannot learn much of anything. In the final analysis, then, students should learn facts right along with concepts, ideas, and trends.
篇6：GREIssue高分
The speaker asserts that rather than merely highlighting certain sensational events the media should provide complete coverage of more important events .While the speaker's assertion has merit from a normative standpoint,in the final analysis i find this assertion indefensible.
Upon first impression the speaker's claim seems quite compelling ,for two reasons.First ,without the benefit of a complete, unfiltered, and balanced account of a current evnets ,it is impossible to develop an informed and intelligent opinion about important social and political issue and , in turn, to contribute meaningfully to our democratic society ,which relies on broad participation in an ongoing debate about such issues to steer a proper course.the end result of our being a largely uninformed people is that we relegate the most important decisions to a handful of legislators,jurists ,and executives who may not know what is best for us.
Second,by focusing on the “sensational”-by which i take the speaker to mean comparatively shocking, entertaining , and titillating events which easily catch one's attention-from trashy talk shows and local news broadcasts to The National Enquixer and People Magazine.This trend dearly serves to undermine a society's collective sensibilities and renders a society's members more vulnerable to demagoguery; thus we should all abhor and resist the trend.
However,for serveral reasons i find the media's current trend toward highlights and the sensational to be justifiable.First ,the world is becoming an increasingly eventful place;thus with each passing year it becomes a more onerous task for the media to attempt full news coverage.Second ,we are becoming an increasingly busy society.The average U.S.worker spends nearly 60 hours per week at work now;and in most families both spouses work. Compare this startlingly busy pace to the pace a generation ago,when one bread-winner worked just over 40 hours per week.We have far less time today for news, so highlights must suffice .third,the media does in fact provide full coverage of important events;anyone can find such coverage beyond their newspaper's front page,on daily PBS news programs, and on the Internet.I would wholeheartedly agree with the speaker if the sensational highlights were all the media were willing or permited to provide;this scenario would be tantamount to thought control on a mass scale and would serve to undermine our free society.However , i am aware of no evidence of any trend in this direction.To the contrary,in my observation the media are informing us more fully than ever before;we just need to seek out that information.
On balance,then, the speaker's claim is not behave-regardless of its merits from a normative standpoint begs the question.
篇7：GREIssue高分
Long black coat, large sunglasses, face buried deeply down in the turned-up collar and hurried steps denying any attempt to stop them---no, don't be alarmed; this is not a criminal at large, but only a public figure escaping the voyeuristic eyes and cameras of omnipresent tabloid reporters.
Yet it is only one side of the coin. When you come back home, what greets you in newspapers, on TV or on the Internet, are a sargasso sea of so-called exclusive news telling tales about privacies of public figures. Not only tabloids are selling what they find by voyeurism, public figures, especially singers, movie stars and such alike in show businesses, are also themselves brandishing their underwear, so as to attract the eyes and attention of the public and to remain in the spotlight.
It is a human nature to have the propensity to pry into other people's lives, especially the private lives of famous public figures, for their public lives are all so shining, so different from those of ours, that we cannot help but want to know what they are really like in real daily life and if they too have such sorrows and happiness as those common to us. By peeping into the private lives of public figures, our curiosity is satisfied, our distance from those “shining guys shortened”, and our self-assurance secured by knowing that those “shining guys”, too, are no more than ordinary humans.
Whereas those “shining guys”, on the one hand, detest to be mixed up with ordinary human beings for they are naturally arrogant and supercilious--the inevitable by-products of fame and fortune--and strive to sustain their status and mystery, on the other hand, they have to please the public, for they know quite clearly that attention of the public is the very basis of their fame and fortune, whatever the causes of that attention. Thus, having a private life or not having a private life should not be a big bother to singers and movie stars. Actually, they sometimes are themselves selling their privacies in exchange for fame and fortune.
Yet for politicians, it is a different and a little bit complicated story. As leaders of our government, surely they have more significant responsibilities to shoulder and their behaviors matter more to the society and to every one of us. Considering the onerous tasks of politicians, should we, the public, and the mass media leave them alone and let them concentrate on their job, or thinking of the interests of the public, should the mass media act as a supervisor to those politicians and let the public be informed of their misdeeds?
As officials elected by the public and paid for by the public, politicians should undoubtedly under the supervision of the public and answer for the public. And the public, surely enough, have the right to ask for honest dealings of all kinds of issues of the government. When a politician's private affairs, such as using what power he has to secure a higher position and a higher salary for his girl friend as the Director of the World Bank did, undermine the interests of the public, the public have the right to know such scandals and reconsider their faith been laid on the politician.
But what complicates the problem is that mass media, a commercial institution, is not always so just and serves only the interests of the public and the society--its shareholders' interests have the first and foremost priority. As a result, reporters all too often pry into the private lives of politicians, trying to dig out something provocative that could serve to stimulate the public's appetite and skyrocket the sales of the newspaper.
Private life of a politician is also a vital card in the hands of his opponents. During the presidential election, private lives of presidential candidates have been snooped, exposed, exaggerated, distorted, fabricated and attacked. President Clinton's affair with L. Monica almost costs him his presidency, while helps start his wife, Hilary Clinton's political career.
All these cause pressure on politicians. Concededly, moderate pressure can help politicians remain high-spirited, discreet and prudent with their behaviors, too much pressure surely strains their nerves too much and thus undermines their energy and spirit, and therefore their working efficiency.
However, a politician also takes advantage of his own private life to establish a wanted image of himself, to win him the critical vote, or to convey a particular political gesture. For instance, the former president of Argentina, Peron married 26-year old Evita, an actress who came from the lower rung of the social ladder, to indicate his determination to stand by the poor and fight for their rights, and this private affair won Peron hearts and faith of millions of peasants and, consequently, the presidency of Argentina.
Thus, private lives of public figures are a two-edged sword--proper use of it could bring magnificent benefits for them, while abuse of it could leave them cut and injured, even fatally.
篇8：GREIssue高分
“The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that everyone has more leisure time.”
The speaker contends that technology's primary goal should be to increase our efficiency for the purpose of affording us more leisure time. I concede that technology has enhanced our efficiency as we go about our everyday lives. Productivity software helps us plan and coordinate projects; intranets, the Internet, and satellite technology make us more efficient messengers; and technology even helps us prepare our food and access entertainment more efficiently. Beyond this concession, however, I find the speaker's contention indefensible from both an empirical and a normative standpoint.
The chief reason for my disagreement lies in the empirical proof: with technological advancement comes diminished leisure time. In 1960 the average U.S. family included only one breadwinner, who worked just over 40 hours per week. Since then the average work week has increased steadily to nearly 60 hours today; and in most families there are now two breadwinners. What explains this decline in leisure despite increasing efficiency that new technologies have brought about? I contend that technology itself is the culprit behind the decline. We use the additional free time that technology affords us not for leisure but rather for work. As computer technology enables greater and greater office productivity it also raises our employers' expectations--or demands--for production. Further technological advances breed still greater efficiency and, in turn, expectations. Our spiraling work load is only exacerbated by the competitive business environment in which nearly all of us work today. Moreover, every technological advance demands our time and attention in order to learn how to use the new technology. Time devoted to keeping pace with technology depletes time for leisure activities.
I disagree with the speaker for another reason as well: the suggestion that technology's chief goal should be to facilitate leisure is simply wrongheaded. There are far more vital concerns that technology can and should address. Advances in bio-technology can help cure and prevent diseases; advances in medical technology can allow for safer, less invasire diagnosis and treatment; advances in genetics can help prevent birth defects; advances in engineering and chemistry can improve the structural integrity of our buildings, roads, bridges and vehicles; information technology enables education while communication technology facilitates global participation in the democratic process. In short, health, safety, education, and freedom--and not leisure--are the proper final objectives of technology. Admittedly, advances in these areas sometimes involve improved efficiency; yet efficiency is merely a means to these more important ends.
In sum, I find indefensible the speaker's suggestion that technology's value lies chiefly in the efficiency and resulting leisure time it can afford us. The suggestion runs contrary to the overwhelming evidence that technology diminishes leisure time, and it wrongly places leisure ahead of goals such as health, safety, education, and freedom as technology's ultimate aims.
GRE Issue高分范文
篇9：GREissue写作
GRE issue写作范文：冒险与计划
题目：
Success in any realm of life comes more often from taking chances or risks than from careful and cautious planning.
在生活的所有领域中，成功往往更多的来自于把握机会或者冒险而不是通过仔细谨慎的计划。
正文：
The speaker asserts people are more likely to attain success when taking chances or risks than planning carefully and cautiously. However, after comparing the characteristics of careful planning and taking chances, I strongly hold that they are of the same importance in the pursuit of success.
In competitive sports, while making appropriate training plans and effective competition strategies constitute necessary conditions of winning the matches, taking risks is almost inevitable when athletes or their coaches confront a sudden matter that might influence the course of a match and that has not been taken into consideration beforehand. In modern competitive sports, it is widely acknowledged that scientific and effective training contributes to athletes’ better performance during matches. Good competition strategies, on the other hand, resulting in the better allocation of physical force, better use of skills or the higher rate in scoring, also play a vital role.
However, when the star players of a soccer team or a basketball team are off the game or fail to implement their chief coach's strategic intention, leaving the whole team in adverseness, the coach faces the choice whether to substitute he/she or not. No doubt substituting a star player with a bench player means taking risk because the bench player may not perform as good as the star player and may make matters worse. If this happens, the substitution will incur discontentment of the players and critique from the team's fans, media and the boss. The capability of the coach may then be suspected and he/she may even be fired. Nevertheless, if the coach dares not to take the risk to substitute a poorly performed star player, his/her team will probably lose the game. Taking chances and risks is reasonable when one is dealing with something that has not been taken into consideration previously. So, in competitive sports, planning and risking are both necessary.
In academic fields, careful and cautious planning is required for large projects and application disciplines while revolutionary scientific breakthroughs are almost impossible without taking chances or risks. Before starting the research project on human genome, scientists had already made plans on the content and method of the research. They did not have to take any chances or risks because all they should do have already been carefully planned. There were no technical obstacles that had not been solved. Therefore, they just followed the plan step by step and accomplished the project in the end. As for significant scientific breakthroughs, they are the important discoveries and theories that disaccord, at least to some extent, with established principles or our intuitions, such as the Theory of Relativity and quantum mechanics. One has no choice but to take chances because established theories may not be applicable on the boundary of what is known and what is unknown. Only after being examined through experiments, practices and observations, can they be confirmed or belied. In a word, planning and taking chances or risks are different means for different levels of academic researches.
In the business world, cautious planning contributes to the long-term development of a company and at the same time, risking is imperative for a company to survive, develop and thrive in the highly competitive society. Planning carefully on inquiring market, training stuff and manufacturing products ensure a company's long-term development by keeping its profit increasing or at least not declining. On the other hand, taking risks, such as incorporating with another company, involving in the market fields that have already been occupied by other enterprises or involving in the market fields that are not considered so profitable, is also necessary because these may save the company from the adversity or help to set foot in new businesses. Clearly,in the business field, planning and risking complement each other.
To conclude, success in any realm of life comes equally from taking chances or risks and from careful and cautious planning. In most cases, they complement each other and pave the way towards success.
GRE Issue写作优秀实例：达到目标的手段
题目：
If a goal is worthy, then any means taken to attain it are justifiable.
只要值得，不择手段达到目的是合理的。
正文：
The speaker claim that if a goal if worthwhile, then any means taken to achieve this goal is justifiable. Although the assertion makes sense when we consider the underlying of this implication is that whatever the conditions, the natures of the endings deserve our effort wholehearted. But if we examine the broad meaning that this claim carries, we find this threshold statement suffer deficiencies from many aspects of consideration.
First let define the worthiness of a goal. How worthwhile and valuable a goal is lies not only in the subjective meditation and evaluation of an individual, we must consider the interactive influence exerted by this goal on others. For example, a country may consider the goal of achieving economic success and well being of its citizens to be worthwhile, but if we know they exploit cheap labor forces in third-world country,utilize scarce natural resources that being exported from poor countries, or dump low-cost goods in these countries, our morals reveal us the dark side of the goal and make it less worthwhile than it seems to be to its home people. On a personal level, a person’s food might be the others’ poison, so did the goal. Consider the ambition of
Napoleon, his ambitious goal is to conquer the whole European Continent, which considered by himself and many of his follows to be the most glorious plan they have ever made. But by resorting to wars, killings, and blood shedding, their sweet dream turn out to be the nightmare of people habituating in this continent. In a word, since no goal is set from a pure disinterested, impartial perspective, it is necessary to bear the interwoven relationship in mind before targeting at a certain goal. Even if a goal is worthwhile agreed by majority of people, we should consider cost-and-benefit side of things in an effort to obtaining an nonbiased, all-around point of view. Most people today agree that the exploration of outer space is a worthy goal considering the valuable research materials we would get from for our physics and medial experiment and weather forecast. What is more, due to the limit longevity of earth and the ever increasing of populations, we see high calls to find another habitat for our future generations. Even if all the advantages and benefits involved justify the worthiness of this goal, not all means taken would be considered as sensible and judicial. Since most pressing social problem such as AIDS prevention, poverty,environmental problems still in need of immediate attention and observation, we need to allocate most of our resources to tackle these problems. As a result, even if one way of achieving the breakthrough in out space exploration would be to devote all research staff and available resource to this project, we have to struggle a balance between the worthiness of a goal and the proper way to obtain this goal.
The above statement is welcomed and readily embraced by the new trend of practicality since in a society where personal achievement is highly valued, we look more to ending than means. That is to say, people tend to neglect and forgive their own wrongdoings or others’ wrongdoings in a sense that their goals are goodwill–intending and worthwhile. For one thing, for a personal, a society, or even a nation,even they consider things from a totally isolated or functional perspective, no matter how great achievement they obtain, they are selfish losers with nothing to be accomplished from the physiological point of view. In the second place, we observe too many cases where good intention result in total chaos derive not from the dirty tricks they construe but out of the improper means they take. Since the founding of
People’s Republic of China, under the leadership of Chairman Mao, China has undergone a reform in the area of economy, which is to implement planned economy. Mao’s intention is good, and his goal is to realize communalisms in this new country to short its economic gap with the western country in the shortest as possible. But without considering the properness of this means from the economic and social point of view, he threw china into years of economic regression and stillness. Ideas went contrary to our wills and intentions occasionally and thus make the consideration and full analyzes of the means to obtaining goals even pressing.
To sum up, I am against the speaker’s assertion since he neglects one important aspect of how to evaluate goals. To devote to a worth goal is justifiable and the effort instilled in this process deserve our accolade since it is always this power that push the society forward. But by neglecting the means of how to obtain these goals, we put ourselves in an embarrassing place of functionalists and opportunists. As a result, it is highly resulted to look from different perspectives to figure our where the true value of a goal lies and how to achieve it.
GRE Issue写作优秀实例：礼节和典礼
题目：
Rituals and ceremonies help define a culture. Without them, societies or groups of people have a diminished sense of who they are.
礼节和典礼有助于定义一个文化。如果没有这些，社会或者团体就会逐渐地迷失自我。
正文：
Admittedly, rituals and ceremonies are very significant for a culture in that they can help define a culture. However, a culture’s essence lies not in some specific ceremony or ritual, which are just symbols yet can not stand for the whole, but in common people' daily life, though which one can have more profound and comprehensive understanding concerning a culture and a nation.
It is the fact that ceremonies and rituals are necessary for a nation or culture to distinguish itself from others. People display and pass down their important customs and traditions though ceremonies. The Spring Festival in China is just a case in point.The Spring Festival is the most important ceremony for most Chinese, even those who have settled in foreign countries. In our minds, this ceremony is a paramount symbol for our nation and culture. Though in this rapid-pace life, people would not spend a whole month to celebrate the ritual, most of them would choose to go home to stay several days with their families and friends. And for western countries, it is undeniable that the most important ceremony is Christmas, which is also the mark of their culture.Santa-Clause, Christmas trees, presents in socks, all of them help to define their culture. In a word, different rituals and ceremonies are symbols for different cultures and nations, though which people in the culture would have a clearer sense of who they are and people outside the culture would have a basic understanding of that culture, especially the positive aspects.
Yet the ceremonies and rituals are not the whole of a culture or nation. culture is a matter involved many facets and is not easy to have an accurate definition from only one or two events, say important ceremonies and rituals. To further understand and define a culture requires careful observation and deep thinking of people's daily behaviors in that specific culture. For example, how do people eat, dress, study, and make friends, all of which may be trivial things in some one's eyes, but they have essential functions to define a culture or nation. However, sometimes they can not display themselves very clearly in ceremonies and rituals. Therefore, if people wants to define their own culture, they much do deep and careful investigation with respect to people's behaviors in their daily life. Moreover, in ceremonies and rituals, we always see the positive sides of a culture; but in fact, every culture has negative aspects as well. So, for individuals who want to have an all-round sense of who are they, they must possess a kind of objective and sharp mind which can see through the superficial phenomena in order to get the real nature, whatever positive or negative. For example,some art works, such as movies, novels, function as revealers of a culture's negative aspects. Simply put, one should receive as much information as possible to help him or her to define a culture.
To conclude, culture is such a complex matter that only some ceremonies and rituals can only help to distinguish one from other; and in most cases, they just show the positive aspects of a nation or culture. One who wants to define a culture objectively and have a profound and overall understanding of it should do careful and comprehensive observation with respect to the common people and think independently based on information from all sides of a culture.
GRE Issue写作优秀实例：孩子整体和局部的发展
题目：
Society should identify those children who have special talents and abilities and begin training them at an early age so that they can eventually excel in their areas of ability. Otherwise, these talents are likely to remain undeveloped.
社会应该发现那些具有特殊天赋和能力的孩子，并且在年幼的时候就开始训练他们以便于这些孩子最终可以在他们擅长的领域中出类拔萃。否则这些天才就可能会止步不前。
正文：
I strongly agree with the author on the claim that gifted children should be identified and provided special education. Since such training can help better develop talented individual and greatly benefit the whole society, it is necessary to put this proposal into reality as soon as possible.
Both theoretical studies and experimental practices have indicated that gifted children would better develop themselves under circumstances specially designed for them.Starting with the observation of extraordinary children, teachers from kindergartens and elementary schools have long been reporting their being obsessed with certain “troublesome” kids by their unique behavioral patterns. For example, while the whole class is learning basic arithmetic such as twelve plus thirteen is twenty-five, a math whiz, exercising multiplication on 4-digit numbers without awareness of what's going on in the classroom, may always draw the teacher's attention. So it is very often a headache for the teachers in that to punish this committed kid for not being attentive is so unreasonable. Actually letting him/her to stay in this class is an unreasonable thing itself since what is taught is far behind what is wanted. Hence the solution is to set up a special class or institution for all kids of this kind. I came to know one of these classes in China which mainly aims at academically promising stars. Some thirty talented children of ten years old from elementary schools are enrolled every two years and they will be sent to universities in various majors at the age of fourteen,since they are capable of learning much more and much faster. That is to say ------take the chemistry major as an example ------ some of them will be doing experiments in university chemistry curriculum with ease while others of the same age find it painful to understand the composition of water. It makes a great difference once their potentials are fully developed. Therefore one can see the necessity in providing the talented such institutions as the genuine nourishment they need.
Moreover, these specialized institutions are capable of preventing some unpleasant consequences. Needless to say without these institutions we will miss the chance to produce numerous experts on various fields, or at least their debuts have to be postponed. More importantly, the unbalanced development, that is indulgence in their field of interest and disregard on others, is a commonplace among gifted children. A young math whiz may find it hard to ask for direction when lost his/her way since he/she is poor at communication. Or a young poet with personality flaws frequently complains for his/her absurd demands not being fulfilled. This problem is particularly conspicuous in that they are unexpectedly superior in one field yet unbearably inferior in another. In this case, gifted children's class can better afford solutions than ordinary ones as their experts on psychology can put more emphasis on these points, while ordinary school teachers tend to overlook such problems. In these classes it is far more convenient to make distinct therapy for individual on his/her own drawbacks, and produce genius with personality well-being and other necessary living skills. Thus the specialized institutions yield experts but not maniacs, which is a very satisfying outcome.
Last but not the least, establishment of these institutions is beneficial to the society.These kids with special training will generally work at an early age, and therefore produce more wealth for the society. Teenage university graduates can best support this thesis. The society spend less on their education yet gets back more once they get a job. Also it has been found out that people are usually more creative in their youth,as we recall those prominent figures like Goethe, or Mozart, or Einstein. On the behalf of the society it is advantageous for the talented spend his/her youth on research than on education. Therefore we can expect more inventions from them, be they scientific theory or painting masterpiece. Eventually we see how wise it is to invest in the special training programs.
In conclusion, I believe identification and special education for gifted children is necessary for the society. These projects should be carried out without hesitation, and the society will find it a strikingly wise decision as the talented make contributions in all aspects of life.
篇10：GREissue写作技巧
GRE issue写作技巧：审题+论证+AW
1.审题上
我们有时觉得有些题目太抽象，无从下手的感觉，这个时候我们千万不能以抽象对抽象，而应该抓住某个关键词展开从而具体化，这样我们的论证才有力，有说服力。比如有道关于人们是追求knowledge 还是追求certainty这个问题，我们可以具体化的，分领域分学科展开，就可以有话可说了，领域学科不必面面俱到，只需要选几个典型的自己认为自己能够说得清的领域就好。
2.在具体论证上
分论点之间最好有逻辑上的连续性，就是说你是按照什么原则组织你的观点的，这点很重要，体现了自己对整个题目的把握程度吧，读者读起来也感觉很严谨，无懈可击。具体的怎么审题论证我在我的《新G复习进行时》中有论及，可以参考下。
3.最后一点，AW
个人并不觉得用长难复杂句很好，因为长难复杂句要写好是很难的，如果没有足够的功底不要轻易为之。如果我们能用一句非常简单的话表述一个相对复杂的意思就用简单句呗，这样才更体现出你对语言的掌控能力。我们经常犯的错误是把状语从句随意地并列在一起，然后把宾语从句也并得很长，像GRE阅读那种，定语从句呢，用的时候觉得一定要放好位置，恰到好处，读起来不显得生硬为好，否则就不要写。之前高中老师讲语法时提到，写复杂句，一定要把握好句子的重心，重心最好出现在前面，而不要太绕，让读者读了几个状语和定语之后才看到你的真正的主谓宾等。
新GRE写作issue一定要较为详细的写Issue提纲，否则，在考场如果遇到没有思考过的题目，很容易乱了阵脚，临场去想，导致失败。此外，新GRE issue写作题目必须考前按题材分类去写提纲，知道对立面和大致写作思路，往往论据在同类的很多题目中通用。希望以上三点建议对大家备考新GRE考试有所帮助
GRE issue写作优秀实例：选择少之又少
题目：
The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare.
没有选择的情况少之又少。
正文：
Admittedly being limited by the resources and natural rules, the chance of choice is also limited in a small cycle. However, with the improvement of people's abilities and the development of technology and politics, the chance to choose can be accordingly increased to some extent. Therefore, I fundamentally agree with the speaker on the assertion that the absence of choice is a circumstance is very rare.
As social animals, people are unable to do anything arbitrarily outstepping the limit of their physical abilities, the laws of nature and social rules and regulations. For instance,no matter how high people can jump, they can not fly freely like a bird for the reason that any species, mankind included, can not escaped the rules of gravity; And no matter how fast people run, they can not surmount the speed of the light due to people's physical limitation. People's life process is also lacking the choice. We can not choose our parents. Children have to select the schools based on the previous performance in the junior schools. Within the restriction of social laws and regulations,it is illegal for a man to marry with two or more women. Even when we choose our career, our professional knowledge and skills and the potential roles that the society provides restrict our choices. All these examples demonstrate that human can not make a random choice outstripping the limitation of the natural disciplines and the established laws and rules of our society.
However, it does not follow that people are deprived of all chances to make a choice and therefore turn out to be pessimistic and even cynical. On the one hand, although both the physical and natural limitations hinder people making arbitrary choices,people can augment their chances of choice by self-improvement. For example,through rigid and scientific trains and exercise, athletes can hugely improve their potentials and break the previous records they made. Those job-hunters can enrich their faculties by digesting and assimilating an amount of special knowledge to make themselves qualified to as many fields as possible which provide them more working choice. Therefore, people themselves can to some extent increase the chances of choice by their own efforts.
On the other hand, with the development of economy and politics, the scale and the chance that people can make a choice are expanded accordingly. Nowadays people can safely live in almost any circumstance, no matter how hot or cold, by equipping with the air-conditioners in their homes which was only unrealized dream for our ancestors. And the advanced traffic vehicles make people travel almost every corner all over the world while those in the ancient periods can seldom walk out of their nation. As for political field, more and more people can take part in policy-making nowadays, while it is impossible for our forefathers who were deprived of almost all political rights in the autocratic nations. From these changes, we can safely draw a conclusion that the range for choosing are coordinately inclining with the development of the economy and democracy.
In conclusion, although people can only make choices within the limitation of their own abilities and the laws of the nature, they can change it by self-improvement or personal efforts, and meanwhile the advanced technology and the opening democracy can also grant them various chances of choice.
GRE issue写作优秀实例：个人和整体
题目：
Most people recognize the benefits of individuality, but the fact is that personal economic success requires conformity.
虽然大多数人都承认个人的利益，但是事实上个人的经济成功需要的是合作。
正文：
Ever doubt about the success reason of those outstanding in business, fortune and authority?What makes them so different from common people, who share the same body structures and growing environment? Just like most people recognize, I think it is exactly strong individuality that impels them to positions of honor. Nevertheless, conformity is also indispensable for success in economy for individuals, since this is a character making a person stand on earth and understand commonsense, as well as analyze the consistent environment. In this sense,individuality is a stimulus for personal economic success, while conformity plays as a basic structure.
We are all born as the same, with brains to think, legs to walk and eyes to see. Even education system is placing conformity into our ways of thinking, observing and studying. But after years of efforts, what we gained will be diversified far from each other, some become millionaires, some own big companies, some may still stay in a small house with low salaries and common living conditions. Despite of certain environments like wars, natural disasters and so forth, there are still many people sharing a similar condition. So the conclusion can be easily drawn that those who gain distinct success have got their unique individuality, including abilities to cooperate and communicate, effective methods to analyze existing conditions and more important, strong will to realize their dreams, no matter how hard they are. Many ones may refer to Bill Gates when asked about who is the world's most successful enterpriser. Depending on his unique way to start career, deserted school life and entered market early, Gates managed to develop DOS as only a green man in society. Such a genius-like feat built him the base of today's software empire--Microsoft. It may be tempting to assume that he finished his education as those around him, and just take a step into some companies after graduation, he might have obtained similar feat. However, if this is reality,his outstanding ability in software developing is still necessary. Therefore, individuality is very important for one's economic success, since it separate the elite from common people.Nevertheless, this does not mean one should be strange, unique or even frantic to succeed.
Oppositely, conformity is as important as individuality, or even more necessary. Consider a man without individuality, he may feel so easy to be neglected by the society, but can still live a normal life. By contrast, a man without conformity will be trapped into misunderstanding, ignoring or even excluding. Modern society present us an evitable web, linking us together and requiring conformity to be adapted to it.
Conformity includes diversified aspects, from ethos, morality, natural science to aesthetic value and philosophy. Only after obtaining conformity in all these aspects, one can comprehensively understand his environment, condition and possible support for success. If not, he may feel himself lost, especially on economic issues. Van Gogh, the genius painter for example, suffered from poor all his life. Although his contribution in modern art is considered as splendid, he was totally failed in personal economy. His strong individuality made him diversified from society,even broken up with his good friend, Paul Gauguin. At last, this individuality killed himself after his last painting. From Van Gogh's tragedy, we may see the disadvantage of lacking of conformity.Although some one may take Van Gogh as successful according to his passionate life, it seems to me it would be more perfect if he used his genius for a better life.
Additionally, with the development of society, it is harder to assess the individuality that can bring personal economic success now. Because more and more people learn from others' experiences, much individuality becomes conformity generally. For example, twenty years ago, in China the ability to speak English can help a person gain many chances on doing business, since there were so few people who learned English. It is undoubtedly English is an individuality at that time, however, it now becomes a very common tool for young generation to communicate with the world. Hence, realizing new trend of individuality and indispensability of conformity is a necessary topic for our success today.
To sum up, neither of individuality and conformity can be deserted for one's personal economic success, though the function of individuality seems to be more direct and effective. As economic condition is fundamentally determining our living quality, it is important for us to seek both individuality and conformity that can contribute to our success--therefore bringing us a better society.
GRE issue写作技巧
篇11：GREissue写作技巧
GRE issue写作技巧分享
1. 写作宗旨
“老美是一个崇尚自由，个性，创造力，个人能力的国家，所以我们的立题最后也是偏向这一方面。从的出题倾向中可以很明显的感觉到这种偏好。对于很肯定的题目，不要脚踩两只船，要有自己鲜明的观点!(我觉得凭自己的水平是写不好两边都讨好的题目的，所以与其攻其十指，不如伤其一指。)
论点不要重复题目。由于我有时候找不出什么论点了，会把题目的再重复一遍，所以也想提醒一下和自己有相同毛病的g友，不要犯同样的错误。其实有时候可以把题目再读一遍，你就会有新的发现。”
2. 如何审题
“题目中的话说到绝对的，就diagree。比如题目中有这些词的as long as，anything，everything，all，only，我们可以把它们作为一个论点进行攻击，这是很容易找到反例的。我考试的时候就遇到了这样的情况：题目是：Practicality is now our GREat idol，which all powers and talents must serve. Anything that is not obviously practical has little value in today s world.可以看到题目中有三处很绝对的地方(all，anything，little )，一一反驳就是三个论点了。
题目对X.X不满，就agree。这种题目一般很明显的可以察觉到出题者的意图，所以你就跟着他不满。
若有比较，就顺着agree。题目中会出现诸如as...more...than...这样的词，看到了，你也可以顺着他的意思同意。
题目会很明显的提示你从哪些方面来写，比如说：In any realm of life--whether academic，social，business， or political--the only way to succeed is to take a practical，rather than an idealistic，point of view. Pragmatic behavior guarantees survival，whereas idealistic views tend to be superceded by simpler，more immediate options.你可以看到破折号里面的academic，social，business，or political，所以你就跟着他一个个举例子。”
3. 例子
“第一种是经典型：比如说Einstein，Newton，Galileo，Edison这些科学家的例子被用的烂了，不过也不失为好东西。the earth orbiting around the sun;Copernicus，Bruno等等。Picasso，Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky，Nixon Watergate等。
第二种是时尚型:为了与众不同，胜人一筹可以找一些新的例子。比如文艺类的，电影Matrix，可以用于arts;the project of Three gorges;High speed railway between Beijing and Shanghai;可以用于政治类的政府决策方面。以及写道Scandal时，Tony Blair和那个倒霉的武器核查专家也可以用。还有Iraq和USA的战争，朝鲜的核弹问题，都可以从不同侧面来分析。
我在准备过程中，每天看看yahoo网站的英语新闻，这样，不但可以了解最新的实事，练练泛读，还可以看到很多现代美语的用法以及一些不知道怎么表达的专业词汇，得益非浅。”
作文引用注意要点
1. 内容与GRE作文范文高度相似
官方说明：“text that is substantially similar to that found in one or more other GRE essay responses.”
每年的GRE考生们，为了更好的准备作文部分，会背诵大量的范围，学习和借鉴其中出彩的表达，但是千万注意，学习好词好句，不代表整段直接照搬到考卷上。
2. 部分句子来源于出版或未出版资料
官方说明：“quoting or paraphrasing,without attribution,language or ideas that appear in published or unpublished sources.”
大家若在一些材料中看到了一些词句并且想要在考试的时候引用，一定要正确的做注释，这一点非常的重要。
3. 观点来自他人
官方说明：“essays that are submitted as work of the examinee when the ideas or words have,in fact,been borrowed from elsewhere or prepared by another person.”
写作时的观点，一定要注意不能是与已存在的论点十分相似的，要基于自己的理解，给出和论点紧密联系的论据以支撑。
GRE作文高频题目出题率如何
首先，ETS在从开放题库中抽取题目给考生的时候，是一种随机的选择方式，那么，每个题目被抽取到的概率是完全一样的。而现在并没有证据表明ETS在抽取题目的时候采用了任何优先级策略，所以我们不能对此作出主观假设。
其次，从目前的高频统计方式来看，存在着很大的漏洞。据我所了解的情况，基本上是部分考生在考试结束后，在一些论坛或者BBS上发帖子，来说自己考到了什么题目，然后由一些热心的网友来进行人工统计，最后得到了所谓的“GRE作文高频”题目。
GRE写作想用模板又怕雷同
其实雷同这个问题在GRE作文里面真的是特别特别的敏感，原因是GRE作文出道那么多年居然一成不变，所以我们用的资料啊什么的别人都有可能使用过，如果copy的太厉害的话就很容易被叛雷同，本来还想用别人的资料为自己省点力气，这下子倒好了，赔了夫人又折兵。
Copy人家的例子还有什么好句之类的还好说，准备模板这个东西更是大家头疼的部分，因为这个是叛雷同最危险的导火索。那小西这边给大家的建议其实很简单就是：灵活地蹂躏组合别人的材料和精华。模板的话小西基本上是看网友的范文还有北美范文，先摘选出自己觉得挺好的过渡方式、开头方式、结尾方式、举例方式，然后再从中选择比较适合的，最后再跟其他的句式混合修改一下，这样一个基本模板就出来了，然后就是大家在以后写作文的过程中不断的提升和修改，但是切记，千万不要随便弄个模板然后隔三岔五的就换，这样的就不能做到有效重复了，对你在考场上的行文速度会带来很大的不利影响。
除此之外，事例的抄写的话，给大家一个很有效的方法那就是，句式大体不变或者稍作修改，然后主体换一下，就好像小西当初在上维基百科的时候看到它写丘吉尔的评论有一段很好的话，那小西就找了墨西哥独立之父换掉了丘吉尔，然后基本上稍作修改就直接用了：
Hidalgo is hailed as the “Father of the Nation” whose speeches gave courage to an entire nation. He is considered to be precursor and creator of the rest of the heroes of the Mexican War of independence. The story about him is deeply embedded into the political and educational system of the country for years to come. Yet, achievement of independence would have been impossible without the endeavors of the liberal insurgents who adhered to resist tyranny. These people rarely have been in the limelight while the history is replete with stories about a few famous individuals.
所以大家可以采用这种方式大胆的使用，但是最好也是要稍作修改，双保险嘛!至于固定的思想表达段落，这就是大家必须自己去总结一些好的句子好的词语，然后在里面使用了，小西经常是写了一段，然后在以后看文章或者看材料的时候遇到了更好的句子时就会非常敏感，马上用到以前写过的段子里。这样在日积月累中，你的固定段落就会提升提升再提升，考场上用出来保准出彩!
至于大家对雷同的底线到底在哪里的问题，小西也不好回答，ETS规定好像是连续超过13个英文字相同就会判定为雷同，但是个人感觉应该没有那么死，因为有一些固定表达每个人都会用，有时候连起来肯定会超过13个英文字，所以不想雷同的同学除了固定搭配的那些不用担心之外，其余的句子最好都是要灵活的蹂躏组合后再使用。
GRE issue写作技巧分享
篇12：新GREIssue官方
Issue test 3
The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how those considerations shape your position.
The following sample issue response received a score of 6:
Passion is clearly necessary for a truly great idea to take hold among a people—passion either on the part of the original thinker, the audience, or ideally both. The claim that the most lucrative subject matter for inspiring great ideas is “commonplace things” may seem initially to be counterintuitive. After all, aren’t great ideas usually marked by their extraordinary character? While this is true, their extraordinary character is as often as not directly derived from their insight into things that had theretofore gone unquestioned. While great ideas certainly can arise through seemingly pure innovation... say, for example, Big Bang cosmology, which developed nearly all of its own scientific and philosophical precepts through its own process of formation, it is nevertheless equally true that such groundbreaking thought was, and is, still largely a reevaluation of previous assumptions to a radical degree... after all, the question of the ultimate nature of the universe, and man’s place in it, has been central to human thought since the dawn of time. Commonplace things are, additionally, necessary as material for the generation of “the best ideas” since certainly the success among an audience must be considered in evaluating the significance and quality of an idea.
The advent of Big Bang cosmology, which occured in rudimentary form almost immediately upon Edwin Hubble’s first observations at the Hooker telescope in California during the early 20th century, was the most significant advance in mankind’s understanding of the universe in over 400 years. The seemingly simple fact that everything in the universe, on the very large scale, is moving away from everything else in fact betrays nearly all of our scientific knowledge of the origins and mechanics of the universe. This slight, one might even say commonplace, distortion of tint on a handful of photographic plates carried with it the greatest challenge to Man’s general, often religiously reinforced, conception of the nature of the world to an extent not seen since the days of Galileo. Not even Charles Darwin’s theory, though it created more of a stir than Big Bang cosmology, had such shattering implications for our conceptions of the nature of our reality. Yet it is not significant because it introduced the question of the nature of what lies beyond Man’s grasp. A tremendous number of megalithic ruins, including the Pyramids both of Mexico and Egypt, Stonehenge, and others, indicate that this question has been foremost on humankind’s collective mind since time immemorial. Big Bang cosmology is so incredibly significant in this line of reasoning exactly because of the degree to which it changed the direction of this generally held, constantly pondered, and very ancient train of thought.
Additionally, there is a diachronic significance to the advent of Big Bang cosmology, which is that, disregarding limitations such as the quality of optical devices available and the state of theoretical math, it could have happened at any point in time. That is to say, all evidence points to roughly the same raw intellectual capacity for homo sapiens throughout our history, our progress has merely depended upon the degree of it that a person happens to inherit, a pace that has been increasing rapidly since the industrial revolution. Yet this discovery had to happen at a certain point in time or another—it cannot have been happening constantly or have never happened yet still be present—and this point in time does have its own significance. That significance is precisely the fact that the aforementioned advent must have occurred at precisely the point in time at which it truly could have occured—that is to say, it marks the point in our history when we had progressed sufficiently to begin examining, with remarkable substantiated acuity, the workings of the universe across distances that would take millions of human lifetimes to reach or to traverse. The point for the success of this advent must necessarily have been, additionally, the point at which the audience concerned was capable and prepared to accept such a radical line of reasoning.
Both factors, a radical, passionate interpretation of the commonplace and the preparedness to accept such an interpretation, are necessary for the formulation of a truly great idea. If the passion is absent from an inquiry by the thinker or by the bulk of an audience, the idea will die out if it comes to fruition at all. If the material is not sufficiently commonplace to be considered by an informed audience of sufficient size, the same two hazards exist. Given these two factors, the idea must still be found palatable and interesting by the audience if it is to hope to gain a foothold and eventually establish itself in a significant fashion.
Comments on sample essay receiving score of 6:
This outstanding response presents a cogent, well-articulated analysis of the complexities of the issue by arguing that (1) great ideas develop from commonplace observations that are interpreted in a radical way; and (2) passion is required of both thinkers and the audience in order for great ideas to take hold.
The argument is based on an extended example (Big Bang cosmology) and has two parts. The first part defines “commonplace things” as universal questions (i.e., the quest to understand the cosmos is commonplace, though complex, because it is an ancient and universal question) and places Big Bang cosmology in context with the scientific breakthroughs of Galileo and the Pyramids of ancient Mexico and Egypt.
The second part explains Big Bang as the result of a convergence of factors: both thinkers and the audience must be ready to reevaluate “previous assumptions” and accept “radical, passionate interpretations.”
The argument’s careful line of reasoning is strengthened by appropriate transitions between paragraphs (“Additionally,” “Both factors, a radical, passionate interpretation of the commonplace and the preparedness to accept such an interpretation, are necessary for the formulation of a truly great idea,” etc.) and within paragraphs (“Not even Charles Darwin’s,” “Yet,” “that is to say,” etc.). Fluent and precise language—advent, rudimentary, diachronic, shattering implications, megalithic ruins—and effective sentence variety also characterize this response as outstanding. Finally, despite the presence of minor errors (overuse of comma and inconsistent use of ellipses in paragraph 1), this response demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English.
