10月21日雅思大作文示范写作 | 私企与政府在科学探索与管制上的角色对比

October 23, 2023

雅思作文真题直击 | | 栏目推送说明





每场雅思考试之后，第一时间分享本场考试雅思A类大作文的范文权威解析。欢迎每周锁定。


本期作者：王瑜



2023年10月21日雅思大作文题目



Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and controlled by the governments rather than private companies. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?



许多人认为科学研究应该由政府而不是私人公司来进行和控制。你在多大程度上同意或不同意这个观点?



文章结构分析：

开头段：私人公司以及政府二元论存在于科学研究实施以及控制方面

主体一：私人公司的优势以及其弊端

主体二：表明我方态度，即两者合作带来最大益处

结尾段：重申立场






范文及解析



Introduction


It is true that how scientific researches are
conducted
and supervised largely
dictates
societal
preparedness and rehabilitation
of
looming
crises. Nevertheless, we are still unable to decide whether private versus public
dichotomy
is a false one.


解析


的确，科学研究的开展和监督方式在很大程度上决定了社会对迫在眉睫的危机的准备和恢复。然而，我们仍然无法确定私人与公共的二分法是否错误。

❖ conduct 实施 v.

❖ dictates 决定 v.

❖ preparedness and rehabilitation准备和恢复 n.

❖ looming 迫在眉睫的 adj.

❖ dichotomy 二分法 n.


Body 1


Dominant
behemoth
, which has the potential to
squash
its competitors,
holds

sway
in
unraveling
technological mysteries; having access to
a large pool of
overqualified elites and
cutting-edge
facilities paves the way for
marvels
that only the most
erudite
could
envisage
. However, whether this progress can be maintained relies on the involvement of governmental supervision schemes that maintain
moral compass alignment with
scientific methods. This is primarily because pursuing fame blindly, prejudice, and money may
undermine transparency
and standards of responsible experiments, putting subjects' health at risk and
eroding
ecological sustainability.


解析


实力雄厚的公司，有可能压制竞争对手，在解开技术谜团方面占据主导地位;有机会接触到大量资历过高的精英和尖端设施，为创造只有最博学的人才能想象到的奇迹铺平了道路。然而，这种进步是否能够保持，取决于政府监督计划的参与，该计划使道德准则与科学方法保持一致。这主要是因为盲目追求名利、偏见和金钱可能会破坏负责任实验的透明度和标准，比如将受试者的健康置于危险之中，并侵蚀生态的可持续性。

❖ behemoth 实力雄厚的公司/巨兽

❖ squash 压扁/压碎

❖ hold sway 占据主导地位

❖ unravel 解开/弄清 v.

❖ marvel 令人惊异的事或人/奇迹

❖ a large pool of 大量的

❖ cutting-edge 最前沿的

❖ erudite 博学的/有学问的

❖ envisage 展望/预测 v.

❖ moral compass 道德准则/指南

❖ alignment 符合/正位 n.

❖ undermine 破坏

❖ transparency 透明度

❖ erode 腐蚀 v.


Body 2


Policymakers and privately-owned firms, in my opinion, are not
mutually exclusive
; both corporate
insight
and
public regulation
are critical elements in
ethically acceptable
scientific discoveries. It is their
interplay
that results in policymaking that employs
social-science findings
, spanning from economics and psychology to other domains, to meet extraordinary public needs. Another significant advantage is
national defense technology
with a high level of security that cannot go outside the
realm
of authorities. If the aforementioned were not true,
dystopian predictions
like
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
and
Bram Stoker's Dracula
may become a reality very soon.


解析


在我看来，决策者和私营企业并不是相互排斥的;企业洞察力和公共监管都是伦理上可接受的科学发现的关键因素。正是它们的相互作用导致了政策制定，这些决策采用了从经济学、心理学到其他领域的社会科学发现，以满足非同寻常的公众需求。另一个重要的优势是具有高度安全性的国防技术，不能超出当局的范围。如果上述预言不是真的，像玛丽·雪莱的《弗兰肯斯坦》和布拉姆·斯托克的《德古拉》这样的反乌托邦预言可能很快就会成为现实。

❖ mutually exclusive 相互排斥的

❖ insight 洞察力

❖ public regulation 公共监管

❖ ethically acceptable 伦理上可接受的

❖ interplay 相互作用

❖ social-science findings 社会科学发现

❖ national defense technology 国防技术

❖ realm 范围 n.

❖ dystopian predictions 反乌托邦预言

❖ Mary Shelley's Frankenstein玛丽·雪莱的《弗兰肯斯坦》

❖ Bram Stoker's Dracula布拉姆·斯托克的《德古拉》


Conclusion


In a conclusion, it is a
fallacy
to
overvalue
either
public governance
or
entrepreneurial management
while activating projects in natural and clinical sciences; yet, a combination of both
encapsulates
what
scrupulous
studies require.


解析


总之，在开展自然科学和临床科学项目时，高估公共治理或企业管理都是一种谬论;然而，两者的结合才概括了有道德的研究所需要的所有特质。


❖ fallacy 谬论 n.

❖ overvalue 高估 v.

❖ public governance 公共治理

❖ entrepreneurial management 企业管理

❖ encapsulates 概括 v.

❖ scrupulous 一丝不苟的 / 有道德的 adj.