GRE考试ISSUE写作经典范文赏析 政治问题

北京GRE培训,GRE备考资料,GRE网课,GRE培训机构,GRE保分班,GRE真题,GRE课程

本篇文章是有关国家、社会政治问题的。谈起政治，有些同学可能会很头痛，因为在政治方面有很多专用的名词。如果不能够正确使用一些词语或者固定说法以及一些联盟的简称，那么写出来的文章让阅卷人考到后就会觉得贻笑大方。本文为考生分析了常考政治题目的出题方向，并罗列出来文章大纲，希望考生能够认真阅读，牢记自己不会使用的政治专用名词。

GRE330高分学霸分享复习经验

一、国家政治：

The surest indicator of a great nation is represented not by the achievements

of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but by the general welfare of its

people.

一个国家的伟大体现在国民的安乐上，而不是体现在统治者、艺术家或科学家的成就上。

GRE写作如何让举例论证更有说服力?名师指点写作论据素材分类和正确用法

1. It is true that the general welfare of its all people is a reliable

indicator of a great nation. The welfare of the people, including the living

condition, social security system and charity of developed country is often far

better than those of developing countries.

2. On the other hand, however, the achievements of its rulers, artists and

scientists are of equal important, which by their way bring the aim of welfare

of its people into fruition.

1) As what is mentioned above, when we speak of “promoting the general

welfare”, we refer to the following index: public health and safety, security

against invasion, individual liberty and freedom as well as a high standard of

living, while all of these are brought about by its rulers, artists and

scientist.

2) Scientific and technological achievements serve in the first place to

enhance a nation’s general welfare. (Advance in medical treatment,

transportation, communication, etc.)

3) Artistic achievements could not be neglected, though. They help to make a

nation a better place to reside. (Provide inspiration, life people’s spirit and

bring about creativity and imagination, all of which spur us to make more

accomplishments.)

4) Yet the achievements of artists and scientist, while integral, are

insufficient. The military and diplomatic accomplishment of its leaders could

neither be ignored in the general welfare of a nation. (The War of

Independence)

二、社会政治：

Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government those in power

should step down after five years.

Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization

through new leadership.

结论：如商业、政治、教育、政府，在任何领域中的掌权者应该在五年后就让位 在任何领域中的掌权者应该在五年后就让位。

原因：对于任何机构，最可靠的成功途径是通过新领导阶层带来革新 最可靠的成功途径是通过新领导阶层带来革新。

In this statement, the arguer actually has a dual claim. First, no matter in

which profession, those in power should step down after five years. Second,

revitalization through new leadership is the surest way to success for any

enterprise. As far as I am concerned, I concede that limiting the term of

office/tenure is an effective way to prevent corruption and the lack of

initiatives, however, I disagree with both the two claims.

1. To begin with, in many areas, especially in politics and government, it

might be better that those who in power don’t hold the same position all the

time and should step down regularly.

1) It is known that absolute power will lead to absolute corruption.

2) And leaders tend to abuse their power when they have no fear of losing

their power. In order to avoid corruption, autarchy, those in power should step

down regularly.

3) In addition, such system might activate young man to work hard since they

see the choice and hope to be a leader. And a new leadership usually has greater

initiative motivation and would bring about new ideas. And this new emerged

leaders bring new ways of leading and managing, and they are more likely to keep

pace with the changing times as well.

2. On the other hand, frequently changing the leader also brings out some

problems.

1) The leader tends to only focus on his achievement in his time in the

position but regardless the subsequent leader.

2) Besides, not all those in power of all professions should step down after

five years. Those in power usually have abundant experience.

3) Furthermore, new leadership cannot ensure to be the surest path to success

for any enterprise. New leaders often lack the necessary skill and experience to

cope with exigent problems; therefore, they need a period of time for

adaptation.

三、科学与政府：

Governments should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and

development.

政府应该尽量不去限制科学研究和发展。

1. Generally speaking, government should place few restrictions on scientific

research and development.

1) Little relative knowledge.

2) Would be inclined to be in support what they regard worthwhile and would

benefit the people immediately.

2. Free research can increase invention and progress easily, thus too much

restrictions might encumber the development of science.

1) We can see lots of examples in the history which can show that too much

restriction would be detrimental to the development of scientific research.

2) A telling example of the inherent danger of official restriction of the

scientific research involves the attempts of Soviet during 1920s’ to not only

control the directions and goals of researches but the outcome and results of

the research as well—for the purpose of the general welfare of the people. Some

scientists even disappeared later because of their threats to the safety and

stability of the nation. Not surprisingly, during this period of time, no

significant discovery or invention occurred.

3. However, providing absolute freedom might cause other problems of equal

graveness.

1) Some immoral researches or ones are in threats of the peace, safety and

stability of the society.

2) Scientific research and development is a double-edged sword that can be

used equally for good or evil. If not properly controlled, it will bring

disasters to us. Such as human Cloning, biochemistry weapon, the nuclear

bomb.

Conclusion:

The restrictions placed by government on scientific research should be judged

according to the different nature of various research projects.

以上就是本文为大家分析的政治出题方向，考生们在阅读之后还要自己动脑思考为什么要这么分析，这么分析的合理性在哪里?多进行几次这样的思考，写作一定能够突飞猛进的。

（内容摘选整理自网络，供GRE考生交流学习，如有疑问请联系易伯华编辑）