GRE写作成为横在中国学生的理想和现实之间的一大障碍，因此，如何攻克写作这道屏障，成为摆在我们面前的首要任务。
77
Lending credence to my position is Francis Bacon's scientific method, according to which we
can know only that which we observe, and thus all truth must be based on empirical
observation. This profoundly important principle serves to expose and strip away all subjective
interpretation of observation, thereby revealing objective scientific truths. For example, up until
Bacon's time the Earth was "observed" to lie at the center of the Universe, in accordance with
the prevailing religious notion that man (humankind) was the center of God's creation.
Applying Bacon's scientific method Galileo exposed the biased nature of this claim. Similarly,
before Einstein time and space were assumed to be linear, in accordance with our
"observation." Einstein's mathematical formulas suggested otherwise, and his theories have
been proven empirically to be true. Thus it was our subjective interpretation of time and space
that led to our misguided notions about them. Einstein, like history's other most influential
scientists, simply refused to accept conventional interpretations of what we all observe.
In sum, the speaker confuses observation with interpretation and recollection. It is how we
make sense of what we observe, not observation itself, that is colored by our perspective,
expectations, and desires. The gifted individuals who can set aside their subjectivity and delve
deeper into empirical evidence, employing Bacon's scientific method, are the ones who reveal
that observation not only can be objective but must be objective if we are to embrace the more
fundamental notion that knowledge and truth exist.
Issue 70
"The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only tools of
human minds."
This statement actually consists of a series of three related claims: (1) machines are tools of
human minds; (2) human minds will always be superior to machines; and (3) it is because
machines are human tools that human minds will always be superior to machines. While I
concede the fn:st claim, whether I agree with the other two claims depends partly on how one
defines "superiority," and partly on how willing one is to humble oneself to the unknown future
scenarios.
The statement is clearly accurate insofar as machines are tools of human minds. After all,
would any machine even exist unless a human being invented it? Of course not. Moreover, I
would be hard-pressed to think of any machine that cannot be described as a tool. Even
machines designed to entertain or amuse us--for example, toy robots, cars and video games,
and novelty items--are in fact tools, which their inventors and promoters use for engaging in
commerce and the business of entertainment and amusement. And, the claim that a machine
can be an end in itself, without purpose or utilitarian function for humans whatsoever, is
dubious at best, since I cannot conjure up even a single example of any such machine. Thus
when we develop any sort of machine we always have some sort of end in mind a purpose for
that machine.
As for the statement's second claim, in certain respects machines are superior. We have
devised machines that perform number-crunching and other rote cerebral tasks with greater
accuracy and speed than human minds ever could. In fact, it is because we can devise
machines that are superior in these respects that we devise them--as our tools--to begin with.
However, if one defines superiority not in terms of competence in per-forming rote tasks but
78
rather in other ways, human minds are superior. Machines have no capacity for independent
thought, for making judgments based on normative considerations, or for developing
emotional responses to intellectual problems.
Up until now, the notion of human-made machines that develop the ability to think on their
own, and to develop so-called "emotional intelligence," has been pure fiction. Besides, even in
fiction we humans ultimately prevail over such machines--as in the cases of Frankenstein's
monster and Hal, the computer in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Yet it seems presumptuous to
assert with confidence that humans will always maintain their superior status over their
machines. Recent advances in biotechnology, particularly in the area of human genome
research, suggest that within the 21st Century we'll witness machines that can learn to think on
their own, to repair and nurture themselves, to experience visceral sensations, and so forth. In
other words, machines will soon exhibit the traits to which we humans attribute our own
superiority.
感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（32） 》一文，出国留学网(liuxue86.com)编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。