Jump to content
Urch Forums

241 An individual's greatness cannot be judged objectively by his or her contemporari


pet_ra

Recommended Posts

241 An individual's greatness cannot be judged objectively by his or her contemporaries; the most objective evaluators of a person's greatness are people who belong to a later time.

 

Many historical examples prove the fact that contemporaries are unable to understand the genius who is living the same time as they are. Huge amount of different reasons of such fact exist but I’m going to show the strongest.

 

Individual’s greatness may be described as different approach to life, exactly such outlook which nobody have at the moment. That was Einstein who had unusual look to the surrounding things. Thus nobody was able to understand weird scientist’s theory, Relativity Theory.

 

The genius is expected to be a profound kind of person who is able to create something great. Just remember Russian great scientist, Lomonosov, who was able to learn almost all science contemporary for him and organize the basis for each topic. People who belonged to his time couldn’t achieve the understanding of his doings, as Lomonosov was taller by a head comparing to laymen. It is common actually for all genius.

 

Moreover, it needs to remember great traveler Columbus who was recognized and died in poverty. This ordinary sailor make such a great discover for Spanish but was not understood by contemporaries because of lack of information and facts. Only descendants owned enough data about new continent were able to see the greatness of Columbus founding.

 

Though genius has the followers during their life the most contemporaries are unable to understand and sequentially to judge objectively his work and achievements. Only people of next generation who are on the one level of develop with profound individual can found his inventions and discovering valuable and great. As a result, the topic statement can be proved by numerous historical thus factual examples that individual’s greatness cannot be judged objectively by laymen from his or her time; the objective evaluation comes only with next generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue topic is about "evaluating an individual's achievement", but your thesis is about "understanding". I think you might have digressed from the topic.

The topic sentence in the 3rd paragraph has little to do with your main point. You should rewrite it so that the reader won't misunderstand your meaning.

There is only an example in the 4th paragraph, I think you should add a topic sentence at the beginning of the paragraph.

There are also some mistakes like

"That was Einstein..."-->"It was Einstein..."

"who had unusual look to..."-->"who had unusual outlook on/for..."

I am new to GRE AWA too , so the above advices are just for reference!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think understanding and judging are different.

For example, in the 16th century, Giordano Bruno insisted Copernicus' theory that the earth is revoling around the sun. His contemporaries, I think, could understand his ideas, but they were not able judge the ideas objectively. This is why he was condemned by the Inquisition and finally burned at the stake.

Just for reference!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pet_ra, thanks for asking me for advice on your writing. It's well-structured,really,but I did find several places grammatically doubtable. I might go too far in giving advices(:P)

but I feel I have to repay your trust. I'd like to have your opinion about my essay, too, and eagerly!

Brace yourself, 'cuz I am about to give you creeps by faultfinding.

In Para 2,"exactly such outlook which nobody have at the moment", I guess,"have" is misuse.

As to "That was Einstein who had unusual look to the surrounding things. Thus nobody was able to understand weird scientist’s theory, Relativity Theory. " , can I paraphrase it as "Einstein is perfect illustration of this point as his observations of surrounding phenomena were so unusal and ingenious that his great theory, the relativity theory, was regarded as weird by the multitude. "?

In Para 3, a "the" is pobably missing before "Russian" in "Just remember Russian great scientist" and "R" should be in lowercase. In "comparing to laymen" , "compared" suits better.

In Para 4,"Moreover, it needs to remember great traveler Columbus who was recognized and died in poverty.", I venture that "recognized and died " seems disjunctive concerning the meaning of the whole sentence. In my opinion, "recognized" can be left out.

Again,in "This ordinary sailor make such a great discover for Spanish but was not understood by contemporaries because of lack of information and facts. " ,"ordinary" pertains to Columbus as a humanbeing (?)and can not match the following "great". How about "extraodinary"? "Only descendants owned enough data about new continent "

miused "owned" for "owning" and missed a surfix "s" of "continent".

Such petty slips are, unfornately, a little more than I can identify and give advices to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

johnlock. 10x very much and check my review for your essay)

please find down some answers to your notes

In Para 4,"Moreover, it needs to remember great traveler Columbus who was recognized and died in poverty.",
ups i miss not, it should look like "Moreover, it needs to remember great traveler Columbus who was not recognized and died in poverty."

Again,in "This ordinary sailor make such a great discover for Spanish but was not understood by contemporaries because of lack of information and facts. " ,"ordinary" pertains to Columbus as a humanbeing (?)and can not match the following "great".
but using ordinary i want to underline that such ordinary man made extraodinary discovery, do you think it doesn't match.

by the way, do you have the same point of you as Autosea?

he/she thinks that understanding is not the same as evaluating, but i'm still not certain about this.

Autosea, thanks for the great example. I want to note that if contemporaries had understood Bruno he wouldn't have been borned on the fire. Understanding is a cause of right/wrong evaluating so i'm talking about understanding as about main part of estimation. What do you think? or possibly i need to insert the previous sentence in my essay for better appreciation of my point of view, needn't i?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...