作品欣赏|2019“外研社·国才杯”写作大赛议论文最高分展示

2019“外研社·国才杯”全国英语写作大赛荣耀落幕！决赛选手们面对赛题文思泉涌，佳作频出，惊艳赛场！

自本周起，小U将陆续为大家展示今年决赛写作真题及高分作文，揭秘选手破题角度、写作思路，同时力邀写作领域专家解读点评，带你深入体会文中精彩！今天，跟随小U一起来欣赏议论文最高分选手的精彩呈现！

真题分享

选手破题思路

岳珏嘉 东南大学（指导教师：朱丽田）

2019“外研社·国才杯”全国英语写作大赛季军

读毕题目，我理解材料中的观点为：从自然选择的角度出发，人工干预对人类进化造成了破坏，因此应反对人工干预。但材料所谓“人工干预”恰恰是人类文明的体现。人类文明的进步，使人类可依靠科技和文明手段区别于动植物，以人类独有的方式“进化”。有了这样的思路后，我定下了本篇题目及论述重点。

行文过程中，于开篇表态，针对题目中的担忧，提出自己的反方立场，即所谓“人工干预”实则是人类文明，不应因文明先进辉煌而遭受谴责和抵制。后续段落分别通过举例论述观点，回应材料中提到医疗进步、基因技术和人工智能这三个角度，明确这些看似“干预”人类进化的方面，正是人类进化的体现。通过一步步归谬，我对材料观点进行反驳，增强论述的说服力。最后一段总结全文，呼应标题，重申人类文明比人工干预更值得思量。

其实，我选择这样的立意，是有些剑走偏锋的，但支撑我坚持成文的是希望能够以己之力提醒有technophobia（技术恐惧）的人们，在科技飞速发展的今天，毋须谈科技色变，更不要鼓吹停止发展的论调。文明和发展本无罪，发展问题要依靠发展去解决，恐慌和抵制并不能解决问题，更可能带来文明的倒退。

作品欣赏

Human Civilization Outshines Human Intervention

Recent years have witnessed the heated discussion concerning the potentially dire consequences entailed by the unprecedentedly fast development of human society. Some people fear that the uncontrolled advancement of science and technology will bring about adverse ramifications which would eventually take a deadly toll on human beings itself. According to them, "the doomsday clock is on the verge of striking" if we do not endeavor to stop human intervention before it is too late. However, my view on this issue is different.The so-called "human intervention" is, if we view it from another perspective, actually "human civilization", which is not supposed to be to blame for its grandeur and sophistication.

In the first place, the fast-growing medical technology have been making great contributions to human evolving.Thanks to the progress made in medical cares and hospital facilities, human beings are able to live longer and survive harsh circumstances under which our predecessors are vulnerable to disease and death, such as the dessert zones or icy Antarctic areas. Also, human beings have been developing special treatments to combat what was formerly seen as incurable cancers, such as malaria, AIDS, and Ebola, managing to save lives and increase people's sense of security and happiness. All the uplifting results is evidenced in the global life expectancy surging from about 40 years old in the 20th century - the number of which was much dismal in under-developed countries - to over 65 nowadays. Therefore, instead of claiming such human interventions prevent us from adapting to infectious disease through natural selection, we ought to come to the realization that humans are evolving in a more effective and efficient way, that is, through technological advancement.

Secondly, the highly developed genetic knowledge is increasing biodiversity instead of destroying it.Since human beings became curious about how life forms and how myriads of organs and systems function in human bodies, the world has seen the burgeoning of biotechnology and genetic research. Through all the amazing findings by scientists and researchers, human beings not only have a better grasp of the secrets of life, but also propose new ways to enrich life forms. Because of cloning, we are able to "duplicate" endangered animals which would have been extinct otherwise. Because of genetic advancement, we are able to produce hybrid corns and vegetables, which have been pulling millions of people out of the risk of starving to death. Because of genes transplanting, we are able to create creatures we never see and also many other intriguing possibilities. Evolutionary change is not necessarily achieved by longitude natural selection, but also can be accelerated by modern genetic engineering.

Thirdly, the wider currency of artificial intelligence adds rather than distracts.Increasing automation and diminished human contact is the reality of today: a world where dexterous robots replace endless rows of Chinese workers and the trading floor specialists on New York Stock Exchange are ready to hand over the keys to Wall Street's version of SkyNET. That traditional teachers in classrooms give way to their counterparts on YouTube, under the auspices of the leaders of digital economy, is inevitable. Maybe that is necessary. But that is not the reason we should stop it - at least it's cheap and convenient. A case in point is the MOOCs, or Massive Online Open courses. It is essentially online classrooms, and are easily accessible to courses designed by professors from prestigious universities, such as Yale, Caltech and Duke. Even though MOOCs may in a large extent replace traditional teachers, it offers platforms and opportunities for those who fail to be accepted to selective colleges or those who cannot afford expensive high-quality education. It is therefore concluded that machines and modern technologies can be a blessing in disguise.

It may be argued that, no matter how we whitewash advances of modern age, human practice has been definitely intervening the laws of nature.It's true that humans aren't always comply with how nature works, but the interplay between human and nature can also be seen as human's utilization and transformation of nature by using their endless creativity and ingenious mind. More importantly, there's no point denying the advancing of human society. If the case is exactly what the author of the given paragraphs expects, all human intervention should be eliminated, and the best way for humans not to "intervene" is stopping developing, halting making progress and reducing back to barbarous creatures like any other beings then thousands of millions years ago. Needless to say, it is ridiculous and unrealistic.

In a nutshell, human civilization, another interpretation of "human intervention", should not be stopped or discouraged.The effects of human intervention in biological evolution of the human species pales in comparison with the profound significance that human civilization have on human species in terms of modern advanced technologies.The claim "Humans have stopped evolving" is, in my standpoint, "Humans have been evolving, but in a unique human way".And this is, in essence, how humans evolve far smarter and far more sophisticated than any other living beings.

（为真实展示选手赛场上的写作风貌，文章为从iTEST 大学外语测试与训练系统中摘出的原生作品，仅供学习分享使用。）

名师点评

John Olbrich

任教于清华大学

2019“外研社·国才杯”全国英语写作大赛评委

The judges were asked to evaluate the essays in the writing competition according to three criteria: content/ideas,organisation/development,and language. I shall follow this format.

Content was excellent, very well-argued and thought-through. The writer’s range of knowledge of current social issues was impressive, covering genetics, cloning, AI, disease, MOOCs and the New York stock market. She/he argued persuasively for the continuing evolution of humanity through advances in medicine, AI and technology rather than along Sir David Attenborough’s more simplistic view of evolution as a Darwinian survival of the fittest.

Organisation and development were also outstanding. The writer followed a logical progression, numbering her/his points and with clear and ordered writing. Sentence structure was good, and her/his ideas were presented with clarity and intelligence. The argument had an introduction, definite paragraphs with separate points and a clear conclusion, and the argument was easy to follow yet with intricate knowledge.

Language was where the writer fell down. Although complex vocabulary was used widely and for the part correctly, this piece is not immune from simple grammatical mistakes – in particular

• singular/plural 单数/复数; please remember that a singular noun must take a verb also in the singular, and vice versa. For example: technology (singular)/have (plural); cancers/was; uplifting results/is; it/classrooms; effects/ pales; civilization/have.

• “Dessert” is what follows the main course at a western meal; presumably the writer meant to say “desert”.

• Please try not to use clichés such as “in a nutshell” (used by the writer), “it is a truth universally acknowledged”, or “every coin has two sides”. These expressions are fine, but if every student uses them then they lose their effectiveness.

• In general, try not to use elaborate or complex vocabulary unless you are certain that you know what these words mean. This writer did use vocabulary correctly, but many students did not.

In general, this was an outstanding piece of argument, clear and logical and using a wide range of ideas and concepts.

读罢这篇赛场佳作，是否对你有所启发？