2015年5月10日GRE写作issue真题和范文

还在备考GRE的烤鸭们，一起来看看毕达留学整理的2015年5月10日GRE写作issue真题和范文吧！希望对大家能有所帮助。

Issue

The mainbenefit of the study of the history is to dispel the illusion that peopleliving now is significantly different from those people who live in earliertimes.

范文

Are we today greatly different from our forefathers one hundred years ago, fifty hundred years ago, or a thousand years ago? You will surely not be punished if you answer to such an ambiguous question goes from one end to the other of the full spectrum. The answer depends heavily on what elements we are comparing or contrasting. Physically we are not much different from them in that both the forefathers and people today eat, drink: talk, work: and die. But is it convincing enough to say that we are not much different from them? The way we talk is not longer what it was five score years ago; the food we eat and how we eat have undergone remarkable change; even the diseases that killed the forefathers today kill people in a novel and perhaps more effective way. In the past people survived by means of hunting, fishing, and collecting. But today people make a life by buying and selling. Are we fundamentally different from people who lived before us? If I provide with an affirmative answer, I will be said to have illusions. Alas.

Is it an illusion to think that we are astonishingly different from our ancestors? Admittedly, we are still very similar to the monkeys, physically, just as were people who lived five hundred years ago. Nevertheless, we are what we are, but not what our forefathers were. We do not rely mainly on military power to conquer or defense as did people who lived before us: although military power is still emphasized by many nations. In the ancient Rome Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great considered the triumph to be a war in which the enemies were entirely defeated. But today: our political leaders would consider a campaign to be a triumph only when both parties involved in the campaign are benefited. Are we today different from the people lived before us? Am I in illusion to think that we are different from our forefathers?

Should any human illusion be dispelled? Frogs: Dragonflies or paying mantis perhaps never have any illusion, nor have they had ever conducted any study of history, their history or the history of other animals, says, foxes: wolves, or ablators. We are human beings. We have illusions: not necessarily negative. Astrology, alchemy: mythology, witchcraft, and perhaps all forms of what we call pseudo sciences are the source of various human illusions. Shall we dispel the illusions by eliminating or eradicating these pseudo sciences? They play their roles. Just as night and darkness are against day and the light: illusions are against the truths. But without the night and darkness, never will there be the light and day.

Thus I claim that the benefit of the study of history is not to dispel human illusion. Nor is it to convince that we are similar to the people before us. The benefits of the study of history are determined by such parameters as the person who conducts the study, what she studies, and the purpose why she studies: and how she conducts the study. To the scholars who study history under the supervision of a totalitarian, the main benefits of the study come to the governor rather than to those governed. For instance, during the 1950s, Chinese scholars who studied the history of the Second World War focusing on why Japanese troops withdrew from the mainland of China distorted history to exaggerate the leader roles played by the communist party. What is the main benefit of this study of this history? It is clearly not to dispel illusion but to create illusion. And it had! A myriad of Chinese young people born in 1960s and 197s were subject to the distorted “history” and they were convinced that it was the leadership of the communist party that dispelled the Japanese. They have little information about the contribution of the American nave force: air force: and the military force of the former Russia.

I therefore say that the main benefit of the study of history is not homogenous. Its spectrum is rather broad and colorful. While it is not entirely wrong to connect it with the illusion that people today are similar to people in the past, it is a hasty conclusion based on weak ground.