FreePeter

TOPIC: ISSUE70 - "In any profession-business, politics, education, government-those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
DATE: 2008-8-2 17:18:18

提纲：
有保留同意
Body Paragraph:
1. 更新领导者来保持活力
i. 长期处于权力高峰容易独断/腐化。
ii. 新鲜观点与方法注入

2. 5年是个不错的period : 太短不稳定，太长没效果。
3. Neverthelss
i. 不一定非要5年
ii. 特殊行业需要保持稳定：Greenspan 20

In general, I agree with the author that the man in power should be changed regularly. It's crucial to keep the enterprise or government fresh. People may believe that a great leader should be at the position as long as possible to benefit the organization, yet this is not always the case, as discussed followed.

One reason for my fundamental agreement with the speaker is that in order to keep the organization running normally, the leader cannot be always the same. People who are always at the peak of power will easily be arbitrary, or even corrupted. Although this view might seem pessimistic, this is the truth. Since they are always full of power; and few things can restrict them. They will get used to ordering without discussing with others. After a long time, they may forget how to ask others' opinion or how to compromise. Moreover, a man, no matter how great he is, has his own shortage in view. Thus we need some more thoughts and methods to be entered. This can be easily accomplished by changing the leader regularly. Consider the example of Chairman Mao. No one will doubt he is one of the greatest leaders we have ever seen. However, he made a serious mistake in his later time. In contrast, George Washington retired after being the president of U.S. for eight years. History proves his decision was correct.

Another reason why I agree with the claim is that five years is an excellent period. As discussed earlier, we change the leadership mainly in order to revitalize. Thus, if the period is too long, the enterprise may already have been lack of vitality; and the effect will not be so good. On the other side, if the leadership is changed too frequently, for example, one year, it is obviously that the relationship altered too rapidly to become a good workplace. All people are busily becoming familiar with the new environment. Therefore five years is a good balance for the two sides.

We have recognized that the movement of leadership every five years is beneficial; nevertheless it should not be obeyed without exception. First of all, besides five years, other time period may also be reasonable. Consider the example of the U.S. presidential election. As it is known to all, it is held every four years, and each president can hold his or her position for at most eight years. And I think this is also a significantly good system, for it ensures the vitality in American politics while encourages the excellent governor to prevail their idea. Furthermore, in certain situation the leader can be stable, as it did in the case of Alan Greenspan, the 13th Chairman of the Federal Reserve, who has been in the office for about 20 years. When there are only few people competent for the job, or the policy made should keep steady, it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, for the leaders remain unchanged.

In sum, to guarantee success, any organization should revitalize through new leadership. Admittedly an alternation for every five years is a good idea; other reasonable methods can also lead to success. Yet this is not the golden rule and can be invalid in some special occasion.



--------------------next---------------------

TOPIC: ARGUMENT238 - The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Mira Vista College to the college's board of trustees.

"At nearby Green Mountain College, which has more business courses and more job counselors than does Mira Vista College, 90 percent of last year's graduating seniors had job offers from prospective employers. But at Mira Vista College last year, only 70 percent of the seniors who informed the placement office that they would be seeking employment had found full-time jobs within three months after graduation, and only half of these graduates were employed in their major field of study. To help Mira Vista's graduates find employment, we must offer more courses in business and computer technology and hire additional job counselors to help students with their resumés and interviewing skills."
DATE: 2008-8-2 20:36:33

提纲：
1. 统计数据不可靠，两所学校的就业率不可比较。
2. 让步攻击，有其他原因可以导致找工作的不同。
3. 再次让步，MVC不一定能够照搬GMC的经验。

In this memo Mira Vista College (MVC)'s president recommends that in order to help MVC's graduates find job, MVC should provide more courses in business and computer technology and more job counselors. To support this recommendation, the president points out that Green Mountain College (GMC) has more business courses and more counselors. The president also indicate(可以用indicate表示指出么？) that GMC has higher employment rate according to statistics. However, it is problematic in several respects, rendering the argument unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the president fails to assure me that the statistic of MVC accurately reflects the employment rate. Without evidence that these seniors related to the statistic can represent the students of whole college, it is hasty to draw any conclusions about the rate. Perhaps it is most of such kind of students who felt unlikely to find a job that inform the office. Also, the president does not offer what kind of jobs the 90 percent of the GMC’s last year’s graduates find, perhaps the jobs they found are not as better as MVC’s. Furthermore, the president did not provide data about how long do students usually find their job. It is entirely possible that students need more time than three months to find a satisfied job. All those make the employment rates of two schools incomparable. Thus the president cannot conclude that GMC’s graduates are more likely to find job.

Even I concede that it is easier for GMC's graduates to find a job, the recommendation relies on the assumption that offering certain more courses and advisors was responsible for the higher job-found rate of GMC. The president overlooks other possible causes. For example, perhaps GMC's students have higher score than MVC's students, or perhaps GMC has better teachers. Either scenario would provide an alternative explanation for the difference of two colleges' graduates when they are looking for a job. It is also possible that although MVC has more such courses and advisors, since GMC has fewer students, which causes GMC has the same, or even more courses and advisors per each student.

Finally, even assuming that it is because of certain courses and counselors that make the GMC's graduates easier to be employed, the president fails to consider possible differences between GMC and MVC that might bring about a different result. For instance, MVC has been famous for other majors, such as physics, architecture. Therefore the future students of MVC are less interested in business courses. In this case, students will found the new offered courses tedious. Thus it will not take effect.

In sum, the president has not convinced me that it will help MVC's students to find a job after taking these measures. To bolster the argument, the president must offer more evidence which can prove that MVC's students are hard to find a job. To better assess the argument, I would also need to know some details of GMC and MVC; particularly, I would need to know the capabilities and interests of MVC's students.


--------------------next---------------------
不知道为什么，这两天脑子里经常回荡着这首歌的"ENDLESS RAIN, FALL ON MY HEART kokoro no kizu ni,
LET ME FORGET ALL OF THE HATE, ALL OF THE SADNES............ “部分。。。
难道是因为单词背崩溃了神经错乱了。。。-_-bbbbbbbbbbb

记得zdw曾经和我说过，
rock流的激烈music确实最能够引起共鸣。
是因为足够的激烈么？所以终于，不需要言语了吗。

语言是一种阴谋。(from GRE某填空。。。-_-bbbbbbbbb)



karamitsuku koori no zawameki
koroshi tsuzukete samayou itsu made mo
UNTIL I CAN FORGET YOUR LOVE

nemuri wa mayaku tohou ni kureta
kokoro o shizuka ni tokasu
mai agaru ai o odorasete
furueru karada o kioku no bara ni tsutsumu
I KEEP MY LOVE FOR YOU TO MYSELF

* ENDLESS RAIN, FALL ON MY HEART kokoro no kizu ni
LET ME FORGET ALL OF THE HATE, ALL OF THE SADNESS

Days of joy, days of sadness slowly pass me by
As I try to hold you, you are vanishing before me
You're just an illusion...
When I'm awaken, my tears have dried in the sand of sleep
I'm a rose blooming in the desert

IT'S A DREAM, I'M IN LOVE WITH YOU
madoromi dakishimete

[* repeat]

I AWAKE FROM MY DREAM
I CAN'T FIND MY WAY WITHOUT YOU

[guitar solo]

THE DREAM IS OVER
koe ni naranai kotoba o kurikaeshite mo
takasugiru hai iro no kabe wasugi satta hi no
omoi o yume ni utsusu
UNTIL I CAN FORGET YOUR LOVE

[* repeat]

ENDLESS RAIN, LET ME STAY EVER MORE IN YOUR HEART
LET MY HEART TAKE IN YOUR TEARS, TAKE IN YOUR MEMORIES

* ENDLESS RAIN, FALL ON MY HEART kokoro no kizu ni
LET ME FORGET ALL OF THE HATE, ALL OF THE SADNESS

--------------------next---------------------
这几天的状态非常奇怪，我不确定是不是因为心理失落了什么。感觉心总是定不下来，
如果考试再要过2天的话我估计要囧大了。。。

也不一定，或许再拖两天，由于极度的不安定与崩溃，使得原本的一切掩盖、对抗或者逃避成为不可能，
在被完全毁灭的虚空之中，空性、慈悲与爱就会出现……
这就是，空即是色吗？

悲伤的终点是爱，
有这种爱的地方，就有慈悲。                ——J. Krishnamurti

或者……
只有当你的心变得如顽石一般僵硬，甚至连祈祷都变得不可能时，你才能领会真爱以及向神求助是什么意思。
Prayer and love are learned in the hour when prayer has become impossible and your heart has turned to stone.

                                                          --THOMAS MERTON


而我所作的所有的事情，都在拒绝revolution么？都在试着维护原有的一切么？都在拒绝，真相么？

我有点明白2年前的我，为什么极力造就一种绝望的心绪。
我不知道该如何定义，但在绝对的纯粹绝望之中（暂时这么称呼吧），一切其他东西都没有了生存的环境。
无论是愤怒、嫉妒，或是不安，躁动。
只剩下一种平静的感觉，或许我们可以称之为，慈悲，或者爱。

每天失眠，总是在12点，或是1点多，在很崩溃的感觉中打开灯，
翻开《圣经》，
sigh, 什么时候沦落为睡觉前一定要看一会儿圣经才能睡得着了。

约11:25, 26
耶稣对他说：“复活在我，生命也在我。信我的人，虽然死了，也必复活。凡活着信我的人必永远不死。你信这话么？”


最近比较喜欢J.Krishnamurti……空性与慈悲的流露。
喜欢禅师，我不是指一定要出家修行的那些禅师，我泛指那些慈悲为怀，怀着感恩与菩提面对这个世界的人。那些可以反观自我如空明之镜，可以不染烟尘，直观世界。
所以一直以为Carl Rogers是一个禅师。
其实他的共情(Empathy)，我以为，其实就是慈悲。
看到 Krishinamurti传中的一段话：
我和Krishinamurti在一起已经两个钟头，离开他的房间时，我的身体好像快要粉碎了，但是奇妙的治疗效果却因而产生。我接触到一种崭新的观察和聆听，其中没有任何反应，似乎是从一个又深又远的地方升起的。他不只察觉我的话中之话，还包括所有的表情、手势和态度。

于是就觉得Rogers的心理治疗过程惊人的一致呢（参见On Becoming a Person, 《个人形成论》）
依稀记得Rogers曾经表达过类似这样的观点：
当我们真正的了解自己和自己要做的事情的时候，我们就不会因为外界的批评、指责或者表扬、称赞升起太大的情绪反应了，我们只是把它当作对自己所作事情的一种评判。
（好像表达的可能有点偏差。。。我要重新把那本书借来翻翻。。。-_-bbbbbbb）

但是，这里要求一种开放的觉知，当我试着做到这样的时候，我总是发现我本质上是在我周围建立起了一道封闭的墙，把那些评价挡在外面，籍此来维护我的立场，我的态度，我的想法。
我确信这样是有问题的，但是。。。我不知道不这样，如何防止被某些东西影响呢？……我暂时，终于不能做到反观自我如空明之镜呢。。。
于是我一边封闭某些东西，防止尘埃的进来，
一方面又要适时的打开窗户，否则生命就变成一潭死水。
艰难的寻找着两者的平衡点。


暑假的计划非常简单，
GRE + 《数学分析原理》
据说这本书很强大……估计继续看不完。。。
还有就是，对自我的觉察与反省。

p.s. 考虑先装个OpenSUSE 11玩玩, 终于还是被gentoo崩溃了（主要是在canada发现有个东西没装，然后直接编译了2个小时）。。。呼啦啦……


--------------------next---------------------
先列两本书，有空的话暑假想扫一下。
都没怎么读过，不保证是好书～～～等我扫完了再决定是否推荐～～～

《近世代数概论》

对这本书看着顺眼的原因是当时扫了一下，发现他涵盖了目前为止所有的代数学知识（线性代数等）
感觉其线性代数部分比我们学的要难，但又不像数学系的《高等代数》那样过多东东。
总得说来是代数学的通论。
配合一下那本《数学分析原理》，看起来很完美～～～

《数理逻辑》

还没读过，有空扫一下。
我实在是不理解为什么我们的数理逻辑要用泛代数来引入，其实本质上构造自由代数的过程就是数理逻辑的递归定义过程。
我承认构造自由代数的方式确实是个很漂亮的想法，但问题是，数理逻辑应该是最基本的体系吧（类似于集合论），它的用途是 1. 严密化直觉想法 2. 构造一套让计算机来思考的系统。
对于(1)来说，拿泛代数来引入就很有问题，类似于用高等的东西论证最基本的东西，就好像我们拿现有的计算机来定义Turing Machine……而且我觉得泛代数在很大程度上分散了我们的注意力……。。。@_@
我记得《应用逻辑》中是使用表达式树来引入的，然后还是有一些关于表达式树的形式话定义和一些“看上去很显然”的东东的证明的。基本上严密性还是得到保证的（其实本质上也是一个递归定义）。可惜那本书的重点不是传统逻辑（你看名字都叫《应用逻辑》了是吧～）


考完试，终于可以把那本书给扔了。。。啦啦啦～～～
个人觉得对Mathematicas in Computer Science比Pure Mathematicas有爱的多。。。不知道为什么。。。@_@



--------------------next---------------------