想要在GRE作文部分的考试中写出优秀的文章，论据素材是重要的一环。好的论据不仅能帮助你支撑观点，加强说服力，还能体现出考生在阅读量上的积累和深厚扎实的语言功底基础。特别是ISSUE作文，更是需要大量好素材作为储备，才能保证考生无论遭遇那种题目，都能游刃有余地完成一篇高分作文的写作。小编为大家整理了GRE ISSUE作文各类题目的精品优质素材，一起来看吧。
政府对抗技术负面影响的作用
Individuals rely on governmental assistance to control the side effects and negative consequences of technology.
1. Supposed independence of government. An assumption commonly made about the government is that their governance role is neutral or independent. However, some argue that governing is a political process, so government will be influenced by political winds of influence. In addition, because government provides much of the funding for technological research and development, it has a vested interest in certain outcomes. Others point out that the world’s biggest ecological disasters, such as the Aral Sea, Chernobyl, and Lake Karachay have been caused by government projects, which are not accountable to consumers, so governments should stay out of industry entirely.
2. Liability. One means for controlling technology is to place responsibility for the harm with the agent causing the harm. Government can allow more or less legal liability to fall to the organizations or individuals responsible for damages.
3. Legislation. A source of controversy is the role of industry versus that of government in maintaining a clean environment. While it is generally agreed that industry needs to be held responsible when pollution harms other people, there is disagreement over whether this should be prevented by legislation or civil courts, and whether ecological systems as such should be protected from harm by governments.
科学的界定
Karl Popper contended that the central question in the philosophy of science was distinguishing science from non-science. Early attempts by the logical positivists grounded science in observation while non-science (e.g. metaphysics) was non-observational and hence nonsense. Popper claimed that the central feature of science was that science aims at falsifiable claims (i.e. claims that can be proven false, at least in theory). No single unified account of the difference between science and non-science has been widely accepted by philosophers, and some regard the problem as unsolvable or uninteresting.
This problem has taken center stage in the debate regarding evolution and intelligent design. Many opponents of intelligent design claim that it does not meet the criteria of science and should thus not be treated on equal footing as evolution. Those who defend intelligent design either defend the view as meeting the criterion of science or challenge the coherence of this distinction.
科学的哲学
Philosophy of science is the study of assumptions, foundations, and implications of science. The field is defined by an interest in one of a set of “traditional” problems or an interest in central or foundational concerns in science. In addition to these central problems for science as a whole, many philosophers of science consider these problems as they apply to particular sciences (e.g. philosophy of biology or philosophy of physics). Some philosophers of science also use contemporary results in science to draw philosophical morals. Although most practitioners are philosophers, several prominent scientists have (and do) contributed to the field.
Issues of ethics, such as bioethics and scientific misconduct, are not generally considered part of philosophy of science. These issues may be studied in ethics or science studies.
人们对科技对环境危害的严重性认识不足
Whether it is through intensified media attention, or due to the efforts of prominent scientists and other members of society, we have become increasingly aware of the detrimental effects that technological advances in industry and agriculture have on the global environment.
However, as Carl Sagan points out in Pulling the Plug on Mother Earth, awareness is not enough, nor is society’s response to the catastrophic implications of environmental pollution rapid enough. Slowness to implement sound strategies are in part due to the fact that the threats we face are nebulous, since they come in the form of particles of invisible gases and radioactivity, and in part because response to pollution appears to be so costly at individual, governmental and corporate levels. It appears that great material loss, as well as visual manifestation, has been the only ways to galvanize action towards altering and limiting technologies so that adverse chemicals and substances are no longer belched into the environment.
