GRE写作范文之法律应具有灵活性

　　新GRE写作范文：Issue

　　Laws should not be stationary and fixed. Instead, they should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places.

　　Does originality mean putting together old ideas in new ways, as the speaker contends, rather than conjuring up truly new ideas? Although I agree that in various realms of human endeavor, such as linguistics, law, and even the arts, so-called new or original ideas rarely are. However, when it comes to the physical sciences originality more often entails chartering completely new intellectual territory.

　　The notion that so-called originality is actually variation or synthesis of existing ideas finds its greatest support in linguistics and in law. Regarding the former, in spite of the many words in the modern English language that are unique to Western culture, modern English is derived from, and builds upon, a variety of linguistic traditions--and ultimately from the ancient Greek and Latin languages. Were we to insist on rejecting tradition in favor of purely modern language we would have essentially nothing to say. The same holds true for all other modern languages. As for law, consider the legal system in the United States, which is deeply rooted in traditional English common-law principles of equity and justice. The system in the U.S. requires that new, so-called modern laws be consistent with and indeed build upon--those traditional principles.

　　Even in the arts--where one might think that true originality must surely reside--so-called new ideas almost always embrace, apply, or synthesize what came earlier. For example, most modern visual designs, forms, and elements are based on certain well-established aesthetic ideals--such as symmetry, balance, and harmony. Admittedly, modern art works often eschew these principles in favor of true originality. Yet, in my view the appeal of such works lies primarily in their novelty and brashness. Once the ephemeral novelty or shock dissipates, these works quickly lose their appeal because they violate fn:rnly established artistic ideals. An even better example from the arts is modern rock-and-roll music, which upon first listening might seem to bear no resemblance to dassical music traditions. Yet, both genres rely on the same 12-note scale, the same notions of what harmonies are pleasing to the ear, the same forms, the same rhythmic meters, and even many of the same melodies.

　　When it comes to the natural sciences, however, some new ideas are truly original while others put established ideas together in new ways. One striking example of truly original scientific advances involves what we know about the age and evolution of the Earth. In e~rlier centuries the official Church of England called for a literal interpretation of the Bible, according to which the Earths age is determined to be about 6,000 years. If Western thinkers had simply put these established ideas together in new ways the fields of structural and historical geology

　　might never have advanced further. A more recent example involves Einsteins theory of relativity. Einstein theorized, and scientists have since proven empirically, that the pace of time, and possibly the direction of time as well, is relative to the observers motion through space. This truth ran so contrary to our subjective, linear experience, and to previous notions about time and space, that I think Einsteins theory can properly be characterized as truly original.

　　However, in other instances great advances in science are made by putting together current theories or other ideas in new ways. For example, only by building on certain well-established laws of physics were engineers able to develop silicon-based semiconductor technology. And, only by struggling to reconcile the quantum and relativity theories have physicists now posited a new so-called string theory, which puts together the two preexisting theories in a completely new way.

　　To sum up, for the most part originality does not reject existing ideas but rather embraces, applies, or synthesizes what came before. In fact, in our modern languages, our new laws, and even our new art, existing ideas are reflected, not shunned. But, when it comes to science, whether the speakers claim is true must be determined on a case-by-case basis, with each new theory or innovation.