Issue 31

　　In any academic area or professional field, it is just as important to recognize the limits of our knowledge and understanding as it is to acquire new facts and information.

　　Personally, I hold that knowledge knows no bounds, therefore, on realizing this awkwardness, the only thing man should do is to absorb as much new knowledge as he can for the sake of not lagging behind the pacing steps of our world.

　　Does recognizing the limits of our knowledge and understanding serve us equally well as acquiring new facts and information, as the speaker asserts?注意這一句經(jīng)典的反問式開頭了，這是最引人注目的。While our everyday experience might lend credence to this assertion, further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with our Western view of how we acquire knowledge. Nevertheless,雖然是原則上不盡同意但還是提出妥協(xié)的辦法，從而顯出是critical thinking的，這一點(diǎn)很重要，也是拿分的重頭戲也。a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.

　　讓我們記一記一些好詞好句：lend credence to this assertion 證明這一觀點(diǎn)的正確性；further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with；Nevertheless, a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.

　　On the one hand, the speakers assertion accords with the everyday experience of working professionals. For example, the sort of bookknowledge that medical, law, and business students acquire, no matter how extensive, is of little use unless these students also learn to accept the uncertainties and risks inherent in professional practice and in the business world.

　　Any successful doctor, lawyer, or entrepreneur would undoubtedly agree that new precedents and challenges in their fields compel them to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge, and that learning to accommodate these limitations is just as important in their professional success as knowledge itself.

　　在駁論的第一段，就舉例子說(shuō)明知識(shí)的有限性并不一定意味著各行各業(yè)的人就必須汲取其他方面的知識(shí)，恰恰相反，對(duì)于醫(yī)生、律師或企業(yè)家來(lái)說(shuō)意識(shí)到了自我知識(shí)的有限，并且尋求方法去適應(yīng)調(diào)和這一有限性反而是必要的。

　　Moreover, the additional knowledge we gain by collecting more information often diminishes-sometimes to the point where marginal gains turn to marginal losses. Consider, for instance, the collection of financial- investment information. No amount of knowledge can eliminate the uncertainty and risk inherent in financial investing. Also, information overload can result in confusion, which in turn can diminish ones ability to assimilate information and apply it usefully. Thus, by recognizing the limits of their knowledge, and by accounting for those limits when making decisions, investment advisors can more effectively serve their clients.

　　進(jìn)一步通過(guò)金融投資業(yè)信息的贅余的危害性來(lái)駁斥原文的觀點(diǎn)。

　　On the other hand, the speakers assertion seems self-contradictory, for how can we know the limits of our knowledge until weve thoroughly tested those limits through exhaustive empirical observationthat is, by acquiring facts and information. For example, it would be tempting to concede that we can never understand the basic forces that govern all matter in the universe. Yet due to increasingly precise and extensive fact- finding efforts of scientists, we might now be within striking distance of understanding the key laws by which all physical matter behaves. Put another way, the speakers assertion flies in the face of悍然不顧，公然違抗the scientific method, whose fundamental tenet is that we humans can truly know only that which we observe. Thus Francis Bacon, who first formulated the method, might assert that the speaker is fundamentally incorrect.

　　說(shuō)實(shí)話，我覺得這一段里，玩了一個(gè)詭辯的小伎倆：先是指出原文觀點(diǎn)的自相矛盾性，然后引出自己的看法認(rèn)識(shí)論遠(yuǎn)重要于獲取新的事實(shí)和信息，也就是要先認(rèn)識(shí)知識(shí)和理解力的局限然后才是攝取新知。

　　How can we reconcile our experience in everyday endeavors with the basic assumption underlying the scientific method? Perhaps the answer lies in a distinction between two types of knowledgeone which amounts to a mere collection of observations , the other which is deeper and includes a realization of principles and truths underlying those observations. At this deeper level knowledge equals under- standing: how we interpret, make sense of, and find meaning in the information we collect by way of observation.

　　就上一段提出的問題推出自己的解決方法，即認(rèn)識(shí)到知識(shí)分成兩種：純觀察行為所得的信息；萃取之后的經(jīng)過(guò)自己消化后的理解。但我覺得這里還有待發(fā)揮，估計(jì)是時(shí)間不夠了，倉(cāng)促間收筆吧。沒有很好的說(shuō)明白。

　　In the final analysis, evaluating the speakers assertion requires that we define knowledge,which in turn requires that we address complex epistemological issues best left to philosophers and theologians. Yet perhaps this is the speakers point: that we can never truly know either ourselves or the world, and that by recognizing this limitation we set ourselves free to accomplish what no amount of mere information could ever permit.

　　最后一句玩了復(fù)雜句的構(gòu)句技巧，想搏ets一笑。但我覺得還是總結(jié)的不夠好，沒有說(shuō)到點(diǎn)子上。其實(shí)，我們平實(shí)的寫作大可不必如此玩弄文字，因?yàn)槿绻?dāng)別人都不知道你在說(shuō)什么的話，一味專心于難句，無(wú)異于喧賓奪主了。個(gè)人認(rèn)為，寫得有點(diǎn)不知所云了

　　Issue 31

　　In any academic area or professional field, it is just as important to recognize the limits of our knowledge and understanding as it is to acquire new facts and information.

　　Personally, I hold that knowledge knows no bounds, therefore, on realizing this awkwardness, the only thing man should do is to absorb as much new knowledge as he can for the sake of not lagging behind the pacing steps of our world.

　　Does recognizing the limits of our knowledge and understanding serve us equally well as acquiring new facts and information, as the speaker asserts?注意這一句經(jīng)典的反問式開頭了，這是最引人注目的。While our everyday experience might lend credence to this assertion, further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with our Western view of how we acquire knowledge. Nevertheless,雖然是原則上不盡同意但還是提出妥協(xié)的辦法，從而顯出是critical thinking的，這一點(diǎn)很重要，也是拿分的重頭戲也。a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.

　　讓我們記一記一些好詞好句：lend credence to this assertion 證明這一觀點(diǎn)的正確性；further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with；Nevertheless, a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.

　　On the one hand, the speakers assertion accords with the everyday experience of working professionals. For example, the sort of bookknowledge that medical, law, and business students acquire, no matter how extensive, is of little use unless these students also learn to accept the uncertainties and risks inherent in professional practice and in the business world.

　　Any successful doctor, lawyer, or entrepreneur would undoubtedly agree that new precedents and challenges in their fields compel them to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge, and that learning to accommodate these limitations is just as important in their professional success as knowledge itself.

　　在駁論的第一段，就舉例子說(shuō)明知識(shí)的有限性并不一定意味著各行各業(yè)的人就必須汲取其他方面的知識(shí)，恰恰相反，對(duì)于醫(yī)生、律師或企業(yè)家來(lái)說(shuō)意識(shí)到了自我知識(shí)的有限，并且尋求方法去適應(yīng)調(diào)和這一有限性反而是必要的。

　　Moreover, the additional knowledge we gain by collecting more information often diminishes-sometimes to the point where marginal gains turn to marginal losses. Consider, for instance, the collection of financial- investment information. No amount of knowledge can eliminate the uncertainty and risk inherent in financial investing. Also, information overload can result in confusion, which in turn can diminish ones ability to assimilate information and apply it usefully. Thus, by recognizing the limits of their knowledge, and by accounting for those limits when making decisions, investment advisors can more effectively serve their clients.

　　進(jìn)一步通過(guò)金融投資業(yè)信息的贅余的危害性來(lái)駁斥原文的觀點(diǎn)。

　　On the other hand, the speakers assertion seems self-contradictory, for how can we know the limits of our knowledge until weve thoroughly tested those limits through exhaustive empirical observationthat is, by acquiring facts and information. For example, it would be tempting to concede that we can never understand the basic forces that govern all matter in the universe. Yet due to increasingly precise and extensive fact- finding efforts of scientists, we might now be within striking distance of understanding the key laws by which all physical matter behaves. Put another way, the speakers assertion flies in the face of悍然不顧，公然違抗the scientific method, whose fundamental tenet is that we humans can truly know only that which we observe. Thus Francis Bacon, who first formulated the method, might assert that the speaker is fundamentally incorrect.

　　說(shuō)實(shí)話，我覺得這一段里，玩了一個(gè)詭辯的小伎倆：先是指出原文觀點(diǎn)的自相矛盾性，然后引出自己的看法認(rèn)識(shí)論遠(yuǎn)重要于獲取新的事實(shí)和信息，也就是要先認(rèn)識(shí)知識(shí)和理解力的局限然后才是攝取新知。

　　How can we reconcile our experience in everyday endeavors with the basic assumption underlying the scientific method? Perhaps the answer lies in a distinction between two types of knowledgeone which amounts to a mere collection of observations , the other which is deeper and includes a realization of principles and truths underlying those observations. At this deeper level knowledge equals under- standing: how we interpret, make sense of, and find meaning in the information we collect by way of observation.

　　就上一段提出的問題推出自己的解決方法，即認(rèn)識(shí)到知識(shí)分成兩種：純觀察行為所得的信息；萃取之后的經(jīng)過(guò)自己消化后的理解。但我覺得這里還有待發(fā)揮，估計(jì)是時(shí)間不夠了，倉(cāng)促間收筆吧。沒有很好的說(shuō)明白。

　　In the final analysis, evaluating the speakers assertion requires that we define knowledge,which in turn requires that we address complex epistemological issues best left to philosophers and theologians. Yet perhaps this is the speakers point: that we can never truly know either ourselves or the world, and that by recognizing this limitation we set ourselves free to accomplish what no amount of mere information could ever permit.

　　最后一句玩了復(fù)雜句的構(gòu)句技巧，想搏ets一笑。但我覺得還是總結(jié)的不夠好，沒有說(shuō)到點(diǎn)子上。其實(shí)，我們平實(shí)的寫作大可不必如此玩弄文字，因?yàn)槿绻?dāng)別人都不知道你在說(shuō)什么的話，一味專心于難句，無(wú)異于喧賓奪主了。個(gè)人認(rèn)為，寫得有點(diǎn)不知所云了