求拍，小弟还有7天就上了，实在没谱啊！各位大虾帮帮忙！拍死吧！
Issue 36
The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries." 36． 只有后来人评价以前的人，而不应该同时代的人相互评价
Should the greatness of individuals can be evaluated only by those who live after them which cannot by their contemporaries, as the speaker claims? In a sense, I tend to agree that people prefer to judges the individuals who live before them as a habit. However, the speaker begs question by overlooking the crucial role of the people that has the capability to evaluate others who are live in contemporary. In my point of view, both the evaluation of the former and current individuals are critical to us.
As I see it, there are two fundamental functions for the reason why the people prefer to judge the greatness of individuals who live before them. First, the current person has a habit that they like to judge the former person who has the greatness of individuals. It is breezy to judge someone who had passed away, because when you talking about the current people which might make you sorrowful. For example, a person who is your classmate that have gained an amazing success in business. Though it is well known that his performance is not as well as yours and your capacity is much better than him, then, when someone talk about him you cannot laughing any more, more often than not, there is a heavy pressure come to you. That is the reason why people always avoid talking about the greatness of individuals who might have comparison with themselves.
The second function is that the current people can help the celebrity who received the unfair judgment by esteemed critics of his or her time or did not found by people. History supports this fact. Consider, for example, prodigies often could not receive contemporary appreciation and comprehension, Van Gogh is proper to be mentioned as a representative of the kind. He created the impressionism on painting, which was accepted many years after his death. Moreover, Emily Bronte was a British novelist and poet, best remembered for her one novel Wuthering Heights, an acknowledged classic of English literature. But it received mixed reviews when it first came out, the book did not become an English literary classic until forty years later. In short, this function is an important one because the people that live after them help the individuals who made the contribution to the world remembered by us.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the greatness of individuals by their contemporaries cannot be neglected. The evaluation like a filter which helps us determine which one is worth our time and attention. For example, a new novel by a best-selling author might nevertheless be an uninspired effort, and if the evaluation can call our attention to this fact we gain time to seek out more worthwhile literature to read. What is also can be used in politics, for instance, the 32nd President of the United States (1933-1945). Governor of New York (1929-1932), he ran for President with the promise of a New Deal for the American people. His administration was marked by relief programs, measures to increase employment and assist industrial and agricultural recovery from the Depression, and World War II. He was the only U.S. President to be reelected three times (1936, 1940, and 1944). He died in office. If his people did not think the president achieved his promise and respected him, he could not reelect three times which is never happened in history. It is doubtless that public through the evaluation of him to make that decision.
To sum up, when it come to whether the greatness of individual can be decided by those who live after them, or by their contemporaries. The conclusion is very obvious; both of them are crucial to society for the reason that they enrich the history and help the development of society. In the final analysis, then, I fundamentally disagree with the speaker’s claim.
