比如去年2月份的GRE考试中有一篇作文，题目要求探讨关于移动电话对于现代人生活的影响。假如考生提炼出的观点是“Mobile phones have changed our life greatly. ”这句只是说手机很大程度上改变了人们的生活，但是并未点明从哪些方面上带来了改变，因此把这个观点具化一下：“Mobile phones can serve as a connection to the Internet, which can be extremely convenient for obtaining information wherever you may be.”这样一来大家既有具体内容可写，也可以避免观点过于宽泛大而无当的情况。
而同样是在去年2月份，还有一篇作文的题目则讨论了关于广告泛滥对于社会舆论造成的干扰。如果考生只是简单写“Advertising has bad effects on all of society. ”广告有不良影响显然是不够的。我们需要写出具体的方面，比如“Advertisements which exaggerate the function of the products may mislead the consumers.”这样具体的观点才是GRE考官真正希望看到的内容，言之有物也需要从实际出发。
去年4月GRE作文中曾出现过这样一道题目，讲的是某个地方当地人开展旅游业的看法。有的考生直接把观点写成“There are more local residents engaged in tourism industry. ”这其实并非观点，只是陈述了一个事实就是在当地越来越多人开始从事旅游业，可改为：“Tourism brings huge economic benefits to local residents.”就比较容易展开了。
而今年1月份的GRE作文中也有一道讨论不可再生燃料如何持续利用的题目，如果考生写出“The consumption of fossil fuels increase in recent years. ”这样一句看似结论的话既缺乏数据支持也毫无说服力可言，等于是自己把话说死了，后续要怎么展开?正确写法是给出论述重点，假设原因，比如“The consumption of fossil fuels increasing in recent years results from two factors.”之后就会好写很多。
Too much time, money, and energy are spent developing new and more elaborate technology. Society should instead focus on maximizing the use of existing technology for the immediate benefit of its citizens.
I must say that I reject this statement. While it is true that we need to support society as much as possible with current technology, that does not in any way mean that we should stop progressing simply because our current technology cannot handle all the problems we have brought to it. Does that mean that we should simply accept the status quo and make do? No, I don’t think so. To do so would be tantamount to adopting a fatalistic approach; I think most people would reject that.
Technology has helped, and it has hurt. Without it, we would never have our standard of living, nor quality of nutrition, expectation of a long and productive life span, and the unshakable belief that our lives can be made even better. But it has also brought us universal pollution, weapons so powerful as to be capable of rendering us extinct, and the consequent fear for our survival as species and as a planet. Technology is indeed a double-edged sword. And yet, I still have to argue in its favor, because without it, we have no hope.
Some might argue that we would be better off without technology. They might say that a return to a less technologically driven approach to life would have the benefits of reducing stress and allowing us to live simpler, happier lives, like those of our forebears. Such an idea is seductive, so much so that much of art and all of nostalgia are devoted to it. But upon closer inspection, one realizes that such a move would only return us to a life of different kinds of stress, one of false simplicity, one fraught with danger. It would be a life without antibiotics where a minor cut could prove deadly. It would be a life where childbirth is the main killer of women, and where an emergency is dealt with in terms of hours and days instead of minutes and hours; a life where there are no phones or cars or planes or central heating, no proven drug therapies to treat mental illness, no computers. Would this world really make people happy?
What we already have, we have. And since the only way to move is forward, instead of allowing ourselves to be paralyzed by fear and worry, we need to learn how to clean up the pollution we have caused, and how to deal with a world that feeds on weapons and mass destruction. Doing these things means having to move away from technology into a more difficult realm, that of diplomacy and compromise: to move from the bully stance of “I am bigger and better and I have more toys and so I win” to a place where everyone wins.
Technology is the thing that will allow people to do that. But, advanced as it is, it is still in its infancy. We have to allow it to grow up and mature in order to reap the real rewards that it can bring. And there are even greater rewards ahead of us than what the world has already experienced. When technology is pushed to the outer edge, that is where serendipitous discoveries can occur. This has been seen throughout technological advancement, but the easiest example is probably the space program which made us think, really hard, about how to do things in a different environment. It gave us telecommunications, new fabrics and international cooperation. Paramedical devices, so that people can be treated even as they are being transported to the hosptal, are a direct development of that technology. None of this would have happened in the time frame that it did if we had not pushed for technological advancement. If we had decided to “focus on maximizing the use of existing technology” instead of foolishly reaching for the stars, we would not have made those discoveries which now are the bedrock of the 21st century.
I must say that I reject this statement.
Does that mean that we should simply accept the status quo and make do? No, I don’t think so.
Technology has helped, and it has hurt.
Technology is indeed a double-edged sword. And yet, I still have to argue in its favor, because without it, we have no hope.
Most people often look for similarities, even between very different things, and even when it it is unhelpful or harmful to do so. Instead, a thing should be considered on its own terms: we should avoid the tendency to compare it to something else.
In the age of accelerating changes, the eagerness to understand things in an effective and equally efficient way is more than ever. Although all kinds of complex techniques, skills and equipments helpful for understanding and studying the objects are easily accessible to people, the basic strategies stay the same as before: one is starting from similarities and the other from distinction. From my personal point of view, only by using the two in proper proportion and order can one achieve his/her goal to understand a thing.
Looking for similarities is a proper starting point. When we first meet something new,we need to clarify its basic attributes, finding similarites with other familiar things and classify it according to those attributes. Classification according to similaties is of great assistance to provide us with an outline, basic knowledge which we can base further investigation upon. Although things in contemporary age represent themselves in various forms and styles, similarities exist in any pair as long as certain perspective can be found. For instance, Bookcase and window are so different that at first glance, one may not be able to find the similarities, or even such an effort seems to be meaningless. Yet, they are both part of a house, something that must be taken into consideration when decorating or refurnishing the house. Such a comparison would be helpful for us to realize that “buy” and “sell” are two basic operation we can have upon window even though we have no idea what window is made of, how it is produced or what its function is.What’s more, looking for
similarities not only refer to the object itself, but the relationship with others. Similar relationships helps people understand things in groups or pairs using the strategy: analogy. Analogy is especially useful when the charactertistics of a relationship rather than the objects themselves are the focus of understanding and when similar relationships are known and objects unknown. For example, if told that the relationship between window and ASVE is similar to that between book and read, one can safely guess that ASVE is the operation people can take on window although ASVE stays an unknown action.
Definitely, mere similarity usually exclude the distinctive characteristics of a thing. We need to investigate its own terms for deeper understanding. Within the rough outline sketched by similarity, a more detailed and well-articulated picture can be drawn by grasping own terms of a thing. Still take window as an example. From careful observation, we know that it is transparent, it consists of different chemical materials, it performs the function as to protect privacy, to preserve desirable temperature indoor, and sometimes to prevent rains and snows from going inside. Deeper and further understanding of window can only be gained when we take its own terms besides those it shares with bookcase into consideration.