如何杜絕GRE寫作ISSUE的片面論證呢?參加過GRE考試的同學，都知道GRE寫作的ISSUE是有很大難度的，不容易取得高分。下面小編就和大家分享GRE寫作立論ISSUE避免觀點片面3個方法介紹，希望能夠幫助到大家，來欣賞一下吧。
GRE寫作立論ISSUE避免觀點片面3個方法介紹
GRE寫作論點思路指導
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
從這個instructions可以看出，我們絕不能單純地從正負觀點去展開文章。因為，它明確說了你需要在寫作中討論“命題”中的陳述在何種情況下成立“true”，在何種情況下不成立”not hold true”。如果你在寫作時仍然持有單一觀點，你最后的得分可想而知。但是，實際情況是，對于大多數(shù)中國考生來講，他們往往受困于單一觀點“黑白分明”的思維定式，不善于從多角度分析一個問題。而這里各位考生需要明白，ETS對于GRE高分作文有一個很重要也是最基本的要求，那就是complexity，也就是“立場和角度的多樣化”。為了去應對這樣的寫作要求，我在這里介紹幾種實用且又符合instructions要求的破題方式。
GRE寫作論證方法介紹：融合對立選項平衡觀點
很多題目總是會列出兩個對象，接受一個拋棄另一個，這個時候可以找尋題設中兩個認為對立的對象之間的聯(lián)系，指出兩者是共存的。
例如：
It is the artist, not the critic, who gives society something of lasting value.
1.藝術品本身實際上就有很深刻的內(nèi)涵和永恒的價值，同時批評家可以讓大家明白藝術品的價值在哪里。
2. 那些流傳遠久有永恒價值的藝術都是批評家們幫助篩選出來的。
因此，這兩個對象是不矛盾的。
GRE寫作論證方法介紹：關鍵詞分離寫
很多題目中會出現(xiàn)兩個對象，從表面上看，它們似乎是一致的，但實際上他們之間存在差異。對于這樣的題目，我們可以肯定一個對象，而否定另一個。
例如：
Technologies not only influence but actually determine social customs and ethics.
首先，我們可以看出，題目中的兩個對象customs (風俗)和 ethics(倫理)實際上是有很大差異的。因此，科技對他們的影響力也絕對不會是一樣的。
1.肯定 customs
customs是可以被科技改變的，比如很多典禮和文化還有迷信都因為科學的進步而廢除了，還是有很多傳統(tǒng)被賦予了新的含義。
2.否定 ethics
ethics是很難被科技改變的，無論科技怎么變，道德是數(shù)千年以來人類共同承認的東西，是不會隨著科技的發(fā)展而改變的，反過來是道德影響科技的發(fā)展。
GRE寫作論證方法介紹：定義模糊關鍵詞
很多題目的key point就在于如何定義關鍵詞，題目給出的概念不夠明晰的時候，可以有不同的理解，而不同的理解就可以有不同的方向破題。
例如：
"facts are stubborn things. They cannot be altered by our wishes, or our inclinations."
我們可以看出，本題中的 “facts”意義就非常模糊。因此，我們可以通過對于其不同定義來題目。
1.如果fact作為一種自然客觀規(guī)律，這樣的fact是我們無法改變的，比如所有的生物終將死亡。時間是不能倒退的，這些是我們通過親身感受可以感知到的，無論怎么努力，這些事實是不可能改變的。
2.如果把fact理解為記錄的史實，那么fact是有可能改變的。誠然發(fā)生過的事情不可以改變，但是歷史本來就不可能完全真實的記錄已經(jīng)發(fā)生的事實。這樣的情況下“fact”很多時候都是被改變的。
GRE寫作高分范文：政治領袖
Unlike great thinkers and great artists, the most effective political leaders must often yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise.
不同于偉大的思想家和藝術家，最杰出的政治領袖通常都必須為了妥協(xié)而屈從于大眾的意見并且放棄原則。
GRE寫作范文：
With the respect of history, today’s democratic structure of politic roots deeply in ancient Greek philosophers’ advocation for the respect of public and individual beings,their admiration of the egalitarian, and the eagerness for justice as well as the electoral system specially devised to surpvise those in power. The Renaissance taking place in Europe and the democratic Revolution booted up by Napoleon in France both have produced great thinkers who demand the restriction of the politicians’ power and authority, labeling the end of an era in which politicians could lay their hands on almost every objects of demand. Driven by this trend, the contemporary politicians ostensibly deprived of certain freedom enjoyed by most artists and scientists could no longer behave in the way they would like to. These people, taking the responsibility of the democratic government, are restrained from several aspects. These restriction mainly comes from the public’s desire and different groups’ attitudes.
Although being neglected sometimes, the artists and the scientists still adhere to their own responsibilities, appear undisturbed and display astonishing indifference to the public. Such right is deserved as to artists and scientists, since their insightful thoughts and complicated feeling about life far go beyond what normal people may achieve.Frustrated and deterred by these maestros, publics turn to the other extreme―ignoring these great thinkers and even cursing them as heretics that destroy the current harmony. Again, scientists and artists enjoy the freedom to obliterate the influence laid on them by the mundane world since their interests are just focused on the exploration of the purity of the truth and reciprocating the perfect memory of the past or wonderful visions about future, rather than caring for the public’s benefits.
During such process, they just jump out of the world and objectively describe it, any scorns or restrictions are treated as part of the object they are proceeding, and this is just the hits of their successes. Sometimes, certain behavior that even force the community members away from communicating with these elites are taken as pride in that artists and scientists could employ their free time to continue their interest.
On the other hand, never would the politician own such comparatively broad freedom. As for a politician, the key to success in politics is to gain and maintain political power.Such power comes from certain identification of the public morality with the politician’s private one and the balance of different groups’ benefits and demands. Consequently,the politician’s attitudes, behavior and even the life style are tightly restricted for fear that any diversion from public’s taste may conduce to losing authority which is a real tragedy for a politician. To be an effective political leader excludes the opportunity that a politician may taste the freedom of the same merits as that enjoyed by artists and scientists, the freedom characterd by consciously seperating oneself from commentary and neglecting the demands made by majority. The successful leadership could be achieved by submerging oneself into the public and being sufficiently prepared for sacrificing some freedom for the majority’s benefits.
It is always funny to imagine what will happen to a special politician who could share a scientist or an artist’s freedom. When this politician is bored at the legitimate meeting that is being broadcast by media agencies, he escape to have a chess with his child.Subsequently, critics begin to accumulate the dissatisfaction of the public to attack this leader’s lacking responsibility of the public affairs. Moreover, he may again utilize the freedom to isolate himself from the public pressure by flying out to have a summer holiday. Then, only one thing can be assured, our special politician is deprived of the right to initiate his power which is a symbol of the end of his political life.
The development of technology and recognition of our society require both politicians and insightful thinkers. However, the democratic system of our contemporary world fixes two distinct sets of freedom that could enjoyed by them. While we agree that artists and scientists enjoy the comparatively broad one, we can not expect the political leaders to have opportunity to taste it.
GRE寫作高分范文：想法付諸行動的困難性
It is easy to welcome innovation and accept new ideas. What most people find difficult, however, is accepting the way these new ideas are put into practice.
擁護革新和接受新想法很簡單。但是在大多數(shù)人們看來，最困難的是接受把這些新想法付諸實現(xiàn)的方式。
GRE寫作范文：：
The writer of the issue connotates an ironic phenomenon: though innovation is required in our era and eulogized by most people, application of it is clannished vehemently because of the fear of failure and the possibility of obtained possession and tradition impairing. The author grasps the paradox psychology of most people and pertinently reveals a universal mentality.
As is known that innovation may bring big progress and result in even a revolutionary transition of a society: the elevated efficiency of work, the ameliorated life, the enticing fruit of new technology and so on. Following with innovation of the second industrial revolution, great changes took place and immediately a renewed world unfolded before us with the application of its fruits. Seeing unimaginable profits and the magic power, who (including the society and government) can suppress their agitating desire to restrict development of innovation?
Unfortunately, innovation doesn't always follow the people's will and always acts like an uncontroled horse running in the plain. Worrying about the side-effect, people have to hold their desire back but admire those who are brave enough to taste crabs for the first time. Not everyone possesses the same courage as Biil Gate's, who dare invest on a fresh field and give up the chance of studying in Harvard University, which is the dream of most aggressive young people. Often, pondering what they have already possessed with what they might get from innovation, most people prefer the former to the latter, even content to sacrifice the latter to ensure the integer of the former. For example, a department may enroll those who are not very deft in the work but behave complaisant before higher-ups and deny to those who stick to their innovational opinion obstinately. After all, it is required more to cooperate with others harmoniously and conform to the traditional rules nowadays than to creat a new law according to individual penchant, in any company and corporation.
Maybe, some one argues that, how to cultivate innovation if personality should abdicate to interests of collective? Does the statement above alludes that employees should do nothing but keep silent and follow what the higher-ups dictated, strangling their inspiration to accord to the criterion today? No doubt, such supposition is rediculous. I mean that employees should try to approach their original though to tenet of the collective, not attempt to disobey the existed norm, respect suggestion and supposition of others and circumspect the innovation and then discuss with all the members in the company. That is, responsibility should be taken before the innovation is applied to practice.
Of course, many people don't have the ability that controling their compulsion of carrying their innovation into application. It doesn't lack of people who dare not apply innovation, and people who hold innovational thought are not scarc either, however,those who possess both of the two abilities and are lucky enough to encounter a proper opportunity to release their innovation is very few. The seperation of spirit of application and creation of innovation is the root of the the strange phenomenon, that innovation and new ideas are here and there while the acceptance and combination of them with application is too little to be heard.
