这里是网友评论第3页，点击查看原文
发表评论 评论 (68 个评论)
- 回复 smartman
- i am so glad to know we see eye to eye with each other. shake hands, buddy!
FZM: Thank you! i found what you posted are almost what I want to say.
i am not good myself at typing chinese. but please feel free to write chinese to me.
- 回复 nnzzll
- Bartman自己曾经做过PHD，非常了解他们及其家属的心情。我觉得海攀这里写的稍微‘简陋’了一些。即，Bartman诱惑Yang其实不只是表面看到的这样简单，有很多黯默方式。比如，这里举一个我所知道的故事吧。有一个40几岁的钻石男（已婚），他诱惑女人的方式是，他先观察他中意的女孩子是不是善良，让后对他速说自己婚姻的不幸，并间接让那个女孩子说出对自己男友的不满，以此开和那个女孩子产生共鸣。之后，他在那个女孩子和别人面前也说他自己老婆的不是，那个女孩子就会当众表示出对他的同情，对他妻子的不满。（但是他不会当众说那个女孩子男友的不满。）。之后，时间一长，他越来越得到女孩子的信任，之后使她和她的男友分手。同时，他会想方设法让周围的人孤立她。然后让那个女孩子的情绪变得很坏，以至于她的朋友们离开她，她甚至与不和她的家人交流这件事。这之后，那个女孩子就很容易投入到他的怀抱。直到这个女孩子越陷越深，不可自拔，逼他离婚的时候，他也会毫不犹豫地甩掉她。可是这时候，已经没有人能够同情她，帮助他了。因为大家都受骗于那个男人的假象，认为是那个女孩子太爱他了，一直自厢情愿的追求这个男人，还当众说了不少他妻子的坏话，而那个男人是个好人，对她什么坏事也没有做。
smartman: gee, i love reading your insightful comments. i am so happy to find your forecast matches mine in general.
how about we make a tentative memorandum: ...
所以说，有心计的男人都是一步一步来的，找老婆最好找个‘聪明’的。
- 回复 smartman
- job search is a different story. if he graduates with a phd, bartman won't have much influence on his job search. US academic world is generally fair.
nnzzll: 正是。而且即使他毕业了，由于这个问题，他很可能找不到研究机构的工作。美国也不全是看能力的，更何况能力是要人来‘评价’的。
- 回复 smartman
- that is the trick or tactics a man uses to run after a woman. the method is nothing right or wrong. the person may be wrong, pending on his intention and availability.
nnzzll: Bartman自己曾经做过PHD，非常了解他们及其家属的心情。我觉得海攀这里写的稍微‘简陋’了一些。即，Bartman诱惑Yang其实不只是表面看到的这样简单，有很多黯默方 ...
- 回复 nnzzll
- 这说明你不了解研究这个行业，异想天开。
smartman: job search is a different story. if he graduates with a phd, bartman won't have much influence on his job search. US academic world is generally fai ...
我问你，就算你有了研究成果，是由谁来评价？答案是，Bartman和他一个圈子的人。就像Zheng当时是凭什么能当他的弟子，上王冠呢？Bartman信任的北京综合大学的一个老师的推荐信，而不是Zheng的学习成绩。
- 回复 smartman
- "这说明你不了解研究这个行业，异想天开。"
nnzzll: 这说明你不了解研究这个行业，异想天开。
我问你，就算你有了研究成果，是由谁来评价？答案是，Bartman和他一个圈子的人。就像Zheng当时是凭什么能当他的弟子，上 ...
hahahaha, not sure whether i should call you naiive or lovable.
phd advisors' recommendations mostly focus on the student's potentials and personalities, his attitude, his smartness and creativities. the student research paper quality is self-represented by the publication itself -- first, on which journal it was published, especially peer-reviewed; second, the school you applied most likely have professors in your areas and they are experts, of course, capable of juding your research quality.
a phd advisor can NEVER exaggerate his student research paper's quality. actually, he did not really need to mention or evaulate his student research paper's quality at all in his letter. the academic community knows its value for sure. what an advisor can emphasize is: his student completed his paper quickly in 3 months, published 8 papers in one year, etc. in this case, he is helping his student.
bartman believes in liang's letter that 1. emphasized zheng has extra potential in academic research, and, 2. his potential was not well represented by his low-GPA transcript. bartmen trusted liang's evaluation because he trusted liang's judgement.
- 回复 nnzzll
- 你也承认了。评价的尺度不一定都是成绩等等客观的成绩。所谓的‘有研究能力’，最后还是要靠评价的人的主观看法。
smartman: "这说明你不了解研究这个行业，异想天开。"
hahahaha, not sure whether i should call you naiive or lovable.
phd advisors' recomm ...
更改自己学生的成果是犯罪，老油条的Bartman才不会那么天真，去干那么傻的事情。很多时候，有些人为什么会冲动到杀了对方呢。原因就在于，他知道自己吃亏了。但是他又苦于没有证据来为自己申辩，所以走极端。
再给你举个极端一点的例子吧。有两个实力相当的人同时应征一个位子，这时候，推荐及审查，就不完全是客观原因了。就看审查的人看谁顺眼。对外人家选哪个都有一堆理由，外人根本辨不出里面的猫腻。
别说没有这种巧合，人倒霉的时候，往往就碰到这样的事情。
别说什么中国不公平，美国才公平这种骗人的鬼话。其实哪里都一样，说难听点，那是在中国你没玩过人家，在美国你还没明白人家是怎么玩的。
- 回复 smartman
- looks like i can't call you naiive or loveable. can i call you stubborn?
nnzzll: 你也承认了。评价的尺度不一定都是成绩等等客观的成绩。所谓的‘有研究能力’，最后还是要靠评价的人的主观看法。
更改自己学生的成果是犯罪，老油条的Bartman才 ...
..."我问你，就算你有了研究成果，是由谁来评价？答案是，Bartman和他一个圈子的人。"... -- this is COMPLETELY wrong! a phd research quality is not judged by his advisor. academic community knows its value.
..."更改自己学生的成果是犯罪"... -- how come you brought out this weird idea? there is NO WAY any advisor or anybody can 更改自己学生的成果. 学生的成果 is fully represented by his research paper. it is a published paper. in the public archive. NOBOYD CAN, IN NO WAY, CHANGE IT. again, it does NOT need Bartman to evaluate.
..."很多时候，有些人为什么会冲动到杀了对方呢。"... -- that is because a student felt mistreated and he was not given an equal opportunity to develop his potential. the student was in his early stage. if he has already developed his potential with quality papers, there is NO WAY his professor could mistreat him. he can easily find another better place as long as he has produced quality paper.
"有两个实力相当的人同时应征一个位子" -- WRONG ASSUMPTION! WRONG QUESTION! you made a serious mistake in your assumption. your statement only applies to a student applying for phd program, BUT NOT FOR PHDS APPLYING FOR PROFESSORIAL POSITIONS. when zheng applied for Harvard, he was evalued based on Liang's judgement on his potential, i.e., based on Liang's perception on his 实力. when Zheng finishes his phd and applies for professor positions, he was evalued on his 研究成果 not on his 实力! so, you should change your statement into "有两个研究成果相当的人同时应征一个位子"! in this case, bartman's recommendation will make a difference. that is why I said, bartman does not have too much influence.
look at what you said, "所谓的‘有研究能力’，最后还是要靠评价的人的主观看法。" that is for student applicants into a phd program. NOT FOR PHDs applying for professorship.
I know where and why you are wrong. You did not realize the difference in evaulating a phd applicant and evaluating a phd applying for professorship.
In summary:
1. a phd is expected to have already demonstrated his potential (研究能力) and produced his 研究成果, at least initial stage 研究成果. So, we no longer focus on evaluating his potential (研究能力), rather, we focus on evaluating his 研究成果. therefore, the evalution is relatively subjective. Because his 研究成果 is self-represented and can be subjectively evaluated, his advisor can not help too much.
2. a professor can help a lot for a phd applicant (as liang for zheng), because the student has not produced his 研究成果. so, the evaluation is pretty much objective, pending on the a professor's personal judgement to gauge a student's potential (研究能力).
hope you can understand now. if so, looks like I am a better person than you to assume the the position of "Director, Department of Women Enmacipation and Reeducation".
"别说什么中国不公平，美国才公平这种骗人的鬼话。"-- you have not stayed in academic community so you jumped into the conclusion so quickly. it is widely accepted that US academic research community is a much better and generally fair place for scholars. it does take me to defend. most professors agree, regardless a Chinese professor or a US professor.
========
on second thoughts, i found where you are wrong:
Q1: 我问你，就算你有了研究成果，是由谁来评价？答案是，Bartman和他一个圈子的人。
Q2: 就像Zheng当时是凭什么能当他的弟子，上王冠呢？
you said, Q1 and Q2 are similar (就像). that is your biggest mistake.
NO. This is totally different! Q1 and Q2 are completely 不像!
- 回复 nnzzll
- 看来你太迂腐了，也很天真，逻辑也很冠冕堂皇，但是没有任何的实质的道理。最重要的是，你不愿意面对现实。比你成功的女人有很多，别小瞧女人。当然，你也可以放心，没有人会相信你这套总结的。
smartman: looks like i can't call you naiive or loveable. can i call you stubborn?
..."我问你，就算你有了研究成果，是由谁来评价？答案是，Bart ...
- 回复 smartman
- look, i was correct to call you stubborn.
nnzzll: 看来你太迂腐了，也很天真，逻辑也很冠冕堂皇，但是没有任何的实质的道理。最重要的是，你不愿意面对现实。比你成功的女人有很多，别小瞧女人。当然，你也可以放 ...
if you hold a phd and had ever applied for or assumed a professor position in a research university, you would then know the reality. that is a completely different world you have never entered. you can't jump into conclusion.
this has nothing to do with 成功 or failure. it is just a different world and different experience. that is all. if a person is familiar with or stayed there before, it does not mean he or she is 成功. on the other hand, if a person has never stayed there or is unfamiliar with there, it does not mean he or she is a failure.
- 回复 nnzzll
- 呵呵，所以说，你还不知道人家的游戏规则是什么。你还太单纯，想当然的东西在你脑海里太多了。没办法，谁让你还是在校学生，理解不了社会上的事情。
smartman: look, i was correct to call you stubborn.
if you hold a phd and had ever applied for or assumed a professor position in a research university, you wo ...
‘成功’有很多要素，一个人的实力水平可能占98%，但是你缺那2%，你也是成功不了的。可能你自己的心理上没有任何后悔的事情。
我不是强调2%的比例大小，但是你也不能无视它的存在。
我敢说，在国外进入‘主流’的人士，绝对不会否定我所说的。
- 回复 smartman
- how do you know i am a student? where did you get this info?
nnzzll: 呵呵，所以说，你还不知道人家的游戏规则是什么。你还太单纯，想当然的东西在你脑海里太多了。没办法，谁让你还是在校学生，理解不了社会上的事情。
‘成功’有 ...
"我敢说，在国外进入‘主流’的人士，绝对不会否定我所说的。"
-- do I belong to 在国外进入‘主流’的人士? who is eligible? what is your criterion?
- 回复 nnzzll
- 因为思想单一。
smartman: how do you know i am a student? where did you get this info?
"我敢说，在国外进入‘主流’的人士，绝对不会否定我所说的。"
-- do I belong ...
这个你自己去查。
- 回复 smartman
- so funny! who in the US mainstream society supports you? please name a few.
nnzzll: 因为思想单一。
这个你自己去查。
this is a discussion of contents and topics. not a discussion of personal assertion and student status.
if you really want to justify your viewpoint, use facts and logic. not digress to a student status issue to justify.
even if i were a current student, it would still in no way prove your correctness.
- 回复 nnzzll
- so funny的是你。
smartman: so funny! who in the US mainstream society supports you? please name a few.
this is a discussion of contents and topics. not a discussion of perso ...
一个人的见识，不是你自己说你曾经是教授和高管人家就会信服的。很多话你一出口，人家就是知道你是不是pro。之前人家也断定了，你就是一个学生。
你又没告诉我，我干嘛告诉你。
- 回复 smartman
- it is not to discuss whether i am a student or not. it is to discuss to validate your conclusions which i believe is wrong.
nnzzll: so funny的是你。
一个人的见识，不是你自己说你曾经是教授和高管人家就会信服的。很多话你一出口，人家就是知道你是不是pro。之前人家也断定了，你就是一个学生 ...
"之前人家也断定了，你就是一个学生。". so, you know, because 之前人家也断定了LZ is female, therefore, LZ has to be female?
can't help laughing ...
