發表評論 評論 (68 個評論)
- 回復 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.
- 回復 nnzzll
- Bartman自己曾經做過PHD，非常了解他們及其家屬的心情。我覺得海攀這裡寫的稍微『簡陋』了一些。即，Bartman誘惑Yang其實不只是表面看到的這樣簡單，有很多黯默方式。比如，這裡舉一個我所知道的故事吧。有一個40幾歲的鑽石男（已婚），他誘惑女人的方式是，他先觀察他中意的女孩子是不是善良，讓后對他速說自己婚姻的不幸，並間接讓那個女孩子說出對自己男友的不滿，以此開和那個女孩子產生共鳴。之後，他在那個女孩子和別人面前也說他自己老婆的不是，那個女孩子就會當眾表示出對他的同情，對他妻子的不滿。（但是他不會當眾說那個女孩子男友的不滿。）。之後，時間一長，他越來越得到女孩子的信任，之後使她和她的男友分手。同時，他會想方設法讓周圍的人孤立她。然後讓那個女孩子的情緒變得很壞，以至於她的朋友們離開她，她甚至與不和她的家人交流這件事。這之後，那個女孩子就很容易投入到他的懷抱。直到這個女孩子越陷越深，不可自拔，逼他離婚的時候，他也會毫不猶豫地甩掉她。可是這時候，已經沒有人能夠同情她，幫助他了。因為大家都受騙於那個男人的假象，認為是那個女孩子太愛他了，一直自廂情願的追求這個男人，還當眾說了不少他妻子的壞話，而那個男人是個好人，對她什麼壞事也沒有做。
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: ...
所以說，有心計的男人都是一步一步來的，找老婆最好找個『聰明』的。
- 回復 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。而且即使他畢業了，由於這個問題，他很可能找不到研究機構的工作。美國也不全是看能力的，更何況能力是要人來『評價』的。
- 回復 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自己曾經做過PHD，非常了解他們及其家屬的心情。我覺得海攀這裡寫的稍微『簡陋』了一些。即，Bartman誘惑Yang其實不只是表面看到的這樣簡單，有很多黯默方 ...
- 回復 nnzzll
- 這說明你不了解研究這個行業，異想天開。
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 ...
我問你，就算你有了研究成果，是由誰來評價？答案是，Bartman和他一個圈子的人。就像Zheng當時是憑什麼能當他的弟子，上王冠呢？Bartman信任的北京綜合大學的一個老師的推薦信，而不是Zheng的學習成績。
- 回復 smartman
- "這說明你不了解研究這個行業，異想天開。"
nnzzll: 這說明你不了解研究這個行業，異想天開。
我問你，就算你有了研究成果，是由誰來評價？答案是，Bartman和他一個圈子的人。就像Zheng當時是憑什麼能當他的弟子，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.
- 回復 nnzzll
- 你也承認了。評價的尺度不一定都是成績等等客觀的成績。所謂的『有研究能力』，最後還是要靠評價的人的主觀看法。
smartman: "這說明你不了解研究這個行業，異想天開。"
hahahaha, not sure whether i should call you naiive or lovable.
phd advisors' recomm ...
更改自己學生的成果是犯罪，老油條的Bartman才不會那麼天真，去干那麼傻的事情。很多時候，有些人為什麼會衝動到殺了對方呢。原因就在於，他知道自己吃虧了。但是他又苦於沒有證據來為自己申辯，所以走極端。
再給你舉個極端一點的例子吧。有兩個實力相當的人同時應徵一個位子，這時候，推薦及審查，就不完全是客觀原因了。就看審查的人看誰順眼。對外人家選哪個都有一堆理由，外人根本辨不出裡面的貓膩。
別說沒有這種巧合，人倒霉的時候，往往就碰到這樣的事情。
別說什麼中國不公平，美國才公平這種騙人的鬼話。其實哪裡都一樣，說難聽點，那是在中國你沒玩過人家，在美國你還沒明白人家是怎麼玩的。
- 回復 smartman
- looks like i can't call you naiive or loveable. can i call you stubborn?
nnzzll: 你也承認了。評價的尺度不一定都是成績等等客觀的成績。所謂的『有研究能力』，最後還是要靠評價的人的主觀看法。
更改自己學生的成果是犯罪，老油條的Bartman才 ...
..."我問你，就算你有了研究成果，是由誰來評價？答案是，Bartman和他一個圈子的人。"... -- this is COMPLETELY wrong! a phd research quality is not judged by his advisor. academic community knows its value.
..."更改自己學生的成果是犯罪"... -- how come you brought out this weird idea? there is NO WAY any advisor or anybody can 更改自己學生的成果. 學生的成果 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.
..."很多時候，有些人為什麼會衝動到殺了對方呢。"... -- 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.
"有兩個實力相當的人同時應徵一個位子" -- 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 實力. when Zheng finishes his phd and applies for professor positions, he was evalued on his 研究成果 not on his 實力! so, you should change your statement into "有兩個研究成果相當的人同時應徵一個位子"! 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, "所謂的『有研究能力』，最後還是要靠評價的人的主觀看法。" 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".
"別說什麼中國不公平，美國才公平這種騙人的鬼話。"-- 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: 我問你，就算你有了研究成果，是由誰來評價？答案是，Bartman和他一個圈子的人。
Q2: 就像Zheng當時是憑什麼能當他的弟子，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!
- 回復 nnzzll
- 看來你太迂腐了，也很天真，邏輯也很冠冕堂皇，但是沒有任何的實質的道理。最重要的是，你不願意麵對現實。比你成功的女人有很多，別小瞧女人。當然，你也可以放心，沒有人會相信你這套總結的。
smartman: looks like i can't call you naiive or loveable. can i call you stubborn?
..."我問你，就算你有了研究成果，是由誰來評價？答案是，Bart ...
- 回復 smartman
- look, i was correct to call you stubborn.
nnzzll: 看來你太迂腐了，也很天真，邏輯也很冠冕堂皇，但是沒有任何的實質的道理。最重要的是，你不願意麵對現實。比你成功的女人有很多，別小瞧女人。當然，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.
- 回復 nnzzll
- 呵呵，所以說，你還不知道人家的遊戲規則是什麼。你還太單純，想當然的東西在你腦海里太多了。沒辦法，誰讓你還是在校學生，理解不了社會上的事情。
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，一個人的實力水平可能佔98%，但是你缺那2%，你也是成功不了的。可能你自己的心理上沒有任何後悔的事情。
我不是強調2%的比例大小，但是你也不能無視它的存在。
我敢說，在國外進入『主流』的人士，絕對不會否定我所說的。
- 回復 smartman
- how do you know i am a student? where did you get this info?
nnzzll: 呵呵，所以說，你還不知道人家的遊戲規則是什麼。你還太單純，想當然的東西在你腦海里太多了。沒辦法，誰讓你還是在校學生，理解不了社會上的事情。
『成功』有 ...
"我敢說，在國外進入『主流』的人士，絕對不會否定我所說的。"
-- do I belong to 在國外進入『主流』的人士? who is eligible? what is your criterion?
- 回復 nnzzll
- 因為思想單一。
smartman: how do you know i am a student? where did you get this info?
"我敢說，在國外進入『主流』的人士，絕對不會否定我所說的。"
-- do I belong ...
這個你自己去查。
- 回復 smartman
- so funny! who in the US mainstream society supports you? please name a few.
nnzzll: 因為思想單一。
這個你自己去查。
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.
- 回復 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 ...
一個人的見識，不是你自己說你曾經是教授和高管人家就會信服的。很多話你一出口，人家就是知道你是不是pro。之前人家也斷定了，你就是一個學生。
你又沒告訴我，我幹嘛告訴你。
- 回復 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。
一個人的見識，不是你自己說你曾經是教授和高管人家就會信服的。很多話你一出口，人家就是知道你是不是pro。之前人家也斷定了，你就是一個學生 ...
"之前人家也斷定了，你就是一個學生。". so, you know, because 之前人家也斷定了LZ is female, therefore, LZ has to be female?
can't help laughing ...
