順境有利於人成長辯論稿（精選3篇）

順境有利於人成長辯論稿 篇1

謝謝主席,大家好!

桔生淮南則為桔，桔生淮北則為枳。我方的觀點是順境更有利於人成才。且聽我作如下的兩點分析。

第一，從概念方面説：人活着總處在一定的社會環境和自然環境中，當這樣的環境為我們成才的方方面面都設置了很好的條件，有利於我們主觀能動性的發揮時，這種環境就是順境。當我們生活在不論維持生存還是成就事業總感到困難重重，壓抑苦悶時，這種環境就是逆境。

順境中，給您克服這個困難提供了有利的保障。比如説我們有良師益友的指導，平時為我們諄諄教誨，為我們善言，來提醒我們哪些疏漏;比如説良好的物質條件，良好的生活環境，這些呢，都為我們克服這個困難提供了有利的條件。一個好漢三個幫和眾叛親離，哪個更有利於人的成才呢?

第二,從社會方面説,魯迅曾説，天才的出現，不僅需要天才的種子，而且更要適宜天才生長的土壤。人是一切社會關係的總和。一個人的成才與否，不僅與他的主觀努力有關，而且與他所處的社會經濟環境有關，諸葛亮成為千古人龍沒有劉玄德三顧茅廬是不可思議的，曹雪芹登上中國古典文學的頂峯，沒有他青少年時期的良好教育是不可能的。

歷史上,讓我們記憶猶新的“文革時期”，這段時期的社會環境顯然可以稱之為逆境，是這樣的環境更有利於人成才嗎?答案是否定的。輕視教育，輕視人才的社會風氣，使成才主體的智慧和才能沒有施展、發揮的餘地，他們怎樣成才?然而，改革開放，“尊重知識、尊重人才”，人才成長和發揮作用有了適宜的環境，也就是順境。如果沒有這樣的順境，許多人成才成果的美麗夢想也只能是夢想，不會實現。

為了讓更多的人不再生活在逆境中，無數革命英雄拋頭顱，灑熱寫作通:血，甚至連自己的身家性命都不顧，也要為大家爭來一個生活發展的順境。 假如今天我們為不能生逢亂世而遺憾，如果泉下有知，真不知會作何感想。如果説“逆境有利於人才成長，那麼這些偉人，他們在歷史上的過錯可真是無法計量的!真可謂是千古罪人!”

從教育這一行來説，綜觀世界各國,重視教育投入的國家國民素質就高，重視科研投入的科技成果就多。哈佛大學經濟系居世界第一，為什麼?主要因為哈佛有一流的教授、雄厚的財力，嚴格的制度保障等一切先決條件保證了哈佛學子獨佔熬頭。

我國教育大到國家政策，小到學校的策略，都非常重視人力、物力的投資，國家自改革開放以來，加大教育投資，教育界人才輩出，我國的教育也走在了世界前列。並且我們還向貧困地區捐款助學，創辦了許多希望國小，就是為了給那些因逆境而失學的兒童創造上學的條件，也是因為領導、教育家、有愛心的人都堅信 順境更有利於人成才即我方觀點。

好風憑藉力，助我上青雲。憑藉順境的好風，我們可以展開成才的雙翼，在人生的天際飛得更高，更遠。

順境有利於人成長辯論稿 篇2

尊敬的主席、評委、對方辯友、各位觀眾，大家好。

很高興在這裏與對方辯友進行辯論。我方觀點是順境更有利於人成長。

順境是指優越的環境、條件,如安定的社會環境、良好的家庭環境以及一個人的行為所得到的肯定、賞識、獎勵等，逆境與之相對。人的成長指的是人從自然人轉變為社會人，以及充分社會化的過程。以身心的健康發展和社會角色趨向成熟兩個指標來顯示。

順境給我們提供最基本成長中的物質需求。如果一個人出生於窮鄉僻壤，家裏人都食不果腹，他不得不在貧困線上掙扎，連受教育的可能性都沒有，他如何成長?對目不識丁的人而言，他只能複製祖輩父輩的生活軌道，這種原地踏步式的生活怎麼讓他成長?相反，假如他生於富裕家庭，父母都是高級知識分子，他接受了良好的教育，這樣順利的外在境遇不是更有利於他的成長嗎?曹操的祖父曹騰，是東漢末年官宦集團中的一員，而父親曹嵩官至太尉。曹操是中國東漢末年著名的軍事家、政治家和詩人，三國時代魏國的奠基人和主要締造者，後為魏王。曹丕是三國時期著名的政治家、文學家。曹植是三國時期曹魏詩人、文學家，建安文學的代表人物。後人因他文學上的造詣而將他與曹操、曹丕合稱為“三曹”。可見順境能為個人的健康成長提供經濟、文化等方面的條件，從而促進個人更好的成長。

順境更能給人們帶來正面的積極的心理影響，從而促進個人更好地成長。順利的環境讓人輕鬆、愉悦，而逆境則容易讓人緊張，沮喪，相比之下，當然人在心情好的情況成長得更好。逆境不僅阻礙人成才的腳步，而且會摧殘、扼殺、毀滅人才。就比如説同樣面臨逆境，只有極少數人跨了過去，功成名就，而絕大多數被淘汰出局，成了風成了塵，成了不知名的陪襯。著名畫家梵高面對愛情受挫、生活艱難、創作得不到肯定，最終抑鬱自殺。文化大革命更不知殘害了多少可以成為人才的人。順境對人的幫助要比逆境來得快，一句鼓勵的話，對你的肯定，是一種自信的力量、一比錢，是成功的本錢。

順境給了我們更高更廣闊的發展平台。小到一個人，大到一個國家，都是在全盛時期發展的更快更好。我國人均GDP在六十年代增速僅僅為17%，到七十年代增至70%，到了飛速發展的八十年代以63%的速度一舉超過印度，最後在九十年代更是達到了175%的高峯。(在順境當中，有師長指路，有書籍指引，有親友幫助，順境可以讓我們考慮的更全面更完善，那麼我們在成長路上都會提前做好準備，對各種可能的問題提前防範，繞道而行，即使面對問題也可以從容不迫，讓困難迎刃而解。)而另一方面，一個人在有主動選擇權的情況下，主動放棄有利條件而選擇不利條件。顯然這和人類的基本行為規律是違背的。人都是趨利避害的，都是尋求更好的外部環境和條件的。即使我們深陷逆境當中，在逆境中求發展的目的也是為了在順境中更好的成長。而我們擺脱逆境的能力和條件正是在順境當中累積而來，並不是憑空而在的潛能。倘若人始終處於逆境當中，遇到問題時恐怕早已被擊垮打倒，肯定沒有智慧和體力進行反抗。因此，順境才能提供給人成長更高更廣闊的平台，也是自然規律中使人成長的必須環境因素

順境有利於人成長辯論稿 篇3

Good evening，Ladies and gentlemen.

According to the law, every single individual is born with the right to keep living. Since death is just a part of life, to suggest that it is a right is to grant that it is a freedom to decide when and where to give up this kind of right. In a manner of speaking, it is a man’s right to commit suicide.

Again, we can find in the OXFord Advanced Learner’s English-Chinese dictionary the explanation of “suicide”----the act of killing oneself intentionally----which indicates that suicide is simply a libertarian movement for human freedom and the right of making choices. It is the law’s duty to protect human’s freedom and the right of making choices.

While it is without doubt that suicide, in reality, is human’s right, there main argument remain:

1,Maybe some people will say that the primary purpose of human being is to live, so suicide is inhumane and totally against the standard of ethic;

2,Suicide is criminal offense because it involves the killing of a person;

3,The people who commits suicide is irrespondsable to those who love him, even if it is a physical and mental realse to himself.

However, an evidence to sustain the first argument is difficult to is common sense to note that Modern medicine has its own limitation and can not cure all the existing spite of the extraordinary progress made in Modern medicine, problems remain in terms of guaranteeing that all the pains due to illness can be reduced to a tolerant level. As a result of this, at least in the near future, there must be some illnesses which can not be treated, some pains which are uncontrollable, some people who are terminally ill. Maybe the primary purpose of an ordinary and healthy human being is to live, but what if the person we are talking about is a terminally ill patient whose remaining time is no more than a series of suffering . Neither the law nor medical ethics requires “everything be done” to keep a person alive. However, insistnece, against the patient’s wishes, that death be postponed by every means available is contrary to law and practice. It would also be cruel and inhumane. There comes a time when continued attempts to cure are not compassionate, wise or medically sound. That’s where only euthanasia can be of use. Voluntary euthanasia,which is another form of suicide, is human, because it brings mental and physical release to the patient and his family and helps to put an ultimate end to the torment of a termnally ill patient by hastening his death when he has no prospect of recovering. Extending an incurably sick patient’s life means the same as aggravating the pain . It is unnecessory to maintain life artificially beyond the point when people will never regain consciousness. Because effort should not be made to perpetuate what has become a meanless existence.

Others may argue that “suicide is criminal offense because it involves the killing of a person”. Indeed, killing another person is a kind of serious criminal offense which we call “murder”. However, what we are talkig about is “suicide”, not “murder”. Do they realise there is a big difference between the lives of our own and the lives of other people? Since it is our own life, we have the right to decide in what way the life meets its end. If not ,what is the difference gonna be? For instance, you are guity of keeping other people’s possession without permition. Because you are stealing the things which do not belong to you. But when it comes to your own possession, that it is to say, when you keep your own possession or even use it in a way that will probably destroy it,no one would consider you as , Sustaining the idea of “suicide is criminal offense” is as ridiculous as saying that a person is guity of using his own possession in a destructive way. In the case of suicide, there is no victims, let alone the so-called criminal offense.

With regard to the last argument----”the people who commit suicide ,even if it is a physical and mental realse to himself, is irresponsable to the people who really love him”----the argument itself, ironically is in some sense to abmit that suicide is a physical and mental realse. But what they fail to realise is that the kind of release is not just to the one who commit suicide, but also to his is a terminally sick patient’s right as well as duty to put an utimate end to the torment of himself and his family. Because he is the reason of all the suffering. Those who choose suicide are a class of people whose remaining time is nothing but simply suffering, a class of people who choose death as an ultimate escape from the eternal torture they are destined to ,a class of people who need compassion and understanding from their relatives and the society, rather than meanlessly prolonging his painful life. If we really love the one who commit suicide, we should let him die in a desired way, die with dignity as he wishes. Because this is where true love lies.

Judging from what has been discussed above, we can safely draw the conclusion that we should make suicide legalized. Because it’s a new and bitter truth we must learn to face.

That’s k you.