In 1896 a Georgia couple suing for damages in the accidental death of their two year old was told that since the child had made

admin2017-06-30  43

问题     In 1896 a Georgia couple suing for damages in the accidental death of their two year old was told that since the child had made no real economic contribution to the family, there was no liability for damages. In contrast, less than a century later, in 1979, the parents of a three year old sued in New York for accidental-death damages and won an award of $ 750, 000.
    The transformation in social values implicit in just a posing these two incidents is the subject of Viviana Zelizer’s excellent book, Pricing the Priceless Child. During the nineteenth century, she argues, the concept of the "useful" child who contributed to the family economy gave way gradually to the present-day notion of the "useless" child who, though producing no income for, and indeed extremely costly to, its parents, is yet considered emotionally "priceless". Well established among segments of the middle and upper classes by the mid-1800’s, this new view of childhood spread through-out society in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries as reformers introduced child-labor regulations and compulsory education laws predicated in part on the assumption that a child’s emotional value made child labor taboo.
    For Zelizer the origins of this transformation were many and complex. The gradual erosion of children’s productive value in a maturing industrial economy, the decline in birth and death rates, especially in child mortality, and the development of the companionate family(a family in which members were united by explicit bonds of love rather than duty)were all factors critical in changing the assessment of children’s worth. Yet "expulsion of children from the ’ cash nexus’ , ... although clearly shaped by profound changes in the economic, occupational, and family structures," Zelizer maintains. "Was also part of a cultural process ’of sacralization’ of children’s lives. " Protecting children from the crass business world became enormously important for late-nineteenth-century middle-class Americans, she suggests; this sacralization was a way of resisting what they perceived as the relentless corruption of human values by the marketplace.
    In stressing the cultural determinants of a child’s worth. Zelizer takes issue with practitioners of the new " sociological economics" , who have analyzed such traditionally sociological topics as crime, marriage, education, and health solely in terms of their economic determinants. Allowing only a small role for cultural forces in the form of individual "preferences" , these sociologists tend to view all human behavior as directed primarily by the principle of maximizing economic gain. Zelizer is highly critical of this approach, and emphasizes instead the opposite phenomenon: the power of social values to transform price. As children became more valuable in emotional terms, she argues, their " exchange" or "surrender" value on the market, that is, the conversion of their intangible worth into cash terms, became much greater.
The primary purpose of the passage is to______.

选项 A、review the literature in a new academic subfield
B、present the central thesis of a recent book
C、contrast two approaches to analyzing historical change
D、refute a traditional explanation of a social phenomenon

答案B

解析 本题是主旨题。本文通过举例,前后对比说明孩子的货币价值逐渐发生改变,引出Viviana Zelizer的新书,并介绍书中的观点与社会经济学家观点的不同之处。由此可判断B正确。并且强调自己人性化的观点。文中没有提及academic subfield,故排除A。C项“对比分析历史的变化”,对比是为了突出作者观点的人性化,与原文不符。D项“反驳对于社会现象的传统解释”,不符合原文。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/hcFO777K
0

最新回复(0)