首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talk show, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack ea
In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talk show, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack ea
admin
2016-01-30
46
问题
In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talk show, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other — hurl insults, even — and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it. It seems that our society favors a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims. The problem is society’s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong.
Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly consensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even. The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics — just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time — keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You’ll be upset, but you’ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves — by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It’s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate; if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another’s folly. Mockery — so cruel when practiced on the innocent — can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is to so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel quality if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I ’m prepared to bet on it. You’ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.
The author’s tone in this passage can be best described as______.
选项
A、objective
B、formal
C、critical
D、ironic
答案
D
解析
作者态度题。本文作者在讨论“辩论”这一普遍的社会现象时,用了很多如favor,advantage,reverence.the smarter…the better…等褒义词,但事实上,他并不欣赏以“辩论”解决问题,由此可见,本文带有很浓的讽刺意味,因此只有选项D最恰当地描述了文章的语气。选项C最具干扰性,因为本文确实在评论“辩论”这一做法,但critical倾向于指“严厉批判”或“挑刺找茬”,这与文章中用词轻快的特点是不相符的,因此选项C不如选项D恰当。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/chGO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
Inrecentyears,therehasbeenasteadyassaultonsaltfromthedoctors:saltisbadforyouregardlessofyourhealth.Politi
Inrecentyears,therehasbeenasteadyassaultonsaltfromthedoctors:saltisbadforyouregardlessofyourhealth.Politi
Itisaneverydayobservationthatanimalsareborn,grow,andmature,thenbegintolosesomeoftheircapabilities,andfinall
Whatdoconsumersreallywant?That’saquestionmarketresearcherswouldlovetoanswer.Butsincepeopledon’talwayssaywhat
(浙江大学2008年试题)Sincetheearly1930s,Swissbankshadpridedthemselvesontheirsystemofbankingsecrecyandnumberedaccou
(复旦大学2009年试题)Hereisagreatironyof21st-centuryglobalpublichealth;Whilemanyhundredsofmillionsofpeoplelackade
Theworkerschoseto______theirdissatisfactioninaseriesofstrikes.(复旦大学2011年试题)
Somecultureshavecustomsthat______theclothingfashionsofpeopleincertainsocialclasses.
ThefirstfewmonthsoftheyearIhaddreadedtheringingofthetelephone,becauseIknewitmeantanother______decisiontobe
In1900theUnitedStateshadonlythreecitieswithmorethanamillionresidents—NewYork,Chicago,andPhiladelphia.By193
随机试题
两台交换机分别具有12个和16个10/100Mbps全双工下联端口,它们的上联端口带宽至少应为()。
22岁男性患者,感冒后10天后出现双下肢浮肿伴乏力,血压155/105mmHg,尿蛋白(++),红细胞(++++),颗粒管型1~4个/HP,血肌酐106μmol/L,血红蛋白122g/L。本例临床表现符合
A、舟车丸B、保和丸C、枳实消痞丸D、木香槟榔丸E、枳实导滞丸具有行气导滞,攻积泄热功用的方剂是
骨囊肿好发于
与低常期相对应的动作电位时相是
某单位自用办公房产原值为100万元,其房产税税基可能为()万元。
下面属于著名作曲家舒伯特的作品的是()
当x→∞时,ln(1+[*])~1→x,可知[*]所以本题是“∞-∞”型.应先做变换,令t=1→x,则[*]
设矩阵,当a为何值时,存在可逆矩阵P,使得P-1AP=Λ,并求出此时的矩阵P和相应的对角矩阵Λ。
设曲线y=a+x-x3,其中a<0.当x>0时,该曲线在x轴下方与y轴、x轴所围成图形的面积和在x轴上方与x轴所围成图形的面积相等,求a.
最新回复
(
0
)