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
22
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
(浙江大学2008年试题)Sincetheearly1930s,Swissbankshadpridedthemselvesontheirsystemofbankingsecrecyandnumberedaccou
(复旦大学2009年试题)Hereisagreatironyof21st-centuryglobalpublichealth;Whilemanyhundredsofmillionsofpeoplelackade
(复旦大学2010年试题)Businessandgovernmentleadersconsidertheinflationratetobeanimportantgeneralindicator.Inflationis
______thenewfund-raisingplanisapproved,wewillsoonhavemoremoneytobuildthegymnasium.(四川大学2010年试题)
(上海理工大学2006年试题)Inatelephonesurveyofmorethan2,000adults,21%saidtheybelievedthesunrevolved(旋转)aroundtheearth
(浙江大学2008年试题)Theenergycrisis,whichisbeingfeltaroundtheworld,hasdramatizedhowthecarelessuseoftheearth’sre
(浙江大学2008年试题)Theenergycrisis,whichisbeingfeltaroundtheworld,hasdramatizedhowthecarelessuseoftheearth’sre
(浙江大学2008年试题)Theenergycrisis,whichisbeingfeltaroundtheworld,hasdramatizedhowthecarelessuseoftheearth’sre
Fewnaturaldangersaremorefearedthanavalanches.AvalanchesareafamiliarpartofEuropeanhistory.ParticularlyintheSwi
Ifyouareafanofsciencefiction,you’venodoubtencounteredthetermnanotechnology,Yetoverthepastyearalso,aseries
随机试题
如何正确执行校准规范?
肝性脑病病人不应给予的治疗是( )。
A组织液B组织细胞内C动脉血D静脉血E肺泡气氧分压最低的是
患儿,女,2岁。睡眠差、哭闹、易出汗;双腿呈O形。X线平片如图所示。关于维生素D缺乏性佝偻病的影像表现哪些正确
一个全部由基因型为Aa的豌豆植株组成的种群,经过连续n代自交,获得的子代中,Aa的频率为()n,AA和aa的频率均为。根据现代生物进化理论,可以肯定该种群在这些年中()。
客体内容丰富、新颖又富于变化有助于注意的稳定。()
倘若不幸求职失败,也不用颓丧失望,大丈夫要有不患得失的_______,可能是对方没有发现你的才干,可能是你的专长不适于那工作,此地不容人自有容人处,你应该_______,自有更好的机会等着你。依次填入画横线部分最恰当的一项是()。
某夜十点某特快列车的餐厅里,某甲见某乙给某商人下迷药欲行抢劫,便抓起一只酒瓶向某乙的后脑部猛击十几下,某乙当场死亡。对某甲行为的评论,哪些是错误的?()
下列叙述中正确的是()。
A—midfieldB—backfieldC—cheerteamD—shootE—cornerhallF—kick-offG—stoppingH—pas
最新回复
(
0
)