下载文档原格式
关于战争批判性思维的英语作文War, a concept that has haunted humanity since the dawn of civilization, is a complex tapestry of power struggles, ideological conflicts, and territorial disputes. It is a subject that demands critical thinking, as it is not merely a clash of arms but a profound test of morality, strategy, and the very essence of human nature. The critique of war is not just an academic exercise but a necessary dialogue to foster peace and prevent the recurrence of history's most devastating events.The first line of critique against war is its cost in human lives. The toll of war is not only measured in the dead but also in the wounded, both physically and psychologically. The scars of war run deep, affecting not just the soldiers but also the innocent civilians who are all too often caught in the crossfire. This human cost is incalculable and serves as a stark reminder of the urgency to seek peaceful resolutions to conflicts.Economically, war is a drain on resources that could be better spent on education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The diversion of funds to military endeavors often leads to the neglect of social services and the exacerbation of inequality. Moreover, the long-term economic impact of war includes rebuilding costs, reparations, and the lingering effects of a destabilized economy.Moral and ethical considerations are also central to the critique of war. The principles of just war theory, which include the concepts of just cause, right intention, and proportionality, provide a framework for evaluating the morality of war. However, the application of these principles is often fraught with controversy, as the realities of warfare can lead to civilian casualties, collateral damage, and the violation of human rights.Furthermore, the psychological impact of war cannot be understated. It breeds fear, hatred, and a cycle of vengeance that is difficult to break. The mental health of societies is severely affected, leading to intergenerational trauma and a pervasive sense of insecurity.The critique of war also extends to its role in the propagation of ideologies that may not withstand the scrutiny of critical analysis. Wars are often fought in the name of freedom or democracy, yet the methods employed can be in direct opposition to these values. The paradox of using violence to establish peace is a contradiction that requires careful examination.In conclusion, the critical thinking approach to war involves a multifaceted analysis that considers the human, economic, moral, and psychological dimensions. It is through this lens that we can better understand the true costs of war and work towards a world where the resolution of conflicts is achieved through diplomacy and dialogue rather than through the destructive path of warfare.。
试析美国种族歧视的历史根源摘要: 美国是一个自我标榜的民主和自由的国家, 但是这种民主和自由是充满了悖论的。
美国一直存在着种族歧视现象。
美国的白人观、黑奴制、黑人意识等三个因素互相影响, 使美国的种族矛盾丛生。
作者简介: 张晓云(1978- ) , 女, 安徽淮北人, 硕士研究生, 研究方向: 美国史。
长期以来, 美国一直标榜自己是最民主、最自由、最理想的社会, 殊不知其本身也是社会问题丛生。
种族歧视便是其根深蒂固的社会痼疾之一。
2000年9 月21 日美国国务院发表的报告承认, 尽管消除种族歧视的法律已经颁布了几十年, 但是种族歧视依然困扰着美国社会。
报告声称:“虽然大多数白人不认为今天的美国有太多的种族歧视问题, 但大多数少数民族在现实生活中的感觉却正好相反。
”[1 ]90年代美国依然出现了一系列的种族歧视的事件, 诸如1991 年洛杉矶警察殴打黑人罗尼·金, 1999 年黑人移民迪亚洛在纽约被4 名白人警察连击几十枪而当场毙命, 得克萨斯州一位名叫詹姆斯·伯德的黑人被绑在汽车上活活拖死, 以及许多犹太人、穆斯林和黑人宗教场所被烧毁等, 充分显示了这一问题的严重性。
报告还注意到, 在美国被关押在监狱里的黑人和被判死刑的黑人比例明显高于白人。
在各州的监狱中, 大约47% 的囚犯为黑人, 16% 的囚犯为拉美裔美国人。
在1977 年至1998 年期间, 黑人仅占美国全国人口的10% 至12% , 但在5709 名被判死刑的人当中, 有41% 是黑人。
为什么种族歧视在美国依然存在。
本文试图做简单的分析。
1美国的白人观美国的白人意识由来已久, 它并不是在接触黑人后才产生的, 而是英国文化中早已沉淀下来的自我认同心理。
对于伊丽莎白时代的英格兰人来说, 白色具有一种特殊的文化上的含义, 它成为人们特别是女性美丽的代表物。
有诗这样赞美女王:“她的脸颊, 她的下颚, 她的勃颈, 她的鼻子, 这就是百合, 这就是玫瑰; 她的双手之白, 洁如鲸骨, 她的指尖, 闪烁着淡紫; 她的胸脯, 光滑如巴黎凝脂, 托起两峰雪花石膏。
写矛盾的英语作文Progress is often heralded as the pinnacle of human achievement. It signifies development, improvement, and the relentless pursuit of betterment. However, the very conceptof progress is riddled with contradictions and paradoxes that challenge our understanding of what it truly means to advance. This essay explores the multifaceted nature of progress, dissecting its inherent contradictions and evaluating its implications on society.One of the most glaring paradoxes of progress is thenotion that technological advancement, while designed to make life easier, often complicates it. The advent of the smartphone is a prime example. Originally intended to enhance communication and productivity, smartphones have become a source of constant distraction and anxiety. People are perpetually connected, which blurs the line between work andpersonal life, leading to burnout and decreased overall well-being. This phenomenon is emblematic of a broader trend where tools designed to liberate us often end up enslaving us in new ways.Similarly, the rise of social media platforms, which promised to bring people closer together, has, in many cases, driven them apart. The curated nature of online personas fosters unrealistic expectations and feelings of inadequacy among users. Instead of fostering genuine connections, social media often encourages superficial interactions and amplifies feelings of loneliness and depression. This contradiction highlights the complexity of progress in the realm of human relationships.Economic progress presents another set of contradictions. The Industrial Revolution, for instance, brought about unprecedented economic growth and improved standards ofliving for many. However, it also resulted in significantsocial upheaval, environmental degradation, and a stark division between the rich and the poor. Today, the rapid pace of technological innovation continues to create economic disparities. While some reap enormous benefits from advancements in fields like artificial intelligence and biotechnology, others are left behind, struggling to adapt to the changing job market. This growing inequality underscores the double-edged nature of economic progress.Environmental progress is fraught with paradoxes as well. Efforts to develop sustainable technologies, such as electric cars and renewable energy sources, are crucial in combating climate change. Yet, the production and disposal of these technologies often involve environmentally harmful practices. For example, the mining of lithium for electric car batteries can lead to significant ecological damage. This contradiction reveals the complexity of achieving true sustainability in a world dependent on industrial and technological solutions.The paradox of progress is also evident in the realm of healthcare. Medical advancements have undoubtedly extendedlife expectancy and improved the quality of life for many. However, these advancements have also led to new ethical dilemmas and unintended consequences. The development of antibiotics, for instance, has saved countless lives but has also contributed to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Moreover, while modern medicine can prolong life,it often does so at the expense of quality of life, raising difficult questions about the balance between longevity and well-being.Cultural progress, too, is not immune to paradoxes. The push for globalization has led to a more interconnected world, fostering cross-cultural exchange and understanding. However, this same process has also resulted in the erosion of local cultures and traditions. The homogenization of global culture can lead to the loss of unique cultural identities and practices, which are essential components of human diversity.This tension between global integration and cultural preservation is yet another example of the complex nature of progress.Educational progress reveals further contradictions. While access to education has increased globally, leading to greater literacy rates and opportunities for many, the pressure to excel academically has also intensified. This has resulted in a culture of competition and stress among students, sometimes to the detriment of their mental health. Additionally, the focus on standardized testing and measurable outcomes can stifle creativity and critical thinking, which are essential for true intellectual growth. This paradox highlights the challenge of fostering meaningful education in a performance-driven society.Political progress is equally complex. The spread of democratic ideals and institutions has been a hallmark of modern progress. However, the implementation of democracy isoften fraught with challenges. Democracies can be prone to inefficiency, corruption, and populism, which can undermine their effectiveness and legitimacy. Moreover, the imposition of democratic systems in regions with different cultural and historical contexts can lead to instability and conflict. This paradox illustrates the difficulties in achieving and maintaining political progress.Scientific progress, while expanding our understanding of the universe, also raises profound ethical questions. Breakthroughs in genetics, for example, hold the potential to eradicate diseases and improve human capabilities. However, they also pose significant ethical dilemmas regarding genetic modification and the potential for eugenics. The dual-use nature of many scientific discoveries, which can be used for both beneficial and harmful purposes, exemplifies the ethical paradoxes inherent in scientific progress.The paradoxes of progress extend to the personal realm as well. The pursuit of self-improvement and personal growth is a fundamental aspect of the human experience. However, this pursuit can sometimes lead to a perpetual sense of inadequacy and dissatisfaction. The pressure to constantly better oneself can overshadow the appreciation of one's current state and achievements, leading to a paradox where the quest for personal progress undermines personal happiness.In conclusion, the concept of progress is inherently paradoxical. While it drives development and innovation, it also introduces new challenges and complexities. Technological advancements can complicate lives, economic growth can exacerbate inequalities, and environmental solutions can have unintended ecological impacts. Medical breakthroughs pose ethical dilemmas, cultural integration threatens diversity, and educational improvements can create pressure and stifle creativity. Political systems face implementation challenges, scientific discoveries raiseethical questions, and the pursuit of personal growth can lead to dissatisfaction. Understanding these paradoxes is crucial in navigating the path of progress, ensuring that we strive for advancements that genuinely enhance human well-being without overlooking their potential downsides.。
In theory, democracy is a bulwark againstsocially harmful policies. In practice, however,democracies frequently adopt and maintain poli-cies that are damaging. How can this paradox beexplained?The influence of special interests and voterignorance are two leading explanations. I offeran alternative story of how and why democracyfails. The central idea is that voters are worsethan ignorant; they are, in a word, irrational —andthey vote accordingly. Despite their lack ofknowledge, voters are not humble agnostics;instead, they confidently embrace a long list ofmisconceptions.Economic policy is the primary activity of themodern state. And if there is one thing that thepublic deeply misunderstands, it is economics.People do not grasp the “invisible hand” of themarket, with its ability to harmonize private greed and the public interest. I call this anti-mar-ket bias. They underestimate the benefits of interaction with foreigners. I call this anti-foreign bias. They equate prosperity not with produc-tion, but with employment. I call this make-work bias. Finally, they are overly prone to think that economic conditions are bad and getting worse.I call this pessimistic bias. In the minds of many, Winston Churchill’s famous aphorism cuts the conversation short:“Democracy is the worst form of government,except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” But this saying overlooks the fact that governments vary in scope as well as form. In democracies the main alternative to majority rule is not dictatorship, but markets. A better understanding of voter irrationality advis-es us to rely less on democracy and more on the market.The Myth of the Rational VoterWhy Democracies Choose Bad Policies by Bryan Caplan_____________________________________________________________________________________________________Bryan Caplan is an associate professor of economics at George Mason University and an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute. This study is an excerpt from Caplan’s book, The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies (Princeton University Press, 2007).Executive Summary No. 594May 29, 2007Introduction: The Paradoxof DemocracyIn a dictatorship, government policy is often appalling but rarely baffling. The building of the Berlin Wall sparked worldwide outcry, but few wondered, “what are the leaders of East Germany thinking?” That was obvious: they wanted to continue ruling over their subjects, who were inconsiderately fleeing en masse.No wonder democracy is such a popular political panacea. The history of dictator-ships creates a strong impression that bad policies exist because the interests of rulers and ruled diverge. A simple solution is make the rulers and the ruled identical by giving “power to the people.” If the people decide to delegate decisions to full-time politicians, so what? Those who pay the piper—or vote to pay the piper—call the tune.This optimistic story is, however, often at odds with the facts. Democracies frequently adopt and maintain policies harmful for most people.1Protectionism is a classic example. Economists across the political spectrum have pointed out its folly for centuries, but almost every democracy restricts imports. Admittedly, this is less appalling than the Berlin Wall, yet it is more baffling. In theory, democracy is a bul-wark against socially harmful policies, but in practice it gives them a safe harbor.H ow can this paradox be explained? One answer is that the people’s “representatives”have turned the tables on them.2Elections might be a weaker deterrent to misconduct than they seem on the surface, making it more important to please special interests than the general public. A second answer, which com-plements the first, is that voters are deeply ignorant about politics.3They do not know who their representatives are, much less what they do. This tempts politicians to pursue per-sonal agendas and sell themselves to donors.I offer an alternative story of how democ-racy fails. The central idea is that voters are worse than ignorant; they are, in a word, irra-tional—and vote accordingly. Despite their lack of knowledge, voters are not humbleagnostics; instead, they confidently embrace a long list of misconceptions.When cataloging the failures of democra-cy, one must keep things in perspective. The shortcomings of democracy pale in compari-son with those of totalitarian regimes. Democracies do not murder millions of their own citizens. Fair enough, but such compar-isons set the bar too low. Now that democra-cy is the most common form of government, there is little reason to dwell on the truism that it is “better than communism.” It is now more worthwhile to figure out how and why democracy falls short.In the minds of many, one of Winston Churchill’s most famous aphorisms cuts the conversation short: “Democracy is the worst form of government, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”4But this saying overlooks the fact that governments vary in scope as well as form. In democracies the main alternative to majority rule is not dictatorship, but markets.Economists have an undeserved reputa-tion for “religious faith” in markets. No one has done more than economists to dissect the innumerable ways that markets can fail. After all their investigations, though, econo-mists typically conclude that the man in the street—and the intellectual without econom-ic training—underestimates how well mar-kets work. I maintain that something quite different holds for democracy: it is widely over rated not only by the public but by most economists, too. Thus, while the general pub-lic underestimates how well markets work, even economists underestimate markets’virtues relative to the democratic alternative.Is the “Miracle of Aggregation” Just WishfulThinking?What voters don’t know would fill a uni-versity library. In the last few decades, econo-mists who study politics have thrown fuel on the fire by pointing out that—selfishly speak-ing—voters are not making a mistake. One2Voters are worse than ignorant; theyare, in a word,irrational—and vote accordingly.vote has so small a probability of affecting electoral outcomes that a realistic egoist pays no attention to politics; he chooses to be, in economic jargon, rationally ignorant.The vast empirical literature on voter knowledge bears this out.5Almost all econo-mists and political scientists now accept that the average citizen’s level of political knowl-edge is extraordinarily low. At the same time, however, scholars have also largely come to believe that this doesn’t really matter,because democracy can function well under almost any magnitude of voter ignorance.6How is this possible? Assume that voters do not make systematic errors. Though they err constantly, their errors are random.7If voters face a blind choice between X and Y, knowing nothing about them, they are equal-ly likely to choose either.With 100 percent voter ignorance, matters are predictably grim. One candidate could be the Unabomber, plotting to shut down civiliza-tion. If voters choose randomly, the Unabomber wins half the time. True, the assumption of zero voter knowledge is overly pessimistic; informed voters are rare, but they do exist. But this seems a small consolation. One hundred percent igno-rance leads to disaster. Can 99 percent ignorance be significantly better?Yes. Democracy with 99 percent ignorance looks a lot more like democracy with full information than democracy with total igno-rance. Why? First, imagine an electorate where 100 percent of all voters are well-informed. Who wins the election? Trivially, whoever has the support of a majority of the well-informed. Next, switch to the case where only 1 percent of voters are well-informed. The other 99 percent are so thick that they vote at random. Quiz a person waiting to vote, and you are almost sure to conclude, with alarm, that he has no idea what he is doing. Nevertheless, it is basic statistics that—in a large electorate—each candidate gets about half of the random votes. Both candidates can bank on roughly a 49.5 percent share. Yet that is not enough to win. For that, they must focus all their energies on the one well-informed person in a hundred. Who takesthe prize? Whoever has the support of a majority ofthe well-informed.This result has been aptly named the “mira-cle of aggregation.”8It reads like an alchemist’srecipe: mix 99 parts folly with 1 part wisdom toget a compound as good as unadulterated wis-dom. An almost completely ignorant electoratemakes the same decision as a fully informedelectorate—lead into gold, indeed!It is tempting to call this “voodoo poli-tics,” or quip, as H. L. Mencken did, that“democracy is a pathetic belief in the collec-tive wisdom of individual ignorance.” Butthere is nothing magical or pathetic about it.James Surowiecki documents many instanceswhere the miracle of aggregation—or some-thing akin to it—works as advertised.9In acontest to guess the weight of an ox, the averageof 787 guesses was off by a single pound. OnWho Wants to Be a Millionaire,the answer mostpopular with studio audiences was correct 91percent of the time. Financial markets—which aggregate the guesses of large num-bers of people—often predict events betterthan leading experts. Betting odds are excel-lent predictors of the outcomes of everythingfrom sporting events to elections. In eachcase, the logic enunciated by political scien-tists Benjamin Page and Robert Shapiroapplies:This is just an example of the law oflarge numbers. Under the right condi-tions, individual measurement errorswill be independently random and willtend to cancel each other out. Errors inone direction will tend to offset errorsin the opposite direction.10Judging from research in recent decades,most economists find this logic compelling.Almost all “respectable” modern economictheories of politics begin by assuming thatthe typical citizen understands economicsand votes accordingly—at least on average.11Nor is this view limited to apologists for thestatus quo. Some of the sternest critics ofgovernment regulation nevertheless scoff atthe assumption of systematic voter bias.3Almost all“respectable”modern economictheories of politicsbegin by assumingthat the typicalcitizenunderstandseconomics andvotes accordingly.Legendary Chicago economist George Stigler is a case in point:The assumption that public policy hasoften been inefficient because it wasbased on mistaken views has little tocommend it. To believe, year after year,decade after decade, that the protectivetariffs or usury laws to be found inmost lands are due to confusion ratherthan purposeful action is singularlyobfuscatory.12The bottom line is that if the miracle of aggre-gation is true, then democracy can work, even with a morbidly ignorant electorate. Demo-cracy gives equal say to the wise and the not-so-wise, but the wise determine policy. Belaboring the electorate’s lack of knowledge with study after study is beside the point.But there is another kind of empirical evi-dence that can discredit the miracle of aggre-gation. The “miracle” only works if voters do not make systematic errors. This suggests that instead of rehashing the whole topic of voter error, we concentrate our fire on the critical and relatively unexplored question: Are voter errors systematic?13There are good reasons to suspect so. Our average guess about the weight of oxen is dead on. But cognitive psychology catalogs a long list of other questions where our average guess is systematically mistaken.14That body of research ought to open our minds to the possibility of systematic voter error.By itself, though, the psychological litera-ture does not get us very far. The link between general cognition and particular political decisions is too loose. Voters might be bad statisticians but perceptive judges of wise policy. Thus, we should refine our ques-tion: Are voter errors systematic on questions of direct political relevance?My answer is an emphatic yes. Economic policy is the primary activity of the modern state, making voter beliefs about economics among the most—if not the most—politically relevant beliefs. And if there is one thing that the public deeply misunderstands, it is eco-nomics.15People do not grasp the “invisible hand” of the market and its ability to harmo-nize private greed and the public interest. I call this anti-market bias. They underestimate the benefits of interaction with foreigners. I call this anti-foreign bias. They equate prosperity not with production, but with employment. I call this make-work bias. Lastly, they are overly prone to think that economic conditions are bad and getting worse. I call this pessimistic bias.If voters base their policy preferences on deeply mistaken models of the economy, gov-ernment is likely to perform its bread and but-ter function poorly. To see this, suppose that two candidates compete by taking positions on the degree of protectionism they favor. Random voter errors about the effect of protec-tion cause some voters who prefer the effect of free trade to vote for protection. But it is equal-ly common for voters who prefer the effect of protection to vote for free trade (see Figure 1).16Then the miracle of aggregation holds: in spite of voter ignorance, the winning platform is socially optimal.For anyone who has taught international economics, though, this conclusion is under-whelming. It takes hours of patient instruc-tion to show students the light of compara-tive advantage. After the final exam, there is a distressing rate of recidivism. Suppose we adopt the more realistic assumption that vot-ers systematically overestimate the benefits of protection. What happens? Lots of people vote for protection who prefer the effect of free trade, but only a few vote for free trade who prefer the effect of protection (see Figure 2). The political scales tilt out of bal-ance; the winning platform is too protection-ist. The median voter would be better off if he received less protection than he asked for. But com-petition impels politicians to heed what vot-ers ask for, not what is best for them.Comparable biases plausibly underlie policy after policy. For example, the law of supply and demand says that above-market prices create unsaleable surpluses, but that has not stopped most of Europe from regulating labor markets into decades of depression-level unemploy-ment.17The most credible explanation is that 4Are voter errors systematic onquestions of direct politicalrelevance?the average voter sees no link between artificial-ly high wages and unemployment. Before I studied economics, I failed to see it myself.Systematically Biased Beliefs about EconomicsEconomists have been complaining about anti-market, anti-foreign, make-work, and pessimistic biases for centuries. But what exactly have economists been criticizing? Where does the public go wrong? How preva-lent are these biases? And if experts and thepublic deeply disagree, what reason is thereto side with the experts, anyway? Perhaps it isthe experts who are biased.I draw on several different bodies of evidenceto answer those questions. To pin down whateconomists have been criticizing, I providesome historic examples. To explain where thepublic goes wrong, I summarize the main argu-ments that economists have made in the pastand that textbooks still make today. To esti-mate the prevalence of these biases, I rely on alarge body of surveys from recent decades.But what about the hardest objection ofall? Isn’t it possible that the bias lies in the5Economists havebeen complainingabout anti-market,anti-foreign,make-work, andpessimistic biasesfor centuries.Figure 1The Median Voter Model: Random Error Figure 2The Median Voter Model: Systematic Errorexperts, rather than the public? If one finds the economists of the past and the textbooks of the present convincing, this question becomes less interesting. But the critics of the economics profession do make some disturb-ing accusations about the field’s objectivity.The most common doubt about econo-mists stems from their apparent inability to agree, bestcaptured by George Bernard Shaw’s line that “if all economists were laid end to end, they would not reach a conclu-sion.”18But economists’ hard-core detractors recognize the superficiality of this complaint. They know that economists regularly see eye-to-eye with one another. A quip from Steven Kelman directly contradicts Shaw:The near-unanimity of the answerseconomists give to public policy ques-tions, highly controversial among therun of intelligent observers, but whichshare the characteristic of being able tobe analyzed in terms of microeconomictheory, reminds one of the unanimitycharacterizing bodies such as the polit-buro of the Soviet Communist Party.19It is not lack of consensus that incenses knowledgeable critics, but the way econo-mists unite behind unpalatable conclusions, such as doubts about the benefits of regula-tion. Kelman bemoans the fact that even economists in the Carter administration were economists first and liberals second: At the government agency where I haveworked and where agency lawyers andagency microeconomists interact witheach other . . . the lawyers are oftenexasperated, not only by the frequencywith which agency economists attacktheir proposals but also by the una-nimity among the agency economistsin their opposition. The lawyers tendto (incorrectly) attribute this opposi-tion to failure to hire “a broad enoughspectrum” of economists, and to begthe economists, if they can’t supportthe lawyers’ proposals, at least to givethem “the best economic arguments”in favor of them. . . . The economists’answer is typically something like,“There are no good economic argu-ments for your proposal.”20Unsurprisingly, critics rarely change their minds once they notice how regularly econo-mists agree. Instead, they typically shift to the argument that the experts are biased. Biased how? There are two prominent stories. The first is that economists suffer from “self-serv-ing bias.” Economists are unusually affluent, tenured, white, and male, and supposedly confuse what is good for them with what is good for the country. The second is that economists suffer from right-wing “ideologi-cal bias.” They use economics to give scientif-ic respectability to their political prejudices.Fortunately, there is one excellent data set that allows us to bring these accusations to trial: the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy (henceforth SAEE).21This unique study, conducted by the Washington Post,Kaiser Family Foundation, and H arvard University Survey Project, asked 1,510 members of the general public and 250 PhD economists the same diverse set of questions about how the economy works. The SAEE strongly supports the view that economists and the public sharply disagree in predictable ways. More importantly, though, the survey also collected detailed infor-mation about the respondents: income, job security, race, gender, party identification, ideol-ogy, and much more.The upshot is that we can statistically test whether the vast belief differences between econ-omists and the public are just a byproduct of economists’ privileged circumstances, a right-wing orientation, or both. In other words, we can use the data to run a thought experiment: What would a person with average income, aver-age job security, average party identification, average ideology, average everything,think if he had a PhD in economics? I call such a person a member of the “enlightened public”—someone who combines the circumstances of the layman with the knowledge of the expert.22If the critics of the economics profession 6It is not lack of consensus that incenses knowledgeablecritics, butthe way economists unite behindunpalatable conclusions.were completely right—if the sole reasons for economists’ unusual views were self-serving and/or ideological bias—then the enlightened public and the actual public would see eye-to-eye. If the critics of the economics profession were completely wrong—if self-serving and ideological bias had nothing to do with econ-omists’ unusual views—then the enlightened public and economists would see eye-to-eye.The world turns out to be much closer to the second extreme than the first. Self-serv-ing bias accounts for less than 20 percent of the belief gap between economists and lay-men. Controlling for ideological bias actual-ly seems to slightly increase the size of the belief gap. How is this possible? Because con-trary to popular belief, economists tend to be moderate Democrats, not conservative Repub-licans. Economists are unusually favorable toward markets not because of their extreme right-wing perspective, but despite their mildly left-wing perspective.23Shooting down the leading opponents of the “economists right, public wrong” posi-tion does not prove that it is true. But it sig-nificantly increases the probability. Think of it this way: common sense advises us to trust the experts. Critics challenge the experts’objectivity, and their complaints turn out to be in error. The sensible response is to reaf-firm the common sense position. Indeed, after the strongest challengers fail, we should become more confident that economists are right and the public is wrong.There is no reason, then, to deny econo-mists a normal level of deference in their field of expertise. But the profession also deserves an affirmative defense. Frankly, the strongest reason to accept its reliability is to flip through a basic economics text, then read the SAEE questions for yourself. You may not be fully convinced of economists’ wisdom. I, too, doubt it on occasion. But it is hard to avert your gaze from the public’s folly. Time and again, it gravitates toward answers that are positively silly.If that is too subjective for you, an impres-sive empirical regularity points in the same direction: education makes people think like econo-mists.Out of the SAEE’s 37 questions, there are19 where economic training and educationmove together and only two where they moveapart. It is not merely members of one inbreddiscipline who diverge from mainstream opin-ion. So do educated Americans in general,with the degree of divergence rising with thelevel of education. And the magnitude is sub-stantial. Moving from the bottom of the edu-cational ladder to the top has more than halfof the (enormous) effect of an econ PhD.24This pattern is all the more compellingbecause it has parallels in other fields. Takepolitical knowledge. Education substantiallyimproves performance on objective tests aboutgovernment structure, leaders, and currentevents.25Kraus, Malmfors, and Slovic similarlyfind that education makes members of the gen-eral public “think more like toxicologists.”26Perhaps education just increases exposure tobrainwashing. But it is more likely that educat-ed people think more clearly and know more.With the most fundamental doubts aboutthe economics profession out of the way, weare now ready to proceed. Economists havebeen complaining about laymen’s economicmisconceptions for centuries. What seems tobe the problem?Anti-Market BiasI first learned about farm price supportsin the produce section of the grocery store. Iwas in kindergarten. My mother explainedthat price supports seemed to make fruits andvegetables more expensive, but assured methat this conclusion was simplistic. If thesupports went away, so many farms would goout of business that prices would soon behigher than ever. If I had been more preco-cious, I would have asked a few questions.Were there price support programs for theother groceries? Why not? As it happened,though, I accepted what she told me, and felta lingering sense that price competition isbad for buyer and seller alike.This was one of my first memorableencounters with anti-market bias,a tendencyto underestimate the economic benefits of the marketmechanism.27The public has severe doubts7Economists areunusuallyfavorable towardmarkets despitetheir mildlyleft-wingperspective.about how much it can count on profit-seek-ing business to produce socially beneficial out-comes. It focuses on the motives of business, and neglects the discipline imposed by com-petition. While economists admit that profit-maximization plus market imperfections can yield bad results, non-economists tend to view successful greed as socially harmful per se.Near the end of his life, Joseph Schumpeter eloquently captured the essence of anti-mar-ket bias:Capitalism stands its trial beforejudges who have the sentence of deathin their pockets. They are going to passit, whatever the defense they may hear;the only success victorious defense canpossibly produce is a change in theindictment.28Arguably the greatest historian of eco-nomic thought, Schumpeter elsewhere mat-ter-of-factly speaks of “the ineradicable preju-dice that every action intended to serve the profit interest must be anti-social by this fact alone.”29Considering his encyclopedic knowledge, this remark speaks volumes. Anti-market bias is not a temporary, cultural-ly specific aberration. It is a deeply rooted pattern of human thinking which has frus-trated economists for generations.Liberal Democratic economists echo and amplify Schumpeter’s theme. Charles Schultze, head of President Carter’s Council of Economic Advisers, proclaims that “har-nessing the ‘base’ motive of material self-inter-est to promote the common good is perhaps the most important social invention mankind has yet achieved.”30But politicians and voters fail to appreciate this invention. “The virtually universal characteristic of [environmental] policy . . . is to start from the conclusion that regulation is the obvious answer; the pricing alternative is never considered.”31There are too many variations on anti-mar-ket bias to list them all. Probably the most common is to equate market payments with trans-fers,ignoring their incentive properties. (A “transfer,” in economic jargon, is a no-strings-attached movement of wealth from one per-son to another). All that matters, then, is how much you empathize with the transfer’s recip-ient compared to the transfer’s provider. To take the classic case: People tend to see profits as a gift to rich. So unless you perversely pity the rich more than the poor, limiting profits seems like common sense.Economists across the ideological spec-trum find it hard to respond to this outlook with anything but derision. Profits are not a handout, but a quid pro quo: “If you want to get rich, then you have to do something peo-ple will pay for.” Profits give incentives to reduce production costs, move resources from less-valued to more-valued industries, and dream up new products. This is the cen-tral lesson of The Wealth of Nations: the “invisi-ble hand” quietly persuades selfish business-men to serve the public good:Every individual is continually exertinghimself to find out the most advanta-geous employment for whatever capi-tal he can command. It is his ownadvantage, indeed, and not that of thesociety, which he has in view. But thestudy of his own advantage naturally,or rather necessarily leads him to pre-fer that employment which is mostadvantageous to the society.32For modern economists, these are tru-isms, but they usually miss the deeper lesson. If Adam Smith’s observations are only tru-isms, why did he bother to write them? Why do teachers of economics keep quoting and re-quoting this passage? Because Smith’s thesis was counterintuitive to his contemporaries, and remains counterintuitive today. A truism for the few is heresy for the many. Smith, being well aware of this fact, tried to shock readers out of their dogmatic slumber: “By pursuing his own interest he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I have never known much good done by those who affect-ed to trade for the publick good.”33Business profit appears to be a transfer but benefits 8Anti-market bias has frustrated economists forgenerations.。
初三英语政治词汇练习题20题1<背景文章>Democracy is a concept that has been widely discussed and practiced around the world. Democracy means that the power of a country belongs to the people. In a democratic country, people have the right to participate in political decision-making, express their opinions and choose their leaders.The importance of democracy cannot be overstated. Democracy ensures that the voices of all citizens are heard and that decisions are made in the interests of the majority. It promotes equality, freedom and justice. Different countries have different democratic practices. For example, in some countries, people vote directly for their leaders, while in others, they elect representatives to make decisions on their behalf.Democracy also encourages public participation and debate. It allows people to express different views and work together to find solutions to problems. In a democratic society, people have the right to freedom of speech, assembly and association.However, democracy is not without challenges. It requires an informed and active citizenry, as well as a commitment to the principles of democracy. There are also issues such as political polarization and theinfluence of money in politics that can undermine democracy.Despite these challenges, democracy remains an important goal for many countries. It is a system that values the rights and dignity of every individual and provides a framework for peaceful coexistence and progress.1. What does democracy mean?A. The power of a country belongs to the leaders.B. The power of a country belongs to the military.C. The power of a country belongs to the people.D. The power of a country belongs to the rich.答案：C。
现代社会的挑战英语作文Challenges of Modern SocietyIn the contemporary world, society faces numerous challenges that require immediate attention and effective solutions. These challenges have a profound impact on the quality of life and the very fabric of our communities. This essay aims to explore some of the significant challenges faced by modern society.1. Environmental Degradation:One of the most pressing challenges of modern society is environmental degradation. The excessive consumption of natural resources, pollution, and climate change have led to the destruction of ecosystems, loss of biodiversity, and extreme weather events. It is crucial for individuals, communities, and governments to adopt sustainable practices and promote renewable energy sources to mitigate these issues.2. Economic Inequality:Economic inequality has reached unprecedented levels, creating a divide between the rich and the poor. This disparity not only affects individuals' access to basic necessities but also hampers social cohesion and economic growth. Addressing income inequality through progressive taxation, social welfare programs, and equal opportunities for education and employment is essential for a fair and just society.3. Technological Advancements and Job Displacement:The rapid pace of technological advancements has revolutionized various industries, leading to increased efficiency and productivity. However, this progress has also resulted in job displacement and a skills gap. Automation and artificial intelligence threaten to replace numerous jobs, making it crucial for society to adapt through reskilling and upskilling programs, as well as fostering an environment that encourages innovation and entrepreneurship.4. Mental Health Epidemic:Modern society's fast-paced and high-stress environment has contributed to a mental health epidemic. Issues such as anxiety, depression, and substance abuse have become increasingly prevalent, affecting individuals of all ages and backgrounds. Prioritizing mental health awareness, providing accessible mental healthcare services, and fostering a supportive and compassionate society are vital to address this growing challenge.5. Social Isolation and Disconnection:The digital age has brought about a paradox of connectivity and isolation. While technology allows us to connect with people globally, it has also led to a decline in face-to-face interactions and a sense of community. Social isolation can lead to detrimental effects on mental and physical health, making it essential to cultivate meaningful relationships and promote social cohesion within communities.6. Political Polarization:Political polarization has divided societies, hindering constructive dialogue and compromising democratic processes. The spread of misinformation, echo chambers, and the rise of populist movements have exacerbated this issue. Encouraging critical thinking, media literacy, and fostering environments that promote respectful dialogue and diversity of opinion are crucial for a healthy and functioning democracy.In conclusion, modern society faces a myriad of challenges that require collective efforts to address. By tackling environmental degradation, economic inequality, technological advancements, mental health issues, social isolation, and political polarization, we can work towards building a more sustainable, equitable, and inclusive future for all.。
2023年考研英语一真题及答案详细解析2023年全国硕士硕士入学统一考试英语（一）试题及答案详细解析Section I Use of English :Directions: Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B,C or D on the ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)Though not biologically related, friends are as “related” as fourth cousins, sharing about 1% of genes. That is _(1)_a study, published from the University of California and Yale University in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, has__(2)_.The study is a genome-wide analysis conducted _(3)__1,932 unique subjects which __(4)__pairs of unrelated friends and unrelated strangers. The same people were used in both_(5)_.While 1% may seem_(6)_,it is not so to a geneticist. As James Fowler, professor of medical genetics at UC San Diego, says, “Most people do not even _(7)_their fourth cousins but somehow manage to select as friends the people who_(8)_our kin.”The study_(9)_found that the genes for smell were something shared in friends but not genes for immunity .Why this similarity exists in smell genes is difficult to explain, for now,_(10)_,as the team suggests, it draws us to similar environments but there is more_(11)_it. There could be many mechanisms working together that _(12)_us in choosing genetically similar frien ds_(13)_”functional Kinship” of being friends with_(14)_!One of the remarkable findings of the study was the similar genes seem to beevolution_(15)_than other genes Studying this could help_(16)_why human evolution picked pace in the last 30,000 years, with social environment being a major_(17)_factor.The findings do not simply explain people’s_(18)_to befriend those of similar_(19)_backgrounds, say the researchers. Though all the subjects were drawn from a population of European extraction, care was taken to_(20)_that all subjects, friends and strangers, were taken from the same population.1. [A] when [B] why [C] how [D] what2. [A] defended [B] concluded [C] withdrawn [D] advised3. [A] for [B] with [C] on [D] by4. [A] compared [B] sought [C] separated [D] connected5. [A] tests [B] objects [C]samples [D] examples6. [A] insignificant [B] unexpected [C]unbelievable [D] incredible7. [A] visit [B] miss [C] seek [D] know8. [A] resemble [B] influence [C] favor [D] surpass9. [A] again [B] also [C] instead [D] thus10. [A] Meanwhile [B] Furthermore [C] Likewise [D] Perhaps11. [A] about [B] to [C]from [D]like12. [A] drive [B] observe [C] confuse [D]limit13. [A] according to [B] rather than [C] regardless of [D] along with14. [A] chances [B]responses [C]missions [D]benefits15. [A] later [B]slower [C] faster [D] earlier16. [A]forecast [B]remember [C]understand [D]express17. [A] unpredictable [B]contributory [C] controllable [D] disruptive18. [A] endeavor [B]decision [C]arrangement [D] tendency19. [A] political [B] religious [C] ethnic [D] economic20. [A] see [B] show [C] prove [D] tellSection II Reading ComprehensionPart ADirections:Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET. (40 points)Text 1King Juan Carlos of Spain once insisted “kings don’t abdicate, they dare in their sleep.” But embarrassing scandals and the popularity of the republican left in the recent Euro-elections have forced him to eat his words and stand down. So, does the Spanish crisis suggest that monarchy is seeing its last days? Does that mean the writing is on the wall for all European royals, with their magnificent uniforms and majestic lifestyle?The Spanish case provides arguments both for and against monarchy. When public opinion is particularly polarised, as it was following the end of the Franco regime, monarchs canrise above “mere” politics and “embody” a spirit of national unity.It is this apparent transcendence of politics that explains monarchs’ continuing popularity polarized. And also, the Middle East excepted, Europe is the most monarch-infested region in the world, with 10 kingdoms (not counting Vatican City and Andorra). But unlike their absolutist counterparts in the Gulf and Asia, most royal families have survived because they allow voters to avoid the difficult search for a non-controversial but respected public figure.Even so, kings and queens undoubtedly have a downside. Symbolic of national unity as they claim to be, their very history—and sometimes the way they behave today –embodies outdated and indefensible privileges and inequalities. At a time when Thomas Piketty and other economists are warning of rising inequality and the increasing power of inherited wealth, it is bizarre that wealthy aristocratic families should still be the symbolic heart of modern democratic states.The most successful monarchies strive to abandon or hide their old aristocratic ways. Princes and princesses have day-jobs and ride bicycles, not horses (or helicopters). Even so, these are wealthy families who party with the international 1%, and media intrusiveness makes it increasingly difficult to maintain the right image.While Euro pe’s monarchies will no doubt be smart enough to survive for some time to come, it is the British royals who have most to fear from the Spanish example.It is only the Queen who has preserved the monarchy’s reputation with her rather ordinary (if well-heeled) granny style. The danger will come with Charles, who has both anexpensive taste of lifestyle and a pretty hierarchical view of the world. He has failed to understand that monarchies have largely survived because they provide a service – as non-controversial and non-political heads of state. Charles ought to know that as English history shows, it is kings, not republicans, who are the monarchy’s worst enemies.21. According to the first two Paragraphs, King Juan Carlos of Spain[A] used turn enjoy high public support[B] was unpopular among European royals[C] cased his relationship with his rivals[D]ended his reign in embarrassment22. Monarchs are kept as heads of state in Europe mostly[A] owing to their undoubted and respectable status[B] to achieve a balance between tradition and reality[C] to give voter more public figures to look up to[D]due to their everlasting political embodiment23. Which of the following is shown to be odd, according to Paragraph 4?[A] Ari stocrats’ excessive reliance on inherited wealth[B] The role of the nobility in modern democracies[C] The simple lifestyle of the aristocratic families[D]The nobility’s adherence to their privileges24. The British royals “have most to fear” because Charles[A] takes a rough line on political issues[B] fails to change his lifestyle as advised[C] takes republicans as his potential allies[D] fails to adapt himself to his future role25. Which of the following is the best title of the text?[A] Carlos, Glory and Disgrace Combined[B] Charles, Anxious to Succeed to the Throne[C] Carlos, a Lesson for All European Monarchs[D]Charles, Slow to React to the Coming ThreatsText 2Just how much does the Constitution protect your digital data? The Supreme Court will now consider whether police can search the contents of a mobile phone without a warrant if the phone is on or around a person during an arrest.California has asked the justices to refrain from a sweeping ruling particularly one that upsets the old assumption that authorities may search through the possessions of suspects at the time of their arrest. It is hard, the state argues, for judges to assess the implications of new and rapidly changing technologies.The court would be recklessly modest if it followed California’s advice. Enough of the implications are discernable, even obvious, so that the justices can and should provide updated guidelines to police, lawyers and defendants.They should start by discard ing California’s lame argument that exploring the contents of a smart phone — a vast storehouse of digital information — is similar to, say, rifling through a suspect’s purse. The court has ruled that police don’t violate the Fourth Amendment when they sif t through the wallet or pocketbook of an arrestee without a warrant. But exploring one’s smart phone is more like entering his or her home. A smart phone may contain an arrestee’s reading history, financial history, medical history and comprehensive records of recent correspondence. The development of “cloud computing,” meanwhile, has made that exploration so much the easier.Americans should take steps to protect their digital privacy. But keeping sensitive information on these devices is increasingly a requirement of normal life. Citizens still have a right to expect private documents to remain private and protected by the Constitution’s prohibition on unreasonable searches.As so often is the case, stating that principle doesn’t ease the challenge of line-drawing. In many cases, it would not be overly onerous for authorities to obtain a warrant to search through phone contents. They could still invalidate Fourth Amendment protections when facing severe, urgent circumstances, and they could take reasonable measures to ensure that phone data are not erased or altered while a warrant is pending. The court, though, may want to allow room for police to cite situations where they are entitled to more freedom.But the justices should not swallow California’s argument whole. New, disruptive technology sometimes demands novel applications of the Constitution’s protections. Orin Kerr, a law professor, compares the explosion and accessibility of digital information in the 21st centurywith the establishment of automobile use as a virtual necessity of life in the 20th: The justices had to specify novel rules for the new personal domain of the passenger car then; they must sort out how the Fourth Amendment applies to digital information now.26. The Supreme Court will work out whether, during an arrest, it is legitimate to[A] prevent suspects from deleting their phone contents.[B] search for suspects’ mobile phones without a warrant.[C] check suspects’ phone contents without being authorized.[D]prohibit suspects from using their mobile phones.27. The author’s attitude toward California’s argument is one of[A] disapproval.[B] indifference.[C] tolerance.[D]cautiousness.28. The author believes that exploring one’s phone contents is comparable to[A] getting into one’s residence.[B] handling one’s historical records.[C] scanning one’s correspondences.[D] going through one’s wallet.29. In Paragraph 5 and 6, the author shows his concern that[A] principles are hard to be clearly expressed.[B] the court is giving police less room for action.[C] citizens’ privacy is not effectively protected.[D] phones are used to store sensitive information.30. Orin Kerr’s comparison is quoted to indicate that[A] the Constitution should be implemented flexibly.[B] new technology requires reinterpretation of the Constitution.[C]California’s argument violates principles of the Constitution.[D]principles of the Constitution should never be alteredText 3The journal Science is adding an extra round of statistical checks to its peer-review process, editor-in-chief Marcia McNutt announced today. The policy follows similar efforts from other journals, after widespread concern that basic mistakes in data analysis are contributing to the irreproducibility of many published research findings.“Readers must have confidence in the conclusions published in our journal,” writes McNutt in an editorial. Working with the American Statistical Association, the journal has appointed seven experts to a statistics board of reviewing editors(SBoRE). Manuscript will be flagged up for additional scrutiny by the journal’s internal editors, or by its existing Board of Reviewing Editors or by outside peer reviewers. The SBoRE panel will then find external statisticians to review these manuscripts.Asked whether any particular papers had impelled the change, McNutt said: “Thecreation of the ‘statistics board’ was motivated by concerns broadly with the application of statistics and data ana lysis in scientific research and is part of Science’s overall drive to increase reproducibility in the research we publish.”Giovanni Parmigiani, a biostatistician at the Harvard School of Public Health, a member of the SBoRE group. He says he expects th e board to “play primarily an advisory role.” He agreed to join because he “found the foresight behind the establishment of the SBoRE to be novel, unique and likely to have a lasting impact. This impact will not only be through the publications in Science itself, but hopefully through a larger group of publishing places that may want to model their approach after Science.”John Ioannidis, a physician who studies research methodology, says that the policy is “a most welcome step forward” and “long overdue.” “Most journals are weak in statistical review, and this damages the quality of what they publish. I think that, for the majority of scientific papers nowadays, statistical review is more essential than expert review,” he says. But he noted that biomedical journals such as Annals of Internal Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet pay strong attention to statistical review.Professional scientists are expected to know how to analyze data, but statistical errors are alarmingly common in published research, according to David Vaux, a cell biologist. Researchers should improve their standards, he wrote in 2023, but journals should also take a tougher line, “engaging reviewers who are statistically literate and editors who can verify the process”. Vaux says that Science’s idea to pass some papers to statisticians “has some merit, but aweakness is that it relies on the board of reviewing editors to identify ‘the papers that need scrutiny’ in the first place”.31. It can be learned from Paragraph 1 that[A] Science intends to simplify their peer-review process.[B] journals are strengthening their statistical checks.[C] few journals are blamed for mistakes in data analysis.[D] lack of data analysis is common in research projects.32. The phrase “flagged up” (Para. 2) is the closest in meaning to[A] found.[B] marked.[C] revised.[D] stored.33. Giovanni Parmigiani believes that the establishment of the SBoRE may[A] pose a threat to all its peers.[B] meet with strong opposition.[C] increase Science’s circulation.[D]set an example for other journals.34. David Vaux holds that what Science is doing now[A] adds to researchers’ workload.[B] diminishes the role of reviewers.[C] has room for further improvement.[D]is to fail in the foreseeable future35. Which of the following is the best title of the text?[A] Science Joins Push to Screen Statistics in Papers.[B] Professional Statisticians Deserve More Respect[C] Data Analysis Finds Its Way onto Editors’ Desks[D] Statisticians Are Coming Back with ScienceText 4Two years ago, Rupert Murdoch’s daughter ,Elisabeth ,spoke of the “unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions” Integrity had collapsed, she argued, because of a collective acceptance that the only “sorting mechanism ”in society should be profit and the market .But “it’s us ,human beings ,we the people who create the society we want ,not profit ”.Driving her point home, she continued: “It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose, of a moral language within government, media or business could become one of the most dangerous foals for capitalism and freedom.” This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International ,shield thought ,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking .As the hacking trial concludes –finding guilty ones-editor of the News of the World, Andy Coulson, for conspiring to hack phones ,and finding his predecessor, Rebekah Brooks, innocent of the same charge –the winder issue of dearth of integrity still standstill, Journalists areknown to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people .This is hacking on an industrial scale ,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire, the man hired by the News of the World in 2023 to be the point person for phone hacking. Others await trial. This long story still unfolds.In many respects, the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place .One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom, wow little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired wow the stories arrived. The core of her successful defence was that she knew nothing.In today’s world, title has become normal that well—paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run perhaps we should not be so surprised. For a generation, the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit. The words that have mattered are efficiency, flexibility, shareholder value, business–friendly, wealth generation, sales, impact and, in newspapers, circulation. Words degraded to the margin have been justice fairness, tolerance, proportionality and accountability.The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity. It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact. Ms Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories, but she asked no questions, gave no instructions—nor received traceable, recorded answers.36. According to the first two paragraphs, Elisabeth was upset by[A] the consequences of the current sorting mechanism[B] companies’ financial loss due to immoral practices.[C] governmental ineffectiveness on moral issues.[D]the wide misuse of integrity among institutions.37. It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that[A] Glem Mulcaire may deny phone hacking as a crime[B] more journalists may be found guilty of phone hacking.[C] Andy Coulson should be held innocent of the charge.[D] phone hacking will be accepted on certain occasions.38. The author believes the Rebekah Books’s deference[A] revealed a cunning personality[B] centered on trivial issues[C] was hardly convincing[D] was part of a conspiracy39. The author holds that the current collective doctrine shows[A] generally distorted values[B] unfair wealth distribution[C] a marginalized lifestyle[D] a rigid moral cote40. Which of the following is suggested in the last paragraph?[A] The quality of writing is of primary importance.[B] Common humanity is central news reporting.[C] Moral awareness matters in exciting a newspaper.[D] Journalists need stricter industrial regulations.Part BDirections:In the following text, some sentences have been removed. For Questions 41-45, choose the most suitable one from the fist A-G to fit into each of the numbered blanks. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)How does your reading proceed? Clearly you try to comprehend, in the sense of identifying meanings for individual words and working out relationships between them, drawing on your explicit knowledge of English grammar (41) ______you begin to infer a context for the text, for instance, by making decisions about what kind of speech event is involved: who is making the utterance, to whom, when and where.The ways of reading indicated here are without doubt kinds of of comprehension. But they show comprehension to consist not just passive assimilation but of active engagement inference and problem-solving. You infer information you feel the writer has invited you to grasp by presenting you with specific evidence and cues (42) _______Conceived in this way, comprehension will not follow exactly the same track for each reader. What is in question is not the retrieval of an absolute, fixed or “true” meaning that can beread off and clocked for accuracy, or some timeless relation of the text to the world. (43) _______ Such background material inevitably reflects who we are, (44) _______This doesn’t, however, make interpretation merely relative or even pointless. Precisely because readers from different historical periods, places and social experiences produce different but overlapping readings of the same words on the page-including for texts that engage with fundamental human concerns-debates about texts can play an important role in social discussion of beliefs and values.How we read a given text also depends to some extent on our particular interest in reading it. (45)_______such dimensions of read suggest-as others introduced later in the book will also do-that we bring an implicit (often unacknowledged) agenda to any act of reading. It doesn’t then necessarily follow that one kind of reading is fuller, more advanced or more worthwhile than another. Ideally, different kinds of reading inform each other, and act as useful reference points for and counterbalances to one another. Together, they make up the reading component of your overall literacy or relationship to your surrounding textual environment.[A] Are we studying that text and trying to respond in a way that fulfils the requirement of a given course? Reading it simply for pleasure? Skimming it for information? Ways of reading on a train or in bed are likely to differ considerably from reading in a seminar room.[B] Factors such as the place and period in which we are reading, our gender ethnicity, age and social class will encourage us towards certain interpretation but at the same time obscure or even close off others.[C] If you are unfamiliar with words or idioms, you guess at their meaning, using cluespresented in the contest. On the assumption that they will become relevant later, you make a mental note of discourse entities as well as possible links between them.[D]In effect, you try to reconstruct the likely meanings or effects that any given sentence, image or reference might have had: These might be the ones the author intended.[E]You make further inferences, for instance, about how the test may be significant to you, or about its validity—inferences that form the basis of a personal response for which the author will inevitably be far less responsible.[F]In plays，novels and narrative poems, characters speak as constructs created by the author, no t necessarily as mouthpieces for the author’s own thoughts.[G]Rather, we ascribe meanings to test on the basis of interaction between what we might call textual and contextual material: between kinds of organization or patterning we perceive in a text’s formal structures (so especially its language structures) and various kinds of background, social knowledge, belief and attitude that we bring to the text.Section III TranslationDirections:Read the following text carefully and then translate the underlined segments into Chinese. Your translation should be written clearly on ANSWER SHEET. (10 points) Within the span of a hundred years, in the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, a tide of emigration—one of the great folk wanderings of history—swept from Europe to America.46) This movement, driven by powerful and diverse motivations, built a nation out of a wilderness and, by its nature, shaped the character and destiny of an uncharted continent.47) The United States is the product of two principal forces-the immigration of European peoples with their varied ideas, customs, and national characteristics and the impact of a new country which modified these traits. Of necessity, colonial America was a projection of Europe. Across the Atlantic came successive groups of Englishmen, Frenchmen, Germans, Scots, Irishmen, Dutchmen, Swedes, and many others who attempted to transplant their habits and traditions to the new world.48) But, the force of geographic conditions peculiar to America, the interplay of the varied national groups upon one another, and the sheer difficulty of maintaining old-world ways in a raw, new continent caused significant changes. These changes were gradual and at first scarcely visible. But the result was a new social pattern which, although it resembled European society in many ways, had a character that was distinctly American.49) The first shiploads of immigrants bound for the territory which is now the United States crossed the Atlantic more than a hundred years after the 15th- and 16th-century explorations of North America. In the meantime, thriving Spanish colonies had been established in Mexico, the West Indies, and South America. These travelers to North America came in small, unmercifully overcrowded craft. During their six- to twelve-week voyage, they subsisted on barely enough food allotted to them. Many of the ship were lost in storms, many passengers died of disease, and infants rarely survived the journey. Sometimes storms blew the vessels far off their course, andoften calm brought unbearably long delay.“To the anxious travelers the sight of the American sh ore brought almost inexpressible relief.” said one recorder of events, “The air at twelve leagues’ distance smelt as sweet as a new-blown garden.” The colonists’ first glimpse of the new land was a sight of dense woods. 50) The virgin forest with its richness and variety of trees was a veritable real treasure-house which extended from Maine all the way down to Georgia. Here was abundant fuel and lumber. Here was the raw material of houses and furniture, ships and potash, dyes and naval stores.Section IV WritingPart A51. Directions:You are going to host a club reading session. Write an email of about 100 words recommending a book to the club members.You should state reasons for your recommendation.You should write neatly on the ANSWER SHEET.Do not sign your own name at the end of the letter. Use Li Ming instead.Do not write the address. (10 points)Part B52. Directions:Write an essay of 160-200 words based on the following drawing. In your essay you should1) describe the drawing briefly2) explain its intended meaning, and3) give your commentsYou should write neatly on ANSWER SHEET. (20 points)时代旳聚会参照答案及详细解析I cloze1. [A] when [B] why [C] how [D] what【答案】[D] what【解析】该题考察旳是语法知识。
The Paradox of ChoiceThe paradox of choice is a concept that has been widely discussed in the field of psychology and consumer behavior. It refers to the idea that having morechoices does not necessarily lead to greater happiness or satisfaction. In fact, too many choices can often lead to feelings of anxiety, stress, and dissatisfaction. This paradox has significant implications for individuals, businesses, and society as a whole. From a psychological perspective, the paradox of choice can be explained by the concept of decision fatigue. When faced with an overwhelming number of options, individuals may find it difficult to make a decision and may ultimately feel less satisfied with their choice. This can leadto a sense of regret and a constant questioning of whether the right decision was made. Additionally, the fear of making the wrong choice can lead to a state of paralysis, where individuals are unable to make any decision at all. This can have a negative impact on mental well-being and overall happiness. From a consumer behavior standpoint, the paradox of choice has important implications for businesses. While offering a wide range of options may seem beneficial, it can actually lead to decreased sales and customer satisfaction. Research has shownthat when presented with too many choices, consumers are more likely to experience decision fatigue and may ultimately walk away without making a purchase. This has led many businesses to rethink their approach to product offerings and to streamline their options in order to improve the overall customer experience. Ona societal level, the paradox of choice has implications for the way we approach decision-making and the way we structure our lives. In a world where we are constantly bombarded with options and opportunities, it can be easy to fall into the trap of constantly seeking the "best" choice. This can lead to a sense of FOMO, or fear of missing out, and can prevent individuals from fully committing to their decisions. This can have a ripple effect on relationships, careers, and overalllife satisfaction. One potential solution to the paradox of choice is the concept of minimalism. By intentionally limiting the number of choices we are exposed to, we can reduce decision fatigue and focus on what truly matters to us. This canlead to a greater sense of satisfaction and fulfillment with our decisions. Additionally, practicing mindfulness and being present in the moment can helpindividuals to appreciate the choices they have made and to let go of the constant need to seek out the "best" option. Overall, the paradox of choice is a complex and multifaceted concept that has significant implications for individuals, businesses, and society as a whole. By understanding the psychological and behavioral factors at play, we can work towards finding a balance between having enough choices to feel empowered, but not so many that it becomes overwhelming. This may require a shift in mindset and a reevaluation of our approach todecision-making, but ultimately, it can lead to greater happiness and satisfaction in our lives.。
50个英语高级表达及列举英语高级表达及其示例：1.In essence, ...示例：In essence, the book explores the complexities of human nature.2.It is noteworthy that ...示例：It is noteworthy that the study found a significant correlation between exercise and improved mental health.3.On a deeper level, ...示例：On a deeper level, the painting reflects the artist's struggle with identity and belonging.4.There is a prevailing belief that ...示例：There is a prevailing belief that technology will revolutionize the education sector.5.It goes without saying that ...示例：It goes without saying that a healthy diet is essential for maintaining good health.6.The notion that ... is increasingly being challenged.示例：The notion that traditional education is superior to online learning is increasingly being challenged by modern research.7.From a broader perspective, ...示例：From a broader perspective, climate change is a global issue that requires collective action.8.The complexities surrounding ... are vast and multifaceted.示例：The complexities surrounding the causes of poverty are vast and multifaceted, requiring a comprehensive approach.9.The fact remains that ...示例：The fact remains that despite advances in technology, many people still lack access to basic healthcare.10.It is incontrovertible that ...示例：It is incontrovertible that regular exercise benefits both physical and mental health.11.One cannot deny the significance of ...示例：One cannot deny the significance of diversity in promoting a vibrant and inclusive society.12.The underlying principles of ... are deeply rooted in ...示例：The underlying principles of democracy are deeply rooted in the respect for human rights and the rule of law.13.The intricate web of ... is often overlooked.示例：The intricate web of interdependencies between different ecosystems is often overlooked in environmental policymaking.14.It is imperative that we ...示例：It is imperative that we take immediate action to address the issue of climate change.15.The subtleties of ... are often misunderstood.示例：The subtleties of cultural differences are often misunderstood in international business transactions.16.The concept of ... has gained widespread acceptance.示例：The concept of sustainable development has gained widespread acceptance among governments and businesses.17.It is a paradox that ...示例：It is a paradox that despite the availability of technology, many people still prefer traditional methods of communication.18.The impact of ... on ... cannot be overstated.示例：The impact of social media on modern politics cannot be overstated, shaping public opinion and influencing policy decisions.19.The intricate balance between ... and ... is crucial.示例：The intricate balance between economic growth and environmental protection is crucial for sustainable development.20.It is an established fact that ...示例：It is an established fact that smoking increases the risk of developing lung cancer.。
管理学英语专业词汇Aaccess discrimination 进入歧视action research 动作研究adjourning 解散adhocracy 特别结构administrative principle 管理原则artifacts 人工环境artificial intelligence 人工智能工巧匠avoiding learning 规避性学习ambidextrous approach 双管齐下策略Bbalance sheet 资产负债表bcg matrix 波士顿咨询集团矩阵bona fide occupation qualificationѕ善意职业资格审查bounded rationality 有限理性bureaucracy 官僚机构benchmarking 标杆瞄准bounded rationality perspective 有限理性方法boundary-spanning roles 跨超边界作用Ccomputer-aided design and computer-automated manufacturing(cad/cam)计算机辅助设计与计算机自动生产confrontation 对话consortia 企业联合change agent 变革促进者chaos theory 混沌理论chariѕmatic leaders 魅力型领导者charity principle 博爱原则coercive power 强制权cohesiveness 凝聚力collaborative management 合作型管理comparable worth 可比较价值competitive benchmarking 竞争性基准confrontation meeting 碰头会constancy of purpose 永久性目标contingency approach 权变理论corporate social performance 公司社会表现corporate social responsibility公司社会责任corporate social responsiveness公司社会反应critical incident 关键事件current assets 流动资产current liabilities 流动负债culture strength 文化强度creative department 创造性部门craft technology 技艺性技术contextual dimension 关联性维度continuous process production 连续加工生产collectivity stage 集体化阶段clan control 小团体控制clan culture 小团体文化coalition 联合团体collaborative 协作网络centrality 集中性centraliazation 集权化chariѕmatic authority 竭尽忠诚的权力Ddecentralization 分权democracy management 民主管理departmentalization 部门化differential rate system 差别报酬系统dialectical inquiry methods 辩证探求法division of labor 劳动分工downward mobility 降职流动dynamic engagement 动态融合dynamic network 动态网络domain 领域direct interlock 直接交叉divisional form 事业部模式differentiation strategy 差别化战略decision premise 决策前提dual-core approach 二元核心模式Eelectronic data-processing(edp) 电子数据处理employee-oriented style 员工导向型风格empowerment 授权encoding 解码end-user computing 终端用户计算系统entrepreneurship 企业家精神equity 净资产equity theory 公平理论espoused value 信仰价值ethnocentric manager 种族主义的管理者expectancy theory 期望理论expense budget 支出预算expense center 费用中心external audit 外部审计external stakeholders 外部利益相关者extrinsic rewards 外部奖励ethic ombudsperson 伦理巡视官external adaption 外部适应性elaboration stage 精细阶段entrepreneurial stage 创业阶段escalating commitment 顽固认同Ffamily group 家庭集团financial statement 财务报表flat hierarchies 扁平型结构flexible budget 弹性预算force-field theory 场力理论formal authority 合法权力formal systematic appraisal 正式的系统评估franchise 特许经营权formalization stage 规范化阶段functional grouping 职能组合formal channel of communication 正式沟通渠道Ggame theory 博弈论general financial condition 一般财务状况geocentric manager 全球化管理者general manager 总经理globalization 全球化gossip chain 传言链grapevine 传言网global strategic partnership 全球战略伙伴关系general environment 一般环境generalist 全面战略geographic grouping 区域组合global company 全球公司global geographic structure 全球区域结构Hhawthorne effect 霍桑效应heuristic principles 启发性原理hierarchy 科层制度hiring specification 招聘细则horizontal linkage model 横向联系模型hybrid structure 混合结构high tech 高接触high-velocity environments 高倍速环境Iimpoverished management 放任式管理income statement 损益表information transformation 信息转换infrastructure 基础设施integrative process 整合过程intelligent enterprises 智力企业internal audit 内部审计internal stakeholder 内部相关者internship 实习intrapreneurship 内部企业家精神intrinsic reward 内在报酬inventory 库存, 存货internal integration 内部整合interorganization relationship 组织间的关系intergroup conflict 团体间冲突interlocking directorate 交叉董事会institutional perspective 机构的观点intuitive decision making 直觉决策idea champion 构思倡导者incremental change 渐进式变革informal organizational structure 非正式组织结构informal performance appraisal 非正式业绩评价Jjob description 职务描述job design 职务设计job enlargement 职务扩大化job enrichment 职务丰富化job rotation 职务轮换job specialization 职务专业化Kkey performance areas 关键业丨务区key result areas 关键绩效区Llabor productivity index 劳动生产力指数laissez management 自由化管理large batch production 大批量生产lateral communication 横向沟通leadership style 领导风格least preferred co-worker(lpc)最不喜欢的同事legitimate power 合法权力liability 负债liaison 联络者line authority 直线职权liquidity 流动性liaison role 联络员角色long-linked technology 纵向关联技术losses from conflict 冲突带来的损失low-cost leadership 低成本领先Mmanagement by objective 目标管理Managerial Grid 管理方格matrix bosseѕ矩阵主管management champion 管理倡导者materials-requirements planning(MRP) 物料需求计划Mslow,s hierarchy of needs 马斯洛需求层次论marketing argument 管理文化多元化营销观multiculturalism 文化多元主义multidivisional firm 多部门公司moral rules 道德准则management by walking around(MBWA) 走动式管理matrix structure 矩阵结构multinational enterprise(MNE) 跨国公司moral relativism 道德相对主义mechanistic system 机械式组织middle-of-the-road management 中庸式管理meso theory 常态理论multidomestic strategy 多国化战略mediating technology 调停技术Nnaïve relativism 朴素相对主义need-achievement 成就需要norming 规范化norms 规范nonprogrammed decisions 非程序化决策nonsubstitutability 非替代性nonroutine technology 非例行技术niche 领地Ooff-the-job training 脱产培训on-the-job training 在职培训operational budget 运营预算order backlog 订单储备organic system 有机系统organizational development(OD) 组织发展orientation 定位outcome interdependence 结果的相互依赖性outplacement services 外延服务organization ecosystem 组织生态系统Pparadox of authority 权威的矛盾paradox of creativity 创造力的矛盾paradox of disclosure 开放的矛盾paradox of identify 身份的矛盾paradox of individuality 个性的矛盾paradox of regression 回归的矛盾partial productivity 部分生产率participative management 参与式管理path-goal model 路径目标模型peer recruiter 同级招聘political action committees(PACs) 政治活动委员会polycentric manager 多中心管理者ortfolio framework 业丨务组合框架portfolio investment 资产组合投资positive reinforcement 正强化production flexibility 生产柔性profitability 收益率programmed decisions 程序化决策psychoanalytic view 精神分析法paradigm 范式personal ratios 人员比例pooled dependence 集合性依存professional bureaucracy 专业官僚机构problem identification 问题识别problemistic search 问题搜寻population ecology model 种群生态模型Qquality 质量quality circle 质量圈question mark 问题类市场quid pro quo 交换物Rrational model of decision making 理性决策模式realistic job preview(RJP) 实际工作预览reciprocal interdependence 相互依存性resource dependence 资源依赖理论routine technology 例行技术retention 保留rational approach 理性方法rational model 理性模型rational-legal authority 理性—合法权威Ssemivariable cost 准可变成本sense of potency 力量感sensitivity training 敏感性训练sexual harassment 性骚扰short-run capacity changes 短期生产能力变化single-strand chain 单向传言链situational approach 情境方法situational force 情境力量situational leadership theory 情境领导理论sliding-scale budget 移动规模预算small-batch production 小规模生产sociotechnical approaches 社会科技方法span of management 管理幅度staff authority 参谋职权standing plan 长设计划step budget 分步预算stewardship principle 管家原则stimulus 刺激storming 调整阶段strategic management 战略管理strategic partnering 战略伙伴关系strategy formulation 战略制定strategy implementation 战略实施strategic control 战略控制strategic contingencies 战略权变satisficing 满意度subsystems 子系统subunits 子单位synergy 协同system boundary 系统边界structure dimension 结构性维度sequential interdependence 序列性依存self-directed team 自我管理型团队specialist 专门战略strategy and structure changes 战略与结构变革symptoms of structural deficiency 结构无效的特征Ttall hierarchies 高长型科层结构task force or project team 任务小组或项目团队task independence 任务的内部依赖性task management 任务型管理task-oriented style 任务导向型管理风格total productivity 全部生产率Total Quality Management 全面质量管理training positions 挂职培训training program 培训程序transactional leaders 交易型领导transformational leaders 变革型领导treatment discrimination 歧视待遇two-factory theory 双因素理论two-boss employees 双重主管员工technical or product champion 技术或产品的倡导者Uunfreezing 解冻unit production 单位产品Vvariation 变种子variety 变量valence 效价variable costs 可变成本vertical communication 纵向沟通vertical integration 纵向一体化vestibule training 仿真培训volume flexibility 产量的可伸缩性vertical linkage 纵向连接venture team 风险团队value based leadership 基于价值的领导Wwin-lose situation 输赢情境win-win situation 双赢情境workforce literacy 员工的读写能力work in progress 在制品work flow redesign 工作流程再造成work flow automation 工作流程自动化whistle blowing 揭发Zzero-sum 零---和zone of indifference(area of acceptance) 无差异区域(可接受区域)目标mission/ objective内部环境internal environment外部环境external environment集体目标group objective计划planning组织organizing人事staffing领导leading控制controlling步骤process原理principle方法technique经理manager总经理general manager行政人员administrator主管人员supervisor企业enterprise商业business产业industry公司company效果effectiveness效率efficiency企业家entrepreneur权利power职权authority职责responsibility科学管理scientific management现代经营管理modern operational management 行为科学behavior science生产率productivity激励motivate动机motive法律law法规regulation经济体系economic system管理职能managerial function产品product服务service利润profit满意satisfaction归属affiliation尊敬esteem自我实现self-actualization人力投入human input盈余surplus收入income成本cost资本货物capital goodѕ机器machinery设备equipment建筑building存货inventory经验法the empirical approach人际行为法the interpersonal behavior approach 集体行为法the group behavior approach协作社会系统法the cooperative social systems approach 社会技术系统法the social-technical systems approach 决策理论法the decision theory approach数学法the mathematical approach系统法the systems approach随机制宜法the contingency approach管理任务法the managerial roles approach经营法the operational approach人际关系human relation心理学psychology态度attitude压力pressure冲突conflict招聘recruit鉴定appraisal选拔select培训train报酬compensation授权delegation of authority协调coordinate业绩performance考绩制度merit system表现behavior下级subordinate偏差deviation检验记录inspection record误工记录record of labor-hours lost 销售量sales volume产品质量quality of products先进技术advanced technology顾客服务customer service策略strategy结构structure领先性primacy普遍性pervasiveness忧虑fear忿恨resentment士气morale解雇layoff批发wholesale零售retail程序procedure规则rule规划program预算budget共同作用synergy大型联合企业conglomerate资源resource购买acquisition增长目标growth goal专利产品proprietary product竞争对手rival晋升promotion管理决策managerial decision商业道德business ethics有竞争力的价格competitive price . 供货商supplier小贩vendor利益冲突conflict of interests派生政策derivative policy开支帐户expense account批准程序approval procedure病假sick leave休假vacation工时labor-hour机时machine-hour资本支出capital outlay现金流量cash flow工资率wage rate税收率tax rate股息dividend现金状况cash position资金短缺capital shortage总预算overall budget资产负债表balance sheet可行性feasibility投入原则the commitment principle 投资回报return on investment生产能力capacity to produce实际工作者practitioner最终结果end result业绩performance个人利益personal interest福利welfare市场占有率market share创新innovation生产率productivity利润率profitability社会责任public responsibility董事会board of director组织规模size of the organization组织文化organizational culture目标管理management by objectives 评价工具appraisal tool激励方法motivational techniques 控制手段control device个人价值personal worth优势strength弱点weakness机会opportunity威胁threat个人责任personal responsibility顾问counselor定量目标quantitative objective定性目标qualitative objective可考核目标verifiable objective优先priority工资表payroll策略strategy政策policy灵活性discretion多种经营diversification评估assesѕment一致性consistency应变策略consistency strategy公共关系public relation价值value抱负aspiration偏见prejudice审查review批准approval主要决定major decision分公司总经理division general manager 资产组合距阵portfolio matrix明星star 问号question mark现金牛cash cow赖狗dog采购procurement人口因素demographic factor地理因素geographic factor公司形象company image产品系列product line合资企业joint venture破产政策liquidation strategy 紧缩政策retrenchment strategy 战术tactics追随followership个性individuality性格personality安全safety自主权latitude .悲观的pessimistic静止的static乐观的optimistic动态的dynamic灵活的flexible抵制resistance敌对antagoniѕm折中eclectic激励motivation潜意识subconscious地位status情感affection欲望desire压力pressure满足satisfaction自我实现的需要needs for self-actualization 尊敬的需要esteem needs归属的需要affiliation needs安全的需要security needs生理的需要physiological needѕ维持maintenance保健hygiene激励因素motivator概率probability强化理论reinforcement theory反馈feedback奖金bonus股票期权stock option劳资纠纷labor dispute缺勤率absenteeiѕm人员流动turnover奖励reward特许经营franchise热诚zeal信心confidence鼓舞inspire要素ingredient忠诚loyalty奉献devotion作风style品质trait适应性adaptability进取性aggressiveness热情enthusiaѕm毅力persistence人际交往能力interpersonal skills 行政管理能力administrative ability 智力intelligence专制式领导autocratic leader民主式领导democratic leader自由放任式领导free-rein leader管理方格图the managerial grid工作效率work efficiency服从obedience领导行为leader behavior支持型领导supportive leadership 参与型领导participative leadership指导型领导instrumental leadership成就取向型领导achievement-oriented leadershipAutomated inspection 自动化检验automatic assembly system 自动化装配系统applied biomechanics 应用生物力学CAD/CAM 计算机辅助设计与制造computer integrated manufacturing system 计算机整合制造系统data structure 数据结构data base management system 数据库管理系统decision analysis 决策分析engineering economy 工程经济engineering statistics 工程统计facilities planning 设施规划factory diagnoisis and improvement method 工厂诊断与改善方法financial and cost analysis 财务与成本分析fuzzy theory and application 模糊理论与应用human-computer interaction (HCI)人因工程与计算机系统human factors engineering 人因工程human information processing 人类讯息处理human-machine system design 人机系统设计human resource management 人力资源管理human system diagnosis and improvement 人体系统诊断与改善industrial environment evaluation 工业环境评估industrial organizations and management 工业组织与管理industrial safety 工业安全information technology 信息技术intellectual property laws 智慧财产权法knowledge engineering 知识工程linear algebra 线性代数manufacturing automation 制造自动化manufacturing engineering 制造工程manufacturing management 制造管理manufacturing procesѕ制造程序manufacturing systems and management 制造系统与管理market and marketing 市场与行销material flows automation 物流自动化mathematical programming 数学规划multicriteria decision making 多目标规划multi-criteria decision methods 多准则决策分析network analysis 网络分析numerical analysis 数值分析organization and management 组织与管理product and technology development management 产品与技术开发管理production management 生产管理production planning and control 生产计划与管制quality control 质量管理quality engineering 品质工程quality management techniques and practice 品质管理queueing theory 等候线理论reliability engineering 可靠度工程research，development and innovation management 研究发展管理semiconductor production management 半导体生产管理sequencing and scheduling 排序与排程simulation 模拟分析statistical method 统计方法stochastic processes 随机系统strategic management of technology 技术策略system analysis and design in large scale 大型系统分析与设计system performance evaluation 系统绩效评估技术system quality assurance engineering 系统品质保证工程systems engineering 系统工程systems simulation 系统仿真vision and colors 视觉与色彩work physiology 工作生理学work study 工作研究Accounting Assistant 会计助理Accounting Clerk 记帐员Accounting Manager 会计部经理Accounting Stall 会计部职员Accounting Supervisor 会计主管Administration Manager 行政经理Administration Staff 行政人员Administrative Assistant 行政助理Administrative Clerk 行政办事员Advertising Staff 广告工作人员Airlines Sales Representative 航空公司定座员Airlines Staff 航空公司职员Application Engineer 应用工程师Assistant Manager 副经理Bond Analyst 证券分析员Bond Trader 证券交易员Business Controller 业丨务主任BusinesѕManager 业丨务经理Buyer 采购员Cashier 出纳员Chemical Engineer 化学工程师Civil Engineer 土木工程师Clerk/Receptionist 职员/接待员Clerk Typist & Secretary 文书打字兼秘书Computer Data Input Operator 计算机资料输入员Computer Engineer 计算机工程师Computer Processing Operator 计算机处理操作员Computer System Manager 计算机系统部经理Copywriter 广告文字撰稿人Deputy General Manager 副总经理Economic Research Assistant 经济研究助理Electrical Engineer 电气工程师Engineering Technician 工程技术员English Instructor/Teacher 英语教丨师Export SaleѕManager 外销部经理Export Sales Staff 外销部职员Financial Controller 财务主任Financial Reporter 财务报告人F.X. (Foreign Exchange)Clerk 外汇部职员F.X. Settlement Clerk 外汇部核算员Fund Manager 财务经理General Auditor 审计长General Manager/ President 总经理General Manager Assistant 总经理助理General Manager's Secretary 总经理秘书Hardware Engineer 计算机硬件工程师Import Liaison Staff 进口联络员Import Manager 进口部经理Insurance Actuary 保险公司理赔员International Sales Staff 国际销售员Interpreter 口语翻译Legal Adviser 法律顾问Line Supervisor 生产线主管Maintenance Engineer 维修工程师Management Consultant 管理顾问Manager 经理Manager for Public Relationѕ公关部经理Manufacturing Engineer 制造工程师Manufacturing Worker 生产员工Market Analyst 市场分析员Market Development Manager 市场开发部经理Marketing Manager 市场销售部经理Marketing Staff 市场销售员Marketing Assistant 销售助理Marketing Executive 销售主管Marketing Representative 销售代表Marketing Representative Manager 市场调研部经理Mechanical Engineer 机械工程师Mining Engineer 采矿工程师Music Teacher 音乐教丨师Naval Architect 造船工程师Office Assistant 办公室助理Office Clerk 职员Operational Manager 业丨务经理Package Designer 包装设计师Passenger Reservation Staff 乘客票位预订员Personnel Clerk 人事部职员Personnel Manager 人事部经理Plant/ Factory Manager 厂长Postal Clerk 邮政人员Private Secretary 私人秘书Product Manager 生产部经理Production Engineer 产品工程师Professional Staff 专业人员Programmer 电脑程序设计师Project Staff 项目策划人员Promotional Manager 推售部经理Proof-reader 校对员Purchasing Agent 采购进货员Quality Control Engineer 质量管理工程师Real Estate Staff 房地产职员Recruitment Co-ordinator 招聘协调人Regional Manger 地区经理Research＆.Development Engineer 研究开发工程师Restaurant Manager 饭店经理Sales and Planning Staff 销售计划员Sales Assistant 销售助理Sales Clerk 店员、售货员Sales Coordinator 销售协调人Sales Engineer 销售工程师Sales Executive 销售主管SaleѕManager 销售部经理Salesperson 销售员Seller Representative 销售代表Sales Supervisor 销售监管School Registrar 学校注册主任Secretarial Assistant 秘书助理Secretary 秘书Securities Custody Clerk 保安人员Security Officer 安全人员Senior Accountant 高级会计Senior Consultant/Adviser 高级顾问Senior Employee 高级雇员Senior Secretary 高级秘书Service Manager 服务部经理Simultaneous Interpreter 同声传译员Software Engineer 计算机软件工程师Supervisor 监管员Systems Adviser 系统顾问Systems Engineer 系统工程师Systems Operator 系统操作员Technical Editor 技术编辑Technical Translator 技术翻译Technical Worker 技术工人Telecommunication Executive电讯（电信）员Telephonist / Operator 电话接线员、话务员Tourist Guide 导游Trade Finance Executive 贸易财务主管Trainee Manager 培训部经理Translation Checker 翻译核对员Translator 翻译员Trust Banking Executive 银行高级职员Typist 打字员Wordprocessor Operator 文字处理操作员。
民主理论中的矛盾By Richard Wollheim民主政治的发明一般归功于克里斯提尼（Cleisthenes）。
很多人反对这个归因，很多并不是基于事实依据，而是因为其享有英雄主义或者普罗米修斯式的历史观。
但在这里这种观点至少是合乎情理的。
我们对这位伟大的改革者的动机和观点了解极其有限，但他所实现的成就确实具有长期持续的重要性的这一点是毋庸置喙的。
他所设计的制度只略加调整便长期作为雅典的政治结构：围绕其产生了一种对流行政府的信念或理论，其中只有部分流传了下来，最后希腊词XXXX的最初所指正是这些制度。
到公元前五世纪中期，民主政治已经作为一系列制度，一种政府理论和一个词汇而存在。
由于制度最先产生并推动其他所有，故设计这套制度的人当然有最好的理由被尊为民主政治的发明者。
从克里斯提尼的年代起，民主政治已经在西方文化中已经长期的历史，如果有时是稀少的。
雅典的政治经验从未被忘记也从未完全消失，只要因为其被记载于那些总能因些非直接原因而从受教育者处获得持续的关注和崇敬的文本中。
但是，尽管有延续性，也存在着改变。
在数个重要方面，古代民主政治的都与现代世界的民主政治相异：不仅仅是在实践上，也在理论上。
举个明显的例子：对一个经典的头脑来说，民主与某些特定的政治制度本质上相联系的。
这种联系不复存在了。
因为古人将民主政治与之密切相连的制度不再被与之相联系（或始终联系），如同在公共审查或全部的情况中，或者即使仍然与民主政治相连却不能以可以直接获得民主政治本质的方式，如同法治。
但现代民主政治和古代民主政治相区分的最重要方面是，即使经典民主政治是一种阶层统治，对现代人来说，民主政治是反对任何形式的阶层统治的。
从词源学上可以解释为什么古人这么理解。
因为民主政治被视为是一种与其他与之拥有相同平行结构的名字的统治形式平行的，尽管不同，统治形式，即贵族政治（Aristocracy），寡头政治（Oligarchy），富豪政治（Plutocracy），暴民政治（Ochlocracy）。
其中每一种权力都是被人口的某一阶层所掌握，因权力所掌握阶层的不同故而每种统治形式也就不同相区别，每一种统治习惯是的权力阶层由统治形式的前缀予以表明。
在贵族政治中，统治阶层是Arstoi或精英；在寡头政治中，统治阶层是Oligoi或者极少数人；在暴民政治中，统治阶层是Plutoi或者暴民；在民主政治中，统治阶层是Demos即民众、人民。
古代希腊城邦中德Demos即人民是人口中一个特定的或者确定的阶层，即平民或者贫民。
通过对比发现，民主政治的现代概念是一种管理主体不受到任何限制的政治形式：这里的管理主体与公民主体具有相同的所指。
我们可以这样来对古典民主和现代民主做出区分：两者都是人民的统治；但在古典理论中，人民指某个阶层或者人口中的一个部分，而现代理论中的人民则指人口整体或全体。
问题立即就出现了：如果民主指全体人民的统治，如何去实现？对很多现代国家而言，人民都难免即众多而且多样，或者忽略这两者的连词，至少占据其中一端，所以必必须创建一个个人组成的可以进行有效的统治的集团。
在古代，或者在任何的古代政治理论中，这个问题都没有出现。
因为，古希腊城邦的Demos首先是相对较小的；其次，应当是由于利益上的一致而获得了欲望和需求的统一。
这个问题的其中一个解决方案是回到希腊城邦的状态，或者宁说，那种支持希腊城邦Demos的那种可以被用来支持现代民主政治的人民的状态。
这些人口首先在规模上要做相当的缩减。
并且当其不再众多时，它将自动停止变得多样。
否则如果任由多样性存在，这种多样性会变为纯现象的或表面的。
这种大致能相当于卢梭的合法规则的解决方案明显是不受欢迎的。
人口限制是不切实际的；其所倡导的正确的和真实的与任何程度的有意识的多样性相一致的统一也是无价值的。
另外一种解决方法由弱化附于有效规则的观念上的评判标准。
因为如果我们如希腊人那样通过“统治”“设计和编撰法律”，那么一个巨大和多样的人口来实践集体原则就变得明显不可能。
如我们所见，其中一个答案就是我们应该保证一个民主政治下的人口既不众多也不多样；另外一个答案是我们应该通过“统治”表达另外一些东西，或者在阐述民主政治时，我们应该使用另外一个“统治”的概念。
正是这第二个方案明白地、无保留地被现代民主政治理论吸收于其中。
如果现代民主理论坚持认为，民主政治下的人口整体意义上的人民，而非人口的某个阶层，那么它就坚持认为人民应当从选择和控制法律的意义上而非设计和创始法律的意义上进行统治。
这个观点的重要性在于允许一个无关规模和多样性的民族进行统治。
规模并非人民统治的障碍，从这个弱化的意义上变得非常明显。
既然立法的控制和选择并不要求人们的一致性，数量就不会削减其效用。
多样性也同样不再是障碍就没有那么明显了。
这并不直接源于鉴于说人们在强烈的责任感下统治必须使所有人赞成颁布的法律，鉴于说人民统治在较弱的责任感下统治有那么多的需要：在统治意味着控制的流行统治，可以说是坚持即使有相当比例的人们并不赞成但已被通过的东西。
但是，即是大众统治与某些程度的异议相容，也必然会有一些程度的异议与之不相容。
或者，换言之，对被称为是被人民选择的法律，其必须置于与那种个体的市民所希望法律的所是的积极关系中。
这种关系应当具有如何的特征？当然，在实践中，如果（1）与大多数人的所期望的相一致和（2）因为一致而通过的法律，我们就说这样的立法是民主的。
但也有争论称，尽管实践中多数人原则是没有问题的，其较于任何形式的理想民主结构都是不充分的；因为民主政治的任何正当理由都极关系到理想结构，因而这也就显得很重要了。
在阐述多数人原则的不足性之前，在新政策制定中的歧义需要先澄清。
因为这个原则需要坚持立法与市民选择的绝大多数或尽是最多数票保持一致。
如果绝大多数是预期的，那么多数人原则就是可以接受的，因为若是公民的选择，其绝不会选择自觉上无法接受的立法。
但问题在于，有极大范围的可能性情况多数人原则根本就不选择绝对多数立法。
相应的，如果管理成为持续的，多数人原则需要被其他原则所补充，这个角色最好的候选人就是相对多数原则。
这个原则在仁义情况下都能选出专门的立法，但是问题在于其所选择的立法有些情况下是反直觉的，比如如果是市民的选择。
一个例子可以说明这种情况。
我们试想，有三个人们必须从中选择的政策：A，B，C。
40%，选择了A；35%选择了B；25%，选择了C。
基于纯粹的多数人原则，A被选定了。
但是，如果选择B人更倾向于C而非A，选择C的人更倾向于B而非A。
根据此信息，如果民主原则被执行，那么A是正确的抉择就远非清晰的了。
因为有60%的人，都更倾向于B或C而非A。
这个例子阐述了，倘若公民的个人选择，如果我们所有考虑仅是公民的第一选择，那么民主政治下的政策或者立法应该被实行就不总是那么明确。
我们需要更加深入并考虑个体市民的整体的倾向情况。
深究多数人原则的这类批评意见，政治科学家们已经设想民主政治的问题作为（的解决方案）设计一种可以从个体市民有序的选择或者倾向情况中导出所谓的“民主抉择”的功能。
我们只有构建了这么一种功能我们才可以宣称我们已经阐述了根据现代理论人民在民主下统治的弱性的统治。
近来，这个方法遭到了逆转。
因在《社会选择和个人价值》中，Arrow已经证明了构建一种可以满足某些直觉标准的功能是不可行的。
Arrow的专业顾虑在于他称为“社会福利功能”，其主要任务是在个体倾向的基础上确定完整的社会倾向表。
但是，最近的研究表明Arrow不可能定理也更适用于更加直接与民主政治相关的不那么宏大的构建仅仅基于个体倾向表给我们社会第一选择的功能的工程。
我完全是顺道提及这个问题：并非因为我意图解决它，而是因为我意图搁置它。
这篇论文的目的，我意图假设所谓的“聚集的难题”已经被解决了；并且确实存在着一种理论或者统治，可以从个体选择通到某些特定立法，以至于我们可以合理的把这个法案的通过称为民主政治的一个实例。
完成这个预设后，现在我继续将民主政治视为一种依据这种理论或规则运转的机器。
这部机器，为方便起见，我们称之为民主机器以一种间断的方式不停运作。
我们以一定的间隔向其输入个体公民的选择。
这部机器就能根据预先设定的规则或者理论将其糅合，并提出所谓的其自己的“选择”。
如果这个机器不运转的阶段自始自终，人们都依据机器最新近做出的选择行事，就说民主的规则实现了。
现在问题出现了：机器所表达的选择的权威是什么呢？具体说，为什么将自己的选择输入机器却被机器得出一个与自己不同的选择的人会觉得有义务接受呢？不论如何，为了进一步深化质疑，我们现在必须注意到一个区别。
因为个体市民输入民主机器和民主机器所赖以做出决策的根据的选择容易收到两种不同的理解的影响。
一方面，我们将这些选择视作需求的表达。
说某个市民选择A或者他更倾向于A而非B，即是说他相对于其他任何选择或者相对于B他更倾向于A。
当一个人决定他相对B更倾向于A时，他有可能已经因非他自己的狭隘利益而是某种对别人的福利的关心而改变。
但是相同的是，选择了A，他并非坚持别人想选择A，也非A是他们的利益所在，亦非A即是理想解决方案，亦非A应该付诸现实；他仅仅只是表明他想要A。
如果我们设想民主机器是依据选择所表达的需求运转的，那么我们的问题分解为某种近似于古老的功利主义难题的东西：为什么一个想要A的人会认为B应该被选择，而B却与A明显不一致，但通过考虑社会其他人的需求去有了这个想法？我认为必须做对这个联系做两个简要的分析。
首先，无论怎样，即使是A和B本身并不一致，想要A却认为应该是B也没有什么不一致。
我们也许常有欲望并且也同时有与欲望相抗衡的道德信仰。
事实上，很多伦理学家认为如果没有一些道德信仰与欲望相抗衡反而是意见难以置信的事情。
但是，尽管想要A和认为应该是B之间并没有不一致，同样明显的是，前者也不能充当后者的原因，当然后者也不能从前者中得出。
但这个问题中似乎有个预设，此即应该展现出来的。
然而矛盾的是，功利主义者（我颇为笼统地用这个词）似乎持有“想要而却认为应该是B有着先入为主的不一致”以及“只有‘应该是B’的想法是基于‘想要A’时才能消除这种不一致”这两种误解。
但是当然，后一种要求是一种谬论。
它要么源于一种“证明一致性”的错误夸大概念，即为了证明两个命题的一致，其中一个必须由另外一个得出；要么源于道德基础概念的根本自我中心立场，即所有的道德信仰根源于需求。
事实上，一个表达出想要A，鉴于民主机器的运行，认为应该是B的人可能考虑到，因为应用了某些更高位原则到民主机器选择应该是什么的效果上而认为应该是B。
他顾及，换言之，他的原则，他不再回头并重新考虑他的需求。
他所需要确认的所有只是他的原则和他的需求，尽管会通向不同的方向，事实上并不一致；以及将任何意义附着在他们可能是的可能性上变得非常困难。
