英语六级
单选题根据下面资料，回答题
What Do the Humanities Teach Us?
A. Humanities professors have come up with a seemingly foolproof (无懈可击的. defense against those who trash degrees in, say, English literature or philosophy as wasted tuition dollars, one-way tickets to unemployment. Oh no, we say—the humanities prepare students to succeed in the working world just as well as all those alleged practical majors, maybe even better.
B. We offer tools of thought. We teach our students to understand and analyze complex ideas. We help them develop powers of expression, written and verbal. The lengthy essays we assign enhance their capacity to do independent work. At our best, we teach them how to reason--and reasoning under girds (从底层加强，巩固. every successful professional project. In the short term, such a defense may seem effective. But it is dead wrong.
C. In the Chronicle of Higher Education, a distinguished humanities scholar recently wrote with pride about a student of his, a classics major, who wrote brilliantly on Spinoza yet plans to become a military surgeon. A recent article in Business Insider offered "11 Reasons to Ignore the Haters and Major in the Humanities." For example: You'll be able to do things machines can't do in a service economy. You'll learn to explain and sell an idea. You'll stand out in the crowd in the coming STEM glut (供应过剩.. In the same publication, Bracken Darrell, the chief executive of Logitech, talked about why he loves hiring English majors: "The best CEOs and leaders are extremely good writers and have this ability to articulate and verbalize what they're thinking."
D. Some of my colleagues are getting quite aggressive about this line of reasoning. "I think we actually do a better job getting people ready for law school and business than the people in economics do," a good friend who teaches humanities told me not long ago. It seems that there's no problem, then. Want success? Come on in, our tent flap is open.
E. But the humanities are not about success. They're about questioning success--and every important social value. Socrates taught us this, and we shouldn't forget it. Sure, someone who studies literature or philosophy is learning to think clearly and write well. But those skills are means to an end. That end, as Plato said, is learning how to live one's life. "This discussion is not about any chance question," Plato's Socrates says in The Republic, "but about the way one should live."
F. That's what's at the heart of the humanities—informed, thoughtful dialogue about the way we ought to conduct life. This dialogue honors no pieties: All positions are debatable; all values are up for discussion. Ralph Waldo Emerson speaks for the spirit of the humanities in Self-Reliance when he says that we "must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness." He will not accept what the world calls "good" without consideration. He'll look into it as Socrates did and see if it actually is good. When Montaigne doubts received opinions and asks himself what he really knows and what he does not, he is acting in the spirit of the humanities. "Que sais-Je?" or "What do I know?" was his motto.
G. Socrates, who probably concentrates the spirit of the humanities better than anyone, spent his time rambling around Athens asking people if they thought they were living virtuous lives. He believed that his city was getting proud and lazy, like an overfed thoroughbred horse, and that it needed him, the stinging gadfly (牛虻., to wake it up. The Athenians had to ask themselves if the lives they were leading really were good. Socrates didn't help them work their way to success; he helped them work their way to insight and virtue.
H. Now, Americans are in love with success—success for their children in particular. As a parent of sons in their 20s, I understand this and sympathize with it. But our job as humanists isn't to second whatever values happen to be in place in society. We're here to question those values and maybe--using the best that has been thought and said--offer alternatives.
I. We commonly think in binaries(对,双.. Vanilla(香草. is the opposite of chocolate. The opposite of success—often defined today as high-status work and a big paycheck—is failure. But the great books tell us that this is not necessarily true. Think of Henry David Thoreau' s life of voluntary poverty and his dedication to nature and writing. Some of my students have cultivated values similar to Thoreau's and have done so at least in part through the study of the humanities. They've become environmental activists and park rangers. Or they have worked modestly paid jobs to spend all the time they can outdoors. They are not failures. Nor are those who work for the poor, or who explore their artistic talents, or who enlist in the military. These students are usually not in pursuit of traditional success. They have often been inspired by work they've encountered in humanities courses—and, for a time at least, they are choosing something other than middle-class corporate life.
J. The humanities are not against conventional success; far from it. Many of our students go on to distinguished careers in law and business. But I like to think they do so with a fuller social and self-awareness than most people. For they have approached success as a matter of debate, not as an idol of worship. They have considered the options. They have called "success" into question and, after due consideration, they have decided to pursue it. I have to imagine that such people are far better employees than those who have moved lockstep (因循守旧. into their occupations. I also believe that self-aware, questioning people tend to be far more successful in the long run.
K. What makes humanities students different isn't their power of expression, their capacity to frame an argument or their ability to do independent work. Yes, these are valuable qualities, and we humanities teachers try to cultivate them. But true humanities students are exceptional because they have been, and are, engaged in the activity that Plato commends--seeking to understand themselves and how they ought to lead their lives.
L. If some of our current defenders have their way, the humanities will survive, but in name only. The humanities will become synonymous (同义的. with unreflective training for corporate success. What would Socrates think?
According to Plato, the ultimate goal of studying the humanities is to learn how to live one's life.
What Do the Humanities Teach Us?
A. Humanities professors have come up with a seemingly foolproof (无懈可击的. defense against those who trash degrees in, say, English literature or philosophy as wasted tuition dollars, one-way tickets to unemployment. Oh no, we say—the humanities prepare students to succeed in the working world just as well as all those alleged practical majors, maybe even better.
B. We offer tools of thought. We teach our students to understand and analyze complex ideas. We help them develop powers of expression, written and verbal. The lengthy essays we assign enhance their capacity to do independent work. At our best, we teach them how to reason--and reasoning under girds (从底层加强，巩固. every successful professional project. In the short term, such a defense may seem effective. But it is dead wrong.
C. In the Chronicle of Higher Education, a distinguished humanities scholar recently wrote with pride about a student of his, a classics major, who wrote brilliantly on Spinoza yet plans to become a military surgeon. A recent article in Business Insider offered "11 Reasons to Ignore the Haters and Major in the Humanities." For example: You'll be able to do things machines can't do in a service economy. You'll learn to explain and sell an idea. You'll stand out in the crowd in the coming STEM glut (供应过剩.. In the same publication, Bracken Darrell, the chief executive of Logitech, talked about why he loves hiring English majors: "The best CEOs and leaders are extremely good writers and have this ability to articulate and verbalize what they're thinking."
D. Some of my colleagues are getting quite aggressive about this line of reasoning. "I think we actually do a better job getting people ready for law school and business than the people in economics do," a good friend who teaches humanities told me not long ago. It seems that there's no problem, then. Want success? Come on in, our tent flap is open.
E. But the humanities are not about success. They're about questioning success--and every important social value. Socrates taught us this, and we shouldn't forget it. Sure, someone who studies literature or philosophy is learning to think clearly and write well. But those skills are means to an end. That end, as Plato said, is learning how to live one's life. "This discussion is not about any chance question," Plato's Socrates says in The Republic, "but about the way one should live."
F. That's what's at the heart of the humanities—informed, thoughtful dialogue about the way we ought to conduct life. This dialogue honors no pieties: All positions are debatable; all values are up for discussion. Ralph Waldo Emerson speaks for the spirit of the humanities in Self-Reliance when he says that we "must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness." He will not accept what the world calls "good" without consideration. He'll look into it as Socrates did and see if it actually is good. When Montaigne doubts received opinions and asks himself what he really knows and what he does not, he is acting in the spirit of the humanities. "Que sais-Je?" or "What do I know?" was his motto.
G. Socrates, who probably concentrates the spirit of the humanities better than anyone, spent his time rambling around Athens asking people if they thought they were living virtuous lives. He believed that his city was getting proud and lazy, like an overfed thoroughbred horse, and that it needed him, the stinging gadfly (牛虻., to wake it up. The Athenians had to ask themselves if the lives they were leading really were good. Socrates didn't help them work their way to success; he helped them work their way to insight and virtue.
H. Now, Americans are in love with success—success for their children in particular. As a parent of sons in their 20s, I understand this and sympathize with it. But our job as humanists isn't to second whatever values happen to be in place in society. We're here to question those values and maybe--using the best that has been thought and said--offer alternatives.
I. We commonly think in binaries(对,双.. Vanilla(香草. is the opposite of chocolate. The opposite of success—often defined today as high-status work and a big paycheck—is failure. But the great books tell us that this is not necessarily true. Think of Henry David Thoreau' s life of voluntary poverty and his dedication to nature and writing. Some of my students have cultivated values similar to Thoreau's and have done so at least in part through the study of the humanities. They've become environmental activists and park rangers. Or they have worked modestly paid jobs to spend all the time they can outdoors. They are not failures. Nor are those who work for the poor, or who explore their artistic talents, or who enlist in the military. These students are usually not in pursuit of traditional success. They have often been inspired by work they've encountered in humanities courses—and, for a time at least, they are choosing something other than middle-class corporate life.
J. The humanities are not against conventional success; far from it. Many of our students go on to distinguished careers in law and business. But I like to think they do so with a fuller social and self-awareness than most people. For they have approached success as a matter of debate, not as an idol of worship. They have considered the options. They have called "success" into question and, after due consideration, they have decided to pursue it. I have to imagine that such people are far better employees than those who have moved lockstep (因循守旧. into their occupations. I also believe that self-aware, questioning people tend to be far more successful in the long run.
K. What makes humanities students different isn't their power of expression, their capacity to frame an argument or their ability to do independent work. Yes, these are valuable qualities, and we humanities teachers try to cultivate them. But true humanities students are exceptional because they have been, and are, engaged in the activity that Plato commends--seeking to understand themselves and how they ought to lead their lives.
L. If some of our current defenders have their way, the humanities will survive, but in name only. The humanities will become synonymous (同义的. with unreflective training for corporate success. What would Socrates think?
According to Plato, the ultimate goal of studying the humanities is to learn how to live one's life.
参考答案：E进入在线模考
【参考译文】
人文学科教会我们什么?
A.[38]有些人贬低英语文学或哲学等学位，认为其是浪费学费，是通往失业的单程票。对此，人文学科的教授已经提出了一个貌似无懈可击的辩解。哦，不对，我们认为—和所有号称很实用的专业一样，人文学科也能帮助学生做好在职场中获得成功的准备，可能还更成功。
B.我们提供的是思维工具。我们教授学生理解和分析复杂的观点。我们帮助他们培养书面和口头表达能力。我们布置的长篇论文提升他们独立工作的能力。我们在最佳状态时教他们如何推理——推理是所有专业项目成功的基础。从短期来看，这种辩解也许看似有效，但却是大错特错。
C.最近一位著名的人文学者在《高等教育纪事报》上撰文，骄傲地谈及他的一位古典文化专业的学生撰写了关于斯宾诺莎的优秀论文，却计划成为一名军医。最近在“商业内幕”网站上，有一篇文章提出了“不理睬人文学科的厌恶者及选择人文学科的ll条理由”。比如：你将能够在一个服务型经济中做到机器做不到的事情；你将学会解释和推销一种观点；在即将出现的科学、技术、工程和数学人才过剩的局面下，你将脱颖而出。在同一网站中，[37]罗技公司的主管布拉肯·达雷尔谈论了他喜欢雇用英语专业学生的原因：“最好的总裁和领导者都是很出色的写手，具备阐述自己想法的能力。”
D.在这种论证思路下，我的一些同事正变得野心勃勃。一位教授人文学科的好友不久前告诉我：“我认为我们实际上在培养学生进入法学院和商学院方面比经济学专业的人做得好。”那么，似乎就不存在问题了。想要成功?来吧，我们的大门为你敞开。
E.但是人文学科并非关于成功。人文学科质疑成功——以及每一条重要的社会价值观。苏格拉底教给了我们这一道理，我们不应该忘记。当然，[36]研究文学或哲学的人正在学习如何清楚地思考以及如何写好文章。但是这些技能都只是实现某个终极目标的方式。那个终极目标，正如柏拉图所说，就是学习如何度过自己的一生。柏拉图笔下的苏格拉底在《理想国》中说道：“这个讨论并不是针对任何一个偶然的问题．而是关于一个人应当怎样生活的问题。”
F.这就是人文学科的核心——关于我们应当如何生活的有见地、有思想的对话。这一对话不推崇虔诚：所有立场都是可商榷的；所有价值观都是可讨论的。[44]在《自立》一文中，拉尔夫·沃尔多。爱默生道出人文学科的精神，他说我们“不应被善的名义羁绊，而必须探求其是否为善”。他不会不假思索地接受世人所谓的“善”。他会像苏格拉底那样探究清楚其是否真的为善。[42]当蒙田对人们普遍接受的观点提出质疑，并问自己到底知道什么，不知道什么时，他正在践行人文学科的精神。“Que sais-Je?(我知道什?.”是他的座右铭。
G.[39]苏格拉底可能比任何人都关注人文学科的精神，他经常在雅典城里漫步，询问人们是否认为他们自己过的是有德行的生活。他认为自己的城市正变得傲慢和懒惰，像一匹吃撑了的纯种马，正好需要他这只蜇人的牛虻来把它蜇醒。雅典人必须扪心自问，他们的生活真的好吗?[39]苏格拉底没有帮助他们获取成功，而是帮助他们获得洞察力和美德。
H.现在。美国人热衰成功——特别是他们孩子的成功。作为几个20多岁男孩的父亲，我理解这一切并也有同感。[45]但是作为人文学者。我们的工作不是赞同社会中任何一种恰好大行其道的价值观。我们的存在是要质疑这些价值观并且或许——利用已有的思想和言论的精华——提供备选。
I.我们的想法通常非此即彼。与巧克力相对的是香草，与成功——今天往往被定义为社会地位高和薪水丰厚——相对的是失败。但是那些伟大的著作告诉我们，这未必是正确的。[43]想想亨利·戴维·梭罗清贫的生活和对自然及写作的热爱。我的一些学生也树立了类似梭罗的价值观，至少其中一部分是通过人文学科的学习而获得的。他们已经成了环保积极分子和公园管理员，或者为了尽可能待在室外而从事收入一般的工作。他们不是失败者。那些为穷人工作的人、发掘自身艺术天赋的人和参军的人都不是失败者。，这些学生往往追求的不是传统意义上的成功。他们往往是在学习人文学科的课程中受到启发——至少在一段时间内，他们选择了与中产阶级上班族不一样的生活方式。
J.人文学科并非反对传统成功，绝对不是。我的许多学生后来在法律界和商界都工作得风生水起。但是我更相信，他们之所以这样是因为比大多数人有更全面的社会意识和自我意识。因为他们将成功看作是可商榷的，而不是崇拜的对象。他们已经考虑过多种选择。他们质疑过“成功”，在充分思考过后，他们决定追求成功。我能想象得出，与那些按部就班选择职业的人相比，作为员工，他们会做得更好。[41]我也相信从长远来看，有自我意识和质疑精神的人往往会取得更大的成功。
K.人文专业学生的独特之处不在于他们的表达能力，也不在于其构建论点或独立工作的能力。的确，这些都是难能可贵的素质，我们人文学科的老师也努力培养这些素质。[40]但是人文专业学生的真正优秀之处在于他们做过并且正在践行柏拉图所推崇的事——力图了解自己并且知道自己应该过什么样的生活。
L.如果我们当前的某些辩论者为所欲为，那么人文学科将继续存在下去，但实质上是名存实亡。人文学科将与致力于职场成功却不思考的训练一样。如果这样，苏格拉底会做何感想?
【答案解析】
解析：题干意为，根据柏拉图的观点，学习人文学科的终极目标是学会如何度过一生。注意抓住题干中的关键词Plato和me ultimate goal of studying the humanities。关于柏拉图对哲学等人文学科终极目标的观点的内容出现在E段。该段第四句至第六句中提到，研究文学或哲学的人正在学习如何清楚地思考以及如何写好文章。但是这些技能都只是实现某个终极目标的方式。那个终极目标，正如柏拉图所说，就是学习如何度过自己的一生。由此可见，题干是对原文的同义转述，故答案是E。
人文学科教会我们什么?
A.[38]有些人贬低英语文学或哲学等学位，认为其是浪费学费，是通往失业的单程票。对此，人文学科的教授已经提出了一个貌似无懈可击的辩解。哦，不对，我们认为—和所有号称很实用的专业一样，人文学科也能帮助学生做好在职场中获得成功的准备，可能还更成功。
B.我们提供的是思维工具。我们教授学生理解和分析复杂的观点。我们帮助他们培养书面和口头表达能力。我们布置的长篇论文提升他们独立工作的能力。我们在最佳状态时教他们如何推理——推理是所有专业项目成功的基础。从短期来看，这种辩解也许看似有效，但却是大错特错。
C.最近一位著名的人文学者在《高等教育纪事报》上撰文，骄傲地谈及他的一位古典文化专业的学生撰写了关于斯宾诺莎的优秀论文，却计划成为一名军医。最近在“商业内幕”网站上，有一篇文章提出了“不理睬人文学科的厌恶者及选择人文学科的ll条理由”。比如：你将能够在一个服务型经济中做到机器做不到的事情；你将学会解释和推销一种观点；在即将出现的科学、技术、工程和数学人才过剩的局面下，你将脱颖而出。在同一网站中，[37]罗技公司的主管布拉肯·达雷尔谈论了他喜欢雇用英语专业学生的原因：“最好的总裁和领导者都是很出色的写手，具备阐述自己想法的能力。”
D.在这种论证思路下，我的一些同事正变得野心勃勃。一位教授人文学科的好友不久前告诉我：“我认为我们实际上在培养学生进入法学院和商学院方面比经济学专业的人做得好。”那么，似乎就不存在问题了。想要成功?来吧，我们的大门为你敞开。
E.但是人文学科并非关于成功。人文学科质疑成功——以及每一条重要的社会价值观。苏格拉底教给了我们这一道理，我们不应该忘记。当然，[36]研究文学或哲学的人正在学习如何清楚地思考以及如何写好文章。但是这些技能都只是实现某个终极目标的方式。那个终极目标，正如柏拉图所说，就是学习如何度过自己的一生。柏拉图笔下的苏格拉底在《理想国》中说道：“这个讨论并不是针对任何一个偶然的问题．而是关于一个人应当怎样生活的问题。”
F.这就是人文学科的核心——关于我们应当如何生活的有见地、有思想的对话。这一对话不推崇虔诚：所有立场都是可商榷的；所有价值观都是可讨论的。[44]在《自立》一文中，拉尔夫·沃尔多。爱默生道出人文学科的精神，他说我们“不应被善的名义羁绊，而必须探求其是否为善”。他不会不假思索地接受世人所谓的“善”。他会像苏格拉底那样探究清楚其是否真的为善。[42]当蒙田对人们普遍接受的观点提出质疑，并问自己到底知道什么，不知道什么时，他正在践行人文学科的精神。“Que sais-Je?(我知道什?.”是他的座右铭。
G.[39]苏格拉底可能比任何人都关注人文学科的精神，他经常在雅典城里漫步，询问人们是否认为他们自己过的是有德行的生活。他认为自己的城市正变得傲慢和懒惰，像一匹吃撑了的纯种马，正好需要他这只蜇人的牛虻来把它蜇醒。雅典人必须扪心自问，他们的生活真的好吗?[39]苏格拉底没有帮助他们获取成功，而是帮助他们获得洞察力和美德。
H.现在。美国人热衰成功——特别是他们孩子的成功。作为几个20多岁男孩的父亲，我理解这一切并也有同感。[45]但是作为人文学者。我们的工作不是赞同社会中任何一种恰好大行其道的价值观。我们的存在是要质疑这些价值观并且或许——利用已有的思想和言论的精华——提供备选。
I.我们的想法通常非此即彼。与巧克力相对的是香草，与成功——今天往往被定义为社会地位高和薪水丰厚——相对的是失败。但是那些伟大的著作告诉我们，这未必是正确的。[43]想想亨利·戴维·梭罗清贫的生活和对自然及写作的热爱。我的一些学生也树立了类似梭罗的价值观，至少其中一部分是通过人文学科的学习而获得的。他们已经成了环保积极分子和公园管理员，或者为了尽可能待在室外而从事收入一般的工作。他们不是失败者。那些为穷人工作的人、发掘自身艺术天赋的人和参军的人都不是失败者。，这些学生往往追求的不是传统意义上的成功。他们往往是在学习人文学科的课程中受到启发——至少在一段时间内，他们选择了与中产阶级上班族不一样的生活方式。
J.人文学科并非反对传统成功，绝对不是。我的许多学生后来在法律界和商界都工作得风生水起。但是我更相信，他们之所以这样是因为比大多数人有更全面的社会意识和自我意识。因为他们将成功看作是可商榷的，而不是崇拜的对象。他们已经考虑过多种选择。他们质疑过“成功”，在充分思考过后，他们决定追求成功。我能想象得出，与那些按部就班选择职业的人相比，作为员工，他们会做得更好。[41]我也相信从长远来看，有自我意识和质疑精神的人往往会取得更大的成功。
K.人文专业学生的独特之处不在于他们的表达能力，也不在于其构建论点或独立工作的能力。的确，这些都是难能可贵的素质，我们人文学科的老师也努力培养这些素质。[40]但是人文专业学生的真正优秀之处在于他们做过并且正在践行柏拉图所推崇的事——力图了解自己并且知道自己应该过什么样的生活。
L.如果我们当前的某些辩论者为所欲为，那么人文学科将继续存在下去，但实质上是名存实亡。人文学科将与致力于职场成功却不思考的训练一样。如果这样，苏格拉底会做何感想?
【答案解析】
解析：题干意为，根据柏拉图的观点，学习人文学科的终极目标是学会如何度过一生。注意抓住题干中的关键词Plato和me ultimate goal of studying the humanities。关于柏拉图对哲学等人文学科终极目标的观点的内容出现在E段。该段第四句至第六句中提到，研究文学或哲学的人正在学习如何清楚地思考以及如何写好文章。但是这些技能都只是实现某个终极目标的方式。那个终极目标，正如柏拉图所说，就是学习如何度过自己的一生。由此可见，题干是对原文的同义转述，故答案是E。
你可能感兴趣的试题
最新试题
中国的龙是中国神话和民间故事里传说的生物。龙有许多动物的特征，例如龟、鱼等。但是，大多情况下龙被描绘成长着四只脚的蛇形动
类型：简答题2017-06-10
It is implied that, in the long run, most Latinos in A
类型：单选题2017-06-10
According to the author, Arizona should give highest p
类型：单选题2017-06-10
The underlined part "educational deficits" (Para.4)&nb
类型：单选题2017-06-10
What can be inferred from the third paragraph?
类型：单选题2017-06-10
Questions are based on the following passage. Latino youths
类型：单选题2017-06-10
Which of the following can best summarize the main idea of t
类型：单选题2017-06-10
It can be inferred from the last two paragraphs that __
类型：单选题2017-06-10
Ethan Kross´s 2013 study failed to find __
类型：单选题2017-06-10
What does the phrase "this problem" in Paragraph 3 refer to?
类型：单选题2017-06-10