题目内容
Part A
Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D . Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.
One of the principal of Walzer's critique of liberal capitalism is that it is insufficiently egalitarian. Walzer's case against the economic inequality generated by capitalism and in favor of "a radical redistribution of wealth" is presented in a widely cited essay entitled "In Defense of Equality."
The most striking feature of Waizer's critique is that, far from rejecting the principle of reward according to merit, Walzer insists, on its validity. People who excel should receive the superior benefits appropriate to their excellence. But people exhibit a great variety of qualities—" intelligence, physical strength, agility and grace, artistic creativity, mechanical skill, leadership, endurance, memory, psychological insight, tile capacity for hard work—even moral strength, sensitivity, the ability to express compassion". Each deserves its proper recompense, and hence a proper distribution of material goods should reflect human differences as measured on all these different scales. Yet, under capitalism, the ability to make money ("the green thumb of bourgeois society") enables its possessor to acquire almost "every other sort of social good" such as the respect and esteem of others.
The centerpiece of Walzer's argument is the invocation of a quotation from Pascal's Pensees, which concludes: "Tyranny is the wish to obtain by one means what can only be had by another." Pascal believes that we owe different duties to different qualities. So we might say that infatuation is the proper response to charm, and awe the proper response to strength. In this light, Walzer characterizes capitalism as the tyranny of money (or of the ability to make it). And Walzer advocates as the means of eliminating this tyranny and of restoring genuine equality "the abolition of the power of money outside its sphere" . What Walzer envisions is a society in which wealth is no longer convertible into social goods with which it has no intrinsic connection. Walzer's argument is a puzzling one.
After all, why should those qualities unrelated to the production of material goods be rewarded with material goods？ Is it not tyrannical, in Pascal's sense, to insist that those who excel in "sensitivity" or "the ability to express compassion" merit aqua] wealth with those who excel in qualities (such as "the capacity for hard work" ) essential in producing wealthy Yet Waizer's argument, how- ever deficient, does point out one of the most serious weaknesses of capitalism-that it brings pre- dominant positions to people who, no matter how legitimately they have earned their material re- wards, often lack those other qualities that evoke affection or admiration. Some even argue plausibly that this weakness may be irremediable: in any society that, like a capitalist society, seeks to be- come ever wealthier in material terms disproportionate rewards are bound to flow to the people who are instrumental in producing the increase in its wealth.
The author write this passage mainly to______.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Americans intentionally choose particular eye signals to show their personal emotions towards their talking partners.
The author's attitude towards Walzer's theory in "In Defense of Equality" can be best de-
A．Communication through language is unlimited.B．Only man uses language.C．There are no
Nonverbal Communication
Like all animals, people communicate by their actions as well as by the noises they make. Language is obviously essential for human beings, but it is not the whole story of human communication.
There are many different cultures in the world, and in each of them the children must learn a great many things that are expected of everyone who participates effectively in that culture. These things are taken for granted by everyone who shares the culture. When I say that they are taken for granted, I mean that nobody needs to describe them or write them down or try self-consciously to teach them to children. Indeed, the children begin to learn them before their linguistic skills are far enough developed to understand a verbal description of what they are learning. This kind of learning has sometimes been called "imitation," but that is much too simple an explanation for the complex processes that go on when a child learns what is normal and expected in his own community. Most of the norms (标准) are communicated to the child nonverbally, and he internalizes them as if no other possibilities existed. They are as much a part of him as his own body; he would no more question them than he would question the fact that he has two hands and two feet, but only one head.
What is an example of the sort of thing that children learn nonverbally？ One of the simplest examples to observe and analyze and discuss is the way people use clothing and bodily ornamentation (装饰) to communicate. At any particular time in any particular culture there is an accepted and normal way to dress and to arrange one's hair and to paint the face and to wear one's jewelry. By adopting those conventions for dressing himself, a person communicates to the world that he wants to be treated according to the standards of the culture for which they are appropriate. When a black person in America rejects the normal American dress and puts on African clothing, he is communicating to the world that he wants to be treated as an Afro-American. On the surface, dressing up in unusual costumes would seem to be one of the more innocent forms of dissent that a person would express, but in fact it is deeply resented by many people who still feel bound by the traditional conventions of their culture and who become fearful or angry when those norms are violated. The nonverbal message that such a costume communicates is "I reject your culture and your values," and those who resent this message can be violent in their response.
Eye contact also has an important role in regulating conversational interactions. In America, a typical pattern is for the listener to signal that he is paying attention by looking at the talker's mouth or eyes. Since direct eye contact is often too intimate, the talker may let his eyes wonder elsewhere. As the moment arrives for the talker to become a listener, and for his partner to begin talking, there will often be a preliminary signal. The talker will often look toward the listener, and the listener will signal that he is ready to talk by glancing away.
Such eye signals will vary, of course, depending on what the people are talking about and what the personal relation is between them. But whatever the pattern of eye signals that two people are using, they use them unconsciously. If you try to become aware of your own eye movements while you are talking to someone, y6u will find it extremely frustrating. As soon as you try to think self-consciously about your own eye movements, you don't know where you should be looking. If you want to study how the eyes communicate, therefore, you should do it by observing other people, not yourself. But if you watch other people too intently, of course, you may disturb them or make them angry. So be careful!
Eye communication seems to be particularly important for Americans. It is part of the American culture that pe
微信支付 
支付宝支付