成人欧美在线观看,成人米奇777,国产一级片播放,黄网在线观看免费

歡迎來到在職研究生網!為您提供專業擇校服務!
微信公眾號
在職研究生微信公眾號

政策解讀

擇校小程序
在職研究生微信小程序

快速擇校

2017雙證在職研究生英語二完形填空真題原文

來源:文都教育 時間:2016-12-26 10:45:37

  2017雙證在職研究生英語二完形填空真題原文,內容如下:

Would a Work-Free World Be So Bad?

  Fears of civilization-wide idleness are based too much on the downsides of being unemployed in a society premised on the concept of employment.

  A 1567 painting by Pieter Bruegel the Elder depicts a mythical land of plenty, where people grow idle in the absence of work. Wikimedia

  " Ilana E. Strauss

  " Jun 28, 2016

  People have speculated for centuries about a future without work, and today is no different, with academics, writers, and activists once again warning that technology is replacing human workers. Some imagine that the coming work-free world will be defined by inequality: A few wealthy people will own all the capital, and the masses will struggle in an impoverished wasteland.

  A different, less paranoid, and not mutually exclusive prediction holds that the future will be a wasteland of a different sort, one characterized by purposelessness: Without jobs to give their lives meaning, people will simply become lazy and depressed. Indeed, today's unemployed don't seem to be having a great time. One Gallup poll found that 20 percent of Americans who have been unemployed for at least a year report having depression, double the rate for working Americans. Also, some research suggests that the explanation for rising rates of mortality, mental-health problems, and addiction among poorly-educated, middle-aged people is a shortage of well-paid jobs. Another study shows that people are often happier at work than in their free time. Perhaps this is why many worry about the agonizing dullness of a jobless future.

  But it doesn't necessarily follow from findings like these that a world without work would be filled with malaise. Such visions are based on the downsides of being unemployed in a society built on the concept of employment. In the absence of work, a society designed with other ends in mind could yield strikingly different circumstances for the future of labor and leisure. Today, the virtue of work may be a bit overblown. "Many jobs are boring, degrading, unhealthy, and a squandering of human potential," says John Danaher, a lecturer at the National University of Ireland in Galway who has written about a world without work. "Global surveys find that the vast majority of people are unhappy at work."

  These days, because leisure time is relatively scarce for most workers, people use their free time to counterbalance the intellectual and emotional demands of their jobs. "When I come home from a hard day's work, I often feel tired," Danaher says, adding, "In a world in which I don't have to work, I might feel rather different"-perhaps different enough to throw himself into a hobby or a passion project with the intensity usually reserved for professional matters.

  Having a job can provide a measure of financial stability, but in addition to stressing over how to cover life's necessities, today's jobless are frequently made to feel like social outcasts. "People who avoid work are viewed as parasites and leeches," Danaher says. Perhaps as a result of this cultural attitude, for most people, self-esteem and identity are tied up intricately with their job, or lack of job.

  Plus, in many modern-day societies, unemployment can also be downright boring. American towns and cities aren't really built for lots of free time: Public spaces tend to be small islands in seas of private property, and there aren't many places without entry fees where adults can meet new people or come up with ways to entertain one another.

  The roots of this boredom may run even deeper. Peter Gray, a professor of psychology at Boston College who studies the concept of play, thinks that if work disappeared tomorrow, people might be at a loss for things to do, growing bored and depressed because they have forgotten how to play. "We teach children a distinction between play and work," Gray explains. "Work is something that you don't want to do but you have to do." He says this training, which starts in school, eventually "drills the play" out of many children, who grow up to be adults who are aimless when presented with free time.

  "Sometimes people retire from their work, and they don't know what to do," Gray says. "They've lost the ability to create their own activities." It's a problem that never seems to plague young children. "There are no three-year-olds that are going to be lazy and depressed because they don't have a structured activity," he says.

  But need it be this way? Work-free societies are more than just a thought experiment-they've existed throughout human history. Consider hunter-gatherers, who have no bosses, paychecks, or eight-hour workdays. Ten thousand years ago, all humans were hunter-gatherers, and some still are. Daniel Everett, an anthropologist at Bentley University, in Massachusetts, studied a group of hunter-gathers in the Amazon called the Pirah? for years. According to Everett, while some might consider hunting and gathering work, hunter-gatherers don't. "They think of it as fun," he says. "They don't have a concept of work the way we do."

  "It's a pretty laid-back life most of the time," Everett says. He described a typical day for the Pirah?: A man might get up, spend a few hours canoeing and fishing, have a barbecue, go for a swim, bring fish back to his family, and play until the evening. Such subsistence living is surely not without its own set of worries, but the anthropologist Marshall Sahlins argued in a 1968 essay that hunter-gathers belonged to "the original affluent society," seeing as they only "worked" a few hours a day; Everett estimates that Pirah? adults on average work about 20 hours a week (not to mention without bosses peering over their shoulders). Meanwhile, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average employed American with children works about nine hours a day.

  Does this leisurely life lead to the depression and purposelessness seen among so many of today's unemployed? "I've never seen anything remotely like depression there, except people who are physically ill," Everett says. "They have a blast. They play all the time." While many may consider work a staple of human life, work as it exists today is a relatively new invention in the course of thousands of years of human culture. "We think it's bad to just sit around with nothing to do," says Everett. "For the Pirah?, it's quite a desirable state."

  Gray likens these aspects of the hunter-gatherer lifestyle to the carefree adventures of many children in developed countries, who at some point in life are expected to put away childish things. But that hasn't always been the case. According to Gary Cross's 1990 book A Social History of Leisure Since 1600, free time in the U.S. looked quite different before the 18th and 19th centuries. Farmers-which was a fair way to describe a huge number of Americans at that time-mixed work and play in their daily lives. There were no managers or overseers, so they would switch fluidly between working, taking breaks, joining in neighborhood games, playing pranks, and spending time with family and friends. Not to mention festivals and other gatherings: France, for instance, had 84 holidays a year in 1700, and weather kept them from farming another 80 or so days a year.

  This all changed, writes Cross, during the Industrial Revolution, which replaced farms with factories and farmers with employees. Factory owners created a more rigidly scheduled environment that clearly divided work from play. Meanwhile, clocks-which were becoming widespread at that time-began to give life a quicker pace, and religious leaders, who traditionally endorsed most festivities, started associating leisure with sin and tried to replace rowdy festivals with sermons.

  As workers started moving into cities, families no longer spent their days together on the farm. Instead, men worked in factories, women stayed home or worked in factories, and children went to school, stayed home, or worked in factories too. During the workday, families became physically separated, which affected the way people entertained themselves: Adults stopped playing "childish" games and sports, and the streets were mostly wiped clean of fun, as middle- and upper-class families found working-class activities like cockfighting and dice games distasteful. Many such diversions were soon outlawed.

  With workers' old outlets for play having disappeared in a haze of factory smoke, many of them turned to new, more urban ones. Bars became a refuge where tired workers drank and watched live shows with singing and dancing. If free time means beer and TV to a lot of Americans, this might be why.

  At times, developed societies have, for a privileged few, produced lifestyles that were nearly as play-filled as hunter-gatherers'. Throughout history, aristocrats who earned their income simply by owning land spent only a tiny portion of their time minding financial exigencies. According to Randolph Trumbach, a professor of history at Baruch College, 18th-century English aristocrats spent their days visiting friends, eating elaborate meals, hosting salons, hunting, writing letters, fishing, and going to church. They also spent a good deal of time participating in politics, without pay. Their children would learn to dance, play instruments, speak foreign languages, and read Latin. Russian nobles frequently became intellectuals, writers, and artists. "As a 17th-century aristocrat said, 'We sit down to eat and rise up to play, for what is a gentleman but his pleasure?'" Trumbach says.

  It's unlikely that a world without work would be abundant enough to provide everyone with such lavish lifestyles. But Gray insists that injecting any amount of additional play into people's lives would be a good thing, because, contrary to that 17th-century aristocrat, play is about more than pleasure. Through play, Gray says, children (as well as adults) learn how to strategize, create new mental connections, express their creativity, cooperate, overcome narcissism, and get along with other people. "Male mammals typically have difficulty living in close proximity to each other," he says, and play's harmony-promoting properties may explain why it came to be so central to hunter-gatherer societies. While most of today's adults may have forgotten how to play, Gray doesn't believe it's an unrecoverable skill: It's not uncommon, he says, for grandparents to re-learn the concept of play after spending time with their young grandchildren.

  When people ponder the nature of a world without work, they often transpose present-day assumptions about labor and leisure onto a future where they might no longer apply; if automation does end up rendering a good portion of human labor unnecessary, such a society might exist on completely different terms than societies do today.

  So what might a work-free U.S. look like? Gray has some ideas. School, for one thing, would be very different. "I think our system of schooling would completely fall by the wayside," says Gray. "The primary purpose of the educational system is to teach people to work. I don't think anybody would want to put our kids through what we put our kids through now." Instead, Gray suggests that teachers could build lessons around what students are most curious about. Or, perhaps, formal schooling would disappear altogether.

  Trumbach, meanwhile, wonders if schooling would become more about teaching children to be leaders, rather than workers, through subjects like philosophy and rhetoric. He also thinks that people might participate in political and public life more, like aristocrats of yore. "If greater numbers of people were using their leisure to run the country, that would give people a sense of purpose," says Trumbach.

  Social life might look a lot different too. Since the Industrial Revolution, mothers, fathers, and children have spent most of their waking hours apart. In a work-free world, people of different ages might come together again. "We would become much less isolated from each other," Gray imagines, perhaps a little optimistically. "When a mom is having a baby, everybody in the neighborhood would want to help that mom." Researchers have found that having close relationships is the number-one predictor of happiness, and the social connections that a work-free world might enable could well displace the aimlessness that so many futurists predict.

  In general, without work, Gray thinks people would be more likely to pursue their passions, get involved in the arts, and visit friends. Perhaps leisure would cease to be about unwinding after a period of hard work, and would instead become a more colorful, varied thing. "We wouldn't have to be as self-oriented as we think we have to be now," he says. "I believe we would become more human."

  1.[A] boasting [B] denying [C] warning [D] ensuring

  【答案】[C] warning

  2.[A] inequality [B] instability [C] unreliability [D] uncertainty

  【答案】[A] inequality

  3.[A] policy [B]guideline [C] resolution [D] prediction

  【答案】[D] prediction

  4.[A] characterized [B]divided [C] balanced [D]measured

  【答案】[A] characterized

  5.[A] wisdom [B] meaning [C] glory [D] freedom

  【答案】[B] meaning

  6.[A] Instead [B] Indeed [C] Thus [D] Nevertheless

  【答案】[B] Indeed

  7.[A] rich [B] urban [C]working [D] educated

  【答案】[C] working

  8.[A] explanation [B] requirement [C] compensation [D] substitute

  【答案】[A] explanation

  9.[A] under [B] beyond [C] alongside [D] among

  【答案】[D] among

  10.[A] leave behind [B] make up [C] worry about [D] set aside

  【答案】[C] worry about

  11.[A] statistically [B] occasionally [C] necessarily [D] economically

  【答案】[C] necessarily

  12.[A] chances [B] downsides [C] benefits [D] principles

  【答案】[B] downsides

  13.[A] absence [B] height [C] face [D] course

  【答案】[A] absence

  14.[A] disturb [B] restore [C] exclude [D] yield

  【答案】[D] yield

  15.[A] model [B] practice [C] virtue [D] hardship

  【答案】[C] virtue

  16.[A] tricky [B] lengthy [C] mysterious [D] scarce

  【答案】[D] scarce

  17.[A] demands [B] standards [C] qualities [D] threats

  【答案】[A] demands

  18.[A] ignored [B] tired [C] confused [D] starved

  【答案】[B] tired

  19.[A] off [B] against [C] behind [D] into

  【答案】[D] into

  20.[A] technological [B] professional [C] educational [D] interpersonal

  【答案】[B] professional

  Section II Reading Comprehension

在職研究生有問必答

評論0

“無需登錄,可直接評論...”

用戶評論
發送
500字以內

    相關文章推薦

    09

    18

    中國礦業大學雙證在職研究生學費:中外合作項目24萬,自主創業者提升學歷的選擇?

    中國礦業大學雙證在職研究生學費成為熱議焦點,中外合作項目學費達24萬元,該項目專為自主創業者設計,提供國際化教育平臺,幫助提升管理技能和學歷背景。通過靈活學習模式,創業者可在工作之余深造,課程涵蓋企業管理與創新戰略,增強職業競爭力。了解學費詳情、報考優勢及招生政策,為您的學歷提升和事業發展提供實用指南。

    09

    18

    2026揚州大學雙證在職研究生學費4.5萬,適合職場人士嗎?

    揚州大學雙證在職研究生學費定為4.5萬元,本文探討其是否適合職場人士。分析學費的投資回報率、學習與工作平衡的可行性,以及職業發展提升潛力。結合真實案例,評估教育成本與收益,幫助職場人士權衡時間投入和薪資增長機會。提供實用建議,如靈活學習模式和工作兼容性,助力潛在學員做出明智決策。

    09

    18

    2026年西交利物浦大學雙證在職研究生學費多少?不同專業費用差異大

    西交利物浦大學雙證在職研究生學費因專業不同而存在顯著差異,熱門專業如管理類和工程類費用較高。本文詳細解析學費構成、繳納流程、獎學金政策及專業間費用對比,幫助在職人員清晰規劃教育支出。通過了解不同專業學費范圍,考生可根據經濟狀況選擇合適方向,實現職業提升與財務平衡,確保教育投資回報最大化。

    09

    18

    法律從業者關注:蘇州大學雙證在職研究生學費3.9萬,法律碩士學制3年

    法律從業者關注蘇州大學雙證在職研究生學費信息,學費定為3.9萬元,法律碩士專業學制為3年。該項目為在職法律人士提供靈活學習方案,學費透明合理,學制科學嚴謹,助力職業能力提升。錯過此類招生細節可能影響職業發展,及時了解可把握進階機會。蘇州大學雙證在職研究生學費政策明確,法律碩士課程設計全面,滿足行業需求,幫助學員平衡工作與深造。

    09

    18

    南京醫科大學雙證在職研究生學費2026年調整,職場晉升必備

    南京醫科大學雙證在職研究生學費迎來重要調整,這一變化緊密關聯職場人士的職業晉升路徑。學費調整基于教育成本優化和教學質量提升,為在職學員提供更高效的學習支持。職場人士通過投資雙證教育,不僅能獲得權威學位,還能顯著增強專業技能和競爭力,從而加速職場晉升步伐。忽略學費動態可能導致職業規劃滯后。及時掌握最新政策,規劃學習投資,是把握職業進階機遇的關鍵策略。

    09

    18

    南京信息工程大學雙證在職研究生學費:不同專業費用差異大,如何選擇?

    南京信息工程大學雙證在職研究生學費因專業不同而存在顯著差異。本文深入分析各專業具體費用詳情,探討影響費用的關鍵因素,并提供實用選擇策略,幫助在職人員根據經濟狀況和職業規劃優化決策。了解費用差異,避免盲目報考,把握職業進階機會。

    免費咨詢

    在線咨詢 報考資格測評
    電話咨詢
    010-51264100 15901414202
    全國統一咨詢熱線
    微信咨詢
    15901414202

    張老師

    15901414201

    張老師

    13810876422

    周老師

    15811207920

    育小路

    用手機號進行搜索添加微信好友
    公眾號
    關注微信公眾號

    關注微信公眾號

    招生政策隨時看

    小程序
    關注小程序

    關注小程序

    專業簡章學校隨時查