下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
In the 19th century, there used to be a model of how to be a good person. There are all these torrents of passion flowing through you. Your job, as captain of your soul, is to erect dams to keep these passions in check. Your job is to just say no to laziness, lust, greed, drug use and the other sins.
These days that model is out of fashion. You usually can't change your behavior by simply resolving to do something. Knowing what to do is not the same as being able to do it. Your willpower is not like a dam that can block the torrent of self-indulgence. It's more like a muscle, which tires easily. Moreover, you're a social being. If everybody around you is overeating, you'll probably do so, too.
The 19th-century character model was based on an understanding of free will. Today, we know that free will is bounded. People can change their lives, but ordering change is not simple because many things, even within ourselves, are beyond our direct control.
Much of our behavior, for example, is guided by unconscious habits. Researchers at Duke University calculated that more than 40 percent of the actions we take are governed by habit, not actual decisions. Researchers have also come to understand the structure of habits—cue, routine, reward. You can change your own personal habits. If you leave running shorts on the floor at night, that'll be a cue to go running in the morning. Don't try to ignore your afternoon snack craving. Every time you feel the cue for a snack, insert another routine. Take a walk.
Their research thus implies a different character model, which is supposed to manipulate the neural networks inside. To be an effective person, under this model, you are supposed to coolly examine your own unconscious habits, and the habits of those under your care. You are supposed to devise strategies to alter the cues and routines. Every relationship becomes slightly manipulative, including your relationship with yourself. You're trying to arouse certain responses by implanting certain cues.
This is a bit disturbing, because the important habitual neural networks are not formed by mere routine, nor can they be reversed by clever cues. They are burned in by emotion and strengthened by strong yearnings, like the yearnings for admiration and righteousness.
If you think you can change your life in a clever way, the way an advertiser can get you to buy an air freshener, you're probably wrong. As the Victorians understood, if you want to change your life, don't just look for a clever cue. Commit to some larger global belief.
1. Which of the following is a key element in the 19th-century character model?
A. Passion.
B. Determination.
C. Capability.
D. Action.
2. The 19th-century model supposedly does not work because _______.
A. it has worked unsatisfactorily most of the time
B. the comparison of free will to dam is groundless
C. what one wished to do should be considered carefully
D. there were many other factors beyond one's control
3. What is the main implication of the research at Duke University?
A. Habit is key to one's behavior.
B. One's behavior is difficult to change.
C. Both habit and will power are important.
D. Habit has an unidentified structure.
4. According to the new character model, personal behavior could be altered through _______.
A. cues to manipulate the habitual neural responses
B. cues to stop all the former unconscious habits
C. techniques to devise different physical cues
D. techniques to supplement old routines
5. We learn from the passage that the new character model _______.
A. has been used to change behavior successfully
B. deals better with emotional aspects of behavior
C. stresses the neural and psychological aspects of habit change
D. can bring about changes in one's life like what advertisers do
“The word ‘protection’ is no longer taboo”. This short sentence, uttered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy last month, may have launched a new era in economic history. Why? For decades, Western leaders have believed that lowering trade barriers and tariffs was a natural good. Doing so, they reasoned, would lead to greater economic efficiency and productivity, which in turn would improve human welfare. Championing free trade thus became a moral, not just an economic cause.
These leaders, of course, weren't acting out of unselfishness. They knew their economies were the most competitive, so they'd profit most from liberalization. And developing countries feared that their economies would be swamped by superior Western productivity. Today, however, the tables have turned—though few acknowledge it. The West continues to preach free trade, but practices it less and less. Asian, meanwhile, continues to plead for special protection but practices more and more free trade.
That's why Sarkozy's words were so important: he finally injected some honesty into the trade debates. The truth is that large parts of the West are losing faith in free trade, though few leaders admit it. Some economists are more honest. Paul Krugman is one of the few willing to acknowledge that protectionist arguments are returning. In the short run, there will be winners and losers under free trade. This, of course, is what capitalism is all about. But more and more of these losers will be in the West. Economists in the developed world used to love quoting Joseph Schumpeter, who said that “creative destruction” was an essential part of capitalist growth. But they always assumed that destruction would happen over there. When Western workers began losing jobs, suddenly their leaders began to lose faith in their principles. Things have yet to reverse completely. But there's clearly a negative trend in a Western theory and practice.
A little hypocrisy is not in itself a serious problem. The real problem is that Western governments continue to insist that they retain control of the key global economic and financial institutions while drifting away from global liberalization. Look at what's happening at the IMF (International Monetary Fund). The Europeans have demanded that they keep the post of managing director. But all too often, Western officials put their own interests above everyone else's when they dominate these global institutions.
The time has therefore come for the Asians—who are clearly the new winners in today's global economy—to provide more intellectual leadership in supporting free trade. Sadly, they have yet to do so. Unless Asians speak out, however, there's a real danger that Adam Smith's principles, which have brought so much good to the world, could gradually die. And that would leave all of us, worse off, in one way or another.
1. It can be inferred that “protection” (Line 1, Para.1) means ______.
A. improving economic efficiency
B. ending the free-trade practice
C. lowering moral standard
D. raising trade tariffs
2. The Western leaders preach free trade because ______.
A. it is beneficial to their economies
B. it is supported by developing countries
C. it makes them keep faith in their principles
D. it is advocated by Joseph Schumpeter and Adam Smith
3. By “the tables have turned” (Line 6-7, Para.2) the author implies that ______.
A. the Western leaders have turned self-centered
B. the Asian leaders have become advocates of free trade
C. the developed economies have turned less competitive
D. the developing economies have become more independent
4. The Western economies used to like the idea of “creative destruction” because it ______.
A. set a long-term rather than short-term goal
B. was an essential part of capitalist development
C. entailed a positive rather than negative mentality
D. was meant to be the destruction of developing economies
5. The author uses “IMF” as an example to illustrate the point that ______.
A. European leaders are reluctant to admit they are hypocritical
B. there is an inconsistency between Western theory and practice
C. global institutions are not being led by true globalization advocates
D. European countries' interests are being ignored by economic leaders
Americans to buy a car often use online price-comparison sites to find the best deal. Most such sites charge dealers a small fee for passing on sales leads from shoppers who have submitted their details. TrueCar does things differently. It charges dealers $300, but only when its introduction of a customer results in a sale, and it makes its dealers guarantee to honour their quotes, no excuses.
TrueCar taps into data from state vehicle-registration offices, car-loan providers and other sources to compile what it says are the most accurate figures available for what motorists pay for the same car locally. This can be several hundred dollars less than the sticker price, and is often below “invoice”—the price that represents the wholesale price the dealer paid. In fact dealers receive various rebates from carmakers, and make money from such things as loans and service contracts, so a modest profit is still possible.
But such heavy discounting alarms carmakers. Honda's American arm recently told dealers it would cut off their marketing allowances if they did not stop offering sub-invoice prices on TrueCar and other sites. Honda insists it will not pay them to market its products as “cheap” or “low-end” cars. It also suggests that some dealers use such sites to “bait-and-switch”, offering tantalizingly cheap cars they do not have, to reel in suckers, a practice many states ban.
TrueCar insists that the contracts it makes dealers sign commit them to deliver the cars they promise at the price quoted. David Wilson, who owns 16 dealerships in California, says he has reason to share Honda's skepticism: he plays back to the Economist a voicemail from a rival dealer who has quoted him an attractive price via TrueCar on a new Lexus, calling to say that they did not have it in stock but could try to find one for him. TrueCar says there had been no hiding of the fact that the model concerned might no longer be available, and thus no question of “bait and switch”; that this was a one-off case and that TrueCar has had few complaints so far.
However, several states' regulators are looking into whether the website breaches their laws. Some states specifically ban “bird-dogging”—taking commission for introducing a sale. Some also ban using the word “invoice” in car ads, regarding it as potentially misleading. Colorado's regulator has warned dealers there that they will be held responsible for any rule-breaking in their TrueCar quotes. TrueCar says it will shortly make changes to its website to satisfy the regulators' concerns.
In September, 2015 TrueCar raised $245m for expansion. On January 1st, 2016 it began an exclusive tied-up with Yahoo! to provide car-buying services. It also provides such services for consumer groups such as the American Automobile Association. It could look forward to a large slice of the $6 billion a year American car dealers spend on advertising—if it can convince both regulators and dealers that it is operating within the law.
1. We can learn from the first two paragraphs that TrueCar _______.
A. is more successful in car business than other sites
B. reduces dealers' profits while protecting buyers' benefit
C. get support from both car buyers and sellers
D. can benefit not only car buyers but also car dealers
2. It is indicated in Paragraph 3 that ______.
A. Honda reckoned that TrueCar affected their car's brand image
B. car dealers largely depend on carmakers' marketing allowance
C. TrueCar is an illegal website that deals in car business
D. car dealers cannot provide buyers with the cars they want
3. Which of the following could account for Wilson's complaint about TrueCar？
A. It charges commissions for introducing car sales.
B. It uses unavailable cheap cars as bait to attract customers.
C. Dealers cannot guarantee the promised prices on the website.
D. The prices set by the website mislead shoppers.
4. It is implied in the last paragraph that True Car ______.
A. is developing at such a fast speed that lots of problems emerge
B. provides after-sale services for both consumers and car dealers
C. should try harder to earn more trust from dealers and regulators
D. can earn $6 billion advertising fee from car dealers every year
5. Which of the following could be the best title for the text?
A. The TrueCar Challenge
B. The Future of Car Sales
C. The Objection to TrueCar
D. The Illegal Deals on TrueCar
For much of the past decade, American and British scientists have been annoyed by the phenomenon known as the French Paradox. Nutritionally speaking, the French have been getting away with murder: They eat all the butter, cream, foie gras, pastry and cheese that their hearts desire, and yet their rates of obesity and heart disease are much lower than ours. Then French eat three times as much saturated animal fat as Americans do, and only a third as many die of heart attacks. It's maddening.
Baffled, scientists struggled to come up with a few hypotheses: Maybe it was something in the red wine, they said. But while winemakers worldwide celebrated the news, sober research has suggested that any alcohol—whether Lafite Rothschild, a banana daiquiri or a cold Bud—pretty much has the same nice, relaxing effect. So while a little wine is apt to do you good, the French aren't so special in having a drink now and then (though the fact that they drink wine moderately and slowly with meals, instead of downing shots at the bar, could make a difference).
After the wine argument, scientists ventured that it must be the olive oil that keeps the French healthy. But this does not explain the butter or brie. Then, French Scientists Serge Renaud (made famous on “60 Minutes” as an expert on the French Paradox) said it's the foie gras that melts away cholesterol. This, too, is dicey: While people in Toulous—the fattened forced-fed duck-liver-eating area of France—do indeed have one of the lowest rates of heart disease in the developed world, they actually only eat the delicacy about six times a year. And they're a lot more likely to die of stroke than we are anyway.
Other researchers, perhaps sponsored by the garlic and onion industry, suggested that the French Paradox effect is due to garlic and onions. Claude Fischler, a nutritional sociologist at INSERM, the French equivalent of America's National Institutes of health, says all these single hypotheses are wishful thinking than science.
Last May, researchers writing in the British Medical Journal came up with the least cheerful hypothesis of all. They argued that it's just a matter of time before the French—who are in fact eating more hamburgers and French fries these days—catch up with Americans, and begin suffering the same high rates of cardiovascular disease.
These researchers, Malcolm Law and Nicholas Wald, call this the “time large explanation” for the French Paradox.As far as they are concerned, the McDonaldization (this is a French catch—all terms for the importation of fast food and other American cultural horrors) of France will continue at a frantic pace, and it is as inevitable that Frenchmen will start keeling over of heart attacks as it is that French women will eventually wear jean shorts and marshmallow tennis shoes on the streets of Paris.
1. What is the French Paradox according to the passage?
A. The French eat more nutritious food than Americans.
B. Few French die of heart attacks each year.
C. The French suffer much less from heart disease although they eat lots of fatty food.
D. The French eat less fatty food.
2. What can be learned from the passage?
A. The French drink as much wine as the people elsewhere.
B. The French wine has different relaxing effect to any other wine.
C. Drinking wine will benefit people.
D. The French drink wine in different ways from people of other countries.
3. The word “dicey” (Line 7, Para. 3) probably means ______.
A. uncertain
B. strange
C. satisfactory
D. interesting
4. In the author's opinion, the French Paradox has something to do with ______.
A. red wine
B. olive oil
C. garlic and onion
D. something unknown
5. What can you infer from the passage?
A. The French Paradox's is due to the influence of American values.
B. The French Paradox will disappear in time.
C. The Mcdonaldization of France has little effect on the French's health.
D. There is no such thing as French Paradox.
