推薦簡章
更多>政策解讀
快速擇校
2017雙證在職研究生英語二完形填空真題原文,內(nèi)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
推薦簡章
更多>相關(guān)文章推薦
07
04
青島雙證在職研究生要讀3年,前兩年主要聚焦課程學(xué)習(xí),采用周末授課、集中授課等上課方式;第三年學(xué)員重心轉(zhuǎn)向論文撰寫與實踐應(yīng)用。另外在職人員對于課程難度和學(xué)校一覽等內(nèi)容,也要在報考時提前進(jìn)行充分的了解,以避免出現(xiàn)其他狀況。
07
03
湖北雙證在職研究生畢業(yè)還是有一定難度的,首先考勤參與度方面均有嚴(yán)格要求;其次課程考核標(biāo)準(zhǔn)要求課程成績達(dá)到合格才能下一階段學(xué)習(xí);再者入學(xué)考試與全日制采用相同考試標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和流程;最后畢業(yè)考試題型多樣,并有英語水平測試,需要具備相應(yīng)能力。另外對于就業(yè)前景和院校推薦,在職人員也要提前進(jìn)行充分了解。
07
03
雙證在職研究生考試,初試中管理類專業(yè)考管理類聯(lián)考綜合能力和英語二,非管理類專業(yè)考思想政治理論、外國語、專業(yè)課一和專業(yè)課二。復(fù)試一般有筆試和面試,筆試包括專業(yè)深化考核和政治理論加試,面試有綜合面試和英語聽說測試。其全國平均通過率約10%-30%,受院校層次、區(qū)域、專業(yè)冷熱等因素影響。
07
02
不用考的雙證在職研究生是真的,指在職國際碩士項目,包括中外合作辦學(xué)碩士和國際獨立辦學(xué)碩士。中外合作辦學(xué)碩士由中外高校合辦,畢業(yè)獲海外學(xué)位證,經(jīng)認(rèn)證等同雙證,免統(tǒng)考但需通過材料審核與面試,對英語有要求,學(xué)員多有豐富管理經(jīng)驗。國際獨立辦學(xué)碩士由海外院校直招,發(fā)校本部學(xué)位證可認(rèn)證為雙證,采用申請-審核制,看重本科背景與工作履歷。
07
01
汕頭大學(xué)在職研究生報考方式主要是同等學(xué)力申碩,其目前沒有雙證在職研究生。首先畢業(yè)后最終學(xué)員獲得的是碩士學(xué)位證書,不會頒發(fā)研究生學(xué)歷證書;同時其證書與全日制證書在法律效力上是等同的,在職稱評定等方面國家承認(rèn)其學(xué)位效力。另外對于職場優(yōu)勢和專業(yè)一覽等內(nèi)容,在職人員也要提前進(jìn)行充分的了解。
07
01
安徽雙證在職研究生相對其他報考方式難度較大,首先其初試與全國碩士研究生招生考試有統(tǒng)一的要求;其次復(fù)試競爭激烈;再者在職人員需要兼顧工作,生活和備考,時間分配有一定難度;最后由于報考人數(shù)增多,競爭壓力較大。另外對于報考準(zhǔn)備工作和院校一覽等內(nèi)容,在職人員報考時也要提前進(jìn)行充分的了解。
客服電話:010-51264100
中國在職研究生網(wǎng)
免費咨詢
張老師
15901414201張老師
13810876422周老師
15811207920育小路
關(guān)注微信公眾號
招生政策隨時看
關(guān)注小程序
專業(yè)簡章學(xué)校隨時查
評論0
“無需登錄,可直接評論...”