Chart 5
How Good Are Your Opinions?
你的觀點(diǎn)有多少根據(jù)？
To me truth is precious. . . . I should rather be right and stand alone than to run with the multitude and be wrong. . . . The holding of the views herein set forth has already won for me the scorn and contempt and ridicule of some of my fellow men. I am looked upon as being odd, strange, peculiar. . . . But truth is truth and though all the world reject it and turn against me, I will cling to truth still.
在我看來(lái)，真理是寶貴的……我寧愿獨(dú)自一人堅(jiān)持正確的觀點(diǎn)，也不愿追隨多數(shù)人而堅(jiān)持錯(cuò)誤的……因此，持有這樣的觀點(diǎn)已使我遭受到一些同胞的輕蔑、鄙視和嘲笑。我被看成是古怪的、奇特的和孤僻的人……但是，真理就是真理，即使全世界都拒絕它并反對(duì)我，我仍然固守真理。
Stirring words, those. You can envision their author bravely facing legions of reactionaries intent on imposing their narrow dogmas on him. In the background you can almost hear a chorus singing “Stout-Hearted Men.” Stand tall, brave hero. Never give in!
這是些激動(dòng)人心的話語(yǔ)。你可以想象其作者勇敢地面對(duì)眾多意圖把他們狹隘的教條強(qiáng)加于他的保守派。在這樣的背景下，你幾乎可以聽(tīng)到齊聲合唱“堅(jiān)毅勇者”：巍然屹立，勇敢的英雄，永不放棄！
But wait a minute. Just who is the author? And what exactly is the opinion he is valiantly defending? His name is Charles Silvester de Fort. The quotation is from a booklet he wrote in 1931. And the opinion is—are you ready for this?—that the earth is flat.
但是等一下。這個(gè)作者到底是誰(shuí)？他勇敢捍衛(wèi)的觀點(diǎn)究竟是什么？他的名字是查爾斯·西爾維斯特·德·弗特（Charles Silvester de Fort)。這段引文出自他于1931年寫(xiě)的小冊(cè)子。這個(gè)觀點(diǎn)是（你準(zhǔn)備好了嗎？）：大地是平的。
People have always taken their opinions seriously, but today many people embrace their opinions with extraordinary passion. “I have a right to my opinion” and “Everyone’s entitled to his or her opinion” are common expressions. Question another person’s opinion and you’re likely to hear, “Well, that’s my OPINION.” The unspoken message is “Case closed.”
人們總是認(rèn)真地對(duì)待自己的觀點(diǎn)，但是，今天許多人以不尋常的激情堅(jiān)持自己的觀點(diǎn)?！拔矣袡?quán)擁有自己的觀點(diǎn)¨和“每個(gè)人都有權(quán)擁有他或她的觀點(diǎn)”是常用的表述。詢問(wèn)別人的觀點(diǎn)，你可能會(huì)聽(tīng)到：“好啦，這是我的觀點(diǎn)?！麤](méi)明說(shuō)的意思是：“到此為止。”
Is that a reasonable view? Is it inappropriate to challenge the opinions of others? The answer depends on the kind of issue involved. If it is a matter of taste, then the standard is the undemanding one of personal preference. If Agnes finds Reginald handsome and Sally disagrees, there’s really no basis for a meaningful dispute. Ditto if Ralph drools over an orange Camaro with brass wire hubcaps and purple upholstery and Carla is repulsed by it. Some people put catsup on hot dogs, while others prefer mustard or relish, and perhaps at this very moment someone, somewhere, is slathering a hot dog with mayonnaise or blueberries or pureed brussels sprouts. So what? Vive la différence!
這是一種合理的觀點(diǎn)嗎？質(zhì)疑其他人的觀點(diǎn)是不妥當(dāng)?shù)膯?？答案取決于所涉及問(wèn)題的種類(lèi)。如果是個(gè)人喜好的問(wèn)題，那么，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)就是要求不高的個(gè)人偏好標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。如果艾格尼絲發(fā)現(xiàn)雷金納德英俊，而莎莉不同意，那就的確不存存什么有意義的爭(zhēng)辯的基礎(chǔ)。同樣，如果拉爾夫?qū)τ悬S銅絲輪轂蓋和紫色內(nèi)飾的橙色雪佛蘭Camaro轎車(chē)垂涎三尺，而卡拉對(duì)此表示反感，則情況也是如此。一些人把醬涂在熱狗上，而男一些人更喜歡倒上芥末或調(diào)料，也許此時(shí)此刻某人在某處正往熱狗上涂抹大量的蛋黃醬、藍(lán)莓或球芽甘藍(lán)。那又怎樣？差別萬(wàn)歲?。ㄔ南捣ㄕZ(yǔ)Vive la difference-譯者注）
However, consider this very different use of the term opinion: A newspaper reports that the Supreme Court has delivered its opinion in a controversial case. Obviously, the justices did not state their personal preferences, their mere likes and dislikes. They stated their considered judgment, painstakingly arrived at after thorough inquiry and deliberation.
然而，考慮一下觀點(diǎn)這個(gè)詞的這種很不相同的用法。某報(bào)紙報(bào)道，最高法院就一件有爭(zhēng)議的案例發(fā)表見(jiàn)解。顯然，大法官們不是陳述他們的個(gè)人偏好，他們純粹的喜歡或不喜歡。而是經(jīng)過(guò)深思熟慮的判斷，是在徹底調(diào)查和審議后艱難作出的判斷。
In the context of critical thinking, the term opinion refers to expressions of judgment rather than to expressions of taste.* In some cases, unfortunately, it is not clear whether someone is expressing taste or judg ment. A friend might say to you, as you leave a movie theater, “That was a wonderful film,” which could mean “I liked it” or “It meets a very high standard of cinematography.” If she is merely saying she liked it, and you didn’t, the disagreement would be over personal taste, which is pointless to debate. However, if she is making an aesthetic judgment, you could reasonably challenge her, citing specific film standards the movie failed to meet.
在批判性思考的背景下，觀點(diǎn)這個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)指的是判斷的表達(dá)而不是喜好的表達(dá)_。不幸的是，在某些情況下，并不清楚某人是在表達(dá)喜好還是在表達(dá)判斷。當(dāng)你離開(kāi)電影院時(shí)，一位朋友也許對(duì)你說(shuō)：“這是一部精彩的電影”，這可能意味著“我喜歡它”或“它達(dá)到了很高的電影制作水平”。如果她僅僅說(shuō)喜歡它，而你不喜歡，那么爭(zhēng)論會(huì)是圍繞個(gè)人喜好的爭(zhēng)論，一場(chǎng)無(wú)意義的爭(zhēng)論。但是，如果她作出一個(gè)美學(xué)判斷，那你能夠合理地質(zhì)疑她，引用這部電影未達(dá)到的具體電影標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。
Is everyone entitled to his or her opinion? In a free country this is not only permitted but guaranteed. In Great Britain, for example, there is still a Flat Earth Society. As the name implies, the members of this organization believe that the earth is not spherical but flat. In this country, too, each of us is free to take as bizarre a position as we please about any matter we choose. When the telephone operator announces, “That’ll be ninety-five cents for the first three minutes,” you may respond, “No, it won’t—it’ll be twenty-eight cents.” When the service station attendant notifies you, “Your oil is down a quart,” you may reply, “Wrong—it’s up three.”
每個(gè)人有權(quán)擁有他或她的觀點(diǎn)？在一個(gè)自由的國(guó)度，這不僅得到允許而且得到保障。例如，在英國(guó)，仍然有一個(gè)“平面大地協(xié)會(huì)”。顧名思義，該組織成員認(rèn)為地球不是圓的而是平的。在我國(guó)，我們每個(gè)人也都可以就我們選擇的任何問(wèn)題自由地持有自己喜歡的一種奇怪的看法。當(dāng)話務(wù)員宣布：“前3分鐘要付95美分”，你可能回答：“不，不是——這是28美分”。當(dāng)服務(wù)站工作人員通知你：“你的機(jī)油在線下1夸脫”，你可能回答：“不對(duì)——它是線上3夸脫”。
Being free to hold an opinion and express it does not, of course, guarantee favorable consequences. The operator may hang up on you, and the service station attendant may respond unpleasantly.
當(dāng)然，自由地持有一種觀點(diǎn)并表達(dá)它，并不必然保證獲得有利的結(jié)果。話務(wù)員有可能掛斷你的電話，而服務(wù)站工作人員可能作出不愉快的反應(yīng)。
Acting on our opinions carries even less assurance. Consider the case of the California couple who took their eleven-year-old diabetic son to a faith healer. Secure in their opinion that the man had cured the boy, they threw away his insulin. Three days later, the boy died. The parents remained unshaken in their belief, expressing the opinion that God would raise the boy from the dead. The police arrested them, charging them with manslaughter. The law in such matters is both clear and reasonable: We are free to act on our opinions only as long as, in doing so, we do not harm others.
根據(jù)我們的觀點(diǎn)行事甚至?xí)鄙侔盐??？紤]這樣一個(gè)案例，加利福尼亞一對(duì)夫婦帶著患糖尿病的11歲兒子去見(jiàn)一位信仰療法者。他們確信此人已治好了他們的男孩，就停止給孩子注射胰島素。三天后，這個(gè)男孩死了。這對(duì)父母仍然保持著堅(jiān)定的信念，表達(dá)上帝能讓這男孩起死回生的看法。警察逮捕了他們，指控他們謀殺。在這件事中，法律是清楚而合理的。只有當(dāng)不傷害他人時(shí)，我們才可自由地根據(jù)自己的觀點(diǎn)行事。
Opinions Can Be Mistaken
可能出錯(cuò)的觀點(diǎn)
We might be tempted to conclude that if we are free tohave an opinion, it must be correct. That, however, is not the case. Freesocieties are based on the wise observation that people have an inalienableright to think their own thoughts and make their own choices. But this fact inno way suggests that the thoughts they think and the choices they make will bereasonable. It is a fundamental principle of critical thinking that ideas areseldom of equal quality. Solutions to problems vary from the practical to theimpractical, beliefs from the well founded to the ill founded, arguments fromthe logical to the illogical, and opinions from the informed to the uninformed.Critical thinking serves to separate the more worthy from the less worthy and,ultimately, to identify the best.
如果我們可自由地?fù)碛幸环N觀點(diǎn)，那我們也許會(huì)試圖推斷它一定是正確的。但事實(shí)并非如此。自由社會(huì)的基礎(chǔ)是建構(gòu)在明智的觀察之上：人們擁有不可剝奪的權(quán)利去思考自己的想法并作出選擇。但是，這個(gè)事實(shí)并不是說(shuō)，他們思考的想法和作出的選擇將都是合理的。批判性思考的基本原則就是，各種思想很少具有同等的質(zhì)量。問(wèn)題的解決方案從切合實(shí)際到不切實(shí)際之不等，信念從有根據(jù)到無(wú)根無(wú)據(jù)之不等，論證從符合邏輯到不合邏輯之不等，觀點(diǎn)也從有見(jiàn)識(shí)到無(wú)見(jiàn)識(shí)之不等。批判性思考的任務(wù)是把較有價(jià)的與較無(wú)價(jià)值的區(qū)別開(kāi)來(lái)，并最終確定最佳者。
Evidence that opinions can be mistaken is allaround us. The weekend drinker often has the opinion that, as long as hedoesn’t drink during the week, he is not an alcoholic. The person who continuesdriving her gas guzzler with the needle on Empty may have the opinion that theproblem being signaled can wait for another fifty miles. The student who quitsschool at age sixteen may have the opinion that an early entry into the jobmarket ultimately improves job security. Yet, however deeply and sincerely suchopinions are held, they are most likely wrong.
觀點(diǎn)有可能出錯(cuò)的證據(jù)俯抬皆是。周末酗酒者通常認(rèn)為，只要他在周一至周五不喝酒，他就不是一個(gè)酒鬼。在油量指針指到零時(shí)繼續(xù)駕駛高耗油車(chē)的某人，也許認(rèn)為指針顯示的問(wèn)題還可以撐過(guò)下一個(gè)5 0英里。16歲退學(xué)的學(xué)生可能讓為，早點(diǎn)進(jìn)入就業(yè)市場(chǎng)最終能提高就業(yè)保障。然而，無(wú)論如何深刻地、真誠(chéng)地持有這些觀點(diǎn)，他們還是錯(cuò)了。
Research shows that people can be mistakeneven when they are making a special effort to judge objectively. Sometimestheir errors are caused by considerations so subtle that they are unaware ofthem. For example, before Taster’s Choice coffee was introduced, it was testedand sampled with three different labels—brown, yellow, and red. People whosampled the brown-labeled coffee reported that it was too strong and kept themawake at night. Those who sampled the yellow-labeled coffee found it weak andwatery. Those who sampled the red-labeled coffee judged it to be just the rightstrength and delicious. All this even though the coffee in each jar was exactlythe same. The people had beensubconsciously influenced by the color of the label.
研究表明，人們甚至在特別努力地進(jìn)行客觀判斷時(shí)，也可能出錯(cuò)。有時(shí)，一些錯(cuò)誤是由如此微妙的想法引起的，以至于人們并來(lái)意識(shí)到它們。例如，前面介紹了品嘗者的咖啡選擇，對(duì)咖啡進(jìn)行檢驗(yàn)并對(duì)樣品貼上三種不同的標(biāo)備——棕色、黃色和紅色。喝了貼有棕色標(biāo)簽容器內(nèi)的咖啡的人們說(shuō)它太強(qiáng)烈，致使他們徹夜難眠。喝了貼有黃色標(biāo)簽咖啡的人們認(rèn)為它太弱、索然光味。喝了標(biāo)有紅色標(biāo)簽咖啡的人們則說(shuō)其強(qiáng)度恰到好處而且昧美。盡管如此，所有三種罐中裝的咖啡卻是完全相同的。人們無(wú)意中受到了標(biāo)簽顏色的影響。
Opinions on Moral Issues
關(guān)于道德問(wèn)題的觀點(diǎn)
The notion that everyone is entitled to his or her opinion is especially strong in the area of morality. Questions of right and wrong are presumed to be completely subjective and personal. According to this notion, if you believe a particular behavior is immoral and I believe it is moral, even noble, we are both right. Your view is “right for you” and mine is “right for me.”
每個(gè)人都有權(quán)擁有他或她的觀點(diǎn)，這一觀念在道德領(lǐng)域特別強(qiáng)烈。對(duì)與錯(cuò)的問(wèn)題被認(rèn)為是純主觀和個(gè)人的。根據(jù)這種信念，如果你認(rèn)為某種特定的行為是不道德的，而我認(rèn)為它是道德的，甚至是高尚的，那我們兩人都是對(duì)的。你的觀點(diǎn)“對(duì)你是對(duì)的¨，而我的觀點(diǎn)“對(duì)我是對(duì)的。
This popular perspective may seem eminently sensible and broadminded, but it is utterly shallow. Almost every day, situations arise that require reasonable people to violate it. Have you ever heard anyone claim that burglary, spousal abuse, or rape is morally acceptable for those who believe it is? When someone is convicted of child molesting, do citizens parade in front of the courthouse with banners proclaiming “Pedophilia may be wrong for us, but it was right for him”? If your instructor discovers you cheating on an examination, will she accept your explanation that you believe the end justifies the means? If a Breathalyzer test reveals that your classmate was driving with a blood alcohol level higher than his grade point average, will the police officer commend him for living by his moral conviction?
這種流行觀點(diǎn)也許看起來(lái)是相當(dāng)有道理和寬宏大量的，但它卻是完全膚淺的。幾乎每一天都出現(xiàn)需要理性的人們違背的情況。你聽(tīng)過(guò)有人聲稱，入室盜竊、虐待配偶或強(qiáng)奸，對(duì)于信奉這些行為的人來(lái)說(shuō)在道德上是可接受的嗎？當(dāng)某人因猥褻兒童被定罪，有市民在法院前面拉著寫(xiě)有“戀童癖對(duì)我們來(lái)說(shuō)可能是錯(cuò)的，但對(duì)他卻是對(duì)的”橫幅游行的嗎？如果你的老師發(fā)現(xiàn)你考試作弊，她能接受你的目的可為手段辯護(hù)的解釋嗎？如果酒精測(cè)試表明，你正在開(kāi)車(chē)的同學(xué)血液酒精含量高于平均積分點(diǎn)，交警會(huì)表?yè)P(yáng)他按照自己的道德信念而生活的行為嗎？
Virtually every professional organization and every corporation has a code of ethics that specifies the behaviors that are required or forbidden. Every country has a body of laws with prescribed penalties for violators. There are even international laws that govern affairs among countries. All these codes and legal systems don’t appear out of thin air. They are the products of moral judgment, the same mental activity individuals use in deciding everyday issues of right and wrong. And they are subject to the same limitations and imperfections. Opinions about moral issues, like other opinions, may be correct or incorrect.
事實(shí)上，每個(gè)職業(yè)團(tuán)體和每家公司都有一套倫理規(guī)范，用以規(guī)范所要求或禁止的行為。每個(gè)國(guó)家都規(guī)定了制裁違法者的法律體系，甚至還有處理國(guó)家間事務(wù)的國(guó)際法。所有這些規(guī)范和法律體系都不是從天上掉下來(lái)的。它們是道德判斷的結(jié)果，個(gè)人用于決定日常對(duì)錯(cuò)問(wèn)題的也是同樣的心智活動(dòng)。而且，它們也具有同樣的局限性和不完善性。關(guān)于道德問(wèn)題的看法，就像其他看法一樣，可以是正確的或不正確的。
Are there criteria we can use to increase the chance that our moral judgments will be correct? Definitely. The most important criteria are obligations, ideals, and consequences.*
存在可用來(lái)提高我們正確道德判斷的可能性的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)嗎？當(dāng)然有。最重要的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是義務(wù)、理想和結(jié)果。
? Obligations: Obligations are restrictions on behavior, demands that we do or avoid doing something. The most obvious kinds of obligations are formal agreements such as contracts. Others include professional and business obligations, and obligations of friendship and citizenship. When two or more obligations conflict, the most important one should take precedence.
·義務(wù)：義務(wù)是對(duì)行為的限制，要求我們做或不做某事。最明顯的義務(wù)種類(lèi)是正式協(xié)議，如合同。其他的包括職業(yè)和商業(yè)義務(wù)，以及友誼和公民的義務(wù)。當(dāng)兩個(gè)或更多義務(wù)之間發(fā)生沖突時(shí)，應(yīng)優(yōu)先考慮最重要的一個(gè)。
? Ideals: In the general sense, ideals are notions of excellence, goals that bring greater harmony within ourselves and with others. In ethics they are also specific concepts that help us maintain respect for persons. Some noteworthy examples of ideals are honesty, integrity, justice, and fairness. When two or more ideals conflict in a given situation, the most important one should be given precedence.
·理想：從一般意義上說(shuō)，理想是卓越的觀念，是帶來(lái)自身之內(nèi)、與他人之間更大的和諧的目標(biāo)。在倫理上，它們也是有助于我們尊重他人的特定概念。一些顯著的理想的例子是：誠(chéng)實(shí)、正直、正義和公平。在某種情況下，當(dāng)兩個(gè)或更多理想之間發(fā)生沖突時(shí)，應(yīng)優(yōu)先考慮最重要的一個(gè)。
? Consequences: Consequences are the beneficial and/or harmful results of an action that affect both the person performing that action and other people. Any examination of consequences should consider the various kinds: personal and societal; physical and emotional; immediate and eventual; intended and unintended; obvious and subtle; and possible, probable, and certain. Actions that achieve beneficial consequences should be preferred over those that do harm.Whenever the consequences are mixed (some beneficial, others harmful), the preferred action is the one that achieves the greater good or the lesser evil.
·結(jié)果：結(jié)果是既影響行為人自己也影響他人的一個(gè)行為所產(chǎn)生的有利和／或有害的后果。對(duì)結(jié)果的任何一種檢驗(yàn)都應(yīng)考慮各個(gè)方面：個(gè)人和社會(huì)的；身體和情感的；當(dāng)下的和永久的；有目的和無(wú)目的的；明顯的和微妙的；可能的、概率的和確定的。應(yīng)當(dāng)選擇導(dǎo)致有利結(jié)果的行為，放棄造成有害結(jié)果的行為。只要結(jié)果是混合的（有些是有利的，其他則是有害的），首選的行為應(yīng)是那種導(dǎo)致較大善或較小惡的行為。
Even Experts Can Be Wrong
甚至專(zhuān)家也可能出錯(cuò)
History records numerous occasions when the expert opinion has been the wrong opinion. In ancient times the standard medical opinion was that headaches were caused by demons inside the skull. The accepted treatment ranged from opening the skull and releasing the demons to giving medicines derived from cow’s brain and goat dung. (Some Native American tribes preferred beaver testicles.)
歷史多次記錄下專(zhuān)家意見(jiàn)是錯(cuò)誤的意見(jiàn)的情況。在古代，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的醫(yī)學(xué)觀點(diǎn)是頭痛是由顱骨內(nèi)的惡魔造成的。 治療方法是從打開(kāi)顱骨并釋放惡魔到提供取自牛的大腦和山羊糞的藥物。 （一些美洲原住民部落偏愛(ài)海貍睪丸。）
numerous ['nju?m(?)r?s] adj. 許多的，很多的
occasions n. 場(chǎng)合；機(jī)會(huì)（occasion的復(fù)數(shù)）；理由v. 致使；引起（occasion的第三人稱單數(shù)）
ancient [?e?n??nt] adj. 古代的；古老的，過(guò)時(shí)的；年老的n. 古代人；老人
ranged v. 排列；把…分類(lèi)；射程為…（range的過(guò)去分詞）
derived from來(lái)源于
beaver testicles海貍睪丸
When the idea of inoculating people against diseases such as smallpox first arrived in the colonies in the early 1700s, most authorities regarded it as nonsense. Among them were Benjamin Franklin and a number of the men who later founded Harvard Medical School. Against the authorities stood a relatively unknown man who didn’t even have a medical degree, Zabdiel Boylston. Whose opinion was proved right? Not the experts’ but Zabdiel Boylston’s.
1700年代早期，當(dāng)通過(guò)接種使人預(yù)防比如天花這樣疾病的概念首次抵達(dá)殖民地時(shí)，大多數(shù)權(quán)威認(rèn)為這是荒謬的。其中包括本杰明·富蘭克林和一些后來(lái)成立哈佛醫(yī)學(xué)院的人。相對(duì)于權(quán)威來(lái)，一個(gè)不知名甚至沒(méi)有醫(yī)學(xué)學(xué)位的人，扎博迪爾·波爾斯頓。誰(shuí)的觀點(diǎn)被證明是正確的？不是專(zhuān)家，而是扎博迪爾·波爾斯頓的。
inoculating [醫(yī)] 接種，灌輸（inoculate的現(xiàn)在分詞）
nonsense ['n?ns(?)ns] n. 胡說(shuō)；廢話adj. 荒謬的int. 胡說(shuō)！
smallpox ['sm??lp?ks] n. [內(nèi)科] 天花
authorities [??'θ?r?t?z] n. 當(dāng)局，官方（authority的復(fù)數(shù)）
In 1890 a Nobel Prize–winning bacteriologist, Dr. Robert Koch, reported that he had found a substance that would cure tuberculosis. When it was injected into patients, though, it was found to cause further illness and even death.
1890年，諾貝爾獎(jiǎng)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)呒?xì)菌學(xué)家羅伯特·科赫博士報(bào)告說(shuō)他已經(jīng)發(fā)現(xiàn)了一種可以治愈結(jié)核病的物質(zhì)。然而，當(dāng)注射到患者身上時(shí)，發(fā)現(xiàn)加重病情甚至導(dǎo)致死亡。
bacteriologist [b?k,t?r??'ɑl?d??st] n. 細(xì)菌學(xué)家
substance ['s?bst(?)ns] n. 物質(zhì)；實(shí)質(zhì)；資產(chǎn)；主旨
tuberculosis [tj?,b??kj?'l??s?s] n. 肺結(jié)核；結(jié)核病
In 1904 psychologist G. Stanley Hall expressed his professional opinion that when women engage in strenuous mental activity, particularly with men, they experience a loss of mammary function and interest in motherhood, as well as decreased fertility. If they subsequently have children, the children will tend to be sickly. Today this idea is laughable.
1904年，心理學(xué)家史坦利·霍爾表達(dá)了自己的專(zhuān)業(yè)觀點(diǎn)：當(dāng)女性從事艱苦的腦力活動(dòng)時(shí)，尤其同男性一起，她們將經(jīng)歷乳腺功能和母性的喜好喪失，以及生育能力的下降。如果她們以后有孩子，孩子們傾向是多病的。如今，這個(gè)想法是可笑的。
engage [?n'ge?d?; en-] vt. 吸引，占用；使參加；雇傭；使訂婚；預(yù)定vi. 從事；答應(yīng)，保證；交戰(zhàn)；嚙合
strenuous ['strenj??s] adj. 緊張的；費(fèi)力的；奮發(fā)的；艱苦的；熱烈的
mammary ['m?m?r?] adj. 乳腺的；[解剖] 乳房的
motherhood ['m?e?h?d] n. 母性；母親身份；母親們（總稱）
decreased減少的
fertility [f?'t?l?t?; f??'t?l?t?] n. 多產(chǎn)；肥沃；[農(nóng)經(jīng)] 生產(chǎn)力；豐饒
subsequently ['s?bs?kw?ntl?] adv. 隨后，其后；后來(lái)
Between 1919 and 1922 the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City bought seventeen gold vessels that experts determined were authentic treasures from a 3,500-year-old Egyptian tomb. In 1982 the vessels were discovered to be twentieth-century fakes.
在1919年至1922年間，紐約市的大都會(huì)藝術(shù)博物館購(gòu)買(mǎi)了十七個(gè)黃金容器，它們被專(zhuān)家鑒定為來(lái)自有三千五百年歷史的埃及古墓的真正寶藏。1982年，這些黃金容器被證實(shí)是二十世紀(jì)的贗品。
Metropolitan [metr?'p?l?t(?)n] adj. 大都市的；大主教轄區(qū)的；宗主國(guó)的n. 大城市人；大主教；宗主國(guó)的公民
vessels ['ves(?)lz] n. 血管（vessel的復(fù)數(shù)）；船舶；容器n. (Vessels)人名；(英)維瑟爾斯
authentic [??'θent?k] adj. 真正的，真實(shí)的；可信的
treasures n. 寶物（treasure的復(fù)數(shù)）v. 珍愛(ài)（treasure的第三人稱單數(shù)）；儲(chǔ)藏
Egyptian [?'d??p?(?)n] adj. 埃及的；埃及人的n. 埃及人；古代埃及語(yǔ)
In 1928 a drug called thorotrast was developed and used to outline certain organs of the body so that clearer X-rays could be taken. Nineteen years later, doctors learned that even small doses of the drug caused cancer. In 1959 a sedative called thalidomide was placed on the market. Many physicians prescribed it for pregnant women. Then, when a large number of babies were born deformed, medical authorities realized that thalidomide was to blame.
1928年，一種被稱為氧化釷膠體被發(fā)明出來(lái)，并被用于顯示身體的某些器官的輪廓，以便可以獲得更清晰的X射線照片。十九年后，醫(yī)生獲知即使是小劑量的該藥物也引發(fā)癌癥。在1959年，一種稱為薩力多胺的鎮(zhèn)靜劑被投放市場(chǎng)。許多醫(yī)生向孕婦開(kāi)出這種藥物。后來(lái)，當(dāng)當(dāng)大量畸形嬰兒出生時(shí)，醫(yī)療權(quán)威意識(shí)到這應(yīng)歸咎于薩力多胺。
thorotrast氧化釷膠體，釷造影劑
thalidomide [θ?'l?d?ma?d] n. 薩力多胺（一種安眠藥，鎮(zhèn)靜劑）
prescribed [pr?'skra?bd] adj. 規(guī)定的
pregnant ['pregn?nt] adj. 懷孕的；富有意義的
deformed [d?'f??md] adj. 畸形的；丑陋的；殘廢的v. 使...殘缺，使...變形（deform的過(guò)去式和過(guò)去分詞形式）
In 1973, using refined radar mapping techniques, scientists decided that their earlier claims about the surface of Venus were wrong. It was not smooth, as they had thought, but pockmarked with craters.
1973年，科學(xué)家們使用精確的雷達(dá)測(cè)繪技術(shù)，認(rèn)為他們?cè)缧r(shí)候關(guān)于金星表面的主張是錯(cuò)誤的。它并不像他們所想的是光滑的表面，而是滿目瘡痍布滿隕石坑。
refined [r?'fa?nd] adj. [油氣][化工][冶] 精煉的；精確的；微妙的；有教養(yǎng)的
pockmarked ['pɑkmɑrkt] adj. 有痘瘡的v. 使有痘痕；使有凹痕（pockmark的過(guò)去式）
craters n. [地質(zhì)] 火山口；[天] 環(huán)形山（crater復(fù)數(shù)）v. 形成坑；毀壞（crater的三單形式）
In the 1980s and 1990s one of the hottest topics in the publishing and seminar industries was co-dependency. Anyone related to an alcoholic or drug addict was considered to be a contributor to the problem, chiefly by unconsciously encouraging the person’s habit or enabling the person to indulge it. Soon the idea of co-dependency became the diagnosis of choice for any situation characterized by out-of-control behavior. Co-dependents were urged to buy books, attend seminars, and join their troubled family member in counseling. Then one curious researcher, Edith Gomberg, examined the scientific research base on which the movement was founded. She found . . . zip, nada, nothing. In her words, “There are no surveys, no clinical research, no evaluations; only descriptive, impressionistic statements.”
在1980年代和1990年代，出版業(yè)和研討會(huì)行業(yè)中最熱門(mén)的話題之一是共同依賴現(xiàn)象。任何一個(gè)酗酒或吸毒成癮的人被視為帶來(lái)這方面的問(wèn)題，主要通過(guò)無(wú)意識(shí)的助長(zhǎng)此人的習(xí)慣或“使得”此人沉溺于其中。很快，這種共同依賴的觀念就成了任何行為失控為特征的情況的診斷選擇。共同依賴的人被催促去購(gòu)買(mǎi)書(shū)籍，出席研討會(huì)并與陷入困境的家庭成員一起參加咨詢。然而，一名好奇的研究者，伊迪絲·戈伯就科學(xué)的研究了該運(yùn)動(dòng)的基礎(chǔ)。她發(fā)現(xiàn)……無(wú)、不存在、什么也沒(méi)有。用她的話說(shuō)：“并不存在調(diào)查，也沒(méi)有臨床研究，沒(méi)有評(píng)估；只有描述，僅憑印象的陳述”。
publishing ['p?bl????] n. 出版；出版業(yè)adj. 出版的；出版業(yè)的v. 出版；發(fā)行（publish的現(xiàn)在分詞形式）；發(fā)表
seminar ['sem?nɑ?] n. 討論會(huì)，研討班
co-dependency互相依賴, 依賴共生關(guān)系
contributor [k?n'tr?bj?t?] n. 貢獻(xiàn)者；投稿者；捐助者
unconsciously [?n'kɑn??sli] adv. 不知不覺(jué)；無(wú)意識(shí)地
indulge [?n'd?ld?] vt. 滿足；縱容；使高興；使沉迷于…vi. 沉溺；滿足；放任
urged vbl. 慫恿；催促v. 慫恿；催促
counseling ['ka?nsl??] n. 咨詢服務(wù)v. 建議；勸告；商討（counsel的ing形式）
zip [z?p] n. 拉鏈；活力，精力；尖嘯聲，撕裂聲；一種程序壓縮的檔案文件格式. (Zip)茲普（人名）vi. 拉開(kāi)或拉上；以尖嘯聲行進(jìn)vt. 給...以速度；拉上或拉開(kāi)拉鏈
nada ['nɑd?] abbr. 美國(guó)汽車(chē)經(jīng)銷(xiāo)商聯(lián)合會(huì)（the National Automobile Dealers Association）n. n. (Nada)人名；(塞、葡、俄、阿拉伯、英)娜達(dá)(女名)，納達(dá)，nothing 無(wú)物
(Nada)人名；(塞、葡、俄、阿拉伯、英)娜達(dá)(女名)，納達(dá)
surveys [s?'ve] n. 調(diào)查（survey的復(fù)數(shù)）
clinical ['kl?n?k(?)l] adj. 臨床的；診所的
impressionistic [?m,pre??'n?st?k] adj. 印象派的；印象主義的；給人深刻印象的
statements ['stetm?nt] n. 聲明；報(bào)告；陳述句；狀態(tài)說(shuō)明（statement的復(fù)數(shù)形式）
For most of the twentieth century, the universally accepted scientific opinion was that stomach ulcers are caused by excess stomach acid generated by stress. Then Barry Marshall demonstrated that ulcers are caused by bacteria and can be cured with antibiotics.
在二十世紀(jì)的大部分時(shí)間里，普遍接受的科學(xué)觀點(diǎn)是胃潰瘍是由壓力而導(dǎo)致的胃酸過(guò)多引起的。然而，巴爾·馬歇爾證明潰瘍是由細(xì)菌引起的，并可以用抗生素治愈。
universally [ju?n?'v??s?l?] adv. 普遍地；人人；到處
excess [?k'ses; ek-; 'ekses] n. 超過(guò)，超額；過(guò)度，過(guò)量；無(wú)節(jié)制adj. 額外的，過(guò)量的；附加的
demonstrated演示
ulcers ['?ls?] n. [病理] 潰瘍，瘍（ulcer的復(fù)數(shù)）
antibiotics [,?nt?ba?'?t?ks] n. [藥] 抗生素；抗生學(xué)
Remember the brontosaurus with his head stretching to the treetops in Jurassic Park? That scene reflected the traditional scientific opinion that the big dinosaurs dined on leaves thirty or more feet off the ground. In 1999, however, Michael Parrish, a northern Illinois researcher, experimented with a computer model of the neck bones of large dinosaurs and discovered that they could never have lifted their heads above the level of their bodies. If they had, their neck vertebrae would have collapsed. They couldn’t have stood on their hind legs, either, because the demands on their blood pressure would have been excessive.
記住侏羅紀(jì)公園中雷龍將它的頭伸到樹(shù)梢的情景嗎？這個(gè)場(chǎng)景反映了傳統(tǒng)科學(xué)觀念中大型恐龍取食距離地面三十英尺高的樹(shù)葉觀點(diǎn)。然而，在1999年，北伊利諾伊大學(xué)研究員邁克爾·帕里什利用一種大型恐龍頸椎骨的計(jì)算機(jī)模型試驗(yàn)時(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)它們永遠(yuǎn)不能將頭抬起超過(guò)身高。如果它們這樣做的話，它們的椎骨就會(huì)崩潰。它們也不能用它們的后腿站立，因?yàn)檫@對(duì)它們的血壓要求超出承受范圍。
brontosaurus [,br?nt?'s??r?s] n. 雷龍
stretching ['stret?i?] n. 伸長(zhǎng)；展寬v. 拉伸（stretch的ing形式）
Northern Illinois ：北伊利諾大學(xué),伊利諾北部,北伊利諾伊大學(xué) ；
vertebrae [?v??t?br?;?v??t?bre?] n. [解剖] 椎骨；脊椎
hind [ha?nd] adj. 后部的n. 雌鹿n. (Hind)人名；(英、芬)欣德
excessive [?k'ses?v; ek-] adj. 過(guò)多的，極度的；過(guò)分的
For years physicians told us that fiber lowers cholesterol and protects against colon cancer. Eventually, medical research established that it doesn’t lower cholesterol. Then researchers demonstrated that it doesn’t protect against colon cancer.
多年來(lái)，內(nèi)科醫(yī)生告訴我們，纖維會(huì)降低膽固醇并防止結(jié)腸癌。最終醫(yī)學(xué)研究證明確定它不會(huì)降低膽固醇。并且研究人員也證明它不能防止結(jié)腸癌。
physicians [f?'z???n] n. [內(nèi)科] 內(nèi)科醫(yī)生（physician的復(fù)數(shù)）
cholesterol [k?'lest?r?l] n. [生化] 膽固醇
Eventually [?'vent???l?] adv. 最后，終于
established [?'st?bl??t] adj. 確定的；已制定的，已建立的
colon ['k??l?n] n. [解剖] 結(jié)腸；冒號(hào)（用于引語(yǔ)、說(shuō)明、例證等之前）；科郎（哥斯達(dá)黎加貨幣單位）
To this day, many experts are convinced that the cause of crime is a bad social environment and that the solution is to pour millions of dollars into poor neighborhoods for a variety of social programs. Other experts are equally convinced that the cause of crime is an emotional disorder that can be cured only by psychological counseling. But a leading researcher, Stanton Samenow, disputes both views. Samenow argues that “bad neighborhoods, inadequate parents, television, schools, drugs, or unemployment” are not the cause of crime—criminals themselves are. They break the law not because conditions force them to but because they choose to, and they choose to because they consider themselves special and therefore above the law. In Samenow’s view, the key to criminals’ rehabilitation is for them to accept responsibility for their behavior. Is Samenow correct? Time will tell.
到目前為止，許多專(zhuān)家確信，犯罪的原因是惡劣的社會(huì)環(huán)境，而解決辦法是向貧困社區(qū)投入百萬(wàn)計(jì)的美元，以開(kāi)展各種社會(huì)項(xiàng)目。其他專(zhuān)家也同樣確信，犯罪的原因是情緒失常，只能通過(guò)心理咨詢來(lái)治愈。但是一位杰出的研究員，斯坦頓·薩姆諾夫就這兩個(gè)觀點(diǎn)提出異議。薩姆諾夫認(rèn)為：“惡劣的社區(qū)、失職的家長(zhǎng)、電視、學(xué)校、毒品或失業(yè)”不是犯罪的原因。犯罪本身才是原因。他們違反法律，不是因?yàn)樾蝿?shì)迫使他們，而是因?yàn)樗麄冞x擇這么做，他們這樣選擇是因?yàn)樗麄冋J(rèn)為自己是特殊的，因此凌駕于法律。在薩梅諾夫看來(lái)，罪犯改過(guò)自新的關(guān)鍵是讓他們?yōu)樽约旱男袨槌袚?dān)責(zé)任。薩姆諾夫是否正確？時(shí)間會(huì)告訴。
convinced [k?n'v?nst] adj. 確信的；深信的v. 使確信（convince的過(guò)去分詞）；說(shuō)服
variety [v?'ra??t?] n. 多樣；種類(lèi)；雜耍；變化，多樣化
psychological [sa?k?'l?d??k(?)l] adj. 心理的；心理學(xué)的；精神上的
disputes [d?'spj?t] n. 爭(zhēng)論（dispute的復(fù)數(shù)）v. 爭(zhēng)論（dispute的單數(shù)第三人稱）
inadequate [?n'?d?kw?t] adj. 不充分的，不適當(dāng)?shù)?br>
rehabilitation ['ri?h?,b?l?'te???n] n. 復(fù)原
It is impossible to know what expert opinions of our time will be overturned by researchers in the future. But we can be sure that some will be. And they may well be views that today seem unassailable.
不可能知道未來(lái)的研究人員將推翻哪些我們這個(gè)時(shí)代專(zhuān)家觀點(diǎn)。但是我們可以肯定一些會(huì)有某些觀點(diǎn)被推翻。而這些很有可能是當(dāng)代看起來(lái)不容置疑的。
overturned [,ov?'t?n] adj. 傾覆的，倒轉(zhuǎn)的v. 顛覆（overturn的過(guò)去式）
unassailable [?n?'se?l?b(?)l] adj. 不容置疑的；無(wú)懈可擊的
Kinds of Errors
錯(cuò)誤的種類(lèi)
Opinion can be corrupted by anyone of four broad kinds of errors. These classifications, with examples added for clarification, are the following:
觀點(diǎn)有可能受到四種普遍錯(cuò)誤中任何一種的侵蝕。下面是這些錯(cuò)誤的種類(lèi)，再加上各類(lèi)別的例子：
Errors or tendencies to error common among all people by virtue of their being human (for example, the tendency to perceive selectively or rush to judgment or oversimplify complex realities)
由于人的本性，錯(cuò)誤或出錯(cuò)的傾向在所有人之間是普遍的（例如，有選擇地感知、倉(cāng)促作判斷或過(guò)于簡(jiǎn)化復(fù)雜的現(xiàn)實(shí)的傾向）。
Errors or tendencies to error associated with one's individual habits of mind or personal attitudes, beliefs,or theories (for example, the habit of thinking the worst of members of a race or religion against which one harbors prejudice)
錯(cuò)誤或出錯(cuò)的傾向與一個(gè)人的思維習(xí)慣或個(gè)人態(tài)度、信仰或理論有關(guān)（例如，習(xí)慣于思考一個(gè)人懷有偏見(jiàn)的某個(gè)種族或宗教的成員之最壞情況）。
Errors that come from human communication and the limitations of language (for example, the practice of expressing a thought or feel-ing inadequately and leading others to form a mistaken impression)
3．源于人際溝通和語(yǔ)言的局限性的錯(cuò)誤（例如，不恰當(dāng)?shù)乇磉_(dá)思想或感受，引起他人形成錯(cuò)誤印象的做法）。Errors in the general fashionof an age (for example, the tendency in our grandparents' day to accept authority unquestioningly or the tendency in ours to recognize no authority but oneself)
4.存在于一個(gè)時(shí)代的普遍風(fēng)氣中的錯(cuò)誤(例如，在我們袓父母的時(shí)代，不加質(zhì)詢地接受權(quán)威的傾向，或是在我們的時(shí)代不承認(rèn)權(quán)威而是承認(rèn)自己的傾向）。
Some people, of course, are more prone to errors than others.English philosopher John Locke observed that these people fall into three groups:
當(dāng)然，有些人比其他人更容易犯錯(cuò)。英國(guó)哲學(xué)家約翰-洛克說(shuō)，這些人可以分為三類(lèi)：
Those who seldom reason at all, but think and act as those around them do—parents, neighbors, the clergy, or anyone else they admire and respect. Such people want to avoid the difficulty that accompanies thinking for themselves.
那些根本不進(jìn)行推理、而是像其周?chē)耍ǜ改?、鄰居、牧師和他們羨慕或尊敬的任何其他人）一樣思考和行動(dòng)的人。這樣的人想避免伴隨自己思考而來(lái)的困難。
Those who are determined to let passion rather than reason govern their lives. Those people are influenced only by reasoning that supports their prejudices.
那些決意讓激情而不是理性統(tǒng)攝自己生活的人。這些人僅受支持其偏見(jiàn)的推理影響。
Those who sincerely follow reason, but lack sound, overall good sense, and so do not look at all sides of an issue. They tend to talk with one type of person, read one type of book, and so are exposed to only one viewpoint.
那些真誠(chéng)地遵猸理性，但缺乏準(zhǔn)確、全面的判斷力，從而看不到問(wèn)題的各個(gè)方面的人。他們喜歡跟同一種類(lèi)型的人談話，讀一 種類(lèi)型的書(shū)，所以所接觸的也只是一種觀點(diǎn)。
To Locke's list we should add one more type: those who never bother to reexamine an opinion once it has been formed. These people are often the most error prone of all,for they forfeit all opportunity to correct mistaken opinions when new evidence arises.
對(duì)于洛克的這個(gè)淸單，我們還應(yīng)增加一種類(lèi)型：那些對(duì)已經(jīng)形成的觀點(diǎn)從不費(fèi)心再次檢驗(yàn)的人。這些人是所有人中最容易出錯(cuò)的，因?yàn)樗麄兙芙^了在新證據(jù)面前糾正錯(cuò)誤的所有機(jī)會(huì)。
