雅思考試
報考指南考試報名準考證打印成績查詢考試題庫

重置密碼成功

請謹慎保管和記憶你的密碼,以免泄露和丟失

注冊成功

請謹慎保管和記憶你的密碼,以免泄露和丟失

久热久热草在线视频,亚洲欧美伊人成综合小说,北欧一区二区三区,亚洲伊人色综网一本道

當前位置: 首頁雅思考試閱讀模擬試題正文
2020年雅思考試閱讀部分復習資料分享05
幫考網校2020-10-31 11:20
2020年雅思考試閱讀部分復習資料分享05

小伙伴們,雅思考試大家復習的怎么樣了呢?下面是幫考網分享一些雅思考試閱讀部分的復習資料,一起來看看吧!

閱讀:

READING PASSAGE 2

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 14-26, which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.

Nature or Nurture?

A A few years ago, in one of the most fascinating and disturbing experiments in behavioural psychology, Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life for their willingness to obey instructions given by a ‘leader’ in a situation in which the subjects might feel a personal distaste for the actions they were called upon to perform. Specifically, Milgram told each volunteer ‘teacher-subject’ that the experiment was in the noble cause of education, and was designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils’ ability to learn.

B Milgram’s experimental set-up involved placing the teacher-subject before a panel of thirty switches with labels ranging from ‘15 volts of electricity (slight shock)’ to ‘450 volts (danger - severe shock)’ in steps of 15 volts each. The teacher-subject was told that whenever the pupil gave the wrong answer to a question, a shock was to be administered, beginning at the lowest level and increasing in severity with each successive wrong answer. The supposed ‘pupil’ was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks by emitting a spectrum of groans, screams and writhings together with an assortment of statements and expletives denouncing both the experiment and the experimenter. Milgram told the teacher-subject to ignore the reactions of the pupil, and to administer whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment.

C As the experiment unfolded, the pupil would deliberately give the wrong answers to questions posed by the teacher, thereby bringing on various electrical punishments, even up to the danger level of 300 volts and beyond. Many of the teacher-subjects balked at administering the higher levels of punishment, and turned to Milgram with questioning looks and/or complaints about continuing the experiment. In these situations, Milgram calmly explained that the teacher-subject was to ignore the pupil’s cries for mercy and carry on with the experiment. If the subject was still reluctant to proceed, Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end. His final argument was, ‘You have no other choice. You must go on.’ What Milgram was trying to discover was the number of teacher-subjects who would be willing to administer the highest levels of shock, even in the face of strong personal and moral revulsion against the rules and conditions of the experiment.

D Prior to carrying out the experiment, Milgram explained his idea to a group of 39 psychiatrists and asked them to predict the average percentage of people in an ordinary population who would be willing to administer the highest shock level of 450 volts. The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists felt that ‘most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts’ and they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts. Furthermore, they thought that only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1,000 would give the highest shock of 450 volts.

E What were the actual results? Well, over 60 per cent of the teacher-subjects continued to obey Milgram up to the 450-volt limit! In repetitions of the experiment in other countries, the percentage of obedient teacher-subjects was even higher, reaching 85 per cent in one country. How can we possibly account for this vast discrepancy between what calm, rational, knowledgeable people predict in the comfort of their study and what pressured, flustered, but cooperative ‘teachers’ actually do in the laboratory of real life?

F One’s first inclination might be to argue that there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment, and that Milgram’s teacher-subjects were just following a genetic need to discharge this pent-up primal urge onto the pupil by administering the electrical shock. A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors in their struggle against the hardships of life on the plains and in the caves, ultimately finding its way into our genetic make-up as a remnant of our ancient animal ways.

G An alternative to this notion of genetic programming is to see the teacher-subjects’ actions as a result of the social environment under which the experiment was carried out. As Milgram himself pointed out, ‘Most subjects in the experiment see their behaviour in a larger context that is benevolent and useful to society - the pursuit of scientific truth. The psychological laboratory has a strong claim to legitimacy and evokes trust and confidence in those who perform there. An action such as shocking a victim, which in isolation appears evil, acquires a completely different meaning when placed in this setting.’

H Thus, in this explanation the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties like loyalty, self-sacrifice and discipline to the service of malevolent systems of authority.

I Here we have two radically different explanations for why so many teacher-subjects were willing to forgo their sense of personal responsibility for the sake of an institutional authority figure. The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible. This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology - to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates, or at least strongly biases, the interaction of animals and humans with their environment, that is, their behaviour. Put another way, sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour.

好了,以上就是今天分享的全部內容了,各位小伙伴根據自己的情況進行查閱,希望本文對各位有所幫助,預祝各位取得滿意的成績,如需了解更多相關內容,請關注幫考網!

聲明:本文內容由互聯網用戶自發貢獻自行上傳,本網站不擁有所有權,未作人工編輯處理,也不承擔相關法律責任。如果您發現有涉嫌版權的內容,歡迎發送郵件至:[email protected] 進行舉報,并提供相關證據,工作人員會在5個工作日內聯系你,一經查實,本站將立刻刪除涉嫌侵權內容。
  • 雅思考試可以不可以帶筆入場

    anlengrou·2021-03-30
  • 參加雅思考試需要準備多久

    caihuzhun·2021-03-30
  • 雅思考試是取每科的最高分嗎

    chaniuduan·2021-03-30
  • 雅思考試報名對證件有哪些要求

    baikongbi·2021-03-30
  • 雅思考試被認定作弊會被禁考嗎

    aanjing·2021-03-30
  • 雅思口語考試需要帶哪些證件

    biegunxue·2021-03-30
  • 班型推薦
    報考指南
    雅思考試百寶箱離考試時間484天
    學習資料免費領取
    免費領取全套備考資料
    測一測是否符合報考條件
    免費測試,不要錯過機會
    提交
    雅思考試題庫我的題庫
    熱門視頻
    互動交流

    微信掃碼關注公眾號

    獲取更多考試熱門資料

    溫馨提示

    信息提交成功,稍后幫考專業顧問免費為您解答,請保持電話暢通!

    我知道了~!
    溫馨提示

    信息提交成功,稍后幫考專業顧問給您發送資料,請保持電話暢通!

    我知道了~!

    立即領取

    提示

    信息提交成功,稍后班主任聯系您發送資料,請保持電話暢通!

    我知道了