劍橋雅思5 Test 1閱讀Passage 2原文翻譯Nature or Nurture

劍橋雅思5 Test 1閱讀Passage 2原文翻譯Nature or Nurture，今天中國教育在線就來為大家分析這個(gè)問題。

Nature or Nurture

服從實(shí)驗(yàn)

劍橋雅思5 Test 1 Passage 2閱讀原文翻譯

自然段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.

幾年前，耶魯大學(xué)的斯坦利·米爾格拉姆（Stanley Milgram）在行為心理學(xué)最令人著迷和煩惱的實(shí)驗(yàn)之一中，對(duì)40名來自各行各業(yè)的受試者進(jìn)行了測試，以了解他們在特定情景下是否愿意服從“領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者”的指示。該情境中，他們可能對(duì)自己被要求所做的事情感到厭惡。米爾格拉姆特意告訴每個(gè)志愿者“老師-受試者”，該實(shí)驗(yàn)是出于崇高的教育目的，旨在測試懲罰學(xué)生的錯(cuò)誤是否會(huì)對(duì)學(xué)生的學(xué)習(xí)能力產(chǎn)生積極影響。

自然段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.

米爾格拉姆（Milgram）的實(shí)驗(yàn)設(shè)置如下：將充當(dāng)教師的志愿者放置在由30個(gè)開關(guān)組成的面板之前，每個(gè)開關(guān)的標(biāo)簽從“15伏特（輕微電擊）到450伏特（危險(xiǎn)-嚴(yán)重電擊）”，每步15伏。老師被告知，每當(dāng)學(xué)生對(duì)一個(gè)問題給出錯(cuò)誤的答案時(shí)，他們要對(duì)其實(shí)行電擊。電擊文章來自老烤鴨雅思從最低水平開始，隨著連續(xù)回答錯(cuò)誤而加大電量?！皩W(xué)生”其實(shí)是現(xiàn)實(shí)中的一名演員，米爾格拉姆雇他來模擬受到電擊后的反應(yīng)。他會(huì)呻吟，尖叫，扭曲身體，并用各種各樣的詞匯咒罵該實(shí)驗(yàn)和實(shí)驗(yàn)者。米爾格拉姆告訴老師忽略學(xué)生的反應(yīng)，嚴(yán)格按照實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)當(dāng)下情景的規(guī)定實(shí)行電擊，而不管其當(dāng)量如何。

自然段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.

隨著實(shí)驗(yàn)的進(jìn)行，學(xué)生會(huì)故意對(duì)老師提出的問題給出錯(cuò)誤的答案，從而帶來各種電擊，甚至達(dá)到危險(xiǎn)的300伏以及更高的水平。許多充當(dāng)老師的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象執(zhí)行更高級(jí)別的懲罰猶豫不決，帶著疑問的表情看向米爾格拉姆，或者抱怨繼續(xù)執(zhí)行實(shí)驗(yàn)。在這種情況下，米爾格拉姆平靜地解釋說，老師應(yīng)該忽略學(xué)生的求情，并繼續(xù)進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)。如果受試者仍然不愿繼續(xù)，米爾格拉姆會(huì)說，為了實(shí)驗(yàn)?zāi)軌虺晒?，從頭到尾遵守程序非常重要。他的最后會(huì)說：“你別無選擇。你必須繼續(xù)”。米爾格拉姆試圖發(fā)現(xiàn)的是，即使面對(duì)個(gè)人和道德上對(duì)實(shí)驗(yàn)規(guī)則的強(qiáng)烈反感，有多少充當(dāng)老師的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象愿意釋放最高級(jí)別的電擊。

自然段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.

在進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)之前，米爾格拉姆向一組39位精神科醫(yī)生解釋了他的想法，并要求他們預(yù)測愿意釋放450伏最高電擊水平的人在普通人群所占的平均比例。壓倒性的共識(shí)是，幾乎所有充當(dāng)老師的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象都會(huì)拒絕服從實(shí)驗(yàn)者。精神科醫(yī)生認(rèn)為“大多數(shù)受試者的電壓不會(huì)超過150伏”，他們進(jìn)一步預(yù)計(jì)只有4％的人會(huì)愿意將電壓會(huì)升至300伏。此外，他們認(rèn)為1000個(gè)人中才會(huì)有一個(gè)瘋子愿意釋放450伏的最高電擊。

自然段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?

實(shí)際結(jié)果是什么？好吧，超過60％的受試者繼續(xù)服從米爾格拉姆（Milgram）將電壓升至450伏的極限！在其他國家的重復(fù)實(shí)驗(yàn)中，遵從指令的受試者的比例甚至更高，在一個(gè)國家中達(dá)到了85％。我們該如何解釋這種冷靜，理性，有知識(shí)的人們在他們舒適的書房中所做出的預(yù)測，與在現(xiàn)實(shí)的實(shí)驗(yàn)室中受到壓迫，慌張但合作的“老師們”實(shí)際行為之間的巨大差異？

自然段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.

一個(gè)人可能一開始傾向于爭辯，實(shí)驗(yàn)一定激活了某種內(nèi)在的動(dòng)物侵略本能。而米爾格拉姆的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象只是遵循基因的需要，將這種壓抑的原始沖動(dòng)通過實(shí)行電擊傳遞給學(xué)生。現(xiàn)代核心社會(huì)生物學(xué)家甚至可能聲稱這種侵略性的本能是作為一種有利特質(zhì)進(jìn)化出來的。在我們的祖先在平原上和山洞里與艱難生活斗爭時(shí)，它具有生存價(jià)值，并最終作為我們古代動(dòng)物生活方式的殘余而進(jìn)入我們的基因結(jié)構(gòu)中。

自然段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.’

遺傳編碼概念的另一種解釋是，將充當(dāng)教師的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象的行為視為進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)的社會(huì)環(huán)境的結(jié)果。正如米爾格拉姆本人指出的那樣：“實(shí)驗(yàn)中的大多數(shù)受試者將他們的行為放在一個(gè)對(duì)社會(huì)有益和有用的更大環(huán)境中看待-追求科學(xué)真理。心理實(shí)驗(yàn)室本身具有強(qiáng)烈的合法性，并激發(fā)在其中行動(dòng)的人們的信任和信心。單獨(dú)看起來很邪惡的行為，例如電擊受害者，置于此環(huán)境中時(shí)則會(huì)獲得完全不同的含義?！?/p>

自然段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.

因此，在這種解釋中，實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象將其獨(dú)特的人格，以及個(gè)人和道德準(zhǔn)則與更大的制度結(jié)構(gòu)相結(jié)合，從而將忠誠，自我犧牲和紀(jì)律等個(gè)人特質(zhì)屈服于惡意的權(quán)威系統(tǒng)。

自然段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.

這樣一來，我們就有了兩種截然不同的解釋，說明為什么這么多的實(shí)驗(yàn)對(duì)象為了機(jī)構(gòu)權(quán)威而愿意放棄他們的個(gè)人責(zé)任感。對(duì)于生物學(xué)家，心理學(xué)家和人類學(xué)家來說，問題是要找出這兩種極端解釋中哪一個(gè)更合理。這在本質(zhì)上是現(xiàn)代社會(huì)生物學(xué)的問題-發(fā)現(xiàn)基因編碼的支配程度，或至少是強(qiáng)烈的偏見，動(dòng)物和人類與環(huán)境的相互作用，也就是他們的行為。換句話說，社會(huì)生物學(xué)與闡明所有行為的生物基礎(chǔ)有關(guān)。

>> 雅思 托福 免費(fèi)課程學(xué)習(xí)，AI量身規(guī)劃讓英語學(xué)習(xí)不再困難<<