2018-10-19 12:02:54 来源：网络专四专八资料下载
Americans today don’t place avery high value on intellect. Our heroes are athletes, entertainers, andentrepreneurs, not scholars. Even our schools are where we send our children toget a practical education—not to pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Symptoms ofpervasive anti-intellectualism in our schools aren’t difficultto find。
“Schools havealways been in a society where practical is more important than intellectual,”sayseducation writer Diane Ravitch. “Schools could be a counterbalance。” Ravitch’s latestbock, Left Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms, traces the roots ofanti-intellectualism in our schools, concluding they are anything but acounterbalance to the American distaste for intellectual pursuits。
But they could and should be. Encouraging kids to reject the lifeof the mind leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and control. Without theability to think critically, to defend their ideas and understand the ideas ofothers, they cannot fully participate in our democracy. Continuing along thispath, says writer Earl Shorris,“We will become a second-rate country. We will have a less civilsociety。”
“Intellect isresented as a form of power or privilege,”writes historian andprofessor Richard Hofstadter in Anti-Intellectualism in American Life, aPulitzer Prize winning book on the roots of anti-intellectualism in USpolitics, religion, and education. From the beginning of our history, saysHofstadter, our democratic and populist urges have driven us to reject anythingthat smells of elitism. Practicality, common sense, and native intelligencehave been considered more noble qualities than anything you could learn from abook。
Ralph Waldo Emerson and other Transcendentalist philosophersthought schooling and rigorous book learning put unnatural restraints onchildren: “We are shut up in schools and college recitation rooms for 10 or 15years and come out at last with a bellyful of words and do not know a thing。”Mark Twain’sHuckleberry Finn exemplified American anti-intellectualism. Its hero avoidsbeing civilized—going to school and learning to read—so he can preservehis innate goodness。
Intellect, according to Hofstadter, is different from nativeintelligence, a quality we reluctantly admire. Intellect is the critical,creative, and contemplative side of the mind. Intelligence seeks to grasp,manipulate, re-order, and adjust, while intellect examines, ponders, wonders,theorizes, criticizes and imagines。
School remains a place where intellect is mistrusted. Hofstadtersays our country’s educational system is in the grips of people who “joyfully andmilitantly proclaim their hostility to intellect and their eagerness toidentify with children who show the least intellectual promise。”
36. What do American parents expect their children to acquire inschool?
[A] The habit of thinking independently。
[B] Profound knowledge of the world。
[C] Practical abilities for future career。
[D] The confidence in intellectual pursuits。
37. We can learn from the text that Americans have a history of
[A] undervaluing intellect。
[B] favoring intellectualism。
[C] supporting school reform。
[D] suppressing native intelligence。
38. The views of Ravish and Emerson on schooling are
39. Emerson, according to the text, is probably
[A] a pioneer of education reform.
[B] an opponent of intellectualism。
[C] a scholar in favor of intellect.
[D] an advocate of regular schooling。
40. What does the author think of intellect?
[A] It is second to intelligence.
[B] It evolves from common sense。
[C] It is to be pursued.
[D] It underlies power。