2. 外语
  3. If the various advocates of the conflicting options are all smart, experienced, and well-informed, why do they disagree so compl

If the various advocates of the conflicting options are all smart, experienced, and well-informed, why do they disagree so compl

admin2011-03-22  47
问题    If the various advocates of the conflicting options are all smart, experienced, and well-informed, why do they disagree so completely? Wouldn’t they all have thought the issue through carefully and come to approximately the same "best" conclusion?
   The answer to that crucial question lies in the structure of the human brain and the way it processes information.
   Most human beings actually decide before they think. When any human being —executive, specialized expert, or person in the street — encounters a complex issue and forms an opinion, often within a matter of seconds, how thoroughly has he or she explored the implications of the various courses of action? Answer: not very thoroughly. Very few people, no matter how intelligent or experienced, can take inventory of the many branching possibilities, possible outcomes, side effects, and undesired consequences of a policy or a course of action in a matter of seconds. Yet, those who pride themselves on being decisive often try to do just that. And once their brains lock onto an opinion, most of their thinking thereafter consists of finding support for it.
   A very serious side effect of argumentative decision making can be a lack of support for the chosen course of action on the part of the "losing" faction. When one faction wins the meeting and the others see themselves as losing, the battle often doesn’t end when the meeting ends. Anger, resentment, and jealousy may lead them to sabotage the decision later, or to reopen the debate at later meetings.
   There is a better way. As philosopher Aldous Huxley said, "It isn’t who is right, but what is right, that counts. "
   The structured-inquiry method offers a better alternative to argumentative decision making by debate. With the help of the Internet and wireless computer technology, the gap between experts and executives is now being dramatically closed. By actually putting the brakes on the thinking process, slowing it down, and organizing the flow of logic, it’s possible to create a level of clarity that sheer argumentation can never match.
   The structured-inquiry process introduces a level of conceptual clarity by organizing the contributions of the experts, then brings the experts and the decision makers closer together. Although it isn’t possible or necessary for a president or prime minister to listen in on every intelligence analysis meeting, it’s possible to organize the experts’ information to give the decision maker much greater insight as to its meaning. This process may somewhat resemble a marketing focus group; it’s a simple, remarkably clever way to bring decision makers closer to the source of the expert information and opinions on which they must base their decisions.
Judging from the context, what does the word "them" (Line 4, Paragraph 4) refer to?
选项 A、Decision makers.
B、The "losing" faction.
C、Anger, resentment, and jealousy.
D、Other people.
答案B
解析 词汇题，可根据上下文的前后句关系判断“them”一词的大致含义。根据上下文，此处的“them”指的是“losing faction”，也即是“失败的派别”：愤怒、怨恨和嫉妒会导致他们破坏(sabotage)所做出的决定，由此可断定B为正确答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/oLxd777K
本试题收录于： 公共英语四级笔试题库公共英语（PETS）分类
0

公共英语四级笔试

公共英语（PETS）

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)