-
2012
Text 1
Come
on
–Everybody’s
doing
it.
That
whispered
message,
half
invitation
and
half
forcing,
is
what
most
of
us
think
of
when
we
hear
the
words
peer
pressure.
It
usually leads to no good-drinking,
drugs and casual sex. But in her new book
Join the
Club
,
Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can
also be a positive force through
what
she calls the social cure, in which organizations
and officials use the power of
group
dynamics to help individuals improve their lives
and possibly the word.
得了吧
,
每个人都这样啊
.
这种说法一半是邀
请，
一半是强制。
当我们听到
“同辈（
趋同）压力”这个词组的时候我们想到的就是这种说法。这种信息一般
让人想到不好的事
情，比如喝酒，吸毒，一夜情。但是，在她的新书《参加这个
俱乐部》
< br>, Tina Rosenberg
认为，
纯粹压力也是
一种积极的力量，
通过她所说的社
会治疗，
公司和官方人员可以使用群体力量去帮助个人提高他们的生活，
而且也
有可能提高整个人类世界的生活。
Rosenberg,
the
recipient
of
a
Pulitzer
Prize,
offers
a
host
of
example
of
the
social cure in action:
In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking
program called
Rage
Against
the
Haze
sets
out
to
make
cigarettes
uncool.
In
South
Africa,
an
HIV-prevention initiative
known as LoveLife recruits
young people
to promote safe
sex among their peers.
Rosenberg
是普利策奖获得者，
他提供了许多社会治疗的例子：
在南卡罗莱
纳州，
一个州资助的反对抽烟的项目叫做
“向烟雾宣战”
就旨在控制好烟草销售。
在南非，预防
HIV
< br>，即众所周知的“热爱生命”活动要求年轻人要安全性生活。
The idea seems
promising
，
and Rosenberg is a
perceptive observer. Her critique
of
the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is
spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer
pressure for healthy habits, and they
demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of
psychology.”
Dare
to
be
different,
please
don’t
smoke!”
pleads
one
billboard
campaign aimed at reducing smoking
among teenagers-teenagers, who desire nothing
more
than
fitting
in.
Rosenberg
argues
convincingly
that
public-health
advocates
ought to take a
page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer
pressure.
这个观点似乎很有希望，而且
Rosen
berg
是个敏锐的观察家。她对于许多
公共健康活动缺点的批
评是中肯的：他们没能动员同辈压力来建立健康的习惯，
他们展示的是对心理学的严重误
解。
一个旨在在青少年中禁烟的广告牌写着：
“
就
敢与众不同，请勿吸烟！
”
青少年最渴望的是融入群体。
Rosenberg
认为，公共
健康建议应该效仿广告商，广告商懂得如何应用同辈压力。
But on the general
effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is
less persuasive.
Join the Club is
filled with too much irrelevant detail and not
enough exploration of
the
social
and
biological
factors
that
make
peer
pressure
so
powerful.
The
most
glaring flaw of
th
e social cure as it’s presented here
is that it doesn’t work very well
for
very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state
funding was cut. Evidence that
the
LoveLife program produces lasting changes is
limited and mixed.
但对于社会治疗的广泛效果，
Rosenberg
就没有那么有说服力了。
《加入俱
乐部》
一书写了太多无关细节，
没有认
真探讨社会和生物因素，
这些因素能使同
辈压力变得很有影响力
。
这里说的社会治疗的明显缺点是它有效期不长。
一旦资
金来源消失，那么“向烟雾宣战”的活动就会失败。
“热爱生命”活动
能产生持
久的影响这种说法的证据不足。
There’s no doubt that our peer groups
exert enormous influence on our behavior.
An emerging body of research shows that
positive health habits-as well as negative
ones-spread
through
networks
of
friends
via
social
communication.
This
is
a
subtle
form of peer
pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we
see every day.
毫无疑问，我们的同龄人会对我们的行为产生巨大影响
。研究显示，积极
的健康习惯，
以及负面的习惯，
会通过社会交流在朋友之间传播。
这是同辈压力
的一
种微妙的形式：我们会无意识模仿我们每天看到的行为。
Far less certain, however, is how
successfully experts and bureaucrats can select
our
peer
groups
and
steer
their
activities
in
virtuous
directions.
It’s
like
the
teacher
who breaks up the
troublemakers in the back row by pairing them with
better-behaved
classmates. The tactic
never really works. And that’s the problem with a
social cure
engineered from the
outside: in the real world, as in school, we
insist on choosing our
own friends.
但是，很难确定的是，专家和官员能否成功选择我们的同辈，控制好他们
的行为能在道德的道路上发展。
这就像老师，
通过让问题学生
和好学生坐在一起
的方法，
让后排学生不要凑在一起胡闹。
这种方法从来就没有什么收效。
这就是
从外
界设计出的社会治疗会产生问题所在：
在真实的社会里，
正如在
学校，
我们
坚持会选择自己的朋友。
Text 2
A deal is a deal-
except, apparently, when Entergy is involved. The
company, a
major
energy
supplier
in
New
England,
provoked
justified
outrage
in
Vermont
last
week when it announced it was reneging
on a longstanding commitment to abide by
the strict nuclear regulations.
说好的是不能改变的
!
除非
Entergy
进行的交易。
这个公司是新英格
兰地区
主要的能源提供商，
该公司引起了佛蒙特州人们的义愤，
因为上周它宣称它不想
遵守严格的核能规定。
< br>
Instead, the company has done
precisely what it had long promised it would not
challenge
the
constitutionality
of
Vermont’s
rules
in
the
federal
court,
as
part
of
a
desperate
effort
to
keep
its
Vermont
Yankee
nuclear
power
plant
running.
It’s
a
stunning move.
相反，该公司一直履行了它早
先的承诺过不做的事情：即它不会因为想保
持其
Vermont
Yankee
核电站持续经营，而要在联邦法院挑战该州相关规
定的合
法性（宪法）
。现在这个做法让人震惊。
The
conflict
has
been
surfacing
since
2002,
when
the
corporation
bought
Vermont’s
only
nuclear
power
plant,
an
aging
reactor
in
Vernon.
As
a
condition
of
receiving
state
approval
for
the
sale,
the
company
agreed
to
seek
permission
from
state regulators to operate past 2012.
In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring
that any extension of the plant’s
license be subject to Vermont legislature’s
approval.
Then, too, the company went
along.
这个冲突始于
2002
，当时该公司购买了佛蒙特州唯一一家核电站，其实是
一个位于
Vernon
的破旧反应堆。该交易为了获得州政府的批准，该公司同意一
个前提条件：即同意在
2012
年后征求州政府官员
的同意继续经营。
2006
年，州
政府
又提出，
该核电站能否延期经营要听从佛蒙特州立法机关的批准。
当时，
该
公司也无异议。
Either Entergy never really intended to
live by those commitments, or it simply
didn’t
foresee
what
would
happen
next.
A
string
of
accidents,
including
the
partial
collapse of a
cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an
underground pipe system
leakage, raised
serious questions about both Vermont Yankee’s
safety and Entergy’s
management
–
especially
after
the
company
made
misleading
statements
about
the
pipe.
Enraged
by
Entergy’s
behavior,
the
Vermont
Senate
voted
26
to
4
last
year
against allowing an
extension.
Entergy
从来没有打算要遵守
这些承诺，也根本没有想过将来会发生什么。
一系列的事件，
包
括
2007
年冷却塔的部分崩溃，
以及
地下管道系统泄露的发现，
这些事使得人们严重怀疑
Vermo
nt
Yankee
电站的安全问题和
Entergy
的管理
----
尤其在
该公司对其管道问题所做的误导性言论之后。佛蒙特州参议院对于
Entergy
的行为表示震怒，去年以
26
比
4
的投票反对其延期经营。
Now
the
company
is
suddenly
claiming
that
the
2002
agreement
is
invalid
because of the 2006
legislation, and that only the federal government
has regulatory
power
over
nuclear
issues.
The
legal
issues
in
the
case
are
obscure:
whereas
the
Supreme Court has ruled that states do
have some regulatory authority over nuclear
power, legal scholars say that Vermont
case will offer a precedent-setting test of how
far
those
powers
extend.
Certainly,
there
are
valid
concerns
about
the
patchwork
regulations that could result if every
state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its
word, that debate would be beside the
point.
现在该公司突然宣称
2002
年的协定是无效的，
因为有
2
006
年的立法以及
只有联邦政府拥有核电站管理权。
该案的法律问题是模糊的：
虽然最高法院判决
过
，
各州的确有权管理核电站，
但法学家说佛蒙特案为这种核电站
究竟能延期多
久设定了先例。
显然，
如
果每个州设立自己的法规，
那么关注一下各州拼凑的临
时规定是
必要的。但，要是
Entergy
遵守诺言，这个讨论就无关紧
要了。
The company seems to
have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is
already
so damaged that it has nothing
left to lose by going to war with the state. But
there
should be consequences.
Permission to run a nuclear plant is a public
trust. Entergy
runs
11
other
reactors
in
the
United
States,
including
Pilgrim
Nuclear
station
in
Plymouth.
Pledging
to
run
Pilgrim
safely,
the
company
has
applied
for
federal
permission
to
keep
it
open
for
another
20
years.
But
as
the
Nuclear
Regulatory
Commission (NRC)
reviews the company’s application, it should keep
it mind what
promises from Entergy are
worth.
该公司似乎认定其已声名狼藉，没有什么后顾之忧，不如和佛蒙特州背水
一战。
但不良后果还是有的。
经营核电
站的许可权的问题是一个公共信任的问题。
Entergy
集团
在美国还经营了
11
个反应堆，包括在普利茅斯的
Pilgrim
反应堆。
该公司许诺安全经营
Pilgrim
，要求联邦政府给予继续经营
20
年的许可。但是，
核管理委员会
(NRC)
在审查该公司的申请的时候，它要牢记到底
Ente
rgy
公司的
哪个许诺是可信的。
Text 3
In the
idealized version of how science is done, facts
about the world are waiting
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
上一篇：网申开放性问题以及_参考答案
下一篇：浅谈现代企业的民主化管理