hce_nthu
113年
英文
第 37 題
📖 題組：
Reading 4: The single greatest enemy of contemporary satisfaction may be the belief in human perfectibility. We have been driven to collective rage through the apparently generous yet in reality devastating idea that it might be within our natural remit to be completely and enduringly happy. For thousands of years, we knew better. We might have been superstitious and credulous, but not without limit. All substantial endeavors—marriage, child-rearing, a career, politics—were understood to be sources of distinctive and elaborate misery. Buddhism described life itself as a vale of suffering; the Greeks insisted on the tragic structure of every human project; Christianity interpreted each of us as being marked by a divine curse. First formulated by the philosopher St Augustine in the closing days of the Roman empire, “original sin” generously insisted that humanity was intrinsically, rather than accidentally flawed. We are broken creatures and have been since our expulsion from Eden, damned—to use the resonant Latin phrase—by peccatum originale. This should feel not like a punishing observation, but more like relief from the pressures of 200 years of scientifically mandated faith in the possibility of progress. There can wisely be “no solutions”, no self-help, of a kind that removes problems altogether. What we can aim for, at best, is consolation—a word tellingly lacking in glamour. To believe in consolation means giving up on cures; it means accepting that life is a hospice rather than a hospital, but one we’d like to render as comfortable, as interesting and as kind as possible. A philosophy of consolation directs us to two important salves: understanding and companionship. Or grasping what our problem is—and knowing that we are not alone with it. Understanding does not magically remove the pain but it has the power to reduce a range of secondary aggravations and fears. At least we know what is racking us and why. Our worst fears are held in check, and tears may be turned into bitter knowledge. It helps immensely too to know that we are in company. Despite the upbeat tone of society in general, there is solace in the discovery that everyone else is, in private, of course as bewildered and regretful as we are. This is simply profound relief that we are not the only ones.
Reading 4: The single greatest enemy of contemporary satisfaction may be the belief in human perfectibility. We have been driven to collective rage through the apparently generous yet in reality devastating idea that it might be within our natural remit to be completely and enduringly happy. For thousands of years, we knew better. We might have been superstitious and credulous, but not without limit. All substantial endeavors—marriage, child-rearing, a career, politics—were understood to be sources of distinctive and elaborate misery. Buddhism described life itself as a vale of suffering; the Greeks insisted on the tragic structure of every human project; Christianity interpreted each of us as being marked by a divine curse. First formulated by the philosopher St Augustine in the closing days of the Roman empire, “original sin” generously insisted that humanity was intrinsically, rather than accidentally flawed. We are broken creatures and have been since our expulsion from Eden, damned—to use the resonant Latin phrase—by peccatum originale. This should feel not like a punishing observation, but more like relief from the pressures of 200 years of scientifically mandated faith in the possibility of progress. There can wisely be “no solutions”, no self-help, of a kind that removes problems altogether. What we can aim for, at best, is consolation—a word tellingly lacking in glamour. To believe in consolation means giving up on cures; it means accepting that life is a hospice rather than a hospital, but one we’d like to render as comfortable, as interesting and as kind as possible. A philosophy of consolation directs us to two important salves: understanding and companionship. Or grasping what our problem is—and knowing that we are not alone with it. Understanding does not magically remove the pain but it has the power to reduce a range of secondary aggravations and fears. At least we know what is racking us and why. Our worst fears are held in check, and tears may be turned into bitter knowledge. It helps immensely too to know that we are in company. Despite the upbeat tone of society in general, there is solace in the discovery that everyone else is, in private, of course as bewildered and regretful as we are. This is simply profound relief that we are not the only ones.
Which of the following can be best used to explain “life is a hospice rather than a hospital” in the fourth paragraph?
- A Life is actually more interesting and solacing than it appears.
- B We must endure life like people who are ill and in pain.
- C Life should be about finding happiness rather than fighting for survival.
- D It is impossible to find complete solutions that eliminate problems in life.
- E If people stop helping themselves in life, they might as well be dead.
思路引導 VIP
請思考一下：在現實生活中，我們走進「醫院」時通常抱持著什麼樣的預期（例如：對病症的結果）？而當醫學面對「安寧病房」的病人時，它的目標又是從什麼方向轉變成了另一種照顧方式？這兩者之間關於「能不能徹底變好」的差別，是如何對應到作者對人生的看法呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你正確掌握了這題的核心隱喻！這題的關鍵在於辨析作者如何運用「醫療場域」來比喻人生的本質，你能選出 (D) 選項，說明你已洞悉了文中對「解決方案」與「慰藉」的深刻討論。
隱喻的轉化與哲學反思
在第四段中，作者巧妙地對比了「安寧病房（hospice）」與「醫院（hospital）」的功能。一般而言，醫院的目標是「治癒（cure）」，象徵著我們常誤以為人生問題可以被徹底解決、痛苦可以被消除；而安寧病房則是針對無法痊癒的狀態，目標在於「緩解與慰藉（consolation）」。因此，將人生比作安寧病房，其核心涵義就是：生命中的痛苦與困境並非「待解決的錯誤」，而是「需共存的現實」。選項 (D) 提到人生不可能有「消除問題的完全解方」，精準地對應了這份對生命局限性的接納。
▼ 還有更多解析內容