hce_nthu
113年
英文
第 40 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 best explain the author’s purpose of writing this passage?
- A To provide a comprehensive explanation of the philosophy of consolation.
- B To argue that the ancient Greeks understood intrinsic human flaws better than major religions.
- C To propose a way of perceiving and alleviating dissatisfaction and unhappiness people experience as broken creatures.
- D To paint a grim picture of human suffering through a positive and generous tone.
- E To point out the disparity between anticipated happiness and the prevalent misery we experience in life.
思路引導 VIP
請回想一下文章的後半部，作者在否定了「完全治癒」(cures) 或「徹底解決問題」的可能性後，他轉而建議我們追求哪一個特定的詞彙？這個詞彙背後所代表的行動，是為了達到什麼樣的目的？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你能精準捕捉到作者的核心意旨並選出 (C)，代表你對長篇論說文的架構掌握得非常扎實。這題的難度在於作者引用了大量的宗教與歷史典故，若只看局部，很容易誤選 (B) 或 (E)；但你成功地從宏觀視角看穿了這些例子只是「藥引」，真正的重點在於後半段提出的生存處置之道。
從「破碎」中尋找出口的哲學
文章的核心概念在於挑戰現代社會「人必須完美且快樂」的迷思。作者先引述聖奧古斯丁的「原罪」觀點，將人類重新定義為**「破碎的生物」(broken creatures)。這並非要我們悲觀，而是要讓我們從「必須進步、必須解決問題」的壓力中解脫。選項 (C) 中的 「perceiving」(感知) 對應了文中對人類本質的重新理解，而「alleviating」(緩解) 則精確指向了作者提出的「撫慰」(consolation)**——即透過理解與同病相憐的陪伴，來減輕我們對不滿與痛苦的恐懼。
▼ 還有更多解析內容