劍橋雅思12Test5Passage3閱讀原文翻譯What’s the purpose of gaining knowledge

劍橋雅思12Test5Passage3閱讀原文翻譯What’s the purpose of gaining knowledge，今天中國(guó)教育在線就來(lái)為大家分析這個(gè)問(wèn)題。

What’s the purpose of gaining knowledge

獲取知識(shí)的目的是什么

劍橋雅思12 Test5 Passage3閱讀原文翻譯

段落A

‘I would found an institution where any person can find instruction in any subject.’That was the founder’s motto for Cornell University,and it seems an apt characterization of the different university,also in the USA,where I currently teach philosophy.A student can prepare for a career in resort management,engineering,interior design,accounting,music,law enforcement,you name it.But what would the founders of these two institutions have thought of a course called‘Arson for Profit’?I kid you not:we have it on the books.Any undergraduates who have met the academic requirements can sign up for the course in our program in‘fire science’.

“我將成立一所任何人都可以學(xué)到任何學(xué)科的機(jī)構(gòu)”。這是康奈爾大學(xué)創(chuàng)建者的座右銘。這似乎十分恰當(dāng)?shù)孛枋隽肆硪凰髮W(xué)的特征。它也位于美國(guó)，而我正在那里教授哲學(xué)。學(xué)生在這里可以為將來(lái)各種各樣的職業(yè)做好準(zhǔn)備，包括度假村管理，工程學(xué)，室內(nèi)設(shè)計(jì)，會(huì)計(jì)，音樂(lè)，法律實(shí)施等。但這兩所學(xué)校的創(chuàng)辦者會(huì)怎么看待一門叫做“縱火謀利”的課程呢？我并沒(méi)有跟你開(kāi)玩笑。這門課程是有案可查的。任何滿足學(xué)術(shù)要求的本科生都可以在我們“火災(zāi)科學(xué)”這一項(xiàng)目中選擇該課程。

段落B

Naturally,the course is intended for prospective arson investigators,who can learn all the tricks of the trade for detecting whether a fire was deliberately set,discovering who did it,and establishing a chain of evidence for effective prosecution in a court of law.But wouldn’t this also be the perfect course for prospective arsonists to sign up for?My point is not to criticize academic programs in fire science:they are highly welcome as part of the increasing professionalization of this and many other occupations.However,it’s not unknown for a firefighter to torch a building.This example suggests how dishonest and illegal behavior,with the help of higher education,can creep into every aspect of public and business life.

當(dāng)然，這一課程是為那些未來(lái)的縱火調(diào)查員設(shè)計(jì)的。他們可以學(xué)習(xí)該領(lǐng)域的各種竅門，判斷一場(chǎng)火災(zāi)是否是蓄意而為，找出縱火者，并建立證據(jù)鏈文章來(lái)自雅思以在法庭上可以進(jìn)行有效的訴訟。但這難道不也是一門未來(lái)縱火犯可以報(bào)名的完美課程嗎？我的重點(diǎn)不是批評(píng)縱火科學(xué)領(lǐng)域的學(xué)術(shù)項(xiàng)目：它們作為該行業(yè)以及許多其他行業(yè)日益專業(yè)化的一部分，受到高度歡迎。然而，對(duì)于消防員來(lái)說(shuō)，燒毀一棟建筑并不陌生。這一例子表明，在高等教育的幫助下，欺詐和不法行為是如何悄悄潛入公眾和商業(yè)生活的方方面面的。

段落C

I realized this anew when I was invited to speak before a class in marketing,which is another of our degree programs.The regular instructor is a colleague who appreciates the kind of ethical perspective I can bring as a philosopher.There are endless ways I could have approached this assignment,but I took my cue from the title of the course:‘Principles of Marketing’.It made me think to ask the students,‘Is marketing principled?’After all,a subject matter can have principles in the sense of being codified,having rules,as with football or chess,without being principled in the sense of being ethical.Many of the students immediately assumed that the answer to my question about marketing principles was obvious:no.Just look at the ways in which everything under the sun has been marketed;obviously it need not be done in a principled(=ethical)fashion.

當(dāng)我受邀在市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷課程（我們學(xué)校的另一門專業(yè)）上演講時(shí)，我重新認(rèn)識(shí)了這一點(diǎn)。這門課的日常老師是我的同事。他很欣賞我作為一名哲學(xué)家所帶來(lái)的倫理視角。我有無(wú)數(shù)種方式可以切入這一任務(wù)，但我受到課程名稱-市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷原理-的啟發(fā)。這讓我想要詢問(wèn)學(xué)生，市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷是有原則可循的嗎？畢竟，一門課程從被編纂、設(shè)置規(guī)則的意義上講，是能夠擁有原理的，正如足球和國(guó)際象棋那樣。但從倫理意義而言，是沒(méi)有原則可以遵循的。許多學(xué)生很快認(rèn)為我關(guān)于市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷原理的問(wèn)題的答案是顯而易見(jiàn)的。只需要研究一下世上萬(wàn)物被營(yíng)銷的方式即可。顯然，它不需要以一種“有原則的”（即倫理的）方式進(jìn)行。

段落D

Is that obvious?I made the suggestion,which may sound downright crazy in light of the evidence,that perhaps marketing is by definition principled.My inspiration for this judgement is the philosopher Immanuel Kant,who argued that any body of knowledge consists of an end(or purpose)and a means.

這不明顯么？我認(rèn)為，或許市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷按定義而言就是有規(guī)則的。這在大量的證據(jù)之下可能聽(tīng)起來(lái)很瘋狂。我這一判斷的靈感來(lái)自于哲學(xué)家伊曼努爾·康德。他認(rèn)為任何知識(shí)的本體既包含結(jié)果（或目的），也包含手段。

段落E

Let us apply both the terms‘means’and‘end’to marketing.The students have signed up for a course in order to learn how to market effectively.But to what end?There seem to be two main attitudes toward that question.One is that the answer is obvious:the purpose of marketing is to sell things and to make money.The other attitude is that the purpose of marketing is irrelevant:each person comes to the program and course with his or her own plans,and these need not even concern the acquisition of marketing expertise as such.My proposal,which I believe would also be Kant’s,is that neither of these attitudes captures the significance of the end to the means for marketing.A field of knowledge or a professional endeavor is defined by both the means and the end;hence both deserve scrutiny.Students need to study both how to achieve X,and also what X is.

讓我們將“手段”和“結(jié)果”這兩個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)應(yīng)用于市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷。報(bào)名該課程的學(xué)生是為了學(xué)習(xí)如何有效營(yíng)銷。但為了實(shí)現(xiàn)什么結(jié)果呢？關(guān)于這個(gè)問(wèn)題似乎有兩種主要態(tài)度。一種認(rèn)為答案顯而易見(jiàn)：市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷的目的是出售物品和賺錢。另一種則認(rèn)為市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷的目的無(wú)關(guān)緊要：每個(gè)學(xué)習(xí)這門課程的人都帶著他們自己的計(jì)劃。這些計(jì)劃甚至不需要與市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷技能的獲取有關(guān)。我的想法是，這兩種態(tài)度都沒(méi)有抓住結(jié)果對(duì)于市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷手段的重要性。我相信康德也會(huì)這么認(rèn)為。一個(gè)知識(shí)領(lǐng)域或?qū)I(yè)技能由手段和結(jié)果共同定義。因此，兩者都需要仔細(xì)審視。學(xué)生既需要學(xué)習(xí)如何實(shí)現(xiàn)X，也需要研究X是什么。

段落F

It is at this point that‘Arson for Profit’becomes supremely relevant.That course is presumably all about means:how to detect and prosecute criminal activity.It is therefore assumed that the end is good in an ethical sense.When I ask fire science students to articulate the end,or purpose,of their field,they eventually generalize to something like,‘The safety and welfare of society,’which seems right.As we have seen,someone could use the very same knowledge of means to achieve a much less noble end,such as personal profit via destructive,dangerous,reckless activity.But we would not call that firefighting.We have a separate word for it:arson.Similarly,if you employed the‘principles of marketing’in an unprincipled way,you would not be doing marketing.We have another term for it:fraud.Kant gives the example of a doctor and a poisoner,who use the identical knowledge to achieve their divergent ends.We would say that one is practicing medicine,the other,murder.

正是在這一點(diǎn)上，縱火謀利變得十分相關(guān)起來(lái)。該課程的一切都與手段有關(guān)：如何偵測(cè)與起訴犯罪活動(dòng)。人們因此假定，其目的在倫理意義上是好的。當(dāng)我要求縱火科學(xué)的學(xué)生說(shuō)清楚他們所學(xué)領(lǐng)域的結(jié)果或目的時(shí)，他們最終會(huì)總結(jié)出類似“社會(huì)安全與福祉”這樣似乎正確的說(shuō)法。正如我們所見(jiàn)，一個(gè)人可以使用完全相同的知識(shí)手段來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)不那么高尚的目標(biāo)，比如通過(guò)破壞性的、危險(xiǎn)的、魯莽的行為來(lái)獲取個(gè)人利益。但我們不會(huì)將其稱為消防行為。我們對(duì)其有單獨(dú)的說(shuō)法：縱火。相似的，如果你以一種不遵守原則的方式利用市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷原理，那么你所做的就不是市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷。我們有另外的說(shuō)法：欺詐?？档屡e了醫(yī)生和投毒者的例子。他們利用完全相同的知識(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)不同的結(jié)果。我們會(huì)說(shuō)其中一人在進(jìn)行醫(yī)學(xué)實(shí)踐，而另一個(gè)則是殺人犯。

>> 雅思 托福 免費(fèi)測(cè)試、量身規(guī)劃、讓英語(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)不再困難<<