评论
打印
C
My son Advait taught me a beautiful lesson today. He called out to me saying. “Papa, sit”. That usually means leaving everything and sitting down to play with him. As he will not stop calling out till I give in. He was playing with beads (珠子), an exercise to help build the motor skills.
Anyway, so after he finished playing with the beads he began to put them in their box. He did that very slowly and carefully as if they were made of chocolate. And with over a hundred beads to go, I was getting tired “Why could he not pick up 10 in one go and put them in?” said my anxious mind. Damn! My morning was going to go for a toss today.
And then it hit me like a brick. This boy was enjoying the whole process. For him the fun was in the game, in the preparation for the game and in the process of properly collecting and picking up. It was not just about his turnor the fun part. Every bit was as fun as the other. “What a great view to have.” I thought to myself. To live each moment as it is the perfect moment. To do each task as if it were the most awesome task to do. Nothing else matters.
I thought of myself as a kid when we would go out to play cricket(扳球). If I was not playing, I was unhappy as I desperately waited for my toss to do so. Only the process of doing something I associated with happiness made me cheerful. The rest of the time I was waiting for my turn in the future or thinking of a great hit from the past. This is also how I have so often lived my life, waiting for something in the future or looking back on what it was like in the past.
Now, Advait was showing me that life was about thoroughly living every moment with complete love and peace. I realized that the truest and happiest moments of my life have been the ones where I fullyparticipated without thoughts of the past or the future.
36. We can infer that the writer .
A. liked playing beads when he was a child
B. liked doing exercise to help build his skills
C. wasn’t quite willing to play with his son
D. didn’t allow his son to eat much chocolate
37. The underlined phrase “go for a toss” probably means “ ”.
A. be ruined B. be forgotten
C. become cheerful D. become relaxing
38. When the writer was a kid, he______.
A. hated thinking of' the past B. failed to enjoy every moment
C. was crazy about doing sports D. often associated cricket with happiness
39. What would the writer probably do next?
A. Go to play a cricket game.
B. Go back to do his own work.
C. Enjoy watching his son finish his work.
D. Help his son put away the beads quickly.
40. What is the best title for the passage?
A. How to Enjoy a Game B. My Childhood Memories
C. Value Time with Your Child D. Participate Fully in the Moment
D
You may have heard of the “10,000 hour rule”, popularized in Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers, which suggests that many people who have reached the top of their fields got there, in large part, due to practicing for 10,000 hours. The theory is most often credited to a 1993study by K. Anders Ericsson (which has been mentioned more than 4,000 times, according to Google Scholar). But a new review of that study and other research in the field came to a different conclusion: Practice is not as vital as previously thought.
In the new paper, published in Intelligence, the authors write that “we have evidence that deliberate practice, while important, is not as important as Ericsson has argued it is -- evidencethat it does not largely account for individual differences in performances.”
The authors of the new paper re-analyze scores of studies on outstanding chess players and musicians. They point out that there is significant variation in how long it took for people to get to the level of a chess master. One player in a 2007 study, for example, “took 26 years ofserious involvement in chess to reach a master level, while another player took less than 2years to reach this level”they write. They conclude that practice can only explain one-third of the success in chess and music, and probably other fields as well.
The evidence is “quite clear that some people do reach an outstanding level ofperformance without plentiful practice, while other people fail to do so although they doplentiful practice,” they write. They suggest that other factors together explain the lion’s shareof success (at least in these two most-studied areas), such as intelligence, staffing age, personality and other factors.
Despite their new analysis, the authors write that the debate is likely to continue “formany years to come,” which makes me think: Perhaps the “10,000 hour rule” should bedefined(定义) as “the amount of time scholars spend arguing over what factors explainsuccess.
41. What does the “10,000 hour rule” suggest?
A. Your success is largely determined by your practice.
B. Scholars need to practice less than people in other fields.
C. You can’t succeed with less than l0,000 hour’ practice.
D. 10,000 hours’ practice surely leads to the top of a field.
42. The new paper in Intelligence finds that .
A. more evidence is needed for the research
B. one should not practice deliberately
C. Ericsson does not think practice is important
D. practice isn’t so important as people thought
43. How did the new study get its conclusion?
A. By studying dozens of chess players.
B. By studying other people’s research.
C. Through 26 years of serious study.
D. Through large amount of practice.
44. What does the writer of this passage think of the “1,000 hour rule”?
A. He is strongly for the rule.B. He doubts the truth of the rule.
C He considers it the key to success. D. He prefers the rule to be proved wrong.
45. What is the purpose of the passage?
A. To persuade people to work harder
B. To argue for the 10,000 hour rule.
C. To introduce a new study on the 10,000 hour rule.
D. To introduce different scholars’ great discoveries.
