2. 财务会计
  3. Scientists havelong argued whether hypoc

Scientists havelong argued whether hypoc

昕玥2019-12-17  53
问题 Scientists havelong argued whether hypocrisy is driven by emotion or by reason. In other moraljudgments, brain imaging shows, regions involved in feeling, not thinking,rule. The role of emotion in moral judgments has overturned the Enlightenmentnotion that our ethical sense is based on high-minded philosophy and cognition.That brings us to hypocrisy, which is almost ridiculously easy to bring out inpeople.In a new study,psychologist David De Steno instructed 94 people to assign themselves and astranger of two tasks: an easy one or a hard one. Then everyone was asked, howfairly did you act? Next they watched someone else make the assignments, andjudged that person′s ethics. Selflessness was a virtual no-show: 87 Out of 94people opted forth easy task and gave the next guy the difficult one.Hypocrisy, however, showed up with bells on: every single person who made theselfish choice judged his own behavior less strictly--on average,4.5 vs3.1--than that of someone else who grabbed the easy task for himself.The gap suggests howhypocrisy is possible. When we judge our own misbehaviors less harshly, DeSteno said, it may be because "we have this automatic, gut-level instinctto preserve our self-image. In our heart, maybe we′re just not as sensitive toour own immoral behaviors. People have learned that it pays to seem moral sinceit lets you avoid criticism and guilt. But even better is appearing moralwithout having to pay the cost of actually being moral-such as assigningyourself the tough job."To test the role ofcognition in hypocrisy, De Steno had volunteers again assign themselves an easytask and a stranger a difficult one. But before judging the fairness of theiractions, they had to memorize seven numbers. This tactic keeps the brain′sthinking regions too tied up to think much about anything else, and it worked:hypocrisy vanished. People judged their own (selfish) behavior as harshly asthey did others′, strong evidence that moral hypocrisy requires a high-ordercognitive process. When the thinking part of the brain is otherwise engaged,we′re left with gut-level reactions, and we intuitively and equally condemn badbehavior by ourselves as well as others.If our gut knowswhen we have erred and judges our misbehaviors harshly, moral hypocrisy mightnot be as inevitable as if it were the child of emotions and instincts, whichare tougher to change than thinking. "Since it′s a cognitive process, wehave volitional control over it," argues De Steno. The way to changehearts and minds is to focus on the former: appealing to our better angels inthe brain′s emotion areas, and tell circuits that are going through cognitivedistortions to excuse ourselves what we condemn in others to just shut up.The conclusiondrawn from the first experiment is that _______________.
选项 A.people arehypocritical in natureB.people likepicking faults of othersC.people demandboth benefits and reputationD.people cannotdetermine the validity of hypocrisy
答案C
解析推理题。文章第二段介绍了David De Steno做的实验：让实验对象给自己和陌生人分配任务，并为自己和别人分配任务的公平性打分。结果是无私的现象完全没有出现(Selflessness was a virtual no—show)，人们都为自己选了轻松的任务而把困难的任务留给了别人，但是伪善倒是显现了(showed up with bells on)，人们对自己的自私行为比对别人的自私行为更宽容(4．5 VS．3．1)。这说明人们一方面是自私的，要求实际利益．另一方面给自己的公平性分数较高，要维护个人形象，故选C。
转载请注明原文地址:https://ti.zuoweng.com/ti/Y7y9KKKQ
相关试题推荐
随机试题