四、篇章分析范例及练习

了解上述的技巧后，我们在平时练习时可以针对一篇文章进行一句话批注转述。具体方法如下：

a. 识别段落特征

b. 总结转述信息

c. 简单评价效果

让我们以一篇官方的阅读材料为蓝本学习一下如何进行批注转述。

Adapted from Paul Bogard, "Let There Be Dark." ©2012 by the Los Angeles Times. Originally published December 21, 2012.

At my family's cabin on a Minnesota lake, I knew woods so dark that my hands disappeared before my eyes. I knew night skies in (1) which meteors left smoky trails across sugary spreads of stars. But now, when (2) 8 of 10 children born in the United States will never know a sky dark enough for the Milky Way, I worry we are rapidly losing night's natural darkness before realizing its worth. This winter solstice, as we cheer the days' gradual movement back toward light, let us also remember the irreplaceable value of darkness.

【批注及转述】

(1) The descriptive words used in this sentence add visual intensity, evoking the wonder of the night sky.

(2) The writer uses this statistic as evidence to inform his subsequent claim that we "are rapidly losing night's natural darkness."

All life evolved to the steady rhythm of bright days and dark nights. Today, though, when we feel the closeness of nightfall, we reach quickly for a light switch. And too little darkness, meaning too much artificial light at night, spells trouble for all. (3) Already the World Health Organization classifies working the night shift as a probable human carcinogen, and the American Medical Association has voiced its unanimous support for "light pollution reduction efforts and glare reduction efforts at both the national and state levels." (4) Our bodies need darkness to produce the hormone melatonin, which keeps certain cancers from developing, and our bodies need darkness for sleep. Sleep disorders have been linked to diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and depression, and recent research suggests one main cause of "short sleep" is "long light." Whether we work at night or simply take our tablets, notebooks and smartphones to bed, there isn't a place for this much artificial light in our lives.

【批注及转述】

(3) Providing evidence from authoritative sources (the World Health Organization and the American Medical Association) adds legitimacy to the writer's claim in the paragraph above that "too little darkness ... spells trouble for all."

(4) The writer continues to draw on evidence from the authorities cited above. He uses this evidence to inform his subsequent point that "whether we work at night or simply take our ... smartphones to bed, there isn't a place for this much artificial light in our lives."

The rest of the world depends on darkness as well, (5) including nocturnal and crepuscular species of birds, insects, mammals, fish and reptiles. Some examples are well known — the 400 species of birds that migrate at night in North America, the sea turtles that come ashore to lay their eggs — and some are not, such as the bats that save American farmers billions in pest control and the moths that pollinate 80% of the world's flora. Ecological light pollution is like the (6) bulldozer of the night, wrecking habitat and disrupting ecosystems several billion years in the making. Simply put, without darkness, Earth's ecology would collapse ... (7)

【批注及转述】

(5) The presentation of facts and evidence supports the claim that follows at the end of the paragraph that "without darkness, Earth's ecology would collapse."

(6) The writer compares light pollution to the effects of a "bulldozer," a machine that can be used to ravage land. This imagery dramatizes the destructive potential of light pollution.

(7) By first discussing the human need for darkness and then moving into a discussion of the need for darkness among animals, the writer is able to build his argument about the "irreplaceable value of darkness."

In today's (8) crowded, louder, more fast-paced world, night's darkness can provide solitude, quiet and stillness, qualities increasingly in short supply. Every religious tradition has considered darkness invaluable for a soulful life, and the chance to witness the universe has inspired artists, philosophers and everyday stargazers since time began. (9) In a world awash with electric light... how would Van Gogh have given the world his "Starry Night"? Who knows what this vision of the night sky might inspire in each of us, in our children or grandchildren?

【批注及转述】

(8) The writer makes a stylistic choice here, contrasting a "crowded, louder, more fast-paced world" with darkness that "can provide solitude, quiet and stillness." These words allow the writer to characterize a well-lit world as undesirable and to depict darkness as peaceful and pleasing.

(9) The use of rhetorical questions encourages the reader to consider a world without Van Gogh's beloved painting and what Van Gogh's vision inspires in us all. The suggestion of a world without such artistry and the notion that darkness is "invaluable to a soulful life" are also designed to evoke an emotional reaction in the reader.

Yet all over the world, our nights are growing brighter. (10) In the United States and Western Europe, the amount of light in the sky increases an average of about 6% every year. Computer images of the United States at night, based on NASA photographs, show that what was a very dark country as recently as the 1950s is now nearly covered with a blanket of light. Much of this light is wasted energy, which means wasted dollars. (11) Those of us over 35 are perhaps among the last generation to have known truly dark nights. Even the northern lake where I was lucky to spend my summers has seen its darkness diminish.

【批注及转述】

(10) This statistic is used as evidence to support the claim that "our nights are growing brighter," which leads into the writer's point that this "blanket of light" is largely "wasted energy, which means wasted dollars."

(11) By returning to the introduction's description of a youth spent admiring dark nights, the writer creates another emotional appeal — this one to fear, especially in readers under thirty-five years old, who may now realize that their opportunities to witness true darkness are "diminishing."

(12) It doesn't have to be this way. Light pollution is readily within our ability to solve, using new lighting technologies and shielding existing lights. Already, many cities and towns across North America and Europe are changing to LED streetlights, (13) which offer dramatic possibilities for controlling wasted light. Other communities are finding success with simply turning off portions of their public lighting after midnight. (14) Even Paris, the famed "city of light," which already turns off its monument lighting after 1 a.m., will this summer start to require its shops, offices and public buildings to turn off lights after 2 a.m. Tough primarily designed to save energy, such reductions in light will also go far in addressing light pollution. (15) But we will never truly address the problem of light pollution until we become aware of the irreplaceable value and beauty of the darkness we are losing.

【批注及转述】

(12) The writer moves from evoking fear to reassuring readers that there is a solution to the problem of light pollution.

(13) The writer chooses his words carefully in this paragraph in order to shape readers' perceptions and bolster his claims. For example, he argues that we are using too much light when less is needed by referring to light being "wasted." He also suggests how easily the problem of light pollution might be addressed, using "simply" to describe what "other communities" are doing.

(14) The writer reasons that if even a city known for its light can enact sensible restrictions, it ought to be comparatively easy for cities not famous for their use of light to do so as well. Paris is also used as evidence to support the writer's previous claim that "communities are finding success."

(15) The argument concludes by recalling the "irreplaceable value and beauty" of darkness. As this darkness is being lost, as evidenced over the course of the writer's argument, it serves as a final appeal to readers' emotions.

习题

Note and paraphrase the following texts.

Text 1

Something quite extraordinary happened in Europe during the 17th and 18th centuries: the diversified intellectual explosion called the Enlightenment. Philosophers, natural scientists, artists and political scientists created a revolution in thought based on equal rights for men and the freedom to reason without constraint. Admittedly, it was a relative equality, with some Enlightenment philosophers mistakenly placing white men at the apex of society. But, as a general rule, the core message of the Enlightenment was the need to create a global civilization with shared moral values.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author introduces a precedent for an intellectual revolution. This precedent will set the stage for an argument in support of a new, or updated, intellectual revolution. Notice that the author acknowledges a weakness ("mistakenly placing white men at the apex of society") in the initial revolution while at the same time reiterating the "core message" that should be carried over from the first Enlightenment.

This overarching intellectual framework was far removed from traditional religious precepts. In fact, the Enlightenment declared war on the excesses of religion and blind nationalism. Adam Smith, for example, saw patriotism extending beyond one's own country to the great society of mankind. Immanuel Kant called this "global patriotism." We can identify the influence of these ideas in none other than Albert Einstein, who believed in a need to abolish international borders. "In my opinion there is no other salvation for civilization and even for the human race than the creation of an international government with the security on the basis of law," he declared in a September 1945 interview.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author introduces the context of the Enlightenment. He emphasizes the importance of the Enlightenment vision by citing examples of prominent intellectuals whose contributions to the intellectual movement have remained relevant to this day.

When we revisit these ideas today, we notice that the globalization of free-flowing information has realized part of the Enlightenment program. Political frontiers still stand, while ideas move at light speed across the planet. There is an emerging perspective, that of the planetary citizen. Will this lead to a new Enlightenment? Or are the same age-old rifts simply going to get amplified by the hundreds of millions of anonymous voices claiming authority over the Web? Should we spend our time considering whether every opinion is equally valid or should we aim collectively for some higher goal?

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author examines part of the legacy of the Enlightenment in modern society. He characterizes the current time as a potential turning point, where the ideals of the Enlightenment might continue to impact the world or they become overwhelmed by the old ideas that traditionally held sway. Finally, he asks the question that is at the heart of his thesis: should we seek a common, moral ground?

In the past, I have suggested that modern astronomy offers a new vision for humanity, which I called humancentrism. Essentially, humancentrism is an inversion of Copernicanism. While Copernicanism states that the more we learn about the cosmos the less important we become (so, a doctrine of human insignificance in the grand scheme of things), humancentrism states the opposite. As we scan the skies in search of other Earth-like planets with missions such as the sensational Kepler satellite, which has found thousands of exoplanets, and learn more about the history of life on Earth, we learn something new and essential about our planet and who we are.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author begins to answer his own question by establishing a new context for a new intellectual revolution, namely the science of astronomy. Interestingly, he uses the example of an intellectual that was ahead of his time, and inverts the old idea, that humans become less significant as we learn more about the cosmos, to formulate a new posture, one he calls humancentrism.

Even if there are other planets or moons with properties like Earth (similar mass, liquid water, oxygen-rich atmosphere, etc.), our planet and its geophysical properties are unique. (A large moon, tectonic plates, thick atmosphere, magnetic poles.) These properties are a key ingredient in the success that life has had here, in particular by providing long-term climate stability and protection from harmful cosmic radiation. Standing on this propitious background, single-celled bacteria evolved to multicellular, complex multicellular and, finally, intelligent multicellular life forms. Each one of these steps was delicate and improbable. Most were also deeply linked to the planet; some of them transformed Earth itself, like the oxygenation of the early atmosphere. We have thus learned that if there is complex life elsewhere, and we can't determine either way yet, it will be rare and certainly very distant from us. In other words, in practice we are alone. We matter because we are rare.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author makes the crux of his argument, that humanity is special. According to the author we are special because we came from the planet called Earth, a planet that, while sharing properties with other heavenly bodies, has combined them in a unique way and with stunning results — the advent of intelligent life. This intelligent life is special because it is unlikely. He supports this claim by arguing that we know enough about the possibilities of complex life beyond Earth to say that it will be rare and far away.

If the philosophes from the Enlightenment knew this, I imagine they would have expanded their global stance for humanity to a cosmic stance. A complex molecular machine capable of wondering about its existence should also celebrate and respect its existence. And since we are here only because Earth allows us to be (no teleology implied here, only stable geophysical conditions), we must also celebrate our planet as being unique. Human reason, that leads us to comprehend our place in the universe, leads us also toward a new moral imperative, perfectly secular in its values: the equality of all creatures and the preservation of life and of this planet.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the author consolidates his argument by making the case that his intellectual predecessors would agree with him. The author says that because we can be aware of our existence, we should celebrate it, and that because such an existence comes essentially from the Earth, it too should be respected and preserved.

Text 2

Below is the full text of the written testimony by Vinton G. Cerf.

Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Thune, Members of the Committee, distinguished panelists and guests, I am honored and pleased to have this opportunity to participate in a hearing on a topic about which I am passionate and committed: basic research. There is no substitute for deep understanding of natural and artificial phenomena, especially when our national and global wellbeing depend on our ability to model and make predictions regarding them. It would be hard to overstate the benefits that have been realized from investment by the US Government and American industry in research.

【批注及转述】

The writer introduces the subject of his argument and states his thesis, that is research with the goal of understanding the world around us is important for our wellbeing and requires government investment.

I am sure every member of this committee is well aware of the fundamental scientific paradigm: theories are developed to explain observations or to speculate on how and why things might work. Experiments are undertaken to validate or refute the predictions of the theory. Theories are revised based on experimental results.

【批注及转述】

The writer reviews the scientific process of theorizing, testing, and revision.

While the primary focus of attention in this panel is on basic research, I feel compelled to observe that basic and applied research go hand-in-hand, informing and stimulating each other in a never-ending Yin and Yang of partnership. In some ways, applied research is a form of validation because the success (or failure) of the application may reinforce or contradict the theoretically predicted results and the underlying theory. Basic research tries to understand and applied research tries to do and often one must pursue both in the effort to uncover new knowledge.

【批注及转述】

The writer is going to be talking about basic research, but wants to point out the dynamic and essential relationship between basic and applied research. Without one, the other is incomplete.

Validation of basic research may take a long time. The notion of the inflation of the early universe still awaits satisfactory confirmation. Postulated by Alan Guth (among others) around 1974, this year's recent results, from measurements taken by the BICEP2 experiment, suggest evidence that this theory is correct, but there is significant debate about the interpretation of the measurements. While the community awaits further corroborating or refuting experimental validation of the measurements, it is important to recognize that the means to gather potentially validating experimental data took 30 years to reach maturity. A similar observation can be made for recent discovery of a Higgs boson by the Large Hadron Collider team at CERN. Peter Higgs and his colleagues postulated the existence of this fundamental particle and its associated field around 1964 but it has taken 50 years for the experimental capacity to test this theory to reach the point where such tests could be undertaken.

【批注及转述】

The writer uses two examples to make the point that research can take a long time to verify claims. In one case he cites evidence that came 30 years after the theory (of inflation of the universe) was first put forward. In the second case it took 50 years after the theory was put forward to produce valid data. In both cases there is still debate over the meaning of the data and how to interpret it.

It is worth pausing for a moment to appreciate that research, by its very nature, cannot always guarantee results. Moreover, sometimes the results may come in the form of surprises. A canonical example is the discovery by Alexander Fleming, in 1928, that penicillium mold produces an antibiotic. He was reacting to an unexplained observation in some petri dishes he happened to notice. It was not until 13 years later in 1941 that the active compound we call penicillin was isolated. The best scientists are the ones who are alert to anomalies and seek to understand them. Nobel prizes don't go to scientists who ignore anomalies. They go to the scientists who see unexpected results and say, "huh? That's funny!" and try to find out what is behind an unanticipated observation.

【批注及转述】

The writer goes one step further; sometimes there will be no results, or unexpected results. He uses an example to illustrate how, even in such "failed" cases, there is still the potential for significant discovery. He invokes Nobel prize winners to support the point, though he does not specifically cite a case.

Failure is the handmaiden of wisdom in the scientific world. When we make predictions or build systems based on our theoretical models, we must be prepared for and learn from our failures. Understanding the reason for failure is sometimes even more important than positive results since it may pave the way for far deeper understanding and more precise models of reality. In the scientific enterprise, the freedom to take risk and accept the potential of failure makes the difference between merely incremental refinement and breakthroughs that open new vistas of understanding.

【批注及转述】

The writer expounds further on the possibility of failure and the possibility to learn from it. He even goes so far as to suggest that the biggest breakthroughs sometimes follow failure to prove a theory as it leads research into new areas and different directions.

In my opinion, support for basic and applied research is fundamentally justifiable based not only on the civil and economic benefits it has conferred but also on the ground-level understanding that basic research is high risk but has a high potential payoff. Only the Government has the capacity to sustain this kind of effort. The National Science Foundation was founded by Congress in 1950. Over the past 60+ years, NSF has successfully supported the scientific research enterprise through widely solicited proposals, a well tested peer review system, dedicated and well-qualified program managers and strongly motivated and highly effective leadership.

【批注及转述】

The writer concludes his argument by noting the benefits to society. He states that only government can support such long term and unpredictable research, as it has done effectively through the National Science Foundation for some time.

As a member of the National Science Board, I have learned that successful scientific endeavors supported by NSF rely on a partnership among the research community, the National Science Foundation staff, leadership and board, and the members of the House and Senate who are equally committed to basic and applied research. Vannever Bush got it exactly right in his landmark report: Science, The Endless Frontier. Science is an endless frontier. The more we learn, the more we know we don't know, and the more we must dedicate ourselves to learning and knowing more.

【批注及转述】

Finally, the writer appeals to the ongoing, endless nature of scientific inquiry to appeal for continuing support.

Text 3

The short essay below "College Should Prepare You For Life" was firstly published on The New Republic.

As the college admissions season moves into high gear, I've been talking with many stressed-out young people deciding what kinds of schools they should apply to. As president of a university dedicated to liberal education, I urge them to consider college not just as a chance to acquire particular expertise but as a remarkable opportunity to explore their individual and social lives in connection to the world in which they will live and work.

【批注及转述】

As young people begin to consider attending university, the president of one institution is making an appeal to seize upon the chance of a liberal education to improve oneself, and to understand their world better.

Contentious debates over the benefits — or drawbacks — of broad, integrative learning, liberal learning, are as old as America itself. Several of the founding fathers saw education as the road to independence and liberty. A broad commitment to inquiry was part of their dedication to freedom. But critics of education also have a long tradition. From Benjamin Franklin in the eighteenth-century to today's Internet pundits, they have attacked its irrelevance and elitism — often calling for more vocational instruction.

【批注及转述】

The writer acknowledges the debate over the benefits of a liberal education citing the long traditions that back each side of the argument.

Ben Franklin probably would have had some sympathy for the anti-college message: "You don't need colleges. Go off and learn stuff on your own. You believe you are an innovator? You can prove it without the sheepskin. You want to start a successful company? You don't need permission from out-of-touch professors." From Tom Paine to Steve Jobs, stories of people with the smarts and chutzpah to educate themselves in their own ways have long resonated with Americans.

【批注及转述】

He cites Benjamin Franklin's urge to be self-taught as well as more modern success stories such as Steve Jobs while acknowledging the appeal of the self-made man to Americans.

But Franklin was also dismissive of the arrogant display of parochialism. He would be appalled by the current mania for driving young people into narrower and narrower domains in the name of "day one" job preparedness. He would surely recognize that when industrial and civic leaders call for earlier and earlier specialization, they are putting us on a path that will make Americans even less capable citizens and less able to adjust to changes in the world of work.

【批注及转述】

And yet he uses his opponents' greatest saint, Franklin again, to batter the idea that education should push students increasingly towards specialization at increasingly younger ages. While this approach may have short-term benefits it will ultimately lead to an American populace less able to adjust in a changing world to their ultimate harm.

Citizens able to see through political or bureaucratic doubletalk are also workers who can defend their rights in the face of the rich and powerful. Education protects against mindless tyranny and haughty privilege. Liberal learning in our tradition isn't only training; it's an invitation to think for oneself. For generations of Americans, literate and well-rounded citizens were seen as essential to a healthy republic. Broadly educated citizens aren't just collections of skills — they are whole people. For today's critics, often speaking the lingo of Silicon Valley sophistication, however, a broad, contextual education is merely wasted — non-monetized — schooling.

【批注及转述】

Educated workers, more so than merely trained ones, will be better equipped to defend their rights and freedoms. Indeed, the author writes, well rounded citizens are "essential to a healthy republic." One must resist the urge to consider education merely in terms of consequent financial returns on investment.

It's no wonder that in a society characterized by radical income inequality, anxiety about getting that first job will lead many to aim for the immediate needs of the marketplace right now. The high cost of college and the ruinous debt that many take on only add to this anxiety. In this context, some assert that education should simply prepare people to be consumers, or, if they are talented enough, "innovators." But when the needs of the market change, as they surely will, the folks with that narrow training will be out of luck. Their bosses, those responsible for defining market trends, will be just fine because they were probably never confined to an ultra-specialized way of doing things. Beware of critics of education who cloak their desire to protect privilege (and inequality) in the garb of educational reform.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the writer acknowledges some of the pressures that seem to be driving people away from liberal education in favor of job-related training. But he refutes that line of thinking by making the case that a narrowly trained populace will be left without answers if and when the situation changes, and the jobs they were trained for no longer exist.

"If we make money the object of man-training," W.E.B. Dubois wrote at the beginning of the twentieth-century, "we shall develop money makers but not necessarily men." He went on to describe how "intelligence, broad sympathy, knowledge of the world that was and is, and the relation of men to it — this is the curriculum of that Higher Education which must underlie true life." A good pragmatist, DuBois knew that through education one developed modes of thinking that turned into patterns of action. As William James taught, the point of learning is not to arrive at truths that somehow match up with reality. The point of learning is to acquire better ways of coping with the world, better ways of acting.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the writer cites W.E.B Dubois' warning against making money the sole goal of training. He refers to Dubois's "practicality" to make his own point that in the big picture, liberal education is itself an essential component to being able to act in the real world.

Pragmatic liberal education in America aims to empower students with potent ways of dealing with the issues they will face at work and in life. That's why it must be broad and contextual, inspiring habits of attention and critique that will be resources for students years after graduation. In order to develop this resource, teachers must address the student as a whole person — not just as a tool kit that can be improved. We do need tools, to be sure, but American college education has long invited students to learn, creating habits of independent critical and creative thinking that last a lifetime.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the writer is again on the offensive, touting the virtues of a liberally educated people. He invites educators to go beyond developing their students tools, though not to forsake them, and create learning and thinking habits that will enable people to develop new skills whenever the need arises.

In the nineteenth century, Emerson urged students to "resist the vulgar prosperity that retrogrades ever to barbarism." He emphasized that a true education would help one find one's own way by expanding one's world, not narrowing it: notice everything but imitate nothing, he urged. The goal of this cultivated attentiveness is not to discover some ultimate truth, but neither is it just to prepare for the worst job one is likely to ever have, one's first job after graduation.

【批注及转述】

The writer invokes the words of another great and widely respected American, Emerson, to encourage a broadening view of education, beyond a "vulgar" goal of prosperity. It is that narrowly focused goal that is the enemy of not only the individual, but is counterproductive to its own stated goals in the long run.

Instead, the goal of liberal education is, in John Dewey's words, "to free experience from routine and caprice." This goal will make one more effective in the world, and it will help one continue to grow as a whole person beyond the university. This project, like learning itself, should never end.

【批注及转述】

The writer concludes his argument with an invocation to develop one's self, to become "a whole person," to be a lifelong learner.

Text 4

At this period of wreck and ruin, the one power that can save, can heal, can fortify, is clear and intelligent thought. The statement is not as banal as it may seem. There are people who prefer ardent thought to clear thought, and loyal thought to strict thought. There are people who mistrust thought altogether and prefer the unarguable authenticities of the heart — the individual heart and the collective heart. There are people who regard thought as an activity of an elite. Yet the ideal of "clear and intelligent thought," stripped of its condescension and its indifference to the non-rational dimensions of human life, deserves to be defended. We need not be a nation of intellectuals, but we must not be a nation of idiots.

【批注及转述】

The writer clearly states his thesis, and then introduces many of the objections to that thesis. In the final sentence he somewhat tempers the view stated in his thesis. This allows for a broader defense to be made.

The task is not to intellectualize humanity. It is to humanize intellectuality. To this end, the cultural reputation of reason needs to be revised. Reason is an intensely romantic pursuit, especially if one finds romance in struggle. Reason's victories are almost never final. It is always surrounded by unreason, which is always more popular. Reason is the stout resistance, the flickering lamp in the darkness, the perpetual underdog, the stoic connoisseur of defeat, the loser that dusts itself off and fights another day. If, as some of its enemies claim, reason aspires to control, it is a futile aspiration. The anti-rationalist mob in contemporary thought can relax: reason will never come to rule.

【批注及转述】

The writer addresses an obstacle to his way of thinking ("the cultural reputation") by attempting to define Reason in romantic ("an intensely romantic pursuit") and deferential ("reason will never come to rule") terms.

One of the most absurd charges against reason is that it is authoritarian. There is nothing rational about tyranny: it is stupid and it is mad. Its "rationality," which is to say, its internal coherence and its capacity to function, is not the same as reason. Quite the contrary: it is reason that exposes this rationality for what it really is. More importantly, reason is essentially anti-authoritarian because a rational discussion is never closed. That is why modern thinkers still engage with ancient thinkers. That is why science never ends. New objections and new findings are always welcome. In the war against reason in much of contemporary philosophy, one of the cleverest tricks is to present reason's rigor, its insistence upon the importance of the inquiry into truth and falsehood, as discouraging to thought. But the contrary is the case. What could be more encouraging to thought than the belief in the possibility of intellectual progress? This is a gathering to which all minds are invited. They have merely to agree to behave like minds.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the writer begins by addressing a more blatant objection to reason. First he characterizes the objection as a misunderstanding ("It's rationality…is not the same as reason"). Then the writer goes on to once again characterize reason in his own, more uplifting terms ("What could be more encouraging than…"). He ends with an egalitarian call to reason.

Reason frightens some people, but reason is never as frightening as its opposite. "The God of my heart is the God of my mind," wrote Hermann Cohen. Leave God out of it for a moment: I have never known quite how to read that sentence. The union that it extols seems to liquidate the benefits of our multiplicity. Did he mean that the mind will be like the heart or that the heart will be like the mind? Either way, he was performing an amputation.

【批注及转述】

The writer addresses a less rational objection to reason by quoting a famous thinker. However, the quote is introduced to be debunked, and the author proposes that reason and emotion are not contrary, but complimentary.

Good judgment cannot be prescribed or outsourced. There are no blue-ribbon panels on truth and goodness. The responsibility for belief falls equally on all of us. The search for values, and for the grounds of values, is catch-as-catch-can: it may lead the thoughtful individual to books, to films, to travel, to participation, to conversation, to friendship and love, as the long work of mental clarification proceeds. Most conviction exists in the vast cold space between perfect obscurity and perfect certainty. The thoughtful individual is condemned to an existence of corrections and amplifications, both analytical and empirical, in which unfounded leaps are the selfish indulgences of impatient minds.

【批注及转述】

In this paragraph the writer makes a case that reason is the duty of all people, and one that must proceed according to no fixed rules other than a requirement to proceed patiently.

An open mind is not an empty mind. There are many questions that call for expertise, but this does not settle the matter: The work of natural scientists and social scientists will never relieve the ordinary citizen of his obligation to arrive at some basis for a view. It falls to us, who are not economists or biologists or climatologists, to support a position. We must support what we cannot ourselves verify. By what authority do we choose between authorities? And yet an open society is founded upon the faith in precisely such a choice.

【批注及转述】

The writer next addresses the role of experts in forming reasonable thoughts. He claims it is the role of reason to approach specialized knowledge, and the duty of people to arrive at a reasonable position. He ends by emphasizing the importance of this duty.

In closing we might consider John Stuart Mill's understanding of the purpose of reason, which is "to enable average human beings to attain the mental stature which they are capable of." It is not "solely, or chiefly, to form great thinkers," but to create "an intellectually active people."

【批注及转述】

To conclude the writer uses the words of an influential Enlightenment thinker to summarize his view of the purpose of reason in the individual, and the role of reason in society.