题干

阅读材料,完成下列要求。

材料一儒学自16世纪始大规模西传入欧,到17、18世纪在欧洲掀起了“中国文化热在宗教、哲学领城,欧洲的启蒙思想家们从孔子的“天道自然观”中找到了中国存在原始自然信仰的证据,他们认为,这种信仰不是天神论,而是“自然的道理”,并据此来批判被他称为“理性之大敌”、“文明之恶棍”的基督教神学《在道德伦理、政治制度方面,儒学的突出特征是倒重于道德伦理,并使之与社会政治相结合,以达到国家的“仁政德治”。伏尔泰对此无比推崇,百科全书派代表霍尔巴赫也呼吁“欧洲政府非学中国不可”,他们借此反对旧道德,期许建立新的社会秩序。而此时,中国明清之际的启蒙思想家们也在积极地从先桊儒学中汲取营养。黄宗義指出,“古者以天下为主君为客,凡君之所毕世经营者,为天下也”,得出“为天下之害者,君而已矣”的结论,这是对孟子“民责茗轻”民本思想的重新阐发;王夫之则对维护君主专制的宋明理学给予坚决批判,他认为“人欲”不能扳杀,“天地之产,皆有所用,饮食男女,皆有所负”,这是对先秦儒家“性也,天之就也”(《孟子•解获》)的“人性天就论”思想的重新焕发。

材料二17、18世纪中西方社会均处于较剌烈的变动之中,生产力发展的张力鼓动着先进的阶级或阶层要突破传统政治的鹿敗和官方哲学的愚昧,因此,中国和欧洲的启蒙思想家们取用儒学精荭的社会基础存有某种相似性。但因二者的现实环境却存在着根本区别,欧洲正处于新旧思想,新旧力量激烈交锋的状态,而中国社会经济、政治并未发生根本变化,这就注定了二者产生的影响迥然不同,儒家学说在启蒙运动中产生了推波助澜的作用,进而促进了欧洲社会的巨大变革,而中国的启蒙活动却未能形成一种推动社会进步的强有力的思想运动。

——以上均摘编自谈家胜:《17、18世纪中西启蒙思想家取用儒学精蘊及其影响之比较》

上一题 下一题 0.0难度 选择题 更新时间:2019-01-15 09:21:28

答案(点此获取答案解析)

同类题2

阅读理解

    Norman Garmezy, a development psychologist at the University of Minnesota, met thousands of children in his four decades of research. A nine-year-old boy in particular stuck with him. He has an alcoholic mother and an absent father. But each day he would walk in to school with a smile on his face. He wanted to make sure that "no one would feel pity for him and no one would know his mother's incompetence.” The boy exhibited a quality Garmezy identified as “resilience”.

    Resilience presents a challenge for psychologists. People who are lucky enough to never experience any sort of adversity (逆境) won't know how resilient they are. It's only when they're faced with obstacles, stress, and other environmental threats that resilience, or the lack of it, comes out. Some give in and some conquer.

    Garmezy's work opened the door to the study of the elements that could enable an individual's success despite the challenges they faced. His research indicated that some elements had to do with luck, but quite large set of elements was psychological, and had to do with how the children responded to the environment. The resilient children had what psychologists call an “internal lens of control(内控点)”. They believed that they, and not their circumstances, affected their achievements. The resilient children saw themselves as the arrangers of their own fates.

    Ceorge Bonanno has been studying resilience for years at Columbia University's Teachers College. He found that some people are far better than others at dealing with adversity. This difference might come from perception(认知) whether they think of an event as traumatic(创伤), or as an opportunity to learn and grow. “Stressful” or “traumatic” events themselves don't have much predictive power when it comes to life outcomes. "Exposure to potentially traumatic events does not predict later functioning,” Bonanno said. "It's only predictive if there's a negative response.” In other words, living through adversity doesn't guarantee that you'll suffer going forward.

    The good news is that positive perception can be taught. "We can make ourselves more or less easily hurt by how we think about things," Bonanno said. In research at Columbia, the neuroscientist Kevin Ochsner has shown that teaching people to think of adversity in different ways--to reframe it in positive terms when the initial response is negative, or in a less emotional way when the initial response is emotionally “hot”---changes how they experience and react to the adversity.