刷题刷出新高度,偷偷领先!偷偷领先!偷偷领先! 关注我们,悄悄成为最优秀的自己!

单选题

        Back in 1964, in his book Games People Play, psychiatrist Eric Berne described a pattern of conversation he called “Why Don’t You—Yes But”, which remains one of the most irritating aspects of everyday social life. The person adopting the strategy is usually a chronic complainer. Something is terrible about their relationship, job, or other situation, and they moan about it ceaselessly, but find some excuse to dismiss any solution that’s proposed. The reason, of course, is that on some level they don’t want a solution; they want to be validated in their position that the world is out to get them. If they can “win” the game—dismissing every suggestion until their interlocutor (对话者) gives up in annoyance—they get to feel pleasurably righteous (正当的) in their resentments and excused from any obligation to change.

        Part of the trouble here is the so-called responsibility/fault fallacy (谬误). When you’re feeling hard done by—taken for granted by your partner, say, or obliged to work for a half-witted boss—it’s easy to become attached to the position that it’s not your job to address the matter, and that doing so would be an admission of fault. But there’s a confusion here. For example, if I were to discover a newborn at my front door, it wouldn’t be my fault, but it most certainly would be my responsibility. There would be choices to make, and no possibility of avoiding them, since trying to ignore the matter would be a choice. The point is that what goes for the baby on the doorstep is true in all cases: even if the other person is 100% in the wrong, there’s nothing to be gained, long-term, from using this as a justification to evade responsibility.

        Should you find yourself on the receiving end of this kind of complaining, there’s an ingenious way to shut it down—which is to agree with it, ardently. Psychotherapist Lori Gottlieb describes this as “over-validation”. For one thing, you’ll be spared further moaning, since the other person’s motivation was to confirm her beliefs, and now you’re confirming them. But for another, as Gottlieb notes, people confronted with over-validation often hear their complaints afresh and start arguing back. The notion that they’re utterly powerless suddenly seems unrealistic —not to mention rather annoying—so they’re prompted instead to generate ideas about how they might change things.

        “And then, sometimes, something magical might happen,” Gottlieb writes. The other person “might realise she’s not as trapped as you are saying she is, or as she feels.” Which illustrates the irony of the responsibility/fault fallacy: evading responsibility feels comfortable, but turns out to be a prison; whereas assuming responsibility fees unpleasant, but ends up being freeing.

54. What happens when chronic complainers receive over-validation?

A
They are motivated to find ingenious ways to persuade their interlocutor.
B
They are prompted to come up with ideas for making possible changes.
C
They are stimulated to make more complaints.
D
They are encouraged to start arguing back.
使用微信搜索喵呜刷题,轻松应对考试!

答案:

B

解析:

解析:B。根据题干中的receive over-validation可定位至原文第三段倒数第二句。该句提到,被过度认同的人通常会再次听到自己的抱怨,并开始反驳这些怨言。该段最后一句提到,于是他们会受到激励并思考如何去改变现状。B项是对此内容的同义转述,其中They are prompted to come up with ideas对应最后一句中的they’re prompted instead to generate ideas,making possible changes对应how they might change things,故正确答案为B。

错项排除:A项和D项分别利用第三段中的ingenious way和start arguing back设置干扰,但原文中说的是被过度认同的人会反驳自己的怨言,而不是去反驳或者劝说与他们对话的人,故排除两项。原文中提到,被过度认同的人会停止抱怨,C项与此内容相悖,故排除。

创作类型:
原创

本文链接:54. What happens when chronic complainers receive

版权声明:本站点所有文章除特别声明外,均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。

让学习像火箭一样快速,微信扫码,获取考试解析、体验刷题服务,开启你的学习加速器!

分享考题
share