📝 2023년 고2 3월 영어영역 OX 변형문제 [전체 인쇄용]

The more people have to do unwanted things the more chances are that they create unpleasant environment for themselves and others. If you hate the thing you do but have to do it nonetheless, you have choice between hating the thing and accepting that it needs to be done. Either way you will do it. Doing it from place of hatred will develop hatred towards the self and others around you; doing it from the place of acceptance will create compassion towards the self and allow for opportunities to find a more suitable way of accomplishing the task. If you decide to accept the fact that your task has to be done, start from recognising that your situation is a gift from life; this will help you to see it as a lesson in acceptance.

Everyone’s heard the expression don’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good. If you want to get over an obstacle so that your idea can become the solution-based policy you’ve long dreamed of, you can’t have an all-or-nothing mentality. You have to be willing to alter your idea and let others influence its outcome. You have to be okay with the outcome being a little different, even a little less, than you wanted. Say you’re pushing for a clean water act. Even if what emerges isn’t as well-funded as you wished, or doesn’t match how you originally conceived the bill, you’ll have still succeeded in ensuring that kids in troubled areas have access to clean water. That’s what counts, that they will be safer because of your idea and your effort. Is it perfect? No. Is there more work to be done? Absolutely. But in almost every case, helping move the needle forward is vastly better than not helping at all.

Brands that fail to grow and develop lose their relevance. Think about the person you knew who was once on the fast track at your company, who is either no longer with the firm or, worse yet, appears to have hit a plateau in his or her career. Assuming he or she did not make an ambitious move, more often than not, this individual is a victim of having failed to stay relevant and embrace the advances in his or her industry. Think about the impact personal computing technology had on the first wave of executive leadership exposed to the technology. Those who embraced the technology were able to integrate it into their work styles and excel. Those who were resistant many times found few opportunities to advance their careers and in many cases were ultimately let go through early retirement for failure to stay relevant and update their skills.

What consequences of eating too many grapes and other sweet fruit could there possibly be for our brains? A few large studies have helped to shed some light. In one, higher fruit intake in older, cognitively healthy adults was linked with less volume in the hippocampus. This finding was unusual, since people who eat more fruit usually display the benefits associated with a healthy diet. In this study, however, the researchers isolated various components of the subjects’ diets and found that fruit didn’t seem to be doing their memory centers any favors. Another study from the Mayo Clinic saw a similar inverse relationship between fruit intake and volume of the cortex, the large outer layer of the brain. Researchers in the latter study noted that excessive consumption of high-sugar fruit (such as mangoes, bananas, and pineapples) may cause metabolic and cognitive problems as much as processed carbs do.

Winning turns on a self-conscious awareness that others are watching. It’s a lot easier to move under the radar when no one knows you and no one is paying attention. You can mess up and be rough and get dirty because no one even knows you’re there. But as soon as you start to win, and others start to notice, you’re suddenly aware that you’re being observed. You’re being judged. You worry that others will discover your flaws and weaknesses, and you start hiding your true personality, so you can be a good role model and good citizen and a leader that others can respect. There is nothing wrong with that. But if you do it at the expense of being who you really are, making decisions that please others instead of pleasing yourself, you’re not going to be in that position very long. When you start apologizing for who you are, you stop growing and you stop winning. Permanently.

Human beings like certainty. This liking stems from our ancient ancestors who needed to survive alongside saber-toothed tigers and poisonous berries. Our brains evolved to help us attend to threats, keep away from them, and remain alive afterward. In fact, we learned that the more certain we were about something, the better chance we had of making the right choice. Is this berry the same shape as last time? The same size? If I know for certain it is, my brain will direct me to eat it because I know it’s safe. And if I’m uncertain, my brain will send out a danger alert to protect me. The dependence on certainty all those millennia ago ensured our survival to the present day, and the danger-alert system continues to protect us. This is achieved by our brains labeling new, vague, or unpredictable everyday events and experiences as uncertain. Our brains then generate sensations, thoughts, and action plans to keep us safe from the uncertain element, and we live to see another day.

Robert Blattberg and Steven Hoch noted that, in a changing environment, it is not clear that consistency is always a virtue and that one of the advantages of human judgment is the ability to detect change. Thus, in changing environments, it might be advantageous to combine human judgment and statistical models. Blattberg and Hoch examined this possibility by having supermarket managers forecast demand for certain products and then creating a composite forecast by averaging these judgments with the forecasts of statistical models based on past data. The logic was that statistical models assume stable conditions and therefore cannot account for the effects on demand of novel events such as actions taken by competitors or the introduction of new products. Humans, however, can incorporate these novel factors in their judgments. The composite ─ or average of human judgments and statistical models ─ proved to be more accurate than either the statistical models or the managers working alone.

Free play is nature’s means of teaching children that they are not helpless. In play, away from adults, children really do have control and can practice asserting it. In free play, children learn to make their own decisions, solve their own problems, create and follow rules, and get along with others as equals rather than as obedient or rebellious subordinates. In active outdoor play, children deliberately dose themselves with moderate amounts of fear and they thereby learn how to control not only their bodies, but also their fear. In social play children learn how to negotiate with others, how to please others, and how to manage and overcome the anger that can arise from conflicts. None of these lessons can be taught through verbal means; they can be learned only through experience, which free play provides.

Many early dot-com investors focused almost entirely on revenue growth instead of net income. Many early dot‑com companies earned most of their revenue from selling advertising space on their Web sites. To boost reported revenue, some sites began exchanging ad space. Company A would put an ad for its Web site on company B’s Web site, and company B would put an ad for its Web site on company A’s Web site. No money ever changed hands, but each company recorded revenue (for the value of the space that it gave up on its site) and expense (for the value of its ad that it placed on the other company’s site). This practice did little to boost net income and resulted in no additional cash inflow ─ but it did boost reported revenue. This practice was quickly put to an end because accountants felt that it did not meet the criteria of the revenue recognition principle.

Scholars of myth have long argued that myth gives structure and meaning to human life; that meaning is amplified when a myth evolves into a world. A virtual world’s ability to fulfill needs grows when lots and lots of people believe in the world. Conversely, a virtual world cannot be long sustained by a mere handful of adherents. Consider the difference between a global sport and a game I invent with my nine friends and play regularly. My game might be a great game, one that is completely immersive, one that consumes all of my group’s time and attention. If its reach is limited to the ten of us, though, then it’s ultimately just a weird hobby, and it has limited social function. For a virtual world to provide lasting, wide-ranging value, its participants must be a large enough group to be considered a society. When that threshold is reached, psychological value can turn into wide-ranging social value.

It seems natural to describe certain environmental conditions as ‘extreme’, ‘harsh’, ‘benign’ or ‘stressful’. It may seem obvious when conditions are ‘extreme’: the midday heat of a desert, the cold of an Antarctic winter, the salinity of the Great Salt Lake. But this only means that these conditions are extreme for us, given our particular physiological characteristics and tolerances. To a cactus there is nothing extreme about the desert conditions in which cacti have evolved; nor are the icy lands of Antarctica an extreme environment for penguins. It is lazy and dangerous for the ecologist to assume that all other organisms sense the environment in the way we do. Rather, the ecologist should try to gain a worm’s-eye or plant’s-eye view of the environment: to see the world as others see it. Emotive words like harsh and benign, even relativities such as hot and cold, should be used by ecologists only with care.

Human processes differ from rational processes in their outcome. A process is rational if it always does the right thing based on the current information, given an ideal performance measure. In short, rational processes go by the book and assume that the book is actually correct. Human processes involve instinct, intuition, and other variables that don’t necessarily reflect the book and may not even consider the existing data. As an example, the rational way to drive a car is to always follow the laws. [※ Likewise, pedestrian crossing signs vary depending on the country with differing appearances of a person crossing the street.] However, traffic isn’t rational; if you follow the laws precisely, you end up stuck somewhere because other drivers aren’t following the laws precisely. To be successful, a self‑driving car must therefore act humanly, rather than rationally.

Like positive habits, bad habits exist on a continuum of easy-to-change and hard-to-change. When you get toward the “hard” end of the spectrum, note the language you hear — breaking bad habits and battling addiction. It’s as if an unwanted behavior is a nefarious villain to be aggressively defeated. But this kind of language (and the approaches it spawns) frames these challenges in a way that isn’t helpful or effective. I specifically hope we will stop using this phrase: “break a habit.” This language misguides people. The word “break” sets the wrong expectation for how you get rid of a bad habit. This word implies that if you input a lot of force in one moment, the habit will be gone. However, that rarely works, because you usually cannot get rid of an unwanted habit by applying force one time.

A common but incorrect assumption is that we are creatures of reason when, in fact, we are creatures of both reason and emotion. We cannot get by on reason alone since any reason always eventually leads to a feeling. Should I get a wholegrain cereal or a chocolate cereal? I can list all the reasons I want, but the reasons have to be based on something. For example, if my goal is to eat healthy, I can choose the wholegrain cereal, but what is my reason for wanting to be healthy? I can list more and more reasons such as wanting to live longer, spending more quality time with loved ones, etc., but what are the reasons for those reasons? You should be able to see by now that reasons are ultimately based on non-reason such as values, feelings, or emotions. These deep-seated values, feelings, and emotions we have are rarely a result of reasoning, but can certainly be influenced by reasoning. We have values, feelings, and emotions before we begin to reason and long before we begin to reason effectively.

Electric communication is mainly known in fish. The electric signals are produced in special electric organs. When the signal is discharged the electric organ will be negatively loaded compared to the head and an electric field is created around the fish. A weak electric current is created also in ordinary muscle cells when they contract. In the electric organ the muscle cells are connected in larger chunks, which makes the total current intensity larger than in ordinary muscles. The fish varies the signals by changing the form of the electric field or the frequency of discharging. The system is only working over small distances, about one to two meters. This is an advantage since the species using the signal system often live in large groups with several other species. If many fish send out signals at the same time, the short range decreases the risk of interference.

Creativity can have an effect on productivity. Creativity leads some individuals to recognize problems that others do not see, but which may be very difficult. Charles Darwin’s approach to the speciation problem is a good example of this; he chose a very difficult and tangled problem, speciation, which led him into a long period of data collection and deliberation. This choice of problem did not allow for a quick attack or a simple experiment. In such cases creativity may actually decrease productivity (as measured by publication counts) because effort is focused on difficult problems. For others, whose creativity is more focused on methods and technique, creativity may lead to solutions that drastically reduce the work necessary to solve a problem. We can see an example in the development of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) which enables us to amplify small pieces of DNA in a short time. This type of creativity might reduce the number of steps or substitute steps that are less likely to fail, thus increasing productivity.

A young child may be puzzled when asked to distinguish between the directions of right and left. But that same child may have no difficulty in determining the directions of up and down or back and front. Scientists propose that this occurs because, although we experience three dimensions, only two had a strong influence on our evolution: the vertical dimension as defined by gravity and, in mobile species, the front/back dimension as defined by the positioning of sensory and feeding mechanisms. These influence our perception of vertical versus horizontal, far versus close, and the search for dangers from above (such as an eagle) or below (such as a snake). However, the left-right axis is not as relevant in nature. A bear is equally dangerous from its left or the right side, but not if it is upside down. In fact, when observing a scene containing plants, animals, and man-made objects such as cars or street signs, we can only tell when left and right have been inverted if we observe those artificial items.

[요약문] Having affected the evolution of our spatial perception, vertical and front/back dimensions are easily perceived, but the left-right axis, which is not significant in nature, doesn’t come instantly to us.

Creative people aren’t all cut from the same cloth. They have varying levels of maturity and sensitivity. They have different approaches to work. And they’re each motivated by different things. Managing people is about being aware of their unique personalities. It’s also about empathy and adaptability, and knowing how the things you do and say will be interpreted and adapting accordingly. Who you are and what you say may not be the same from one person to the next. For instance, if you’re asking someone to work a second weekend in a row, or telling them they aren’t getting that deserved promotion just yet, you need to bear in mind the individual. Vincent will have a very different reaction to the news than Emily, and they will each be more receptive to the news if it’s bundled with different things. Perhaps that promotion news will land easier if Vincent is given a few extra vacation days for the holidays, while you can promise Emily a bigger promotion a year from now. Consider each person’s complex positive and negative personality traits, their life circumstances, and their mindset in the moment when deciding what to say and how to say it. Personal connection, compassion, and an individualized management style are key to drawing consistent, rock star-level work out of everyone.