About Sophie：
As an English lover, she is trying to read and translate ** Beyond Feelings ** in spare time recently.
Welcome to correct and communicate with her.
Thanks a lot.

Sophie's Words：
序言介紹該書出版前，主流知識(shí)分子的思維方式以及作者寫這本書的原因担孔；同時(shí)也闡明了為何選擇樸實(shí)語言風(fēng)格的理由罩句。
2017/4/24

Preface

When the first edition of this book appeared in 1975, the dominant intellectual focus was still subjectivity, feelings. That focus, the legacy of the 1960s, was originally a necessary reaction to the rationalism and behaviorism that preceded it. It declared, **in effect: **“People are not robots. They are more than the sum total of their physiology. They have hopes, dreams, emotions. No two humans are alike—each has a special perspective, a unique way of perceiving the world. And any view of humanity that ignores this subjective side is a distortion.”

譯文：

前言

1975年蕉堰，當(dāng)該書的第一版問世時(shí)乡摹，主流知識(shí)分子仍然關(guān)注于主觀及各種感受劝篷。關(guān)注主觀感受——作為19世紀(jì)60年代的產(chǎn)物枫笛，起初是對(duì)先于它而存在的【理想主義和行為主義】必然反應(yīng)法精。實(shí)際上，【關(guān)注主觀和感受】的觀點(diǎn)認(rèn)為：“人不是機(jī)器人系馆，他們超過一切生理機(jī)能的總和送漠。除此之外，人類還有希望由蘑，夢(mèng)想闽寡，感覺；沒有兩個(gè)人是相同的纵穿，每個(gè)人都有獨(dú)特的視角下隧，一種感知世界的特有方式。并且谓媒，任何忽視這種主觀性的人性觀點(diǎn)都是一種曲解淆院。”

legacy 英 ['leg?s?] 美 ['l?g?si] n. 遺贈(zèng)句惯，遺產(chǎn)
rationalism ['r??(?)n(?)l?z(?)m] n. 理性主義土辩；唯理主義
behaviorism [bi'heivi?riz(?)m] n. 行為主義
an approach to psychology that emphasizes observable measurable behavior
** declare ** 英 [d?'kle?] 美 [d?'kl?r]
vt. 宣布，聲明抢野；斷言拷淘，宣稱
vi. 聲明，宣布
** in effect** 實(shí)際上指孤；生效
** physiology** 英 [,f?z?'?l?d??] 美 ['f?z?'ɑl?d?i] n. 生理學(xué)启涯；生理機(jī)能
distortion 英 [d?'st???(?)n] 美 [d?s't?r??n] n. 變形；[物] 失真恃轩；扭曲结洼；曲解

Yet, despite its value, the focus on feelings went too far. Like many other movements, what began as a reaction against an extreme view became an extreme view itself. The result of that extremism was the neglect of thinking. This book was designed to answer that neglect. The introduction to the first edition explained its rationale as follows:

The emphasis on subjectivity ** served to** correct a dangerous oversimplification. But it is the kind of reaction that cannot be sustained for long without causing an even worse situation—the neglect of thinking. Worse for two reasons.

譯文：
然而，盡管有其價(jià)值叉跛，但人們?cè)?jīng)過多重視感受松忍。就像許多其他的運(yùn)動(dòng)一樣，最開始以作為反對(duì)極端觀點(diǎn)的反應(yīng)最后本身也成了極端筷厘，產(chǎn)生的結(jié)果是忽視思考的極端主義鸣峭。該書就是計(jì)劃解答這種忽視問題宏所。第一版概述對(duì)其基本原理的解釋如下：
強(qiáng)調(diào)主觀有助于糾正過度簡(jiǎn)化的危險(xiǎn)，但它不能長(zhǎng)期保持不會(huì)導(dǎo)致更糟的情況——忽視思考摊溶；兩個(gè)理由如下爬骤。

neglect 英 [n?'glekt] 美 [n?'gl?kt]
fail to give them the amount of attention that they deserve. 忽視
rationale 英 [,r???'nɑ?l] 美 [,r???'n?l] n. 基本原理；根本原因
serve to用來更扁，有助于

First, because we live in an age of manipulation. Armies of ** hucksters** and demagogues stand ready with the rich resources of psychology to play upon our emotions and subconscious needs to persuade us that superficial is profound, harmful is beneficial, evil is virtuous. And feelings are especially vulnerable to such manipulation.

譯文：
首先盖腕，由于我們處于一個(gè)操縱時(shí)代。大批的商販和煽動(dòng)者時(shí)刻準(zhǔn)備了豐富的心理源作用在我們的感覺和潛意識(shí)需求上浓镜，說服我們相信膚淺就是深刻，有害就是有益劲厌，邪惡就是善良膛薛。同時(shí)，面對(duì)這樣的操縱补鼻，感受尤為易受攻擊哄啄。

疑難雜句：
Armies of hucksters and demagogues stand ready with the rich resources of psychology to play upon our emotions and subconscious needs to persuade us that superficial is profound, harmful is beneficial, evil is virtuous.

huckster英 ['h?kst?] 美 ['h?kst?]
vt. 叫賣；討價(jià)還價(jià)
n. 叫賣的小販风范；小商人咨跌；吃廣告飯的人
vi. 叫賣；做小商販
demagogue 英 ['dem?g?g] 美 [?d?m?ɡɑɡ] n. 煽動(dòng)者硼婿；煽動(dòng)家锌半；煽動(dòng)政治家
** subconscious =unware**
virtuous 英 ['v??tj??s; -t???s] 美 ['v?t?u?s] adj. 善良的；有道德的
be vulnerable to 易受……攻擊/侵害的

Secondly, because in virtually every important area of modern life— law, medicine, government, education, science, business, and community affairs—we are beset with serious problems and complex issues that demand careful gathering and weighing of facts and informed opinions, thoughtful consideration of various conclusions or actions, and judicious selection of the best conclusion or most appropriate action. . . .

譯文：
第二寇漫，因?yàn)閹缀踉诂F(xiàn)代生活中的每一個(gè)重要領(lǐng)域——法律刊殉、醫(yī)藥、政府州胳、教育记焊、科學(xué)、商業(yè)以及社區(qū)事務(wù)——我們被嚴(yán)肅且復(fù)雜的問題包圍栓撞，這些問題無一不需要細(xì)心收集斟酌的事實(shí)及有根據(jù)的評(píng)價(jià)遍膜，對(duì)各種結(jié)論或行為的深思熟慮，以及對(duì)最好結(jié)論或最宜行為的公正抉擇瓤湘。

be beset with 被……包圍
thoughtful consideration 深思熟慮

[Today’s college student] has been conditioned not to undervalue subjectivity, but to overvalue it. And so he does not need to have his feelings indulged. Rather, he needs to be taught how to sort out his feelings, decide to what extent they have been shaped by external influences, and evaluate them carefully when they conflict among themselves or with the feelings of others. In short, he needs to be taught to think critically.*

譯文：
當(dāng)今的大學(xué)生習(xí)慣于不去低估反而高估主觀性瓢颅；所以他不需要放任自己的情感。然而岭粤，他需要學(xué)會(huì)如何區(qū)分他的情感惜索，決定在多大程度上受外部影響合適，當(dāng)他的情感和周圍的事物沖突或者其他人的情感沖突時(shí)能仔細(xì)評(píng)估他們剃浇。簡(jiǎn)而言之巾兆，就是需要學(xué)會(huì)如何批判性思考猎物。

Be conditioned to習(xí)慣于；以…為條件

There is an unfortunate tendency among many to view feeling and thought as mutually exclusive, to force a choice between them. If we focus on one, then in their view we must reject the other. But this is mistaken. Feeling and thought are perfectly complementary. Feeling, being more spontaneous, is an excellent beginning to the development of conclusions. And thought, being more deliberate, provides a way to identify the best and most appropriate feeling. Both are natural.

Thinking, however, is less automatic than feeling. To do it well demands a systematic approach and guided practice.

譯文：
這有一個(gè)不幸的趨勢(shì)角塑，許多人認(rèn)為感覺和思想是相互排斥的蔫磨，非得在兩者之間做一個(gè)選擇；如果關(guān)注其中一個(gè)圃伶，在他們的觀念中就一定要排除另外一個(gè)——但這種想法錯(cuò)誤的堤如。感覺和思考是完美互補(bǔ)的；感覺窒朋，更多的是無意識(shí)的搀罢，是發(fā)展結(jié)論的極好開始；思想侥猩，更多是深思熟慮榔至，提供了一個(gè)鑒定最好最合適的感覺的方法；二者都是天生的欺劳。
然而與感覺相比唧取，思考自發(fā)性較少；好的思考需要系統(tǒng)的方法和指導(dǎo)性的實(shí)踐划提。

spontaneous 英 [sp?n'te?n??s] 美 [spɑn'ten??s] adj. 自發(fā)的枫弟；自然的；無意識(shí)的
deliberate 英 [d?'l?b(?)r?t] 美 [d?'l?b?r?t]
adj. 故意的鹏往；深思熟慮的淡诗；從容的
vt. 仔細(xì)考慮；商議

The general attitude toward thinking has changed considerably since the mid-1970s. The view that critical thinking is an important skill to which education should give prominence is no longer a minority view. Hundreds of voices have joined the chorus calling for the addition of critical thinking objectives to existing courses and even the creation of special courses in thinking. There is little disagreement that the challenges of the new millennium demand minds that can move beyond feelings to clear, impartial, critical problem solving and decision making.

譯文：
自19世紀(jì)70年代中期以來掸犬，大眾對(duì)思考的態(tài)度有了極大的改變袜漩。認(rèn)為“批判性思考是一項(xiàng)重要的技能，其教育應(yīng)當(dāng)予以重視”已不再是一個(gè)小眾觀點(diǎn)了湾碎。成百上千的人呼吁增加批判性思考到現(xiàn)有課程里宙攻，甚至要求創(chuàng)建思考方面的特殊課程。幾乎沒人同意新世紀(jì)的挑戰(zhàn)需要這么一種“可行進(jìn)至超越直覺到清晰介褥、公正座掘、解決批判性問題并作出決定”的思想，柔滔。

prominence 英音 /'pr?m?n?ns/ 美音 /'prɑm?n?ns/ n. 聲望, 杰出,突出;重要;要事
** millennium ** 英音 /m?'len??m/ 美音 /m??l?ni?m/
n. 一千年,千年期;太平盛世

Features of This Edition

This edition of Beyond Feelings retains the basic organization of previous editions. The first section explains the psychological, philosophical, and social context in which critical thinking takes place and describes the habits and attitudes that enhance such thinking. The second section helps students recognize and overcome common errors in thinking. The third section provides a step-by-step strategy for dealing with issues.

譯文：

該版本的特征

這個(gè)版本的【超越直覺】保留了之前版本的基本構(gòu)架溢陪。
第一部分解釋了批判性思考產(chǎn)生的心理學(xué)、哲學(xué)以及社會(huì)學(xué)環(huán)境睛廊；同時(shí)描述了加強(qiáng)這種思考的習(xí)慣和態(tài)度形真。
第二部分幫助學(xué)生意識(shí)并克服在思考中的一般錯(cuò)誤。
第三部分提供了一個(gè)處理棘手問題的攻略超全。

Within the overall design, however, I have made a number of changes, most in response to the helpful suggestions of reviewers.

In Chapter 1, a new section—“The Influence of Ideas”has been added.
In Chapter 3, a new section—“Understanding Cause and Effect”has been added.
In Chapter 15, new examples of the value of observation have been added.
In Chapter 17, the subsection“Evaluate your information sources”has been expanded.
A number of new “Difference of Opinion” exercises have been added.

譯文：
然而咆霜，在整本書的布局中邓馒，我做了一些改變，大部分是出于對(duì)評(píng)論者的有用建議的回應(yīng)蛾坯。
第一章光酣， 新加了【思想的影響】這一節(jié)。
第三章脉课， 新加了【理解因果】這一節(jié)救军。
第十五章，新加了【觀察的價(jià)值】的實(shí)例倘零。
第十七章唱遭，拓展了【評(píng)估你的信息源】的字節(jié)辆它。
還加了不少關(guān)于新的【不同意見】的練習(xí)。

As in the past, I have attempted to follow George Orwell’s sage advice: “Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.” This is not always easy. When logicians are taught terms such as **argumentum ad hominem, non sequitur, and “affirming the consequent,” ** they naturally want to use them. Arguments for doing so urge themselves upon us: for example, “These are the most precise terms. Don’t join the ranks of the coddlers and deprive students of them.” In weak moments I succumb to this appeal. (Until the previous edition, for example, I included the term enthymeme. Mea culpa . . . there I go again.) But is the precision of such terms the real reason for my wanting to use them? Is it not possible that we professors enjoy parading our knowledge or that we are reluctant to spare our students the struggle we were forced to undergo (“We suffered, so they should too”)? It seems to me that modern culture already provides too many impediments to critical thinking for us to add more.

譯文：
同過去一樣歉嗓，我試圖接受George Orwell給的明智建議——“如果你可以想到等效的日常英語詞匯就不要用外來詞匯疚顷、科學(xué)詞匯或術(shù)語〕就牵”這并非一件容易的事情。當(dāng)邏輯學(xué)家被教會(huì)了argumentum ad hominem, non sequitur, affirming the consequent，諸如此類的術(shù)語時(shí)虏辫，他們會(huì)自然而然地想要去用它們。這些深入骨髓的論據(jù)總會(huì)把它們強(qiáng)加給我們：比如“這些是最簡(jiǎn)潔的術(shù)語锈拨。不要成為嬌聲慣養(yǎng)的一員砌庄，并剝奪他們的學(xué)生∞仁啵”在意志力薄弱的時(shí)候娄昆，我會(huì)屈服于這些呼吁。（例如缝彬，直到上一個(gè)版本萌焰，我還應(yīng)用了術(shù)語enthymeme.這是我的過失，又用了谷浅。）
但我用它們是因?yàn)檫@些術(shù)語的精準(zhǔn)性嗎扒俯？
沒有可能是因?yàn)槲覀兘淌谙硎莒乓R(shí)或不愿讓學(xué)生免受我們當(dāng)年被迫承受的掙扎？（我們受過一疯，所以他們也應(yīng)當(dāng)承受）撼玄？
在我看來現(xiàn)代文化已經(jīng)給了在批判性思考方面給了我們太多阻礙，而不能繼續(xù)再增加了墩邀。

疑難雜句：
Arguments for doing so urge themselves upon us: for example, “These are the most precise terms. Don’t join the ranks of the coddlers and deprive students of them.
** succumb** 英 [s?'k?m] 美 [s? ?'k?m] vi. 屈服掌猛；死；被壓垮
mea culpa 英 ['mi:?'k?lp?] 我應(yīng)負(fù)的責(zé)任眉睹；我的過失
parade 英 [p?'re?d] 美 [p?'red]
n. 游行荔茬；閱兵废膘；炫耀；行進(jìn)兔院；閱兵場(chǎng)v. 游行殖卑；炫耀；列隊(duì)行進(jìn)
spare sb. sth.使某人幸免于……
** It seems to me ** 在我看來

Is it possible to carry this plain language commitment too far? Yes, and some will think I have done so in avoiding the term inferences and speaking instead of conclusions. But I respectfully disagree. Lexicographers point out that the distinction between these terms is extremely subtle, so it seems more reasonable not to devote time to it. Also, I avoid using the term values whenever possible for a somewhat different reason. The word value is so associated with relativism that its use in this context can undermine the crucial idea that arguments differ in quality. For many students, the word value triggers the thought, “Everyone has a right to his or her values; mine are right for me, and though they may need ‘clarification’ from time to time, they are never to be questioned.” This thought impedes critical thinking.

譯文：
有可能恪守這種平白語言的承諾到很遠(yuǎn)處嗎坊萝？
是孵稽，而且有人認(rèn)為我在避免術(shù)語推理及用說代替結(jié)論方面這么做了；但恕難同意十偶。
詞典學(xué)家指出這些術(shù)語之間的差別是很微小的菩鲜，所以不用它們似乎更為合理。同樣惦积，任何可能的時(shí)候會(huì)因?yàn)橐恍┎煌睦碛山有＃視?huì)避免使用術(shù)語values（價(jià)值觀）. Value 在相對(duì)論情境中使用會(huì)削弱批判性思維，它和相對(duì)論關(guān)聯(lián)如此之大狮崩，以至論據(jù)質(zhì)量上是存在差異蛛勉。對(duì)于許多學(xué)生來說，value這個(gè)詞是會(huì)觸發(fā)這么一個(gè)想法“每一個(gè)人都有一個(gè)價(jià)值觀睦柴；對(duì)我自己而言我的是正確的诽凌，盡管它們可能需要不時(shí)澄清，但從來無需置疑”坦敌。這種想法會(huì)阻礙批判性思考侣诵。

疑難雜句：
Is it possible to carry this plain language commitment too far?
The word value is so associated with relativism that its use in this context can undermine the crucial idea that arguments differ in quality.

** lexicographer** 英 [,leks?'k?gr?f?] 美 [,l?ks?'kɑɡr?f?] n. 詞典編纂者
** relativism** 英 ['rel?t?v?z(?)m] 美 ['r?l?t?v?z?m] n. 相對(duì)主義；相對(duì)論

Acknowledgments

I wish to express my appreciation to all those who contributed to the preparation of this edition. Special thanks to those who reviewed the manuscript:

Anna Villegas, San Joaquin Delta College;
Aimee Bissonette, Inver Hills Community College;
James Kruser, Alfred State College;
Sue Crowson, Del Mar College;
Erin Murphy, University of Kentucky;
Adrian Patten, University of Cincinnati;
Dedaimia Storrs Whitney, Franklin College;
Lisa Weisman-Davlantes, California State–Fullerton;
Geoffrey Phillip Bellah, Orange Coast College;
Karen Hoffman, Hood College;
Aimee Ross-Kilroy, Loyola Marymount University;
Deanna Davis, College of the Canyons

I am also grateful to John Augustine, Delta College; Lori Ebert, International Institute of the Americas; John Garcia, Cerro Coso Community College; Michael Small, Shasta College; Joel Brouwer, Montcalm Community College; Cynthia Gobatie, Riverside Community College; Anne Benvennti, Cerro Coso College; Fred Heifner Jr., Cumberland University; and Phyllis Toy, University of Southern Indiana.

譯文：

致謝

我想對(duì)所有為這次出版做出貢獻(xiàn)的人表示感激狱窘，尤其要感謝這些修訂者：
Anna Villegas, San Joaquin Delta College;
Aimee Bissonette, Inver Hills Community College;
James Kruser, Alfred State College;
Sue Crowson, Del Mar College;
Erin Murphy, University of Kentucky;
Adrian Patten, University of Cincinnati;
Dedaimia Storrs Whitney, Franklin College;
Lisa Weisman-Davlantes, California State–Fullerton;
Geoffrey Phillip Bellah, Orange Coast College;
Karen Hoffman, Hood College;
Aimee Ross-Kilroy, Loyola Marymount University;
Deanna Davis, College of the Canyons

我同樣也非常感謝以下學(xué)者的付出：
John Augustine, Delta College;
Lori Ebert, International Institute of the Americas;
John Garcia, Cerro Coso Community College;
Michael Small, Shasta College;
Joel Brouwer, Montcalm Community College;
Cynthia Gobatie, Riverside Community College;
Anne Benvennti, Cerro Coso College;
Fred Heifner Jr., Cumberland University;
Phyllis Toy, University of Southern Indiana.