剑桥雅思5 Test 1阅读Passage 2原文翻译 Nature or Nurture 服从实验
剑桥雅思5第一套题目阅读第二篇文章介绍了历史上某个著名的关于服从的心理学实验。文章分为八个自然段，前三段介绍实验过程，中间两段介绍大家的预测与结果的巨大差异，最后三段说明对此差异的一些解释。下面让我们看看具体每一段的翻译。
点击查看这篇雅思阅读中需要大家掌握的重点词汇，以及题目对应的答案解析：
雅思真题阅读词汇 剑桥雅思5 test 1 passage 2 心理学实验
剑桥雅思5 Test 1阅读Passage 2答案解析 Nature or Nurture 心理学实验
剑桥雅思5 Test 1 Passage 2阅读原文翻译
自然段A
A few years ago, in one of the most fascinating and disturbing experiments in behavioural psychology, Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life for their willingness to obey instructions given by a ‘leader’ in a situation in which the subjects might feel a personal distaste for the actions they were called upon to perform. Specifically, Milgram told each volunteer ‘teacher-subject’ that the experiment was in the noble cause of education, and was designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils’ ability to learn.
几年前，耶鲁大学的斯坦利·米尔格拉姆（Stanley Milgram）在行为心理学最令人着迷和烦恼的实验之一中，对40名来自各行各业的受试者进行了测试，以了解他们在特定情景下是否愿意服从“领导者”的指示。该情境中，他们可能对自己被要求所做的事情感到厌恶。米尔格拉姆特意告诉每个志愿者“老师-受试者”，该实验是出于崇高的教育目的，旨在测试惩罚学生的错误是否会对学生的学习能力产生积极影响。
自然段B
Milgram’s experimental set-up involved placing the teacher-subject before a panel of thirty switches with labels ranging from ‘15 volts of electricity (slight shock)’ to ‘450 volts (danger – severe shock)’ in steps of 15 volts each. The teacher-subject was told that whenever the pupil gave the wrong answer to a question, a shock was to be administered, beginning at the lowest level and increasing in severity with each successive wrong answer. The supposed ‘pupil’ was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks by emitting a spectrum of groans, screams and writhings together with an assortment of statements and expletives denouncing both the experiment and the experimenter. Milgram told the teacher-subject to ignore the reactions of the pupil, and to administer whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment.
米尔格拉姆（Milgram）的实验设置如下：将充当教师的志愿者放置在由30个开关组成的面板之前，每个开关的标签从“ 15伏特（轻微电击）到450伏特（危险-严重电击）”，每步15伏。老师被告知，每当学生对一个问题给出错误的答案时，他们要对其实行电击。电击文章来自老烤鸭雅思从最低水平开始，随着连续回答错误而加大电量。“学生”其实是现实中的一名演员，米尔格拉姆雇他来模拟受到电击后的反应。他会呻吟，尖叫，扭曲身体，并用各种各样的词汇咒骂该实验和实验者。米尔格拉姆告诉老师忽略学生的反应，严格按照实验对当下情景的规定实行电击，而不管其当量如何。
自然段C
As the experiment unfolded, the pupil would deliberately give the wrong answers to questions posed by the teacher, thereby bringing on various electrical punishments, even up to the danger level of 300 volts and beyond. Many of the teacher-subjects balked at administering the higher levels of punishment, and turned to Milgram with questioning looks and/or complaints about continuing the experiment. In these situations, Milgram calmly explained that the teacher-subject was to ignore the pupil’s cries for mercy and carry on with the experiment. If the subject was still reluctant to proceed, Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end. His final argument was, ‘You have no other choice. You must go on.’ What Milgram was trying to discover was the number of teacher-subjects who would be willing to administer the highest levels of shock, even in the face of strong personal and moral revulsion against the rules and conditions of the experiment.
随着实验的进行，学生会故意对老师提出的问题给出错误的答案，从而带来各种电击，甚至达到危险的300伏以及更高的水平。许多充当老师的实验对象执行更高级别的惩罚犹豫不决，带着疑问的表情看向米尔格拉姆，或者抱怨继续执行实验。在这种情况下，米尔格拉姆平静地解释说，老师应该忽略学生的求情，并继续进行实验。如果受试者仍然不愿继续，米尔格拉姆会说，为了实验能够成功，从头到尾遵守程序非常重要。他的最后会说：“你别无选择。你必须继续”。米尔格拉姆试图发现的是，即使面对个人和道德上对实验规则的强烈反感，有多少充当老师的实验对象愿意释放最高级别的电击。
自然段D
Prior to carrying out the experiment, Milgram explained his idea to a group of 39 psychiatrists and asked them to predict the average percentage of people in an ordinary population who would be willing to administer the highest shock level of 450 volts. The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists felt that ‘most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts’ and they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts. Furthermore, they thought that only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1,000 would give the highest shock of 450 volts.
在进行实验之前，米尔格拉姆向一组39位精神科医生解释了他的想法，并要求他们预测愿意释放450伏最高电击水平的人在普通人群所占的平均比例。压倒性的共识是，几乎所有充当老师的实验对象都会拒绝服从实验者。精神科医生认为“大多数受试者的电压不会超过150伏”，他们进一步预计只有4％的人会愿意将电压会升至300伏。此外，他们认为1000个人中才会有一个疯子愿意释放450伏的最高电击。
自然段E
What were the actual results? Well, over 60 per cent of the teacher-subjects continued to obey Milgram up to the 450-volt limit! In repetitions of the experiment in other countries, the percentage of obedient teacher-subjects was even higher, reaching 85 per cent in one country. How can we possibly account for this vast discrepancy between what calm, rational, knowledgeable people predict in the comfort of their study and what pressured, flustered, but cooperative ‘teachers’ actually do in the laboratory of real life?
实际结果是什么？好吧，超过60％的受试者继续服从米尔格拉姆（Milgram）将电压升至450伏的极限！在其他国家的重复实验中，遵从指令的受试者的比例甚至更高，在一个国家中达到了85％。我们该如何解释这种冷静，理性，有知识的人们在他们舒适的书房中所做出的预测，与在现实的实验室中受到压迫，慌张但合作的“老师们”实际行为之间的巨大差异？
自然段F
One’s first inclination might be to argue that there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment, and that Milgram’s teacher-subjects were just following a genetic need to discharge this pent-up primal urge onto the pupil by administering the electrical shock. A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors in their struggle against the hardships of life on the plains and in the caves, ultimately finding its way into our genetic make-up as a remnant of our ancient animal ways.
一个人可能一开始倾向于争辩，实验一定激活了某种内在的动物侵略本能。而米尔格拉姆的实验对象只是遵循基因的需要，将这种压抑的原始冲动通过实行电击传递给学生。现代核心社会生物学家甚至可能声称这种侵略性的本能是作为一种有利特质进化出来的。在我们的祖先在平原上和山洞里与艰难生活斗争时，它具有生存价值，并最终作为我们古代动物生活方式的残余而进入我们的基因结构中。
自然段G
An alternative to this notion of genetic programming is to see the teacher-subjects’ actions as a result of the social environment under which the experiment was carried out. As Milgram himself pointed out, ‘Most subjects in the experiment see their behaviour in a larger context that is benevolent and useful to society – the pursuit of scientific truth. The psychological laboratory has a strong claim to legitimacy and evokes trust and confidence in those who perform there. An action such as shocking a victim, which in isolation appears evil, acquires a completely different meaning when placed in this setting.’
遗传编码概念的另一种解释是，将充当教师的实验对象的行为视为进行实验的社会环境的结果。正如米尔格拉姆本人指出的那样：“实验中的大多数受试者将他们的行为放在一个对社会有益和有用的更大环境中看待-追求科学真理。心理实验室本身具有强烈的合法性，并激发在其中行动的人们的信任和信心。单独看起来很邪恶的行为，例如电击受害者，置于此环境中时则会获得完全不同的含义。”
自然段H
Thus, in this explanation the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties like loyalty, self-sacrifice and discipline to the service of malevolent systems of authority.
因此，在这种解释中，实验对象将其独特的人格，以及个人和道德准则与更大的制度结构相结合，从而将忠诚，自我牺牲和纪律等个人特质屈服于恶意的权威系统。
自然段I
Here we have two radically different explanations for why so many teacher-subjects were willing to forgo their sense of personal responsibility for the sake of an institutional authority figure. The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible. This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology – to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates, or at least strongly biases, the interaction of animals and humans with their environment, that is, their behaviour. Put another way, sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour.
这样一来，我们就有了两种截然不同的解释，说明为什么这么多的实验对象为了机构权威而愿意放弃他们的个人责任感。对于生物学家，心理学家和人类学家来说，问题是要找出这两种极端解释中哪一个更合理。这在本质上是现代社会生物学的问题-发现基因编码的支配程度，或至少是强烈的偏见，动物和人类与环境的相互作用，也就是他们的行为。换句话说，社会生物学与阐明所有行为的生物基础有关。
剑桥雅思5 Test 1阅读Passage 1原文翻译 约翰逊的字典 Johnson’s Dictionary
剑桥雅思5 Test 1阅读Passage 3原文翻译 环境问题的真相 The truth about the environment
