Text B This Is Why the Boss Will Crush All Your Go...

Text B This Is Why the Boss Will Crush All Your Good Ideas

Simon Constable

Change is hard.Getting a great plan past the boss's desk is even harder.

Surely you've heard the plea from on high at your company:we want more innovation,from everyone at every level.Your boss might even agree with the sentiment—because,of course,who doesn't like innovation?It's good for everyone,right?

Yet when it comes to innovating at your job it might be better to lower your expectations—and then some.Your idea is far more likely to die on your boss's desk than it is to reach the CEO.

It's not that top managers don't want new ideas.Rather,it's the people around you—your colleagues,your manager—who are unlikely to bend toward change.Ideas are the enemy

Today,big companies that don't innovate face extinction.“Companies are almost forced to say that they are changing these days,”says Lynn Isabella,professor of organisational behaviour at the University of Virginia Darden School of Business in the US.“There is a bit of keeping up with the Joneses.”Yes,even companies succumb to social pressure.

Lower your expectations for how quickly your ideas will be accepted.They're more likely to be tossed aside.(Credit:Alamy)

But,“it's not organisations that resist change;people resist,”says Isabella.“The people have to see what's in it for them.”

None of this is to say you won't get your new idea accepted,but the idea alone is almost less important than how you get people to buy into it,she explains.Put another way,how you frame the idea matters more.

It boils down to some key questions that the people whom you pitch your ideas to will ask themselves,Isabella says.For instance,what does this innovation mean for me personally?More precisely:will it be more challenging,or will it lead to more career opportunities?Second,what will it mean for my job?Will I get fired?More broadly,will it be worth it,or was it worth it?That last one is crucial,because we all know companies come with a history of ideas to make changes—and at least some of them did not work out so well.

Unfortunately,too often the answers to these questions don't stack up in favour of the innovation,Isabella says.Hence the people who need to buy in don't push for change.

But then it gets worse,history tells us.

“The innovator makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old order,and only lukewarm support is forthcoming from those who would prosper under the new,”says Niccolo Machiavelli,advisor to the rich and powerful in 15th and 16th Century Italy.“Their support is lukewarm…partly because men are generally incredulous,never really trusting new things unless they have tested them by experience.”Now,now,now,not later

That's a fairly broad—and still relevant—take on why new ideas get killed in almost any workplace.But there are some specific ones as well.

One typical problem usually arrives as a corporation grows.

Your idea could get wrapped up in red tape.(Credit:Alamy)

“The focus of a business starts to shift from long-term thinking and the focus is on next-quarter earnings,”says George Deeb,managing partner at consulting company Red Rocket Ventures.“The moment you focus on short-term profits,and not long-term revenues,you put handcuffs on innovation.”

Imagine you have an incredible idea that would cost $10m to get going,but has the potential to generate $1bn in future profits.The possible hundred-fold return might make it sound like a chance worth taking,but the immediate problem becomes explaining away the $10m shortfall in quarterly profits.

“The leaders don't want to put that investment into play,”says Deeb.“They would rather focus their efforts on immediate revenues.”

He contrasts that attitude,which is commonplace,with Amazon's modus operandi.Jeff Bezos,Amazon's founder,has consistently managed investor expectations to focus away from quarterly earnings announcements and towards the longer term.

Innovation is something companies say they want,but in reality,change is often rejected.(Credit:Alamy)

Deeb points out the massive changes that retail giant Amazon has gone through since starting as an online bookseller in the 1990s.It now offers cloud computing services,warehousing,as well as streaming content.“All those initiatives are being driven by the employees,”he says.“I don't think Jeff Bezos is doing it all by himself.”

Perhaps even more telling is that Amazon was prepared to launch products that failed.Long gone experiments include its Fire phone,its Wallet,and its former daily deals site Amazon local.

All are now history.

That litany of now-dead offerings shows a willingness to venture into uncertain projects where the outcome is far from certain.In other words,it means that Amazon accepts risk taking.

Innovators need not apply

But,there's another issue—and it goes to some of the sameness you probably see around you at work.

“Corporations hire bright folks,but they don't hire risk takers,”says Joan Adams,founder of Pierian Consulting.“[They]hire folks who are like them.”So if a manager is not a risk-taker,he's likely to hire another person who doesn't take risks.“And his manager's boss?Same story,”she says.

Then there are plain old politics at play.

“Sometimes people just fail to recognise good work because of political considerations,”says Steven Danley,co-author of the book Management Diseases and Disorders.“If someone isn't liked within an organisation,[then]you know if you take it up to the top that the idea will be killed.”

The history of crushed ideas is long.(Credit:Alamy)

How many managers would forward an idea that they know in advance will be shot down?So,even if your idea has game-changing potential,if you're not liked somewhere up the chain—even for no good reason—your great idea gets killed.

Then there is the matter of competence.Some people are not smart enough or skilled enough to tell whether or not a new idea is a good one,says Danley.But beware,we are all guilty of that at times,especially when the innovation is simply too radical.

The less-stuck factor

However,there's actually some good news in all of this innovation malaise.

“There is an entire industry made up of people who don't think with a corporate mind-set,”says Pierian's Adams.“Every year,high-priced consultants—like me—help companies become a little less stuck on doing the‘same old,same old’at great expense.”

So,it could be you're just on the wrong side of the desk—innovation from the outside is lucrative,and from the success of consultancies like Pieran,much easier for the bosses to take on board.

(1,107words)

Notes

1.Simon Constable,author,broadcaster,journalist,commentator,speaker,is a fellow at the Johns Hopkins Institute for Applied Economics,Global Health and the Study of Business Enterprise.His first book,The WSJ Guide to the 50 Economic Indicators that Really Matter,which he co-authored with Robert E.Wright,was an economics category winner in the 2012 Small Business Book Awards at Small Business Trends.It has sold over 80,000 copies in multiple languages.This essay was published by BBC on 28 February 2017.

2.Darden School of Business is the graduate business school associated with the University of Virginia in Charlottesville,Virginia.The Darden School offers MBA,PhD.and Executive Education programs.The School was founded in 1955 and is named after Colgate Whitehead Darden,Jr.,a former Democratic congressman,governor of Virginia,and former president of the University of Virginia.Darden is on the grounds of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville.

3.Niccolo Machiavelli(1469—1527),or more formally Niccolo di Bernardo dei Machiavelli,was a Florentine Renaissance historian,politician,diplomat,philosopher,humanist,and writer.He has often been called the founder of modern political science.He was for many years a senior official in the Florentine Republic,with responsibilities in diplomatic and military affairs.He also wrote comedies,carnival songs,and poetry.

4.Red tape is an idiom that refers to excessive regulation or rigid conformity to formal rules that is considered redundant or bureaucratic and hinders or prevents action or decision-making.It is usually applied to governments,corporations,and other large organizations.

5.Modus operandi(often shortened to M.O.)is someone's habits of working,particularly in the context of business or criminal investigations,but also more generally.It is a Latin phrase,approximately translated as method or mode of operation.

6.Jeff Bezos(born January 12,1964)is an American technology and retail entrepreneur and investor who is best known as the founder,chairman,and chief executive officer of Amazon.com,which is the world's largest online shopping retailer.The company began as an Internet merchant of books and expanded to a wide variety of products and services,most recently video streaming and audio streaming.Amazon.com is currently the world's largest Internet sales company on the World Wide Web.

7.Amazon is an American electronic commerce and cloud computing company that was founded on July 5,1994,by Jeff Bezos and is based in Seattle,Washington.It is the largest Internet-based retailer in the world by total sales and market capitalization.Amazon.com started as an online bookstore,later diversifying to sell DVDs,Blu-rays,CDs,video downloads/streaming,MP3 downloads/streaming,audiobook downloads/streaming,software,video games,electronics,apparel,furniture,food,toys and jewelry.The company also produces consumer electronics—notably,Kindlee-readers,Firetablets,Fire TV and the Echo—and is the world's largest provider of cloud infrastructure services(IaaS and PaaS).Amazon also sells certain lowend products like USB cables under its in-house brand AmazonBasics.

8.Fire phone was a 3D-enabled smartphone developed by Amazon.com and manufactured by Foxconn.It was announced on June 18,2014,and marked Amazon's first foray into the smartphone market,following the success of the Kindle Fire.It was available for pre-order on the day it was announced.In the United States,it launched as an AT&T exclusive on July 25.

汉译英常用技巧

在汉译英的实践中,译者除了要考虑翻译的共性问题之外,还要针对汉语有别于英语的具体特点,在准确理解原文的基础上,在词汇和句法结构两个层次上进行相应处理。

词的增删

为了保证译文语法结构的完整和语义的明晰,往往需要在译文中增补一些原文没有的词语。

要有把握,就要有准备,而且要有充分的准备。

To ensure success,one must be prepared,and fully prepared.(增补代词主语)

把这些故事看完以后,用你自己的话讲一遍。

After you have read these stories,tell them in your own words.(增补代词宾语)

她用手蒙住脸,好像是为了保护眼睛。

She covered her face with her hands,as if to protect her eyes.(增补物主代词)

虚心使人进步,骄傲使人落后。

Modesty helps one go forward,whereas conceit makes one lay behind.(增补连词)

我们应当逐步消灭城乡差别。

We should gradually eliminate the differences between town and country.(增补介词)

中国的发展离不开世界。

China cannot develop independently of the rest of the world.(增补暗含而未言明的名词)

与词的增译相反,对原文中那些翻译后在译文中可有可无甚至多余的词,往往需要加以省略,才能使译文更加明白畅达。

我们必须培养分析问题、解决问题的能力。

We must cultivate the ability to analyze and solve problems.(删减可省略的重复词语)

美国人总是在迁居,他们从美国的一个地区迁往另一个地区,从一座城市迁往另一座城市,从农村迁往城市,从市区迁往郊区。

The American people are always on the move—from one part of the country to another,from one city to another,from farm to city,from the city to the suburbs.(删减可省略的重复词语)

她把自己的一生献给了儿童福利事业。

She has devoted her whole life to the welfare of the children.(删减范畴词)

她连续讲了两个小时的法语,没有出现错误。

She has been talking in French for two hours without any mistake.(删减动词)

为了保护国家安全,维护民族统一,我们必须不断增强国防实力。

We must build up our defense capability with a view to safeguarding our state security and national unification.(删减汉语意义重复的词语)

词类转换

词类转换也是汉译英中的一个重要方法,将汉语中属于某些词类的词语恰当地译成英语中的另一些词类,可以使译文更加符合英语习惯,避免生硬累赘。

绝不允许违反这个规则。

No violation of this principle can be tolerated.(动词译成名词)

由于不满足于现有的成就,他辞职去国外进修。

Not content with his present achievements,he quit his job and went abroad for further study.(动词译成形容词)

他们不顾所有困难和挫折,坚持做完了这个项目。

They carried the project through in spite of all difficulties and setbacks.(动词译成介词词组)

街上的一切逐渐消失在灰暗的暮色里。

Everything was gradually disappearing into the pall of grey.

该厂产品的主要特点是工艺精湛,经久耐用。

The products of this factory are chiefly characterized by their fine workmanship and durability.(名词译成动词)

汉语主题句

汉语的句法结构某些独有的特点,需要在英译时加以注意。比较突出的是,英语中独立完整的句子都属于主谓结构,而汉语句子中居于相当于英语主语位置的成分,有些是英语句法意义上的主语,很多则并不是。

在前一种情况中,有些汉语句子可以参照英语句法进行结构分析,但很多则不能,尤其是其主语不像在英语中那样必须是名词性结构,而其谓语也不一定是动词性质,可以是形容词、名词短语等;动词谓语又可能出现连动式、兼语式等结构;句中的宾语、定语、状语等其他成分的词性特征也经常并无定规。在英译时需要充分理解原文的意思之后,构造出英语句子的主谓结构,确定一个名词或名词性结构充当句子的主语,谓语部分注意使用与主语的性数相配合的动词的谓语形式。

在后一种情况中,居于句子主位的可能是时间、地点、工具、方式等成分,居于谓语位置的则是与之相关的描写、叙述、说明、判断等。这些句子与其用主谓结构去分析,不如称之为主题句,即将这些句子中居于首位的部分作为句子的主题对待,主题后面是对主题的描述、说明、判断等。在英译时,要确定句子的实质性主语,或添加形式主语来满足英语主谓结构的要求。

膝盖是大腿骨和小腿胫的连接处。

The knee is the joints where the thigh bone meets the large bone of the lower leg.

近年来翻转课堂成为国内外教育界关注的热点,但是国内的研究尚属探索阶段。

In recent years,research into the flipped classroom has become a major concern of educators at home and abroad,but it is still feeling its way in China.

上面这两个汉语句子的主谓结构大体可以参照英语主谓结构进行分析,翻译时基本顺译即可。

经济快速发展必须依靠科技和教育。

Rapid development of the economy must be based on science,technology and education.

解决中国人的吃饭问题,任务艰巨,困难不少。

China has had great difficulties in solving her problem with food provision.

改革开放胆子要大一些,敢于试验。

We should be bolder than before in conducting reform and opening to the outside and have the courage to experiment.

婚姻大事儿女们自有主意。

As for marriage,grown-up sons and daughters have minds of their own.

这件事你暂且保密。

You had better keep quiet about it for the time being.

这几句都属于主题句,第一例中的主题“经济快速发展”形式上是主谓结构,转换成“经济的快速发展”以成为英语句子的主语;第二例中的主题“解决中国人吃饭问题”形式上是动宾结构,后面突出的是这方面的困难,英译时稍加分析可知,解决中国人吃饭问题的主体还是中国自身,故添加China作为施动者,整个结构随之重组;第三例中的主题是“改革开放”,句子实质上是要说胆子要在什么问题上大一些,英译中处理成将“改革开放”置于“be bolder”的状语之中;与此相似,第四例中的主题是“婚姻大事”,实质上是说明儿女们在什么问题上自有主意,英译时“婚姻大事”也被处理成状语的一部分;最后一例中的主题“这件事”实质上是被要求“保密”的内容,英译时处理成介词宾语it。

墙角里有一只棕色的旅行箱。

There is a brown suitcase in the corner.

上个月发现了一个地下溶洞。

A Karst cave was found last month.

这两句中,处于主位的“墙角”和“上个月”实质上分别相当于地点和时间状语,英译时第一句处理成there be句,第二句使用英译的被动语态将“地下溶洞”变成“被发现”的主语。

无主句

汉语中有些既无主语也无主题的无主句,英译时往往要根据情况以不同的方式用英语主谓结构进行翻译。

除液化气之外,不可使用其他燃料。

No other fuel but liquefied gas is allowed.

要付五百块钱。

There is five hundred dollars to pay.

正是为了减少摩擦力才给机器部件上了油。

It is for the purpose of lessening friction that we oil the machine parts.

需要定期维修。

Regular maintenance is necessary.

务必把机器平稳放置。

Make sure that the machine is level.

据推测,这个项目将耗资两百万美元。

It is estimated that the project will cost 2,000,000 dollars.

为了满足英语句子主谓结构的要求,上面这些无主句分别使用被动式、there be句型、强调句型、主语加系动词加补语的结构、祈使句等不同的语态和句式、补出代词等方法来进行翻译。

连动式和兼语式的翻译

汉语中经常有两个或两个以上的动词连用,如果这些动词与同一主语发生主谓关系,就是连动式。连动式中的动词所表示的动作行为在顺序上不能变动,虽然之间没有关联词语,但在意义上却形成特定的关系,如目的与手段、原因与结果等。这就需要将连动式中的主要动词译成英语的谓语动词,而将其他动词译成不定式、分词、介词或介词词组。如果这些动词之间有动作行为的时间先后,则按其先后译成并列的谓语动词。

他站起来发言。

He stood up to deliver a speech.

他赶到车站发现火车已经开走了。

Arriving at the station,he found that the train had left.

他站在门口笑。

He stood at the door,grinning.

他回房间去取钥匙。

He went back to his room for the key.

他放下杯子站了起来。

He put down his glass and stood up.

汉语连用的两个动词中,如果前一个动词的宾语是后一个动词的主语,就构成兼语式。对于兼语式,翻译时往往可以处理成“主语+谓语+宾语+补语”,第二个动词译成不定式、介词短语、形容词、副词、分词等,充当宾语的补语。

我们都劝他戒烟。

We all advised him to give up smoking.

我们不能强迫人们接受某一学派。

We can't compel anyone to accept one particular school of thought.

他迫使对方处于守势。

He drove his opponent into a defensive position.

我们必须使房子保持清洁。

We must keep the room clean and tidy.

她叫你马上回去。

She wants you back home at once.

我们可以听见孩子们在外面玩。

We could hear the children at play outside.

or:We could hear the children playing outside.

Translation Exercises

A.Translate the following sentences into Chinese according to the tips given in the brackets.

1.接到你的来信,非常高兴。(增补代词主语)

2.谁都知道西部山区确实艰苦。(增补暗含的名词主语)

3.同学们在等我,我得走了。(增补连词)

4.她生动地描述了在英国的学习经历。(词类转换)

5.旅客登记须有证明本人身份的证件。(主题句)

6.去年发明了一种新的工艺。(主题句)

7.成败得失他不放在心上。(主题句)

8.据推测,该公司下个月就将在中国投资。(无主句)

9.他打开抽屉拿出一本字典。(连动式)

10.医生表扬这个护士有耐心。(兼语式)

B.Translate the following sentences from Text A into Chinese.

1.Harley Earl,legendary vehicle stylist for General Motors from 1927 through the end of the 1950s,revolutionised the design of mass-produced automobiles by thinking of the car as a work of art—or,at least,fashion—rather than a purely utilitarian product.

2.There are half a dozen companies that make plasticine clay suitable for full-scale design modelling(a few car companies make their own blends),and they deliver their product to design shops on flatbed trucks by the pallet-load.

3.The entire design process takes about a year,starting with concept sketches and working to delivery of what Dodge's Dehner calls a“toolable surface for the engineering team.”

4.The design remains flexible,though,with clay being smoothed on or scraped off until the final design is approved by corporate executives milling around in some secret interior courtyard.

5.Not a lot of future designers think about clay on their career path,according to Vanden Brink,so Ford sends recruiters to colleges and offers training internships.

Summary Writing

A summary is a shortened version of a text that highlights its key points.It restates only the main points of a text without giving examples or details,such as dates,numbers or statistics.

The ability to write an effective summary is a very important writing skill.There is often the need for you to briefly report a piece of writing to other people interested,or form a quick picture of the piece and identify the most important information for your own purposes.

A summary may be between one and three paragraphs,with from less than one hundred to three hundred words,depending on the length and complexity of the original essay and the intended audience and purpose.

While an abstract is to present the essential points of a larger writing of your own,mostly for academic purposes and in somewhat standard forms,a summary is a condensed version in your own words of something you have read.It records your understanding of a text and communicates it to other people.

When writing a summary,you will go through the following steps:

1.Read your material carefully in order to grasp the author's thesis,or main purpose.

2.Reread the material thoroughly.Identify and note down(in words,phrases and/or sentences)in your own words the major points.

3.Organize your notes into a coherent paragraph or paragraphs.

4.Check this summary against the article for accuracy and make sure of your spelling,grammar and punctuation.

A good summary should be brief yet complete.It demands accuracy as well as objectivity.Therefore be sure to include all the major points in the same order as they appear in the original,and leave all the examples or other supporting details out unless they are essential to an understanding of those points.Avoid direct quotations as well as simple rephrasing.Use author tags(Douglas/The author argues/finds/believes…that…)when necessary and refrain from making analyses of or comments on the original.The conclusion of your summary should be a restatement of the author's conclusion.

On certain occasions such as when the summary is written for other people,you should also include such essential publication information as the full title of the article or the book and the full name of the author.The mention of the name of the journal,the newspaper,etc.,where the article gets published,may or may not be necessary.

Examine the following examples.

Migration of the Caribou

Scientists are uncertain what starts caribou on their northward journey—knowledge that they have stored enough fat to carry them through,perhaps.They endure spring blizzards on their journeys and cross ice-choked rivers with great determination and a sure sense of bearing,but they also choose paths of least resistance over the land,often following in each other's tracks through deep snow.

Pregnant cows are normally in the lead;mature bulls may be as much as a month behind the cows,or never arrive at the calving grounds at all.By the end of their arduous journey the females are thin and tattered-looking.Behind them,in places where they have had to cross rivers in a stage of breakup,there may be the carcasses of hundreds of drowned and fatally injured animals.Their calving grounds,writes biologist George Calef,appear“bleak and inhospitable.Melt water lies in pools on the frozen ground,the land is often shrouded in fog,and the wind whistles unceasingly among the stunted plants and bare rocks.”The advantages of these dismal regions,however,are several.The number of predators is low,wolves having dropped away from the herds at more suitable locations for denning to the south.Food plants are plentiful.And these grounds either offer better protection from spring snowstorms or experience fewer storms overall than adjacent regions.

Most calves are born within a few days of each other,and calving occurs at least a month before swarms of emergent mosquitoes,blackflies,warble flies,and botflies embark on a harassment of the caribou that seems merciless to a human observer.If one were to think of events that typify arctic life—the surge of energy one feels with daily gains of ten or fifteen minutes of sunlight in the spring,or waking up one morning to find the ocean frozen—one would also include that feeling of relief that descends over a caribou herd when a wind comes up and puts hordes of weak-flying mosquitoes to the ground.

After calving,cows and their offspring join immature animals,barren cows,and the bulls in“postcalving”aggregations of 75,000 or more animals,their numbers stretching from horizon to horizon.They trek slowly south,breaking up into smaller herds.The first fall storms catch them in open country,and in the cold,snowy air these“gray shepherds of the tundra,”as the Alaskan poet John Haines calls them,“pass like islands of smoke.”They take shelter in the short timber of the taiga for the winter.

After the herds have gone,the calving grounds can seem like the most deserted places on earth,even if you can sense strongly that the caribou will be back next year.When they do return,hardly anything will have changed.A pile of caribou droppings may take thirty years to remineralize on the calving grounds.The carcass of a wolf-killed caribou may lie undisturbed for three or four years.Time pools in the stillness here and then dissipates.The country is emptied of movement.

(503 words)

A likely summary for this process analysis of the caribou migration may be as follows:

Caribou travel to the north despite many hardships.Pregnant cows usually head the herd and get food and shelter on the calving grounds they arrive at.After calving,they join the main bunch in a southward trek and spend the winter in the taiga.The next year they will get back to the calving grounds.

(55 words)

What Sherlock Holmes taught us about the mind

Soon after Andrew Lees embarked on his medical career at University College Hospital London,one of his superiors gave him a rather strange reading list.Rather than the usual fusty anatomical volumes,it included The Complete Sherlock Holmes.

What on earth could the fictional detective teach an aspiring neurologist?As it turns out,a good deal,as Lees recently wrote in a paper in Brain journal.Whatever your expertise,the insights provide a welcome lesson in the art of rational thinking.

As Lees points out,Holmes'creator Arthur Conan Doyle was a physician himself,and there is evidence that he modelled the character of Holmes on one of the leading doctors of the day,Joseph Bell of the Royal Edinburgh Infirmary.“I thought I would try my hand at writing a story where the hero would treat crime as Dr Bell treated disease,”Doyle recalled in a 1927interview.

Notice the details

But Lees suspects that as his stories developed,Conan Doyle may have also drawn some inspiration from other doctors,such as William Gowers,who wrote the Bible of Neurology.(Conan Doyle himself had specialised in neurodegenerative disease as a doctoral student,and he and Gowers had a mutual friend in the author Rudyard Kipling.)

Gowers often taught his students to begin their diagnosis from the moment a patient walked through the door,as seen in a record of one of his clinical demonstrations,later published as A Clinical Lecture on Silver and Syphilis:“Did you notice him as he came into the room?If you did not then you should have done so.One of the habits to be acquired and never omitted is to observe a patient as he enters the room;to note his aspect and his gait.If you did so,you would have seen that he seemed lame,and you may have been struck by that which must strike you now—an unusual tint of his face.”

It's remarkably similar to Holmes'habit of profiling each person he meets based on the scantest of clues,as reimagined in the BBC's remake of the classic stories:

In particular,it was the importance of the seemingly inconsequential that seems to inspire both men.“It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely the most important,”Conan Doyle wrote in A Case of Identity.

Both Gowers and Holmes also warned against letting your preconceptions fog your judgement.For both men,cool,unprejudiced observation was the order of the day.It is for this reason that Holmes chastises Watson in The Scandal of Bohemia:“You see,but you do not observe.The distinction is clear.”Or in the words of Gowers:“The method you should adopt is this:Whenever you find yourself in the presence of a case that is not familiar to you in all its detail forget for a time all your types and all your names.Deal with the case as one that has never been seen before,and work it out as a new problem sui generis,to be investigated as such.”

Occasionally,Gowers'real-life powers of observation appear to have rivalled Holmes'fictional hero.Consider his study of a man initially misdiagnosed with a psychological disturbance similar to hysteria:

“I looked casually at the bed-card and at once my eye was caught by the record of his occupation‘Painter’.I looked from the bed-card to his gums,and there I saw written in equally distinct characters the record of the effect of his occupation—in a conspicuous lead-line.”By simply using his eyes to see what others had missed,Gowers correctly inferred that the man was being poisoned by his pigments.

There are many other examples:how both men“reasoned backwards”,for instance,dissecting all the possible paths that may have led to a particular disease(in Gowers'case)or murder(in Holmes').This line of approach is perhaps best summarised as Holmes'most famous aphorism:“When you have eliminated the impossible,whatever remains,however improbable,must be the truth.”

But perhaps the most important lesson to be learned,from both Gowers and Holmes,is the value of recognising your errors.“Gentlemen—It is always pleasant to be right,but it is generally a much more useful thing to be wrong,”wrote Gowers,while Holmes admits,“I confess that I have been blind as a mole,but it is better to learn wisdom late than never to learn it at all.”

This humility is key in beating the“curse of expertise”that afflicts so many talented and intelligent people.Over the last few years,the cognitive neuroscientist Itiel Dror of University College London has documented many instances in which apparent experts in both medicine and forensic science have allowed their own biases to cloud their judgements—sometimes even in life or death situations.

Whatever the exact nature of Gowers'influence on Conan Doyle,Holmes'lessons today offer a larger lesson in the power of logical thought.Even the most advanced technology can never replace the powers of simple observation and rational deduction.As Lees says,the hospital“is still a crime scene”—and we still need the finest minds to solve those mysteries.As he found all those years ago,if you want to train your powers of deduction,you could do a lot worse than read(or reread)Sherlock Holmes.

(893 words)

This is itself a briefing of a published paper,and may be further boiled down to:

According to neurologist Andrew Lees,Sherlock Holmes,who is based on one or more doctors of Conan Doyle's time,teaches,like one of his possible prototypes William Gowers,us a lot in rational thinking,including the meticulous observation of details,an open-minded approach,backwards reasoning,and the importance of learning from mistakes.Reading Sherlock Holmes helps enhance our logical thinking.

(60 words)

Exercises

A.After carefully reading the following essay,write a summary for it.Be sure to include all the main points without going to much detail unless necessary.

Why it's dangerous to outsource our critical thinking to computers

The lack of transparency around the processes of Google's search engine has been a preoccupation among scholars since the company began.Long before Google expanded into self-driving cars,smartphones and ubiquitous email,the company was being asked to explain the principles and ideologies that determine how it presents information to us.And now,10 years later,the impact of reckless,subjective and inflammatory misinformation served up on the web is being felt like never before in the digital era.

Google responded to negative coverage this week by reluctantly acknowledging and then removing offensive autosuggest results for certain search results.Type“jews are”into Google,for example,and until now the site would autofill“jews are evil”before recommending links to several rightwing antisemitic hate sites.

That follows the misinformation debacle that was the US general election.When Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg addressed the issue,he admitted that structural issues lie at the heart of the problem:the site financially rewards the kind of sensationalism and fake news likely to spread rapidly through the social network regardless of its veracity or its impact.The site does not identify bad reporting,or even distinguish fake news from satire.

Facebook is now trying to solve a problem it helped create.Yet instead of using its vast resources to promote media literacy,or encouraging users to think critically and identify potential problems with what they read and share,Facebook is relying on developing algorithmic solutions that can rate the trustworthiness of content.

This approach could have detrimental,long-term social consequences.The scale and power with which Facebook operates means the site would effectively be training users to outsource their judgment to a computerised alternative.And it gives even less opportunity to encourage the kind of 21st-century digital skills—such as reflective judgment about how technology is shaping our beliefs and relationships—that we now see to be perilously lacking.

The engineered environments of Facebook,Google and the rest have increasingly discouraged us from engaging in an intellectually meaningful way.We,the masses,aren't stupid or lazy when we believe fake news;we're primed to continue believing what we're led to believe.

The networked info-media environment that has emerged in the past decade—of which Facebook is an important part—is a space that encourages people to accept what's presented to them without reflection or deliberation,especially if it appears surrounded by credible information or passed on from someone we trust.There's a powerful,implicit value in information shared between friends that Facebook exploits,but it accelerates the spread of misinformation as much as it does good content.

Every piece of information appears to be presented and assessed with equal weight,a New York Times article followed by some fake news about the pope,a funny dog video shared by a close friend next to a distressing,unsourced and unverified video of an injured child in some Middle East conflict.We have more information at our disposal than ever before,but we're paralyzed into passive complacency.We're being engineered to be passive,programmable people.

In the never-ending stream of comfortable,unchallenging personalized info-tainment there's little incentive to break off,to triangulate and fact-check with reliable and contrary sources.Actively choosing what might need investigating feels like too much effort,and even then a quick Google search of a questionable news story on Facebook may turn up a link to a rehashed version of the same fake story.

The“transaction costs”of leaving the site are high:switching gears is fiddly and takes time,and it's also far easier to passively accept what you see than to challenge it.Platforms overload us with information and encourage us to feed the machine with easy,speedy clicks.The media feeds our susceptibility to filter bubbles and capitalizes on contagious emotions such as anger.

It is crucial for a resilient democracy that we better understand how these powerful,ubiquitous websites are changing the way we think,interact and behave.Democracies don't simply depend on well-informed citizens—they require citizens to be capable of exerting thoughtful,independent judgment.

This capacity is a mental muscle;only repeated use makes it strong.And when we spend a long time in places that deliberately discourage critical thinking,we lose the opportunity to keep building that skill.

(714 words)

B.Find more passages or complete essays that interest you.Read them and exercise your ability to summarize.