懒笔记
2014年考研英语二真题 Section II Part A (3) Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?
Postgraduate · 来自 2014年考研英语二真题 · Section II Part A (3) · 阅读理解（四选一）

Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?

2014年考研英语二真题文章逐层精读

Big Think(《大思想》)2012年12月17日一篇题为Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?(我们能赢得与机器的竞赛吗?)的文章。

本页是 2014年考研英语二真题 Section II Part A (3) 文章的精读视角页——这篇议论文全文 391 词、6 段，CEFR 难度 C1（C1 级在考研英语二文章中占 77%），作者立场为「积极支持」；英文原文之外，本篇已有的 11 项精读维度逐项展开，其中能迁移到其他考研英语真题文章的判断方法（篇章结构、修辞、言外之意、作者态度、体裁速判）随各维度一并讲透。

精读最佳实践

本页解析里的段号（P1）都可以点——点一下，原文在顶部翻开并定位到该段，解析引用的原文同步标亮；合上原文，你还停在刚才读到的位置。点 P1 试试。

PASSAGE · 文章原文

6 段英文原文

以下为2014年考研英语二真题 Section II Part A (3) 的阅读理解（四选一）原文，共 6 段。左侧 P1–P6 是段落编号——本页全部解析（结构、逐段、修辞、自检题）都以它为坐标回指原文，点击解析里的段号，原文即在顶部翻开并定位到该段、引用的原文同步标亮；合上原文仍停在当前阅读位置。原文保持卷面形态，不带翻译与标注。

Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?

The concept of man versus machine is at least as old as the industrial revolution, but this phenomenon tends to be most acutely felt during economic downturns and fragile recoveries. And yet, it would be a mistake to think we are right now simply experiencing the painful side of a boom and bust cycle. Certain jobs have gone away for good, outmoded by machines. Since technology has such an insatiable appetite for eating up human jobs, this phenomenon will continue to restructure our economy in ways we cannot immediately foresee.

When there is rapid improvement in the price and performance of technology, jobs that were once thought to be immune from automation suddenly become threatened. This argument has attracted a lot of attention, via the success of the book Race Against the Machine, by Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, who both hail from MIT's Center for Digital Business.

This is a powerful argument, and a scary one. And yet, John Hagel, author of The Power of Pull and other books, says Brynjolfsson and McAfee miss the reason why these jobs are so vulnerable to technology in the first place.

Hagel says we have designed jobs in the U.S. that tend to be "tightly scripted" and "highly standardized" ones that leave no room for "individual initiative or creativity". In short, these are the types of jobs that machines can perform much better at than human beings. That is how we have put a giant target sign on the backs of American workers, Hagel says.

It's time to reinvent the formula for how work is conducted, since we are still relying on a very 20th century notion of work, Hagel says. In our rapidly changing economy, we more than ever need people in the workplace who can take initiative and exercise their imagination "to respond to unexpected events". That is not something machines are good at. They are designed to perform very predictable activities.

As Hagel notes, Brynjolfsson and McAfee indeed touched on this point in their book. We need to reframe race against the machine as race with the machine. In other words, we need to look at the ways in which machines can augment human labor rather than replace it. So then the problem is not really about technology, but rather, "how do we innovate our institutions and our work practices?"

PARAGRAPHS · 逐段精读

6 段逐段主旨与解读

逐段拆解2014年考研英语二真题 的这篇原文——每段给出英文段落主旨、段落标题与中文解读，并提炼一条「这段为什么这样读」的具体方法。

  1. P1

    Beyond Cyclical Job Loss

    Technological job loss is a lasting structural transformation, not a temporary economic cycle.

    本段承担全文的 problem framing 功能，它先确立 automation 导致岗位消失的严峻性。这样，后文讨论 jobs 为什么脆弱以及 work 如何重塑，才不是普通的技术担忧，而是对长期 structural change 的回应。

    抓住转折后的立场
  2. P2

    Automation's Expanding Reach

    Advancing technology is putting even previously secure jobs at risk of automation.

    本段具体化了首段的结构性危机，说明被技术取代的风险正在扩展到更多职业。它也引出 Brynjolfsson 和 McAfee 的观点，为下一段借 Hagel 进行 critique 和深化埋下对象。

    区分论点与例证
  3. P3

    Questioning the Root Cause

    Hagel challenges the prevailing automation argument by asking why jobs are vulnerable in the first place.

    本段是全文的关键转轴，它没有否认技术替代，而是重新界定真正需要解释的问题。正是这一转向，使后文能够论证 rigid jobs 才是脆弱性的根源，并自然推出改革工作方式的主张。

    从结果追问根因
  4. P4

    The Vulnerability of Scripted Work

    Rigid and standardized job design makes American workers especially vulnerable to machines.

    本段回答了第三段提出的 why，提供全文最核心的诊断：岗位的标准化设计制造了自动化风险。它直接支撑文章主旨中“问题不只是机器替代人，而是我们如何设计工作”的判断。

    串联岗位特征与后果
  5. P5

    Reinventing Human-Centered Work

    Work must be redesigned to rely on human initiative and imagination in unpredictable situations.

    本段把第四段的原因诊断转化为可执行的原则：既然标准化工作易被替代，就应让工作容纳 creativity 和 initiative。它为最后一段的 race with the machine 提供了能力基础和实践理由。

    定位改革方向
  6. P6

    From Competition to Collaboration

    The solution is to innovate work institutions so that humans work with machines rather than compete against them.

    本段收束全文并完整回应文章主旨，它承认 automation 的现实，却拒绝把技术当作唯一问题。作者最终把改革责任放在制度和工作实践上，提出以 augmentation 为目标的人机协作路径。

    抓住结论性改写
SELF CHECK · 段落自检题

5 道逐段细节自检题

针对2014年考研英语二真题这篇原文，每段配 1 道细节题（ 1 个正确项 + 5 个干扰项 ，由懒笔记精读引擎基于本段命制，非试卷原题）。 选项默认中性；点「显示答案与解析」展开正确项、解析与最快解法，现代浏览器会同步高亮正确选项。

  1. 第 1 段 定位词 technology employment

    What does the author suggest about the current impact of technology on employment?

    • A It is a short-term consequence of the latest economic downturn.
    • B It has mainly reduced the performance of workers in traditional industries.
    • C It is causing a lasting restructuring of employment rather than a merely cyclical loss of jobs.
    • D It affects only jobs that have already become technologically outdated.
    • E It can be fully predicted by examining past boom and bust cycles.
    • F It has temporarily slowed the recovery of the American economy.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：C

    正确项整合了 gone away for good 与 restructure our economy：lasting 对应不可逆性，restructuring 对应结构变化，rather than merely cyclical 则对应作者对 boom and bust cycle 解释的修正。其障碍在于使用概括性 paraphrase，而不是连续复现原文措辞。

    盯住转折后的岗位性质 时间最紧张时，直接在 第1段 扫描 employment 的同义表达 jobs，并重点读取 And yet、mistake、for good 等 direction markers。随后把选项按“周期性影响”与“结构性影响”二分，只在符合转折后判断的一组中确认正确项。

  2. 第 2 段 定位词 previously secure jobs automation

    According to the passage, why can previously secure jobs become vulnerable to automation?

    • A Because economic downturns make workers less willing to use new technology.
    • B Because the book Race Against the Machine has changed employers' hiring policies.
    • C Because jobs become highly standardized after workers leave MIT.
    • D Because rapid improvements in the price and performance of technology allow machines to threaten a wider range of jobs.
    • E Because automation is effective only when technology becomes more expensive.
    • F Because all jobs are equally immune from technological change.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：D

    正确项保留了原文的完整 cause-and-effect structure：rapid improvements in price and performance 是条件，原本被认为 immune 的工作变得 threatened 是结果。a wider range of jobs 是对受影响范围扩展的合理概括，未增加新的外部原因。

    截取状态反转前因 最快路径是在 第2段 利用 previously secure 与 vulnerable 寻找状态反转句，识别 once 和 become threatened 后，只读取其前面的 when 条件。随后将各选项的 Because 部分与该条件核对，选择完整保留技术变化条件的正确项。

  3. 第 3 段 定位词 Hagel main objection

    What is Hagel's main objection to Brynjolfsson and McAfee's argument?

    • A They exaggerate the financial success of their book.
    • B They deny that technology can improve in both price and performance.
    • C They underestimate the popularity of tightly scripted jobs.
    • D They are wrong to describe their argument as powerful and scary.
    • E They fail to explain why the affected jobs are vulnerable to technology in the first place.
    • F They give too much attention to individual initiative and creativity.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：E

    正确项等值改写了 miss the reason why these jobs are so vulnerable to technology in the first place。fail to explain 对应 miss the reason，affected jobs 对应 these jobs。in the first place 表明批评针对根本原因，而不是否认技术威胁本身。

    抓住遗漏动词后的缺口 在 第3段 用 Hagel 定位后，只抓取其后的评价动词 miss，再将 miss 后的宾语结构压缩为“被遗漏的解释对象”。能够完整填入“他们遗漏了什么”这一结构且不增加新信息的正确项，即为答案项。

  4. 第 4 段 定位词 rapidly changing economy quality

    What quality does Hagel consider especially necessary in the workplace of a rapidly changing economy?

    • A The willingness to perform highly predictable activities for machines.
    • B The ability to follow tightly scripted instructions without deviation.
    • C The expertise to reduce the price of digital technology.
    • D The discipline to preserve twentieth-century work practices.
    • E The capacity to make all workplace events predictable.
    • F The ability to take initiative and imaginatively respond to unexpected events.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：F

    正确项整合了 take initiative、exercise their imagination 和 respond to unexpected events。imaginatively 是对 exercise their imagination 的词形转换；unexpected events 保留了这种能力所针对的具体情境。

    锁定规范谓语后的动作串 在 第5段 直接抓 rapidly changing economy 后的 need people，忽略前面的历史铺垫，把其后连续动作归纳为一种面向意外情况的人类能力。将人改写成执行 predictable activities 或维持旧模式的选项可快速排除，剩余完整概括动作串的正确项即为答案。

  5. 第 6 段 定位词 race against the machine race with the machine

    What does the proposed shift from a race against the machine to a race with the machine emphasize?

    • A Using machines to augment human labor while reforming the institutions and practices that shape work.
    • B Preventing machines from replacing any form of human labor.
    • C Making technology the only problem institutions need to solve.
    • D Returning workers to tightly scripted jobs that machines cannot perform.
    • E Encouraging workers to compete individually for the same predictable tasks.
    • F Accepting that no innovation in work practices is possible.
    显示答案与解析 收起答案与解析

    正确答案：A

    正确项覆盖两个连续落点：machines 应 augment human labor rather than replace it，同时需要 innovate institutions and work practices。while 将人机协作与工作制度改革并列，准确概括结论段的完整主张。

    双箭头验选项 在 第6段 找到 race against 与 race with 后，直接提取两个方向转换：replace 转向 augment，technology 转向 institutions and work practices。检查选项是否同时符合两条转换，唯一双向一致的正确项即为答案。

STRUCTURE · 篇章结构

6 个意群的议论文骨架

按议论文 的行文骨架切分意群，每个意群标注它覆盖的段落与对主旨的作用——逐段读完后回到这里俯瞰全篇，能看清作者为什么按这个顺序行文。

  1. 引言 P1

    技术自动化对就业的持续冲击

    这个 opening paragraph 通过 man versus machine 的 concept 引出了 automation 对 jobs 的威胁，强调这不是简单的 economic cycle，而是 technology 正在 permanently restructure 我们的 economy，certain jobs 已经 gone away for good，被 machines outmoded 了。

    作为 introduction，这个 paragraph 建立了 automation threat 的 context，为后文关于 how we design jobs 和 how to work with machines 的 discussion 做了铺垫，点明 technology's insatiable appetite 是个 ongoing phenomenon。

    提出技术取代工作的现象
  2. 分论点 P2

    技术进步威胁论的流行观点

    这个 paragraph 引入了 Brynjolfsson 和 McAfee 的 argument，即 rapid improvement in technology 的 price and performance 让 once immune jobs 突然 become threatened，通过 cite 他们的 book 'Race Against the Machine' 来 present 一个 widely accepted view about automation。

    作为 supporting point，这个 unit 引入了 authoritative source 来 establish 'machines replacing humans' 这个 conventional wisdom，为下文 Hagel 的 counter-argument 搭建了 target，形成 'common view vs. deeper insight' 的 argumentative structure。

    引述主流技术威胁论
  3. 分论点 P3

    问题诊断的视角转换

    这个 transitional paragraph 通过 'And yet' 制造 contrast，引入 John Hagel 的 perspective，指出 Brynjolfsson and McAfee 虽然 argument powerful，但 miss the real reason why jobs are vulnerable，从而 shift focus from 'technology threat' 到 'job design flaw'。

    作为 pivotal point，这个 paragraph 完成了从 'symptom'（automation）到 'root cause'（job design）的 argumentative shift，它用 contrasting structure 来 signal 文章的 core thesis is about to emerge，为后续 elaborate Hagel's insight 做了 logical transition。

    转向工作设计缺陷
  4. 分论点 P4

    工作设计缺陷的深层剖析

    这个 paragraph 通过 Hagel 的 analysis 深入 explain root cause：美国的 jobs 被 designed 成 'tightly scripted' 和 'highly standardized'，没有 room for individual initiative or creativity，这正是 machines can perform better 的 types of jobs，所以我们 essentially put a target sign on workers' backs。

    作为 core analytical paragraph，这个 unit 提供了文章 central diagnosis：问题不在于 technology itself，而在于 how we design jobs。它用 specific characterization（'tightly scripted', 'standardized'）来 make the abstract concept concrete，为后续的 solution 提供了 logical foundation。

    揭示标准化工作的脆弱性
  5. 分论点 P5

    重塑工作模式的解决方案

    这个 solution-oriented paragraph 提出 'reinvent the formula' for work，批判我们仍在 rely on 20th century notion，强调在 rapidly changing economy 中需要 people who can take initiative 和 exercise imagination to respond to unexpected events，这些是 machines are not good at 的能力。

    作为 prescriptive paragraph，这个 unit 从 diagnosis 转向 solution，提出需要 emphasize human qualities（initiative, imagination, adaptability）that machines lack。它 bridges 'what's wrong'（previous paragraph）和 'how to fix it'（reframe work practices），是文章从 analysis 到 recommendation 的 transition。

    提出人机协作的解决思路
  6. 结论 P6

    重构人机关系的核心主张

    这个 concluding paragraph 回应 Brynjolfsson and McAfee 的 original point，提出核心 reframing：从 'race against the machine' 到 'race with the machine'，强调需要 look at how machines augment human labor 而非 replace it，最终指出真正的 problem 不是 technology 本身，而是 'how do we innovate our institutions and work practices'。

    作为 conclusion，这个 paragraph 完成了 synthesis function：它 circles back to 开头引入的 Brynjolfsson and McAfee 的观点，用 'reframe' 的 strategy 来 reconcile 不同 perspectives，并且用 rhetorical question 的方式 emphasize 文章的 ultimate thesis：issue 是 institutional innovation，not technology itself。这是 classic closure strategy。

    明确人机协作的核心理念
MAIN IDEA · 速判主旨

5 步定位这篇文章的主旨

不读完全篇也能锁定主旨——以下 5 步按2014年考研英语二真题 这篇原文的实际行文顺序给出，每步说明看哪里、看出什么，可直接迁移到其他考研英语文章。

  1. 首段现象定位 P1

    议论文的 first paragraph 通常会 present 一个现象或问题作为 discussion 的起点。这篇文章在 第1段 中就提出了 man versus machine 这个 concept，并指出 jobs have gone away for good，这是整篇文章的 topic foundation。通过抓住这个 opening issue，我们能快速确定文章的 subject matter。

  2. 对比转折识别 P2 P3

    第2段 介绍了 Brynjolfsson and McAfee 的 argument，但 第3段 立即用 and yet 和 miss the reason 表明这不是作者的 final position。这种 introduce-then-challenge 的结构是议论文中 common 的套路，帮助我们找到作者真正的 standpoint。当看到 however, but, miss, overlook 这类词时，其后的内容往往更接近 thesis。

  3. 根因分析定位 P4

    第4段 中 Hagel 用 the reason why 和 in the first place 来 explain 为什么 jobs are vulnerable。这里出现的 tightly scripted, highly standardized, leave no room for creativity 是作者对 root cause 的 diagnosis，而不仅仅是 surface description。这个 deeper analysis 揭示了作者的 core argument：问题不在 technology 本身，而在 job design。

  4. 方案主张提取 P5 P6

    第5段 和 第6段 中出现大量 prescriptive verbs：it's time to reinvent, we need to, we must。这些 action-oriented expressions 表明作者在 propose solution。特别是 reinvent work practices, reframe race with the machine, innovate our institutions 这些 phrases 构成了作者的 solution framework，是 thesis 的 forward-looking component。

  5. 三层结构综合 P1 P3 P4 P5 P6

    完整的 thesis 应包含三个 components：what the issue is (automation replacing jobs), what the real problem is (how we designed jobs), and what we should do (reinvent work to work with machines)。这篇文章的主旨正是遵循这个 'surface issue → root cause → solution' 的 logic。通过整合各段的 key points，我们能 formulate 一个 comprehensive thesis statement。

主旨信号词 miss the reason P3 the reason why P3 it's time to P5 the real issue P6 rather than P6

MAIN IDEA · 主旨

这篇文章在说什么

技术对工作的自动化不可避免,但真正的问题不是机器取代人类,而是我们设计了易受自动化影响的僵化、标准化工作。我们必须重塑工作方式,强调人类的创造力和主动性,使人们能够与机器协作而非竞争。
Technology's automation of jobs is inevitable, but the real issue isn't machines replacing humans—it's how we've designed rigid, standardized jobs vulnerable to automation. We must reinvent work practices to emphasize human creativity and initiative, enabling people to work with machines rather than compete against them.
WORD INFERENCE · 生词推断

5 个生词的上下文推断

不查词典，只用文中线索推出词义——每个词给出推断出的释义与 完整推理链。已收录进考研英语高频真题词集的单词可点击进入词条页。

  • outmode 使过时、淘汰

    现在我们把两条 clues 结合起来。Contextual evidence 告诉我们机器让某些 jobs permanently disappear,而 morphological analysis 揭示 outmode 指的是使某物超出当前的 mode、不再适用。两者完美吻合:机器的发展让某些工作 exceed the current standard,变得 obsolete。这就是为什么这些 jobs have gone away for good。

    施动者+结果+前缀语义方向
  • insatiable 无法满足的、贪得无厌的

    把 contextual clues 和 morphological structure 融合起来:context 中 technology 的 appetite 表现为 continuous consumption 和 ongoing restructuring,这种 never-ending nature 正好对应 morphology 中 'not able to be satisfied' 的构成。In- prefix 的 negation 和 context 中的 continuity 相互印证,sati- root 关于 satisfaction 的语义和 appetite 的 concept 完美契合。

    行为持续性+否定前缀+核心词根
  • hail 来自、出身于

    Syntactic clue 告诉我们这是个表达 origin relationship 的 verb,而 discourse function analysis 揭示这是在 establish credentials 通过 institutional affiliation。两条线索共同指向一个含义:这个词用于正式地说明某人来自某个地方或机构,特别是在需要 establish authority 的 context 中。

    功能定位+介词搭配+语域特征
  • vulnerable 脆弱的、易受攻击的

    Cross-paragraph contrast 建立了 vulnerable 与 immune/threatened 的 semantic relationship,而 causal explanation 揭示了 vulnerability 的 underlying mechanism。把这两条 threads 编织起来:vulnerable 描述的是一种 state of being easily harmed,specifically because of lacking protection or defensive characteristics。在 job context 中,就是指那些容易被 technology replace 的状态。

    跨段对比+因果溯源
  • augment 增强、扩大

    Contrastive structure 告诉我们 augment 是 replace 的 opposite,而 conceptual reframing 揭示了从 against 到 with 的 paradigm shift。综合起来:augment 描述的是机器不 eliminate human labor,而是 work together with it,enhance its capability。这正是 'race with' 这个 metaphor 所传达的 cooperative enhancement 的概念。

    对比词+概念框架重构
RHETORIC · 修辞手法

6 处修辞手法与仿写

每处修辞给出它在本文的具体用法、同类信号词清单与一份可直接套用的 写作仿写建议——读完能认，也能写。

  • 比喻修辞

    P1

    作者用 'insatiable appetite for eating up human jobs' 这个生动的 metaphor 来描绘 technology 对 jobs 的吞噬。这个 vivid imagery 把抽象的 automation process 具象化为一个永不满足、不断吞食的 creature，强化了 technology 带来的 threat 和 inevitability。这个 figurative language 帮助 readers 直观感受到 job displacement 的 relentless nature，为文章关于 work redesign 的核心论点奠定了 urgency 和 emotional foundation。

    信号词 appetite for hunger for thirst for like as seems to be acts as transforms into devours consumes

    仿写： 当你需要描述某个 abstract process 或 phenomenon 时，可以问自己：这个过程像什么 concrete thing？比如，不要只说 'knowledge spreads quickly'，可以说 'knowledge spreads like wildfire through communities'。模版：[抽象概念] + has/is + [动物/自然现象的特征] + for + [具体行为]。例如：'Social media has an unquenchable thirst for consuming our attention' 或 'Climate change shows a merciless appetite for destroying ecosystems'。

  • 引用论证

    P2 P3 P4 P5 P6

    作者 cite 了多位 authorities 的观点：Erik Brynjolfsson 和 Andrew McAfee 的 'Race Against the Machine'，以及 John Hagel 的 'The Power of Pull'。这种 appeal to authority 通过引入 MIT experts 和 established authors 的 research findings 来 bolster 文章的 credibility。特别是先介绍 Brynjolfsson 和 McAfee 的 threat narrative，再通过 Hagel 的 counterargument 来 deepen 和 redirect the discussion，这种 dialogic structure 展示了 intellectual rigor，同时为文章的 central thesis 提供了 scholarly foundation。

    信号词 according to author of says argues notes points out claims suggests hail from research shows experts believe studies indicate

    仿写： 当构建 complex argument 时，identify key voices in the field 并 strategically incorporate 他们的 insights。不要只是 drop names，而要 contextualize their contributions。模版：According to [专家名], [核心观点]. However, [另一专家] argues that [不同视角], suggesting that [你的synthesis]。例如：'According to behavioral economist Daniel Kahneman, human decision-making is fundamentally flawed. However, psychologist Angela Duckworth contends that persistence can override cognitive biases, suggesting that we must balance awareness of limitations with cultivation of determination.'

  • 对比论证

    P6

    文章构建了一个 central contrast：'race against the machine' versus 'race with the machine'。这个 juxtaposition 不仅是 linguistic 的，更是 conceptual 的转变。前者暗示 humans 和 machines 处于 adversarial relationship，后者则提出 collaborative partnership 的 possibility。这个 stark contrast 直接服务于文章的 thesis，通过 reframing the debate 来引导 readers 从 fear-based mindset 转向 solution-oriented thinking。此外，文章还对比了 '20th century work notion' 和 needed '21st century approach'，强化了 transformation 的 urgency。

    信号词 rather than versus instead of not...but while whereas in contrast on the other hand however yet but although

    仿写： 当你想要 advocate for change 或 challenge conventional thinking 时，establish clear contrasts。识别 dominant narrative 或 common assumption，然后 articulate your alternative vision。模版：We need to reframe [旧观念] as [新观念]. 或者：The question is not [错误框架], but rather [正确框架]。例如：'We need to reframe education as memorization as education as critical thinking' 或 'The question is not how to prevent failure, but rather how to learn from it productively'。

  • 因果论证

    P1 P4 P5

    文章建立了清晰的 causal chain：因为我们 designed jobs 为 'tightly scripted' 和 'highly standardized'，所以这些 jobs 变得 vulnerable to automation。这个 cause-and-effect relationship 是 Hagel's central insight，也是文章 shift the blame 从 technology 到 work design 的关键。通过建立这个 causality，作者不仅 diagnose the problem，还 imply the solution：既然 problem 源于 job design，那么 solution 也应该在 redesigning work practices。这种 logical structure 让 argument 更具 explanatory power 和 actionability。

    信号词 since because as a result therefore thus consequently this is why leads to causes results in due to owing to so that

    仿写： 当你想要 explain a phenomenon 或 justify a solution 时，trace the causal chain。问自己：what led to this situation? What are the consequences? 模版：Because [原因], [结果] has occurred. This is why [进一步推论]。或者：[现象] is not the result of [表面原因], but rather [深层原因]. 例如：'Because we prioritize test scores over genuine learning, students develop anxiety rather than curiosity. This is why educational reform must address assessment methods.'

  • 举例论证

    P2

    虽然文章没有 provide detailed case studies，但它通过 reference 到 'Race Against the Machine' 这本 successful book 作为 concrete example 来 illustrate 'man versus machine debate' 的 contemporary relevance。这个 example 不仅提供了 specific instance，还通过提及 book's success ('attracted a lot of attention') 来 demonstrate 这个 concern 的 widespread resonance。这种 selective exemplification 帮助 ground abstract debate in recognizable cultural artifacts。

    信号词 via for example for instance such as like including consider take look at illustrated by demonstrated by as seen in

    仿写： 当 present abstract concepts 时，ask yourself: what concrete instance can illustrate this? 选择那些 readers 能够 recognize 或 relate to 的 examples。模版：[抽象论点]. This argument has attracted attention, via [具体例证]。或：Consider [具体例子], which demonstrates [抽象原理]。例如：'The power of habit in shaping behavior is undeniable. This principle has attracted widespread attention via the success of books like "Atomic Habits", which has sold millions of copies globally.'

  • 反问修辞

    P6

    文章结尾处使用了 rhetorical question：'how do we innovate our institutions and our work practices?' 这个 question 不是寻求 literal answer，而是 redirecting readers' focus 到 real issue。通过 questioning format，作者 engage readers in active thinking，同时 reframe the entire debate：problem 不是 technology itself，而是我们如何 adapt our systems。这个 strategic question 让文章以 thought-provoking 和 action-oriented 的方式 conclude，prompting readers 去 consider solutions rather than just dwelling on the problem。

    信号词 how do we why should we isn't it don't we can we really what if who can where do we when will we

    仿写： 当你想要 emphasize a point 或 redirect discussion 时，consider using rhetorical questions。确保 question 本身暗含了你想要 convey 的 answer 或 direction。模版：So then the problem is not really about [错误焦点], but rather, [正确问题]? 或者：The question we should be asking is not [A], but [B]? 例如：'So the challenge is not really about having more time, but rather, how do we prioritize what truly matters?' 或 'Isn't the real question not whether technology will change education, but how we can guide that transformation?'

IMPLIED MEANING · 言外之意

6 处话里有话

作者没有明说、但靠信号词传递出来的态度与暗示——每处给出原文片段、信号词类型与解读。

  • 经济衰退只是表象，技术替代是深层趋势

    P1
    And yet, it would be a mistake to think we are right now simply experiencing the painful side of a boom and bust cycle.

    转折类 And yet and yet but however nevertheless nonetheless still

    这个 implication 是说表面上看是 economic cycle 的问题,实际上 technology 对 jobs 的 displacement 是一个 irreversible structural change。通过 'and yet' 这个转折,作者 reject 了把问题 simplify 为周期性波动的想法,instead 强调这是 fundamental transformation。这对文章 thesis 的作用是 establish 问题的 severity 和 permanence,为后文讨论如何 respond to this challenge 奠定 foundation。这个 underlying message 告诉读者:不能用 temporary solution 来应对,必须 fundamentally rethink 我们对 work 的 conception。

  • 技术进步的速度超出预期威胁更多岗位

    P2
    jobs that were once thought to be immune from automation suddenly become threatened

    情态词 suddenly unexpectedly surprisingly shockingly alarmingly dramatically rapidly

    这里的 underlying meaning 是技术 advancement 的 pace 已经快到让原本认为 safe 的 jobs 也变得 vulnerable。'Suddenly' 这个词 convey 了一种 alarm,暗示 automation 的 threat 比人们 anticipate 的更 imminent 和 widespread。这个 implication 对 main argument 的 contribution 是 reinforce 第一段提到的 phenomenon 的 severity,让读者意识到问题不只是 affecting certain sectors,而是 potentially impact 更广泛的 job categories。这为后文 Hagel 的 critique 做 preparation—既然威胁如此 urgent,就更需要 understand root cause 而不只是 react to symptoms。

  • 畅销书的观点仍有重大遗漏

    P3
    And yet, John Hagel... says Brynjolfsson and McAfee miss the reason why these jobs are so vulnerable to technology in the first place.

    转折类 And yet and yet but however nevertheless nonetheless still

    这个 implication 表明尽管 Brynjolfsson 和 McAfee 的书很 influential,但他们只看到 surface problem(technology threatening jobs),没有 dig into root cause(为什么这些 jobs 会 vulnerable)。通过 'and yet' 引入 Hagel 的 critique,作者 signal 接下来要 shift focus 从 'what's happening' 到 'why it's happening'。这对 overall thesis 的 function 是 transition 到文章的 core argument—问题不在于 technology itself,而在于 job design。这个 turning point 让文章从 problem description 进入 causal analysis,这正是 argumentative essay 的 critical move,也是后面 solution 的 basis。

  • 美国工作设计自带致命缺陷

    P4
    jobs in the U.S. that tend to be "tightly scripted" and "highly standardized" ones that leave no room for "individual initiative or creativity"

    模糊限制语/绝对化表达 leave no room for no space for completely eliminate entirely absent totally lack deprive of strip away

    这里的 deeper meaning 是美国的 job design 本身就是 inherently flawed,它把工作变成 mechanical routine,完全 suppress 了 human uniqueness。'Leave no room for' 这个强烈的 negation 暗示这不是 minor deficiency,而是 systemic problem—工作设计从 fundamentally 上就 wrong。这个 implication 对文章 thesis 的 significance 在于它 establish 了 Hagel 的 core critique:问题不是 machines too powerful,而是 we've designed jobs that play to machines' strengths 而非 human strengths。这为第五段的 solution(reinvent work formula)提供了 logical foundation—既然 current design 根本上 flawed,就需要 complete reimagining。

  • 机器无法应对的恰是人类优势

    P5
    That is not something machines are good at. They are designed to perform very predictable activities.

    对比类/否定表达 That is not something machines are good at not something... are good at cannot unable to lack the ability to not capable of beyond the reach of

    这个 implication 指出 machines 的 limitation 恰好 define 了 human value—应对 unexpected events 和 exercise imagination 这些 unpredictable, creative tasks 是 human comparative advantage。通过 emphasize 'machines are not good at' 这类工作,作者 implicitly argue 我们应该 redesign jobs to leverage 这些 human strengths 而不是 compete with machines 在 predictable tasks 上。这对文章 main argument 的 contribution 是 provide 了 constructive direction:不是 resist automation,而是 redefine work to focus on what humans uniquely offer。这个 insight 为最后一段的 'race with machine' concept 做 preparation,clarify 了 human-machine collaboration 的 basis。

  • 真正的问题在于制度创新而非技术本身

    P6
    So then the problem is not really about technology, but rather, "how do we innovate our institutions and our work practices?"

    因果/总结类连接词 So then so then therefore thus hence consequently as a result

    这个 underlying message 是作者完成了一个 fundamental reframing:整个 debate 不应该 focus on technology vs humans,而应该 focus on 如何 reform institutions 和 work practices。'So then' signal 这是 based on 前面所有 analysis 得出的 logical conclusion。通过说 'not about technology, but rather about innovation',作者 redirect 注意力从 external threat(machines)到 internal agency(how we organize work)。这个 implication 对 overall thesis 的 importance 在于它 crystallize 文章的 central claim:technology 不是 problem,我们的 institutional design 才是。这为 concluding argument('race with machine')提供了 conceptual foundation,明确了 solution 的 direction—不是 fight technology,而是 transform our approach to work。

AUTHOR ATTITUDE · 作者态度

作者态度：积极支持

结论先行：本文作者态度为积极支持（ cautiously optimistic advocacy for human-machine collaboration）。下面是按步骤还原的判断过程与文中的态度信号词。

  1. 首尾定调法 P1 P6

    议论文中首尾段往往是作者 stance 最集中的地方：首段的 thesis 奠定问题基调，尾段的 conclusion 揭示作者倾向；若尾段给出 positive 的解决路径，说明作者整体态度是 constructive 而非单纯 pessimistic。

  2. 让步转折识别法 P3 P4 P5 P6

    议论文中 concession（让步）之后的 rebuttal（反驳）才是作者真实态度所在；作者花更多篇幅阐发的观点，就是其 endorsed view。本文第3段以 'And yet' 转入 Hagel 的视角，第4至6段全部用来展开 Hagel 的论点，篇幅分配本身就是态度信号。

  3. 情态动词扫描法 P1 P5 P6

    议论文作者若使用 'it is time to / we need to / we must' 等 prescriptive modals，表明其态度已从 neutral observation 升级为 active advocacy；'it would be a mistake' 这类 epistemic warning 则显示作者在纠正读者可能的误判，体现 corrective stance。

  4. 三角验证综述法 P1 P3 P5 P6

    单一信号可能存在误判风险，但当 structure signal（首尾定调）、discourse signal（让步转折）、lexical signal（情态词汇）三者指向同一方向时，态度判断的准确率极高，可作最终 verdict。

文中的态度信号词

  • it would be a mistake P1

    作者用 'it would be a mistake' 直接 challenge 读者可能持有的 boom-and-bust cycle 误解，体现其 corrective stance——这是议论文中作者 staking a position 最直接的方式之一，表明作者不满足于 neutral description，而是主动 intervene 于读者的认知偏差。

    同类词 it is wrong to think one cannot simply assume it is naive to believe we should not overlook

  • And yet P3

    第3段 中 'And yet' 是全文最关键的 pivot word——它将前两段对 Brynjolfsson 观点的介绍（concession）切换到 Hagel 的反驳（rebuttal），作者通过这一转折词宣告：真正值得重视的观点在 'And yet' 之后。这个 adversative connector 直接标记了作者 endorses Hagel 而非 Brynjolfsson 的立场。

    同类词 However Nevertheless That said Even so But

  • It's time to reinvent P5

    'It's time to reinvent the formula' 是典型的 call-to-action 句式，作者借 Hagel 之口（但全段无反驳，说明作者 endorses this view）发出 prescriptive 呼吁，直接揭示其 pro-change、pro-innovation 的积极倡导态度；'more than ever need' 进一步强化了这种 urgency，表明作者认为改变刻不容缓。

    同类词 It's time to We need to We must It is essential to We should

  • reframe P6

    'reframe race against the machine as race with the machine' 是作者对全文核心 argument 的最精炼表达——从 adversarial 视角转向 collaborative 视角。'reframe' 这个词本身就携带 positive transformation 的语义，表明作者的态度是 optimistic 且 solution-oriented 的，相信人机关系可以被重新 conceptualize。

    同类词 rethink reinvent reimagine transform innovate

  • augment … rather than replace P6

    'augment human labor rather than replace it' 是作者最终 thesis 的核心表述，'rather than' 结构在语义上强制对比两种可能性并明确 prefer 前者——作者通过这个结构宣告其 pro-collaboration、anti-replacement 的立场，是全文 attitude 最直接的 lexical evidence。

    同类词 augment rather than replace complement rather than substitute enhance instead of eliminate work with rather than against collaborate instead of compete

GENRE · 速判体裁

30 秒判定这是一篇议论文

体裁决定读法与出题套路。以下判断步骤与标志词全部以本文为例，可直接迁移到其他考研英语 真题文章。

如何快速判断这是一篇议论文？

  1. 寻找评价性表达 P1

    在 第1段 中，作者用了 'it would be a mistake to think' 这种带有 judgment 的表达，明确表达了自己的 viewpoint。这是典型的 argumentative writing，因为说明文会说 'it is important to understand'，新闻报道会说 'experts say' 或 'according to research'。作者直接说某种想法是 mistake，这是在 argue 一个观点。

  2. 寻找观点交锋 P2 P3 P6

    第2段 引入了 Brynjolfsson 和 McAfee 的 argument，第3段 立刻用 'And yet' 转折，引入 John Hagel 的 counterargument，说他们 'miss the reason'。这是典型的 argumentation structure：present a view, then challenge it。说明文不会有这种 debate，它只会 explain different aspects；新闻报道会 present multiple sides 但不会明确说谁 miss the point。

  3. 寻找行动呼吁 P5 P6

    第5段 说 'It's time to reinvent the formula'，第6段 说 'we need to reframe' 和 'we need to look at'。这些 prescriptive statements 是在告诉读者 what should be done，这是 persuasive writing 的标志。说明文会说 'companies can consider'（给选项），新闻报道会说 'officials are planning'（报道别人的计划），而议论文直接说 'we need to'（呼吁行动）。

  4. 三维度快速定位 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6

    整篇文章完美展示了议论文的 complete arc：第1段 establish position（技术取代工作不只是 cycle），第2段-4 present and critique existing arguments（引入观点再反驳），第5段-6 propose alternative framework（提出新的思考方式）。这个 progression 是 classic argumentation，说明文只会 inform about stages，新闻报道只会 report what happened，而议论文是在 build a case and persuade。

哪些词暴露了议论文体裁？

  • mistake to think P1 立场表态词 would be wrong to assume it is incorrect to believe fallacy that error in assuming misconception that
  • argument P2 论证逻辑连接词 claim contention assertion proposition thesis
  • powerful argument, and a scary one P3 立场表态词 powerful argument compelling point convincing case persuasive reasoning strong contention
  • And yet P1 论证逻辑连接词 and yet however nevertheless nonetheless but
  • says P3 观点引导词 argues contends maintains asserts claims
  • miss the reason why P3 立场表态词 miss the point overlook the fact fail to recognize neglect to consider ignore the reality
  • need to P5 立场表态词 must should ought to have to it is necessary to
  • not really about...but rather P6 论证逻辑连接词 not...but rather not so much...as less about...more about the issue is not...but the question is not...but
SENTENCE INSIGHTS · 句子精讲

12 句真题句逐层精讲

下列真题句各有独立的句子解析页——中文翻译、结构树逐层拆解、成分与时态、考点讲解与真题高频词。点击句子进入完整解析。

FAQ · 常见问题

关于 Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 的常见问题

2014年考研英语二真题 Section II Part A (3) 文章 Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 的原文出自哪里？
Big Think(《大思想》)2012年12月17日一篇题为Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?(我们能赢得与机器的竞赛吗?)的文章。
2014年考研英语二真题文章 Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 的主旨是什么？
技术对工作的自动化不可避免,但真正的问题不是机器取代人类,而是我们设计了易受自动化影响的僵化、标准化工作。我们必须重塑工作方式,强调人类的创造力和主动性,使人们能够与机器协作而非竞争。（英文表述：Technology's automation of jobs is inevitable, but the real issue isn't machines replacing humans—it's how we've designed rigid, standardized jobs vulnerable to automation. We must reinvent work practices to emphasize human creativity and initiative, enabling people to work with machines rather than compete against them.）
Can We Win the Race Against the Machines?（2014年考研英语二真题文章）是什么体裁？难度如何？
体裁为议论文，作者立场是积极支持（cautiously optimistic advocacy for human-machine collaboration）。CEFR 难度 C1，全文 391 词、6 段；在考研英语二全部 94 篇真题文章中，C1 级共 72 篇（占 77%）。
2014年考研英语二真题文章 Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 的篇章结构是怎样的？
全文 6 段按议论文骨架分为 6 个意群：引言 · 第1段——技术自动化对就业的持续冲击；分论点 · 第2段——技术进步威胁论的流行观点；分论点 · 第3段——问题诊断的视角转换；分论点 · 第4段——工作设计缺陷的深层剖析；分论点 · 第5段——重塑工作模式的解决方案；结论 · 第6段——重构人机关系的核心主张。
Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 一文的作者态度是什么？
作者态度是积极支持（cautiously optimistic advocacy for human-machine collaboration）。判断路径：首尾定调法 → 让步转折识别法 → 情态动词扫描法 → 三角验证综述法；文中的态度信号词包括 it would be a mistake（第1段）、And yet（第3段）、It's time to reinvent（第5段）、reframe（第6段）、augment … rather than replace（第6段）。
2014年考研英语二真题文章 Can We Win the Race Against the Machines? 中有哪些值得积累的生词？
按文中出现顺序共 5 个：outmode（使过时、淘汰）、insatiable（无法满足的、贪得无厌的）、hail（来自、出身于）、vulnerable（脆弱的、易受攻击的）、augment（增强、扩大），每个词的词义都可以由文中上下文线索推断得出。

本页数据最后更新：