GRE閱讀資料之別做美國夢了_去冒險吧

　　美國《紐約時報》是是美國嚴正報刊的代表，歷久以來具有優越的公信力和威望性著稱，1913年正式在美國出書刊行，其消息涵蓋社會多個方面，傍邊文章更是席卷了豐碩的辭匯。以是可以經由過程瀏覽《紐約時報》來豐碩本身的辭匯量，從而更好地進備考。下面是小編推舉GRE瀏覽材料之別作美國夢了,去冒險吧.

　　Choose Experiences Over Stuff, and Maybe Over Security Too

　　別作美國夢了，去冒險吧

　　You’ve heard of the American dream, right? The American dream was this machine we built to get rid of uncertainty and create security. It’s the white picket fence, the job and the minivan. You watch Dan Rather and a sitcom. You go to bed, go to sleep and repeat.

　　你確定據說過美國夢吧?美國夢便是誰人咱們造出來反抗不肯定性和發明平安感的機械。它是潔白的尖樁竹籬，是事情，是廂式旅遊車;看完丹·拉瑟(Dan Rather)的消息節目和景象笑劇，上床睡覺，如斯一每天循環往復。

　　It may not be that exciting, but hey, at least it’s stable. For years — for as long as we can remember — that’s been the end goal: stability and security. And millions of us work really hard to get there each year.

　　聽上去大概不怎樣刺激，然則，嘿，最少它穩固啊。多年來——從咱們能記事起——穩固和平安便是最終目的。每年，咱們成百上萬萬的人都在為此冒死盡力。

　　There’s nothing wrong with that if it’s what you’re into. But there’s a whole group of people — and this group is growing, by the way — who have said, “Forget that. I want to focus on experiences instead.”

　　假如那便是你想要的，固然也沒甚麽欠好。但也有這麽一群人會說：“忘了那回事吧，我想更存眷本身的感受。”——趁便說一句，這個群體的人數還在增長。

　　You probably know the refrains by now: Experiences trump stuff. Experiences tend to bring us happiness. More stuff tends to breed discontent. There’s a wealth of research to back up these ideas up.

　　現在，你大概已曉得那句被人幾回再三反復的話了：感受勝於物資;感受能帶來幸福;更多物資只會使人欲壑難填。有大批研討都支撐這些理念。

　　So people go out and spend a bunch of money to participate in adventure races like the Tough Mudder, just to have an experience. Instead of buying a new television, people buy skis and lift tickets. People pay to go to the rock climbing gym instead of paying to go to the movies. More and more, the economy is moving in this direction.

　　因而為了得到感受，人們就走出門去，消費大把款項加入“最強泥人”(Tough Mudder)國際停滯大賽之類的冒險比賽。人們有了錢不是買一台新電視，而是購置滑雪和纜車的票。人們費錢去攀巖館，而不是買片子票。全部經濟越來越向著這個偏向成長。

　　But the idea that you can leave a stable job, a 401(k), sell your house, retrofit your van and spend a couple of years living out of it by yourself, or with your spouse, or even with your kids, is something completely different. Not only is it different, it’s mind-blowing.

　　然則假如你辭掉穩固的事情、廢棄401(k)養老金、賣掉屋子、改裝你的面包車，往後一兩年以車為家，乃至帶上朋友和孩子，那又是完整分歧的另外一回事了。不但是完整分歧，基本便是完全推翻。

　　This mind-blowing concept is not the choice of experience over stuff. It’s not even experience over stability. It’s experience over security. And that is a very fascinating development in our culture.

　　這類完全推翻的看法不是要把感受擺在物資之上，也不是把感受擺在穩固之上，它基本便是把感受擺在平安之上。這是咱們的文化中成長起來的一種異常風趣的征象。

　　Consider the professional baseball player Daniel Norris, who was making $2 million but living in a Volkswagen van. Who told him he could do that? At its extreme, choosing experiences over stuff isn’t just about making these kinds of value-based decisions about recreation on your weekends. It’s also choosing experience over security and making the same decisions on a life-size scale.

　　想一想職業棒球手丹尼爾·諾裏斯(Daniel Norris)吧，他能賺200萬美元，但還住在一輛民眾面包車裏。是誰告知他可以這麽幹的?推演到極致，把感受擺在物資之上，不但象征著為周末若何消遣所做的這種基於代價的決議。這一樣是選取把感受置於平安之上，而且要在人生的標準上做出一樣的決議。

　　Once I began framing it this way, I kept learning about more and more people doing this. There is Jeremy Collins deciding to pursue a life of art and climbing after getting laid off from a comfortable office job, or the writer Brendan Leonard, leaving a copywriting job at IBM (arguably the definition of security) to follow his dreams of being a freelance writer and starting a blog.

　　自從我開端如許對待這件事，我賡續懂得到，有愈來愈多的人在這麽做。好比傑裏米·柯林斯(Jeremy Collins)，他分開一份安寧的辦公室事情，決議在藝術與爬山中渡過人生。另有作家布蘭登·萊昂納德(Brendan Leonard)，他分開了IBM公司的案牘事情(可以說是典範的鐵飯碗)，跟隨本身的妄想，成為了自由撰稿人，而且開端寫博客。

　　The more I learn about people completely bucking convention and living these incredibly interesting alternative existences, the more I find myself wondering, “If they can do it, can I?”

　　越是懂得到有人如許完全沖破傳統，過著風趣的另類生存，我就更加開端撫躬自問：“他們能做到，我能嗎?”

　　Do I dare open that bulletproof, fireproof combination safe where I’ve locked up my dreams and say, “Oh, I’ll do that later, when life is more stable, when I’m more secure”? What if I try to make this really creative vision, one that I’ve always dreamed of, come true and I fail? Do I even dare to ask, “What if?”

　　我的妄想鎖在一個防火防彈的暗碼鎖保險箱裏。我老是會說：“噢，今後再去做吧，等生存再穩固一些，等我更有平安保障的時刻。”然則，我敢不敢打開誰人妄想的保險箱?假如我真的試下實現這個充斥創意的場景，這個我一向以來的妄想，然則成果卻失敗了，那會怎樣?我到底敢不敢問本身一句：“假如做了，會怎樣?”

　　As for you, O.K., so you don’t want to live in a van. Maybe you don’t have a dream locked up inside your own little Pandora’s box. That’s fine.

　　至於你，好吧，你大概不想住在廂型車裏。大概你本身的誰人小潘多拉盒子裏也沒有鎖著一個妄想。這也很好。

　　But if you do — and my gut tells me that for most people reading this, what I’m writing rings true — I am telling you to at least consider that one, simple question, “What if?”

　　但若你有——直覺告知我，大多半讀到這篇文章的人會和我寫的器械發生共識——我想告知你，最少問問本身這個簡略的題目，“假如做了，會怎樣?”

　　In considering the possibilities, consider also that according to this new set of values, the uncertainty and the insecurity that you feel trying something adventurous and new is all part of the very reason for doing it. That’s part of the tangible benefit. That’s the hard part of the adventure race, the mud in your face and the suffer-fest.

　　在斟酌各類大概性的時刻，也要斟酌到，依據這類新的代價系統，你在試下冒險事物與新事物時所感遭到的那些不肯定性與不平安感，恰是你要做這件事的一部門來由。那是有形收益的一部門，是冒險比賽的本質內容：臉上的泥巴與苦楚的狂歡。

　　As the Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard famously said, “It’s not an adventure until something goes wrong.” Maybe you’ll lose some money in selling the house. Maybe you’ll make less income if you quit your job. But that’s part of the adventure.

　　戶外活動品牌Patagonia的開創人伊馮·喬伊納德(Yvon Chouinard)說過如許一句名言：“沒有不測，不算冒險。”賣掉屋子你大概會喪失一些錢。辭去事情你的收入大概會削減。但那便是冒險的一部門。

　　If you would make the same experience-over-stuff choice weekend after weekend, maybe it’s time to start thinking about making the experience-over-security choice for your life. At the very least, you might want to ask yourself, “What if?”

　　假如你每一個周末都打舉動當作這類把感受放在物資之上的選取，大概你可以開端斟酌選取一種把感受置於平安之上的人生了。最少，你可以問一問本身：“假如做了，會怎樣?”

　　以上便是本日小編為眾人分享的GRE瀏覽材料之別作美國夢了,去冒險吧，願望對加入GRE測驗的考生有所贊助。想要懂得2016gre測驗時光、gre測驗流程、gre測驗內容、gre機經等信息和想要加入gre英語培訓考生請選取留學。末了，小編祝眾人出國留學之路順順遂利!更多出色內容盡在留學GRE測驗頻道。