Many americans formed their idea of afmily life in the nineteen-fifties. But that kind Ame

has enjoyed a reputation for superb theater since the time of Shakespeare in the 16th century. The variety ranges from the majestic Royal National Theatre to the lavish Royal Opera House. The sheer number of symphony orchestras is impressive and includes the London Symphony Orchestra, the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra and the English Chamber Orchestra. // Some of the most well-known concert halls in the world, such as the Royal Festival Hall, provide favorable venues for the cornucopia of performances in London. London itself is a living museum, with more than 2,000 years of history and culture. But it also boasts one of the greatest concentrations of significant museums (more than 100) of any city in the world. The jewel in this cultural crown is the British Museum, with 4 kilometers of galleries and more than 4 million exhibits.//

or top-flight researchers. Also at stake is European funding for the UK’s research universities, which totals more than a billion pounds per year. The UK’s departure from the EU may also diminish the country’s role in influencing the union’s research plans. “In almost every area of science now, you can’t be a lone wolf and do it on your own.” says Philip Jones, research director of the university of East Anglia. “You have to work with others. And the EU provides the potential.”

a man -- whose natural talents have destined him for more than obliging obscurity. George Washington, we are told, was a leader who would have preferred to have been a farmer. Thomas Jefferson, a writer. Martin Luther King, Jr., a preacher. These men were roused from lives of perfunctory achievement, our legends have it, not because they chose their own exceptionalism, but because we, the people, chose it for them. We -- seeing greatness in them that they were too humble to observe themselves -- conferred on them uncommon paths. Historical circumstance became its own call of duty, and the logic of democracy proved itself through the answer.

Neil Armstrong was a hero of this stripe: constitutionally humble, circumstantially noble. Nearly every obituary written for him has made a point of emphasizing his sense of privacy, his sense of humility, his sense of the ironic ordinary. And yet every aspect of Armstrong’ s life made clear: On that day in 1969, he acted on our behalf, out of a sense of mission that was communal rather than personal. The reluctant hero is also the self-sacrificing hero.

s international organization. When ti was created more than 60 years ago, the United Nations reflected humanity’s greatest hopes for a just and peaceful global community. It still embodies that dream. We remain the only world institution with the legitinacy and scope that derive from global membership, and a mandate that encompasses development, secutiry and human rights as well as the envoronment.

I restate that we are an organization without independent military capability, and we dispose of relatively modest resources in the economic realm. Yet our influence and impact on the world is far greater than many believe to be the case, and often more than we ourselves realize. This influence derives not from any exercise of power, but from the force of the values we represent. Among these values are the maintenance of the world order and the establishment of world harmony.

无君。无父无君，特别孝爱老母，布尔乔亚之仁未能一扫空也。幼读三百篇，不求甚解。继学师范，遂奠教书匠之基，及壮，糊口四方，教书为业，甚难发财，每购奖券，以得末彩为荣，亦甘于寒贱也。二十七岁发愤著书，科学哲学无所懂，故写小说，博大家一笑，没什么了不得。三十四岁结婚，已有一男一女，均狡猾可喜。闲时喜养花，不得其法，每每有叶无花，亦不忍弃。书无所不读，全无所获并不着急。教书作事均甚认真，往往吃亏，亦不后悔。如此而已，再活四十年，也许有点出息。

早在周朝时期，筷子便被人们用来夹取荤、蔬菜，而米饭在那时则用手来取食。| 全国各地的筷子大小基本一样，而所用的材料的种类则各有不同，所选材料有竹子、木材、漆器、玉石、象牙、塑料、吕、银、金等。特长的竹筷通常用于厨房中。| 中国人使用筷子的方法很有艺术性，各人有各人的方法，就好像签名一样，不尽一致。中国人一般都能随心所欲的用筷子夹起一粒米饭，一粒豌豆，一只滑溜溜的蘑菇或海参。| 使用筷子时，要把一双筷子夹在大拇指和食指之间。要点是让其中的一根筷子保持不动，活动另一根筷子，以便能像钳子一样夹取食物。|

与西方”为创校使命。| 40 多年来，中大一直致力于弘扬中华传统文化，坚持双语教育，并推行独特的书院制度，在香港教育界卓然而立。中大校园占地134 公顷，是世界上最美丽的校园之一。| 中大的师生来自世界各地。有教职员工5200 多人、近万名本科生、约2000 多名研究生，其中约2500 多人来自45 个不同的国家和地区。| 中大实行灵活的学分制，不仅有助于培养有专有博的人才，而且还赋予学生更大的学习自主权。中大的多元教育有助于充分发挥每一个学生的潜能。|

Poverty, crime and education.

The paradox of the ghetto.THE poorest people in Leicester by a wide margin are the Somalis who live in the St Matthews housing estate. Refugees from civil war, who often passed through Sweden or the Netherlands before fetching up in the English Midlands, they endure peeling surroundings and appalling joblessness. At the last census the local unemployment rate was three times the national average. But Abdikayf Farah, who runs a local charity, is oddly upbeat. Just look at the children, he says.

Close to Mr Farah&39;s office is Taylor Road Primary School—which, it turns out, trumps almost every school in Leicester in standardized tests. Its headmaster, Chris Hassall, credits the Somali immigrants, who insist that their children turn up for extra lessons at weekends and harry him when they seem to fall behind. Education is their ticket out of poverty. Poor district, wonderful school, well-ordered children: in Britain, the combination is not as unusual as one might suppose.

Britain has prized the ideal of economically mixed neighbourhoods since the 19th century. Poverty and disadvantage are intensified when poor people cluster, runs the argument; conversely, the rich are unfairly helped when they are surrounded by other rich people. Social mixing ought to help the poor. It sounds self-evident—and colors planning regulations that ensure much social and affordable housing is dotted among more expensive private homes. Yet “there is absolutely no serious evidence to support this,” says Paul Cheshire, a professor of economic geography at the London School of Economics (LSE).

And there is new evidence to suggest it is wrong. Researchers at Duke University in America followed over 1,600 children from age five to age 12 in England and Wales. They found that poor boys living in largely well-to-do neighbourhoods were the most likely to engage in anti-social behavior, from lying and swearing to such petty misdemeanors as fighting, shoplifting and vandalism, according to a commonly used measure of problem behavior. Misbehavior. starts very young (see chart 1) and intensifies as they grow older. Poor boys in the poorest neighbourhoods were the least likely to run into trouble. For rich kids, the opposite is true: those living in poor areas are more likely to misbehave.

The researchers suggest several reasons for this. Poorer areas are often heavily policed, deterring would-be miscreants; it may be that people in wealthy places are less likely to spot misbehavior, too. Living alongside the rich may also make the poor more keenly aware of their own deprivation, suggests Tim Newburn, a criminologist who is also at the LSE. That, in turn, increases the feelings of alienation that are associated with anti-social conduct and criminalbehavior.

Research on England&39;s schools turns up a slightly different pattern. Children entitled to free school meals—a proxy for poverty—do best in schools containing very few other poor children, perhaps because teachers can give them plenty of attention. But, revealingly, poor children alsofare unusually well in schools where there are a huge number of other poor children. That may be because schools have no choice but to focus on them. Thus in Tower Hamlets, a deprived east London borough, 60% of poor pupils got five good GCSEs (the exams taken at 16) in 2013; the national average was 38%. Worst served are pupils who fall in between, attendingschools where they are insufficiently numerous to merit attention but too many to succeed alone (see chart 2).

Mr Cheshire reckons that America, too, provides evidence of the limited benefits of socialmixing. Look, he says, at the Moving to Opportunity program, started in the 1990s, through which some poor people received both counseling and vouchers to move to richer neighbourhoods. Others got financial help to move as they wished, but no counselling. A third group received nothing. Studies after 10-15 years suggested that the incomes and employmentprospects of those who moved to richer areas had not improved. Boys who moved showed worse behavior. and were more likely to be arrested for property crime.

In Britain, this pattern might be partly explained by the existence of poor immigrant neighbourhoods such as St Matthews in Leicester. The people who live in such ghettos are poor in means, because they cannot speak English and lack the kind of social networks that lead to jobs, but not poor in aspiration. They channel their ambitions through their children.

Another probable explanation lies in the way that the British government hands out money. Education funding is doled out centrally, and children in the most indigent parts tend to get the most cash. Schools in Tower Hamlets receive 7,014 ($10,610) a year for each child, for example,compared with the English average of 4,675. Secondary schools also get 935 for each poor child thanks to the “pupil premium” introduced by the coalition government. Meanwhile Teach First sends top graduates into poor schools. In America, by contrast, much school funding comes from local property taxes, so those in impoverished areas lose out.

As the Duke University researchers are keen to point out, all this does not in itself prove that economically mixed neighbourhoods are a bad thing. They may be good in other ways—making politicians more moderate, for example. But the research does suggest that the benefits of such districts are far from straightforward. Patterns of social segregation reflect broadersocial inequality, argues Mr Cheshire, who has written a book about urban economics and policy. Where mixed neighborhoods flourish, house prices rise, overwhelmingly benefiting the rich. Spending more money on schools in deprived areas and dispatching the best teachers there would do more to help poor children. Assuming that a life among wealthy neighbors will improve their lot is too complacent.

I honestly thought any patient needed, but that’s what we do these days. Guidelines mandate tests, and patients expect them; abnormal tests mean medication, and medication means more tests. My tally for the day: five hours, 14 reasonably healthy patients, 299 separate tests of body function or blood composition, three scans and a handful of referrals to specialists for yet more tests.

Teachers complain that primary education threatens to become a process of teaching to the test. They wince as the content of standardized tests increasingly drives their lesson plans, and the results of these tests define their accomplishments. We share their pain: Doctoring to the tests is every bit as dispiriting.

Some medical tests, like blood pressure checks, are cheap and simple. Some are pricier and more complicated, like mammograms or assays for various molecules in the blood that correlate with various diseases. We order them all at prescribed intervals, and if we happen to forget one, either by accident or design, electronic medical records nag us mercilessly until we capitulate. As in education, our test-ordering behavior. and our patients’ results increasingly define our achievements, and in the near future our remuneration is likely to follow. Still, like all test-based quality control systems, ours can be gamed. Our tests can also inflict unnecessary psychic damage, and occasional physical damage as well. Most distressing: Ordering tests, chasing down and interpreting results, and dealing with the endless cycle of repeat testing to confirm and clarify problems absorb pretty much all our time.

It is all in the name of good and equitable health care, a laudable goal. But if you reach age 50 and I cannot persuade you to undergo the colonoscopy or mammogram you really don’t want, am I a bad doctor? If you reach age 85 and I persuade you to take enough medication to normalize your blood pressure, am I a good one?

I am not the only one who wonders. A cadre of test skeptics at Dartmouth Medical School specialize in critically examining our test-based approach to well adult care. If you are confused about mammography, colonoscopy or the PSA test for prostate cancer, these folks deserve much of the blame: They have repeatedly demonstrated that these tests and many others do not necessarily make healthy people any healthier, any more than standardized testing in grade school improves a child’s intellect. Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, a Vermont physician who is part of the Dartmouth group, has a new book that might serve as the test skeptic’s manifesto and bible. Its title, “Less Medicine, More Health,” sums up his trenchant, point-by-point critique of test-based health care and quality control.

In medicine, “true quality is extremely hard to measure,” Dr. Welch writes. “What is easy to measure is whether doctors do things.” Only doing things like ordering tests generates data. Deciding not to do things and let well enough alone generates nothing tangible, no numbers or dollar amounts to measure or track over time. Dr. Welch points out that doctors get to become doctors because they are good with tests, and know instinctively how to behave in a test-focused universe. Rate them by how many tests they order, and they will order in profusion, often more than the guidelines suggest. They will do fine on assessments of their quality, but patients may not do so well. Even perfectly safe tests that are incapable of doing their own damage may, given enough weight, trigger catastrophe.

Yes, little blood pressure cuff over there in the corner, that means you. The link between very high blood pressure and disease is incontrovertible, and the drugs used to control blood pressure are among the cheapest and safest around. Even so, as Dr. Welch pointed out in a recent conversation, systems that rate doctors by how well their patients’ blood pressure is managed are likely to invite trouble. Doctors rewarded for treating aggressively are likely to keep doing so even when the benefits begin to morph into harm. That appears to happen in older adults, at least in those who avoid the common complications of high blood pressure and continue on medication. One study found that nursing home residents taking two or more effective blood pressure drugs did remarkably badly, withdeath rates more than twice that of their peers. In another, dementia patients taking blood pressure medication with optimal results nonetheless deteriorated mentally considerably faster.

Yet no quality control system that I know of gives a doctor an approving pat on the head for taking a fragile older patient off meds. Not yet, at least. Someday, perhaps, not ordering and not prescribing will mark quality care as surely as ordering and prescribing do today. Children go to school to learn. Adults go to the doctor … why? If they are sick, to get better, certainly. But for the average healthy, happy adult, let’s be honest: We really haven’t completely figured out why you are in the waiting room. And so we offer a luxuriant profusion of tests.

义”蒙蔽了其心智，面对中国的成功，西方应及时反思和学习。在别人认同“中国经济前景光明论”时，我们自己不能唱衰自己，误判断世界发展大势和我国处境，低估自身发展潜力，妄自菲薄，丧失信心。

当然，我们也要有忧患意识，居安思危，要看到各种风险和挑战，不能高枕无忧、无所作为。多数机遇都不是不争自来的，机遇需要我们自己去创造和把握。只要我们继续走自己的路，谦虚谨慎，开拓进取，攻坚克难，不断加强和发展自身的优势，我们的日子就会越过越好。