扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / GMATAdvanced-RC-12
Despite their many differences of temperament and of literary perspective, Emerson, Thoreau, Hawthorne, Melville, and Whitman shared certain beliefs. Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue to nature, history, and ultimately the cosmos. Without denying outright the existence of a deity, this perspective explains humans and the world in terms of humanity.
This common perspective is almost always universalized. It emphasizes the human as universal, freed from the accidents of time, space, birth, and talent. Thus, for Emerson, the “American Scholar” turns out to be simply “Man Thinking,” while, for Whitman, the “Song of Myself” merges imperceptibly into a song of all the “children of Adam,” where “every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.”
Also common to all five writers is the belief that self-realization depends on the harmonious reconciliation of two universal psychological tendencies: first, the self-asserting impulse of the individual to be responsible only to himself or herself, and second, the self-transcending impulse of the individual to know and become one with that world. These conflicting impulses can be seen in the democratic ethic. Democracy advocates individualism, the preservation of the individual's freedom and self-expression. But the democratic self is torn between the duty to self, which is implied by the concept of liberty, and the duty to society, which is implied by the concepts of equality and fraternity.
A third assumption common to the five writers is that intuition and imagination offer a surer road to truth than does abstract logic or scientific method. It is illustrated by their emphasis upon introspection—their belief that the clue to external nature is to be found in the inner world of individual psychology—and by their interpretation of experience as, in essence, symbolic. Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account. These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves led them to conceive of the writer as a seer.
It can be inferred that the idea of "an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos" (see lines 44–45) is necessary to the thinking of the five writers because such a relationship
enables them to assert the importance of the democratic ethic
justifies their concept of the freedom of the individual
sustains their faith in the existence of a deity
is the foundation of their humanistic view of existence
is the basis for their claim that the writer is a seer
此讲解的内容由AI生成，还未经人工审阅，仅供参考。
正确答案是 D。此题可以从文章的最后一句“ Their faith in the imagination and in themselves led them to conceive of the writer as a seer” 推测出来。文中说，这些作家共同拥有的观点就是人本主义的观点，即人是宇宙的精神中心，并且只有人才能理解自然、历史以及宇宙。那么，人和宇宙之间的有机关系是必要的，因为这种关系可以帮助这些作家确立其人本主义观点，从而使他们相信作家是先知。因此，选项 D 正确。
我觉得是因为“an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos" 描述的是自我和宇宙的关系，而后面一句的”These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves led them to conceive of the writer as a seer.“描述的是imagination对作家印象的影响，这两个并没有直接的关系。作为分论点，最后一段提到的这种”自我和宇宙的关系“和第一段中的humane perspective是相符合的,因此D优于E
这个题应该回到第一段去定位：Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue to nature, history, and ultimately the cosmos. 人是中心，人是通往xxx甚至宇宙的线索，【这就是在阐明human和cosmos的关系】，及题目问的“an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos”。往前面看一点就可以定位到【its basic premises】
E是一个迷惑项，和原文很近，但是仔细分析一下关系就知道E不对了。最后两句话给了两个逻辑关系：
1.intuition and imagination TAKE ACCOUNT an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos.
2.writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves LED TO conceive of the writer as a seer.
可以说这两个逻辑关系的后半部分是没有什么直接联系的...但做题反应不过来就容易错了
E是一个迷惑项，和原文很近，但是仔细分析一下关系就知道E不对了。最后两句话给了两个逻辑关系：
1.intuition and imagination TAKE ACCOUNT an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos.
2.writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves LED TO conceive of the writer as a seer.
可以说这两个逻辑关系的后半部分是没有什么直接联系的...但做题反应不过来就容易错了
在CD 中犹豫。
选Csustains their faith in the existence of a deity
是因为以为每一段都是服务开头，所以定位到开头 最后一句 Without denying outright the existence of a deity（神）,
另外，C有个错误在于逻辑错误，原文是不否认，但是不代表是承认，更加不是faith in
D 的难点在于is the foundation of their humanistic view of existence 中的existence，通读下来文章没有很明确地讲“存在”，而是讲human ， world，人与世界。
谷歌了一下：存在（英语：Existence），又译为实在、存有，是一个哲学概念，按照20世纪西方存在主义哲学家的定义，是具有难以改变，但能够改变的特性。而相对于存在的不存在（虚无）则是具有难以控制，但能够控制的特性。而两者的界别存在于（无限线）的正反面上。但此界别中的正反面本不存在，故分辨的方向只在乎于其外延对该物的影响。
贝克莱认为，无法被感知的事物（包括被神感知），就无法证明其存在，故“存在就是被感知”。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
题目说的是自我和宇宙的关系，看回第一段：Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe and that in them alone is the clue to nature, history, and ultimately the cosmos.
E：in the imagination and in themselves不符合
所有的推论必须是直接推论！必须去文章里找直接推论！
第一段“ Common to all these writers is their humanistic perspective. Its basic premises are that humans are the spiritual center of the universe...” ---人类是宇宙中心的观点（an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos）是他们的人文主义观点（their humanistic view of existence）的基本前提。选D。
“Both these stresses presume an organic relationship between the self and the cosmos of which only intuition and imagination can properly take account.” --- 只有直觉和想象能解释自我与宇宙的关系。
“These writers’ faith in the imagination and in themselves led them to conceive of the writer as a seer.” --- 这种对直觉和想象的信念让他们认为作家是预言家。E答案，让它们认为作家是预言家的基础是他们对直觉和想象的信念，而不是关于“自我与宇宙的关系”的想法，E错。
这么理解不知道对不对：
理一理逻辑，最后一段最后一句话，作家们对imagination的认可，使得这五个作家认为自己是预言家。倒数第二句话，即问题中的organic relationship是只有imagination可以解释的（这是文章三大论点之一）。那么这样的relationship有什么用呢？也就是三大论点都支持了什么观点呢？就是全文的最大观点：humanity，即选项D
有哪位大神可以解释一下为什么选D吗？以及E错在哪里？谢谢！