16. the war between Britain and France

In the late eighteenth century, battles raged in almost every corner of Europe, as well as in the Middle East, south Africa ,the West Indies, and Latin America. In reality, however, there was only one major war during this time, the war between Britain and France. All other battles were ancillary¹ to this larger conflict, and were often at least partially² related to its antagonist’ goals and strategies. France sought total domination of Europe . this goal was obstructed³ by British independence and Britain’s efforts throughout the continent to thwart⁴ Napoleon; through treaties. Britain built coalitions⁵ (not dissimilar in concept to today’s NATO) guaranteeing British participation⁶ in all major European conflicts. These two antagonists⁷ were poorly matched, insofar as they had very unequal strengths; France was predominant on land, Britain at sea. The French knew that, short of defeating the British navy, their only hope of victory was to close all the ports of Europe to British ships. Accordingly, France set out to overcome Britain by extending its military domination from Moscow t Lisbon, from Jutland to Calabria. All of this entailed⁸ tremendous risk, because France did not have the military resources to control this much territory and still protect itself and maintain order at home.

French strategists calculated that a navy of 150 ships would provide the force necessary to defeat the British navy. Such a force would give France a three-to-two advantage over Britain. This advantage was deemed necessary because of Britain’s superior sea skills and technology because of Britain’s superior sea skills and technology, and also because Britain would be fighting a defensive¹⁰ war, allowing it to win with fewer forces. Napoleon never lost substantial impediment to his control of Europe. As his force neared that goal, Napoleon grew increasingly impatient and began planning an immediate¹¹ attack.

17.Evolution of sleep

Sleep is very ancient. In the electroencephalographic sense we share it with all the primates¹² and almost all the other mammals and birds: it may extend back as far as the reptiles¹³.

There is some evidence that the two types of sleep, dreaming and dreamless, depend on the life-style of the animal, and that predators¹⁴ are statistically¹⁵ much more likely to dream than prey¹⁶, which are in turn much more likely to experience dreamless sleep. In dream sleep, the animal is powerfully immobilized and remarkably¹⁷ unresponsive to external stimuli¹⁸. Dreamless sleep is much shallower, and we have all witnessed cats or dogs cocking their ears to a sound when apparently¹⁹ fast asleep. The fact that deep dream sleep is rare among pray today seems clearly to be a product of natural selection, and it makes sense that today, when sleep is highly evolved, the stupid animals are less frequently immobilized by deep sleep than the smart ones. But why should they sleep deeply at all? Why should a state of such deep immobilization ever have evolved?

Perhaps one useful hint about the original function of sleep is to be found in the fact that dolphins and whales and aquatic²⁰ mammals in genera seem to sleep very little. There is, by and large, no place to hide in the ocean. Could it be that, rather than increasing an animal’s vulnerability, the University of Florida and Ray Meddis of London University have suggested this to be the case. It is conceivable that animals who are too stupid to be quite on their own initiative are, during periods of high risk, immobilized by the implacable arm of sleep. The point seems particularly clear for the young of predatory animals. This is an interesting notion and probably at least partly true.

18.Modern American Universities 胖胖：）

Before the 1850’s, the United States had a number of small colleges, most of them dating from colonial days. They were small, church connected institutions whose primary concern was to shape the moral character of their students.

Throughout Europe, institutions of higher learning had developed, bearing the ancient name of university. In German university was concerned primarily with creating and spreading knowledge, not morals. Between mid-century and the end of the 1800’s, more than nine thousand young Americans, dissatisfied with their training at home, went to Germany for advanced study. Some of them return to become presidents of venerable colleges-----Harvard, Yale, Columbia---and transform them into modern universities. The new presidents broke all ties with the churches and brought in a new kind of faculty²¹. Professors were hired for their knowledge of a subject, not because they were of the proper faith and had a strong arm for disciplining students. The new principle was that a university was to create knowledge as well as pass it on, and this called for a faculty composed of teacher-scholars. Drilling and learning by rote⁹ were replaced by the German method of lecturing, in which the professor’s own research was presented in class. Graduate training leading to the Ph.D., an ancient German degree signifying the highest level of advanced scholarly attainment²², was introduced. With the establishment of the seminar system, graduate student learned to question, analyze²³, and conduct their own research.

At the same time, the new university greatly expanded in size and course offerings, breaking completely out of the old, constricted²⁴ curriculum of mathematics, classics, rhetoric²⁵, and music. The president of Harvard pioneered the elective system, by which students were able to choose their own course of study. The notion of major fields of study emerged. The new goal was to make the university relevant to the real pursuits of the world. Paying close heed²⁶ to the practical needs of society, the new universities trained men and women to work at its tasks, with engineering students being the most characteristic of the new regime. Students were also trained as economists²⁷, architects, agriculturalists, social welfare workers, and teachers.

19.children’s numerical skills 怎么还是胖胖：）

people appear to born to compute²⁸. The numerical skills of children develop so early and so inexorably that it is easy to imagine an internal clock of mathematical maturity²⁹ guiding their growth. Not long after learning to walk and talk, they can set the table with impress accuracy---one knife, one spoon, one fork, for each of the five chairs. Soon they are capable of nothing that they have placed five knives, spoons and forks on the table and, a bit later, that this amounts to fifteen pieces of silverware. Having thus mastered addition, they move on to subtraction³⁰. It seems almost reasonable to expect that if a child were secluded³¹ on a desert island at birth and retrieved³² seven years later, he or she could enter a second enter a second-grade mathematics class without any serious problems of intellectual adjustment.

Of course, the truth is not so simple. This century, the work of cognitive³³ psychologists has illuminated³⁴ the subtle forms of daily learning on which intellectual progress depends. Children were observed as they slowly grasped-----or, as the case might be, bumped into-----concepts that adults take for quantity is unchanged as water pours from a short glass into a tall thin one. Psychologists have since demonstrated that young children, asked to count the pencils in a pile, readily report the number of blue or red pencils, but must be coaxed³⁵ into finding the total. Such studies have suggested that the rudiments³⁶ of mathematics are mastered gradually, and with effort. They have also suggested that the very concept of abstract numbers------the idea of a oneness,

a twoness, a threeness that applies to any class of objects and is a prerequisite³⁷ for doing anything more mathematically demanding than setting a table-----is itself far from innate³⁸

20 The Historical Significance of American Revolution

The ways of history are so intricate and the motivations of human actions so complex that it is always hazardous³⁹ to attempt to represent events covering a number of years, a multiplicity of persons, and distant localities as the expression of one intellectual or social movement; yet the historical process which culminated⁴⁰ in the ascent⁴¹ of Thomas Jefferson to the presidency⁴² can be regarded as the outstanding example not only of the birth of a new way of life but of nationalism as a new way of life. The American Revolution represents the link between the seventeenth century, in which  modern England became conscious of itself, and the awakening⁴³ of modern Europe at the end of the eighteenth century. It may seem strange that the march of history should have had to cross the Atlantic Ocean, but only  in the North American colonies could a struggle for civic⁴⁴ liberty lead also to the foundation of a new nation. Here, in the popular rising against a “tyrannical” government, the fruits were more than the securing of a freer constitution. They included the growth of a nation born in liberty by the will of the people, not from the roots of common descent, a geographic⁴⁵ entity⁴⁶, or the ambitions of king or dynasty. With the American nation, for the first time, a nation was born, not in the dim past of history but before the eyes of the whole world.