insight（）

Ernest Hemingway’s keen insight into his society, ardent love for people and perceptive abilities helped him to form his own ____ characteristic of writing（） The last sentence of “Two Kinds” is significant because it contains the narrator’s epiphany, a moment of insight, discovery or revelation, by which the character’s view is greatly altered. 在INSIGHT窗口中，先选择相应的列变量名，然后点击鼠标右键，在菜单中选择“抽取”，则可以实现数据集的 Which two statements are true about Oracle Real Applications Insight ？（） Which two statements are true about Oracle Real Applications Insight ？（） 在INSIGHT模块的主窗口中，打开已经存在的SAS数据集，选择“分析（A）”→“多元（YX）（M）”菜单项，在弹出的窗口进行相应的设置，可实现（ ） 中国大学MOOC: 设计观点POV中的最后一部分为洞见Insight，它是对用户深层次需求的洞察，重点在于诠释人与物之间的关系。（ ） Passage 1In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition ofcreativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During ourconversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that heused to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed ormisunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity Well, we knowthat someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, apsychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view iswrong, or at least not entirely right. "Creativity is the process, not the product," he says.To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen apaperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a newway of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. "That was very creative," Beeman says. Onthe flip side, if someone works in a new field--Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology--anything that he produces may be considered inherently "creative." But was the act of producing itactually creative As Beeman put it,"Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are verycreative."Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specificmoment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. "Insight is only onepart of creativity," Beeman says."But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker thatsomething just happened in the brain. I′d never say that′s all of creativity, but it′s a central,identifiable component." When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what typesof attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate abreakthrough, are there methods you c Passage 1In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition ofcreativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During ourconversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that heused to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed ormisunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity Well, we knowthat someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, apsychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view iswrong, or at least not entirely right. "Creativity is the process, not the product," he says.To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen apaperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a newway of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. "That was very creative," Beeman says. Onthe flip side, if someone works in a new field--Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology--anything that he produces may be considered inherently "creative." But was the act of producing itactually creative As Beeman put it,"Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are verycreative."Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specificmoment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. "Insight is only onepart of creativity," Beeman says."But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker thatsomething just happened in the brain. I′d never say that′s all of creativity, but it′s a central,identifiable component." When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what typesof attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate abreakthrough, are there methods you c Passage 1In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition ofcreativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During ourconversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that heused to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed ormisunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity Well, we knowthat someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, apsychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view iswrong, or at least not entirely right. "Creativity is the process, not the product," he says.To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen apaperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a newway of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. "That was very creative," Beeman says. Onthe flip side, if someone works in a new field--Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology--anything that he produces may be considered inherently "creative." But was the act of producing itactually creative As Beeman put it,"Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are verycreative."Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specificmoment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. "Insight is only onepart of creativity," Beeman says."But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker thatsomething just happened in the brain. I′d never say that′s all of creativity, but it′s a central,identifiable component." When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what typesof attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate abreakthrough, are there methods you c Passage 1In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition ofcreativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During ourconversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that heused to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed ormisunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity Well, we knowthat someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, apsychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view iswrong, or at least not entirely right. "Creativity is the process, not the product," he says.To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen apaperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a newway of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. "That was very creative," Beeman says. Onthe flip side, if someone works in a new field--Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology--anything that he produces may be considered inherently "creative." But was the act of producing itactually creative As Beeman put it,"Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are verycreative."Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specificmoment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. "Insight is only onepart of creativity," Beeman says."But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker thatsomething just happened in the brain. I′d never say that′s all of creativity, but it′s a central,identifiable component." When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what typesof attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate abreakthrough, are there methods you c Passage 1In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition ofcreativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During ourconversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that heused to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed ormisunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity Well, we knowthat someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, apsychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view iswrong, or at least not entirely right. "Creativity is the process, not the product," he says.To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen apaperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a newway of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. "That was very creative," Beeman says. Onthe flip side, if someone works in a new field--Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology--anything that he produces may be considered inherently "creative." But was the act of producing itactually creative As Beeman put it,"Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are verycreative."Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specificmoment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. "Insight is only onepart of creativity," Beeman says."But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker thatsomething just happened in the brain. I′d never say that′s all of creativity, but it′s a central,identifiable component." When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what typesof attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate abreakthrough, are there methods you c If there is one person to blame for economists"habit of commenting on everything,it is Gary Becker,who died on May 3rd.Not content with studying the worlds economies,he was the first prominent economist to apply economic tools to all aspects of life.He revealed that people are often purposeful and rational in their decisions,whether they are changing jobs,taking drugs or divorcing their spouses This insight,and the work that followed from it earned him a nobel prize in 1992.No less an eminence than Milton Friedman declared in 2001 that Mr Becker was"the greatest social scientist who has lived and worked in the last half-century.At the heart of Mr Beckers work was the view that"individuals maximise welfare as they conceive it.Welfare need not mean income;it could derive from the pleasure of selflessness 在火星表面执行任务的NASA“洞察号（InSight）”探测器探测到火星上可能发生的第一次地震，这使得科学家们兴奋不已。科学家们认为，火星地震的起源与地球上地震活动的起源有些不同。我们星球上的许多地震都是由板块构造引起的。板块在不断地移动和相互摩擦，这种运动部分是由地球内部深处的热量引发。下列选项如果为真，最能肯定科学家的说法的是（）。 If there is one person to blame for economists"habit of commenting on everyhing,it is Gary Becker,who died on May 3rd.Not content with studying the world"s economies,he was the first prominent economist to apply economic tools to all aspects of life.He revealed that people are often purposeful and rational in their decisions,whether they are changing jobs,taking drugs or divorcing their spouses.This insight,and the work that followed from it,eamed him a Nobel prize in 1992.No less an eminence than Milton Friedman declared in 2001 that Mr Becker was"the grealest social scientist who has lived and worked in the last half-century".At the heart of Mr Becker"s work was the view that"individuals maximise welfare as they conceive it."Welfare need not mean income;it could derive from the pleasure of selflessness. Mr.Joneswokeearlyonemorning，beforethesunhadrisen.Itwasabeautifulmorning，_31_hewenttothewindowandlookedout.Hewas_32_toseeaneatly-dressedandmid-agedprofessor，who_33_intheuniversityjustuptheroadfromMr.Jones‘house，comingthedirectionofthetown.Hehadgreyhairthickglasses，andwas_34anumbrella，amorningnewspaperandabag.Mr.Jonesthoughtthathemusthave_35_bythenighttrain_36_takingataxi.Mr.Joneshadabigtreeinhisgarden，andthechildrenhadtiedalong_37_tooneofthebranches，sothattheycouldswingonit.Mr.Jonessawtheprofessor_38_whenhesawtheropeandlookedcarefullyupanddowntheroad.Whenhesawthattherewas_39_insight，hesteppedintothegarden(therewasnofence)，puthisumbrella，newspaper，bagandhatnearlyonthegrassand_40_therope.Hepulledit_41_toseewhetheritwasstrongenoughtotakehisweight，thenranasfastashecouldandswungintothe_42_ontheendoftherope，hisgreyhairblowingallaround_43_._44_heswung，sometimestakingafewmore_45_stepsonthegrasswhentheropebegantoswing_46_slowlyforhim._47_theprofessorstopped，straightenedhistie，combedhishaircarefully，putonhishat，_48_hisumbrella，newspaperandbag，andcontinued_49_hiswaytotheuniversity，lookingas_50_andcorrectandrespectableasonewouldexpectaprofessortobe._________ 资料：Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks. To the contrary, people perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight. These questions gently challenge old assumptions, but do so in a constructive way. Sitting there silently nodding does not provide sure evidence that a person is listening, but asking a good question tells the speaker the listener has not only heard what was said, but that they comprehended it well enough to want additional information. Good listening was consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way “speaker versus hearer” interaction. The best conversations were active.Good listening included interactions that build a person"s self-esteem. The best listeners made the conversation a positive experience for the other party. which doesn"t happen when the listener is passive （or, for that matter, critical!） Good listeners made the other person feel supported and conveyed confidence in them. Good listening was characterized by the creation of a safe environment in which issues and differences could be discussed openly.Good listening was seen as a cooperative conversation. In these interactions, feedback flowed smoothly in both directions with neither party becoming defensive about comments the other made. By contrast, poor listeners were seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn"t make you a good listener. Good listeners may challenge assumptions and disagree, but the person being listened to feels the listener is trying to help, not wanting to win an argumentWhich could be the title of this passage? 资料：Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks. To the contrary, people perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight. These questions gently challenge old assumptions, but do so in a constructive way. Sitting there silently nodding does not provide sure evidence that a person is listening, but asking a good question tells the speaker the listener has not only heard what was said, but that they comprehended it well enough to want additional information. Good listening was consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way “speaker versus hearer” interaction. The best conversations were active.Good listening included interactions that build a person"s self-esteem. The best listeners made the conversation a positive experience for the other party. which doesn"t happen when the listener is passive （or, for that matter, critical!） Good listeners made the other person feel supported and conveyed confidence in them. Good listening was characterized by the creation of a safe environment in which issues and differences could be discussed openly.Good listening was seen as a cooperative conversation. In these interactions, feedback flowed smoothly in both directions with neither party becoming defensive about comments the other made. By contrast, poor listeners were seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn"t make you a good listener. Good listeners may challenge assumptions and disagree, but the person being listened to feels the listener is trying to help, not wanting to win an argumentThe main purpose of the passage is to____. 资料：Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks. To the contrary, people perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight. These questions gently challenge old assumptions, but do so in a constructive way. Sitting there silently nodding does not provide sure evidence that a person is listening, but asking a good question tells the speaker the listener has not only heard what was said, but that they comprehended it well enough to want additional information. Good listening was consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way “speaker versus hearer” interaction. The best conversations were active.Good listening included interactions that build a person"s self-esteem. The best listeners made the conversation a positive experience for the other party. which doesn"t happen when the listener is passive （or, for that matter, critical!） Good listeners made the other person feel supported and conveyed confidence in them. Good listening was characterized by the creation of a safe environment in which issues and differences could be discussed openly.Good listening was seen as a cooperative conversation. In these interactions, feedback flowed smoothly in both directions with neither party becoming defensive about comments the other made. By contrast, poor listeners were seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn"t make you a good listener. Good listeners may challenge assumptions and disagree, but the person being listened to feels the listener is trying to help, not wanting to win an argumentAccording to the paragraph, a good listener would NOT____. 资料：Good listening is much more than being silent while the other person talks. To the contrary, people perceive the best listeners to be those who periodically ask questions that promote discovery and insight. These questions gently challenge old assumptions, but do so in a constructive way. Sitting there silently nodding does not provide sure evidence that a person is listening, but asking a good question tells the speaker the listener has not only heard what was said, but that they comprehended it well enough to want additional information. Good listening was consistently seen as a two-way dialog, rather than a one-way “speaker versus hearer” interaction. The best conversations were active.Good listening included interactions that build a person"s self-esteem. The best listeners made the conversation a positive experience for the other party. which doesn"t happen when the listener is passive （or, for that matter, critical!） Good listeners made the other person feel supported and conveyed confidence in them. Good listening was characterized by the creation of a safe environment in which issues and differences could be discussed openly.Good listening was seen as a cooperative conversation. In these interactions, feedback flowed smoothly in both directions with neither party becoming defensive about comments the other made. By contrast, poor listeners were seen as competitive — as listening only to identify errors in reasoning or logic, using their silence as a chance to prepare their next response. That might make you an excellent debater, but it doesn"t make you a good listener. Good listeners may challenge assumptions and disagree, but the person being listened to feels the listener is trying to help, not wanting to win an argumentWhen a listener asks constructive questions, it means____.