ChaseDream

标题: 再请教一题 [打印本页]

---

作者: christineq    时间: 2004-3-15 17:07
标题: 再请教一题

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, “No.” Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.

Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?

(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, “Yes”?

(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?

(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist’s suggestion that they are deaf?

(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?（A）

(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?

---

作者: tangyi79    时间: 2004-3-15 17:19
答案是C么？


    

---

作者: christineq    时间: 2004-3-15 17:30
是A，不太懂

---

作者: tangyi79    时间: 2004-3-15 19:40
哦，有点明白了。


    that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.


如果the part that replies 不聋的话，那么回答问题应该是”Yes“。


如果回答是“No“，就说明两个部分没有分离，就是说the part that replies 还是认为自己是聋的。


稍微有点绕。

---

作者: jnlvo    时间: 2004-3-15 21:01
og上有比较权威的解释。

---

作者: christineq    时间: 2004-3-16 10:19
拜托告诉我怎么找到好吗？

---

作者: christineq    时间: 2004-3-16 10:45
还是不懂，帮帮我吧

---

作者: lawyer_1    时间: 2004-3-16 23:07
其实问题的关键是: 既然两部分已分离,那麽THE THAT REPLIES回答NO的依据是什麽?为何不回答YES.

---

作者: mariezhu    时间: 2004-3-16 23:12
up!

---

作者: weiyu    时间: 2004-3-18 22:51
    原文推理: 被催眠主体可以区分于其它主体, 被催眠主体回答了No(Evidence)->它们可以区别于被催眠主体中的聋子; A反对了原文推理的Evidencefficeffice" />

---

欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/)

Powered by Discuz! X3.3