问题 问答题 案例分析题

阅读《孟子·梁惠王下》节选段落,回答问题:

庄暴见孟子,曰:“暴见于王,王语暴以好乐,暴未有以对也。”曰:“好乐何如?”孟子曰:“王之好乐甚,则齐国其庶几乎!”

他日见于王曰:“王尝语庄子以好乐,有诸?”王变乎色,曰:“寡人非能好先王之乐也,直好世俗之乐耳。”曰:“王之好乐甚,则齐其庶几乎!今之乐犹古之乐也。”曰:“可得闻与?”曰:“独乐乐,与人乐乐,孰乐?”曰:“不若与人。”曰:“与少乐乐,与众乐乐,孰乐?”曰:“不若与众。”

臣请为王言乐:“今王鼓乐于此,百姓闻王钟鼓之声,管钥之音,举疾首蹙頞而相告曰:‘吾王之好鼓乐,夫何使我至于此极也?父子不相见,兄弟妻子离散。’今王田猎于此,百姓闻王车马之音,见羽旄之美,举疾首蹙頞而相告曰:‘吾王之好田猎,夫何使我至于此极也?父子不相见,兄弟妻子离散。’此无他,不与民同乐也。”

“今王鼓乐于此,百姓闻王钟鼓之声、管钥之音,举欣欣然有喜色而相告曰:‘吾王庶几无疾病与,何以能鼓乐也?’今王田猎于此,百姓闻王车马之音,见羽旄之美,举欣欣然有喜色而相告曰:‘吾王庶几无疾病与,何以能田猎也?’此无他,与民同乐也。今王与百姓同乐,则王矣。”

请结合孟子的仁政、民本思想,谈谈你对“与民同乐”的理解。

答案

参考答案:

①“与民同乐”思想是基于其仁政和民本思想的前提下形成的,是以人性善为哲学基础的。

②“与民同乐”是孟子仁政思想在政治方面的体现,这是仁政的直接成果。

③“与民同乐”的思想是孟子将君与民放在政治天平上权衡,得出“民为贵,社稷次之,君为轻”的超越政治的结论之后所作的深入阐发,使民本真正成为一种文化信念及精神境界。

单项选择题
单项选择题

In 1930, W. K. Kellogg made what he thought was a sensible decision, grounded in the best economic, social and management theories of the time. Workers at his cereal plant in Battle Greek, Mich. were told to go home two hours earlier, every day for good.
The Depression-era move was hailed in Factory and Industrial Management magazine as the "biggest piece of industrial news since Henry Ford announced his five-dollar-a-day policy." It’s believed that industry and machines would lead to workers’ paradises where all would have less work, more free time, and yet still produce enough to meet their needs.
So what happened Today, instead of working less, our hours have stayed steady or risen- and today many more women work so that families can afford the trappings of suburbia. In effect, workers chose the path of consumption over leisure.
With unemployment at a nine-year high and many workers worded about losing their jobs- or forced to accept cutbacks in pay and benefits -- work is hardly the paradise economists once envisioned.
The modern environment would seem alien to pre-industrial laborers. For centuries, the household -- from farms to "cottage" craftsmen -- was the unit of production. The whole family was part of the enterprise, be it farming, blacksmithing, or baking. "In pre-industrial society, work and family were practically the same thing," says Gillis.
The Industrial Revolution changed all that. Mills and massive iron smelters required ample labor and constant attendance. For the first time, work and family were split. Instead of selling what they produced, workers sold their time. With more people leaving farms to move to cities and factories, labor became a commodity and placed on the market like any other.
Innovation gave rise to an industrial process based on machinery and mass production. The theories of Frederick Taylor, a Philadelphia factory foreman, led to work being broken down into component parts, with each step timed to coldly quantify jobs that skilled craftsmen had worked a lifetime to learn. Workers resented Taylor and his stopwatch, complaining that his focus on process stripped their jobs of creativity and pride, making them irritable. Long before anyone knew what "stress" was, Taylor brought it to the workplace- and without sympathy.
The division of work into components that could be measured and easily taught reached its apex in Ford’s River Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Mich., where the assembly line came of age. To maximize the production lines, businesses needed long hours from their workers. But it was no easy to sell.
Labor leaders fought back with their own propaganda. For more than a century, a key struggle for the labor movement was reducing the amount of time workers had to spend on the job.
Between 1830 and 1930, work hours were cut nearly in half, with economist John Maynard Keynes famously predicting in 1930 that by 2030 a 15-hour workweek would be standard. While work had once been a means to serve God, two centuries of choices and industrialization had turned work into an end in itself, stripped of the spiritual meaning that sustained the Puritans who came ready to tame the wilderness.
By the end of the 1970s, companies were reaching out to spiritually drained workers by offering more engagement while withdrawing the promise of a job for life, as the American economy faced a stiff challenge from cheaper workers abroad. By the 1990s, technology made working from home possible for a growing number of people. Seen as a boon at first, telecommuting and the rapidly proliferating "electronic leash" of cell phones made work inescapable, as employees found themselves on call 24/7. Today, almost half of American workers use computers, cell phones, E-mail, and faxes for work during what is supposed to be nonwork time. Home is no longer a refuge but a cozier extension of the office.
When the stock market bubble burst and the economy fell into its recent recession, workers were forced to re-evaluate their priorities. They want a better quality of life; they’re asking for more flextime to spend with their families.
But there’s still the question of fulfillment. A recent study shows that work doesn’t satisfy workers’ deeper needs. "We expect more and more out of our jobs," says Hunnicutt. "We expect to find wonderful people and experience all around us."

According to the passage, which of the following statements is true

A.Employees could work at home freely by using cell phones and telecommuting.

B.Employees could escape from work because they had telecommuting and cell phones.

C.Employees were controlled by their employers because of the telecommuting and cell phones.

D.Employees were called up by their employers for seven times within 24 hours.