一开始,她的声音还有点发紧,但很快,她就逐渐找到了状态。 从分享自己和朋友因为社交媒体重新联系上的小故事切入,再到引用数据说明问题,逻辑清晰,语气也变得自然流畅起来。 "Therefore, I believe that tools themselves are neither good nor evil; it all depends on how we use them. Social media can be a bridge that brings people closer, or a wall that creates division. This hinges entirely on whether we, behind the screens, are willing to invest sincere time and genuine emotion."(……所以,我认为,工具本身并无善恶,关键在于我们如何使用它。社交媒体可以是拉近距离的桥梁,也可以是制造隔阂的高墙,这取决于屏幕背后的我们,是否愿意付出真诚的时间和情感。) 温令仪说完最后一句,微微鞠躬。
他的方案不仅构思巧妙,而且引用了不少课堂上学到的商业模型,逻辑严密,表达清晰。 当他讲到“What we need is not more 'friends,' but more meaningful resonance.”(我们需要的不是更多‘好友’,而是更有质量的‘回响)时,他看到评委席上有几位老师微微颔首。
轮到陆映璇。 她抬起眼,目光平静地看向对方,开口的第一句话就让全场安静下来: "The opposition has argued about the 'side effects' of social media, but equating these side effects with 'leading to increased loneliness' is an equivocation."(对方同学论证了社交媒体的‘副作用’,但将‘副作用’等同于‘使人更孤独’,这是偷换概念。)
她的声音不高。
当陈鋆提到“线上交流无法替代线下陪伴”时,她立刻回应: "So the real question is whether we're discussing feeling 'less lonely' or 'not lonely,' rather than 'completely free from loneliness.' Social media serves as a supplement and extension to our existing emotional networks, not a replacement. Would someone who can readily share their life with distant friends and family truly feel lonelier than someone who has completely lost such connections?"(所以我们讨论的是‘更孤独’还是‘不孤独’,而不是‘完全不孤独’。社交媒体是在原有情感网络上的补充和延伸,而非替代。一个能随时与远方亲友分享生活的人,会比一个完全失去联系的人,更孤独吗?)