描述一条你不认同的规定

如何说满两分钟

是四个节拍，不是四个答案。卡片上的提示只是脚手架——一段自然流过这些提示的讲述，比四个互不相连的回答得分更高。

1. 01准确说明这条规定，以及它适用的场合。
2. 02它背后的道理——好好陈述支持它的理由。
3. 03它在哪里失效了，最好举一个你亲眼见过的例子。
4. 04你会用什么来取代它，因为只反对而不给替代方案是很单薄的。

这张卡适合用的词汇

词汇丰富度占你分数的四分之一，而7分的标准明确允许偶尔用错词——一味求稳、只用简单词汇，正是很多人卡在6分的原因。

这张卡的陷阱

一个8分回答，以及它为什么有效

读它是为了看清其中的技巧，而不是背下这些话。考官每个工作日都会听到背诵的答案，这会体现在你的流利度分数上——背诵者的停顿方式和真正在思考的人完全不同。下面的细节都是虚构的，你的回答应该讲你自己的故事。

The rule I'd take issue with is the one at my old workplace requiring everyone to be at their desk by nine, regardless of what they were doing or when they'd finished the night before. On paper it's about fairness. In practice it did two things, both bad. It punished the people who'd stayed late, since they came in at nine anyway and nobody acknowledged it, and it turned lateness into the main visible measure of whether someone was any good, which meant a person who arrived at 8:55 and did very little was in better standing than someone who arrived at 9:20 and did a great deal. I'd argue the deeper problem is that it's a rule measuring the thing that's easy to see rather than the thing that matters. I understand why it exists — judging output is hard and judging attendance takes no effort at all. But a rule you can follow perfectly while being useless is not a good rule.

拿到这个分数的关键

• “A rule you can follow perfectly while being useless is not a good rule”是一个犀利的收尾表述。
• 它在否定规定之前先为其做最有力的辩护，这比单纯抱怨有说服力得多。
• 两个具体后果并列展开，让论证在时间压力下依然条理清晰。

第三部分接下来会问什么

第三部分和你的长篇独白有松散的联系，但问题会变得抽象——问的是一般人，而不是你自己。这张卡之后通常会谈到：

• why societies need rules
• whether rules should change as attitudes change
• how far people should follow rules they think are wrong

如何应对第三部分讨论

其他“抽象话题”话题卡

浏览全部话题卡