英语社会科学类文章阅读

『壹』 那里去找英文原著或文章--主要是人文社科类的名著

王府井图书大厦地下一楼

『贰』 写一篇英文不少于100字的关于人文和社会科学能给我们什么启示的文章

和谐的社会能给人美的享受和物质的满足，人们过着温暖和质感的生活版;人们的价值得到权承认，智慧得到嘉奖，尊严得到尊重，痛苦和责任得到理解和分担;和谐的社会应有一双大手，扶起跌倒的老人，拭干受挫者的眼泪，抚慰失落者的心灵，给成功的人以掌声，为迷茫的人指明方向。和谐的社会更需要钢筋水泥，架起贯彻长天的虹桥，筑就一座座人类文明发展的里程碑，让高楼拔地而起，让梦想奔向宇宙。这就需要人文来支撑人们的精神价值体系，用科学奠定实生活的基础。
回望中国五千年的绵绣历史，铁马冰河搅乱了多少文人武士的清梦，关塞明月寄托了多少成功战士思家的情怀。尤其是近代以来，帝国主义对中国的侵略，中国如同弃掷于碾盘之中，受尽磨砺。然而中国并没有被打倒，至今仍雄踞一方。是什么让他坚韧如斯，得以长存?是中华民族五千年来的文化积淀，是中华民族的铮铮傲骨，这如一层柔韧的襁褓，呵护着中国度过一个个充斥着凄风苦雨的黑夜。灿烂的文明，是中国捧出的绚丽的珍珠，这珍珠颗颗都是风雨磨砺的结晶。文化支撑着一个古老文明的延续，在延续中文化得充实。正是文化唤醒了人们“天下兴亡，匹夫有责”的意识，激发了战士们同仇故忾，祝死如归的斗志。

『叁』 中国最牛逼的一本社科类杂志，是不是《中国社会科学》啊英文的

应该是吧。

『肆』 推荐一下比较好的英语社科类杂志

英语广场

『伍』 急求英文社科类论文一篇，字数2000字左右，不要太难，六级左右的难度即可，我做翻译用。

你好，我在校内数据库外文知网搜的。所以你打不开。就不给地址了，希望对你有用。
Cooperation and the Commons
Sustainably managing common natural resources, such as fisheries, water, and forests, is essential for our long-term survival. Many analysts have assumed, however, that people will maximize short-term self-benefits—for example, by cutting as much firewood as they can sell—and warned that this behavior will inevitably proce a “tragedy of the commons” (1), such as a stripped forest that no longer proces wood for anyone. But in laboratory simulations of such social dilemmas, the outcome is not always tragedy. Instead, a basic finding is that humans do not universally maximize short-term self-benefits, and can cooperate to proce shared, long-term benefits (2, 3). Similar findings have come from field studies of commonly managed resources (6–7). It has been challenging, however, to directly relate laboratory findings to resource conditions in the field, and identify the conditions that enhance cooperation. On page 961 of this issue, Rustagi et al. (8) help fill this gap. In an innovative study of Ethiopia's Oromo people, they use economic experiments and forest growth data to show that groups that had a higher proportion of “conditional cooperators” were more likely to invest in forest patrols aimed at enforcing firewood collection rules—and had more proctive forests. They also show that other factors, including a group's distance to markets and the quality of its leadership, influenced the success of cooperative management.

Researchers have translated social dilemmas into economic games in which the players—typically college students in the United States or Europe—can earn real money, depending on whether they and others “invest” in a common good, or become “free riders” who benefit without paying their fair share. Cardenas (9) was the first to translate a game carried out with students using computers in a lab (5) into a pen-and-paper version that was played by actual users of local forests in Colombia. This field effort essentially replicated the lab findings, but the levels of cooperative behavior observed were more variable. Other field experiments examined how people who relied on forests, fisheries, and grazing lands responded to experimental designs that enabled them to impose sanctions on free riders, including varying monetary penalties (10, 11). Several examined whether rules established by an external authority—such as a government—“ out” a group's motivation to cooperate
In Ethiopia's Bale Mountains, Rustagi et al. took these experiments a step further. There, high livestock density poses a major threat to forests, because the animals browse on young trees. To address this and other problems, officials launched a forest management program that gave Bale Oromo groups common ownership of woodlands, and responsibility for maintaining forest cover. To explore the role of cooperation in the success of these efforts, Rustagi et al. first set up “field labs” in a number of villages, and invited residents to play games designed to measure their propensity to cooperate (conditional on others' cooperation). They also concted surveys that gathered socioeconomic data and information about resource monitoring efforts. Finally, they compared the game results and the survey data from 49 groups to measurements of potential crop trees, an indicator of forest proctivity. Overall, they found that the groups with the larger shares of conditionally cooperative members were more likely to be successful in managing their forest commons. They also invested more in “costly” enforcement of cooperation (participating in forest patrols, which promote cooperation by sanctioning free riders).

By establishing this link between the levels of cooperation observed in field labs with local forest conditions, Rustagi et al. have increased the confidence that scholars can have in the external validity of results from previous experiments carried out all over the world, with student and nonstudent subjects. In addition, by adding to findings showing diverse levels of cooperation in social dilemmas, rather than no cooperation, they support the growing acceptance of a behavioral theory of human action (14): Indivials facing dilemmas, who learn from experience and adopt a norm of conditional cooperation, achieve levels of cooperation that increase over time—if a sufficient number of conditional cooperators are present. If a group is composed of a substantial number of free riders, however, cooperation levels fall over time.

One way of interpreting Rustagi et al.'s findings is that learning and norm-adopting indivials are attracted to certain situations, and then are affected by the behavior of other actors facing the same situation (see the figure). Initially, this leads to some degree of cooperation (e.g., acceptance of rules of the forest group, monitoring other users, and helping to maintain their forest). If enough indivials initially cooperate, they slowly obtain benefits from the forest, and levels of cooperation grow. Alternatively, initial cooperation rates can be low, and then can continue to decline over time.

Rustagi et al. identify a number of well-known variables that can influence cooperation, including the size of the forest group, its leadership, and the heterogeneity of the group. Other, broader, variables include village elevation and market access, with villages closer to markets for wood procts more likely to invest in cooperative management. Other field studies have found that prior experience in cooperative management increases the likelihood of groups successfully managing a resource.

Rustagi et al. also found that the share of conditional cooperators in a group is affected by clan affiliation and the leader, who needs to have sufficient prestige to change the norms of the group. Other recent evidence from field experiments shows that resource users responded prosocially to environmental appeals made by park rangers (15). More details of cultural effects on cooperation are provided by Prediger et al. (16), who use a socioecological framework (17) to identify main differences between two populations before performing field experiments. They show that historical events that interfere with self-governance, as well as subtle ecological differences, can affect the propensity to cooperate.

More research is needed to explain the factors that proce variation in cooperation. Using multiple methods (18) to identify the relevant “microsituational” and broader contextual variables, and using robust econometric methods to link these variables with differences in behavior and real-world outcomes, will constitute a major step in advancing a behavioral theory of human action.

『陆』 人文社科的优势和劣势英语作文

Since I was an elementary school student, I have been doing a great deal of reading and writing. I like philosophy, politics, and science as well as fairy tales. I study history carefully, especially the history about our own people and country. It is always enjoyable to sit on the grass in an open sir place reading my books. It is quite natural and clear to me that my major in college will be one of the humanities. I imagine that a career in teaching humanities will be challenging and attractive. One day when I hold conversations with young students in classroom or any place, we will discuss a philosophy of life, ways of thinking, the idea of democracy, ideas of right and wrong, and ideas of beauty.

『柒』 请大家推荐几个好的国外社科英文书籍及视频网站，最好能够免费下载国外英文社会科学书籍和观看视频的

去时代周刊就够了。但是视频一般是下载不了的

『捌』 想找一些有意思的人文社科类的英文期刊论文，可以在哪里找

一般比较大型的报纸上会有英文版的内容

『玖』 社科类的英文数据库有哪些

《城市规划》有英文版，但英文版的不是核心，你最好问一下。

『拾』 求社科院研究生英语教材—社会科学英语阅读理解高级教材—里面文章的中文翻译

来这，不如去社科苑论坛。
如果你想考社科院的话，那里信息很多。基本都是免费的。是大家义务提供了。