Emily and her boyfriend had just had a fight. She felt alone and hopeless. Then she went into the kitchen and grabbed what she needed before going back up to her room quietly. She switched on the TV and started eating…and eating…for hours, until it was all gone.

     What Emily didn't know at the time was that she was suffering from an illness called binge-eating disorder(BED)(暴饮暴食).

    For years, Emily didn't tell anyone what she was doing. She felt ashamed, alone, and out of control. Why don't famous people confess (承认) to BED, as they do to anorexia? It's simple: There's a stigma（污名）involved. “Overeating is seen as very bad, but dieting to be skinny is seen as positive and even associated with determination," says Charles Sophy, a doctor in Beverly Hills , California.

    "Some parents or friends may look at a teen with BED and think, 'Oh, a good diet and some will-power will do the trick.' But that's not true," says Dr.Ovidio Bermudez , a baby doctor at the Eating Recovery Center in Denver. "Eating disorders are real physical and mental health issues; it's not about willpower." The focus in treating BED shouldn't be on weight, because as with all eating disorders, the behaviors with food are a symptom of something deeper.

    Like most other diseases, genetics may play a big part in who gets BED and who doesn't. If you have a close relative with an eating disorder, that means you're more likely to develop an eating disorder of your own.

    Besides, many people with BED have tried at some point or another to control it by going on a diet, but paying more attention to food doesn't help. And it might even make things worse, like it did for Carla, who's 15 now and is recovering from BED. "My parents would always tease me about my weight, so when I was 14, I went on a very restrictive diet," she says. When you can't have something, you only want it more, so every time Carla would have a bite of something that wasn't allowed on her strict diet. She would quickly lose control and binge (狂欢).

    Should we allow modern buildings to be built next to older buildings in a historic area of a city? In order to answer this question, we must first examine whether people really want to preserve the historic feel of an area. Not all historical buildings are attractive. However, there may be other reasons—for example, economic (经济的) reasons—why they should be preserved. So, let us assume that historical buildings are both attractive and important to the majority of people. What should we do then if a new building is needed?

    In my view, new architectural styles can exist perfectly well alongside an older style. Indeed, there are many examples in my own home town of Tours where modern designs have been placed very successfully next to old buildings. As long as the building in question is pleasing and does not dominate (影响) its surroundings too much, it often improves the attractiveness of the area.

    It is true that there are examples of new buildings which have spoilt (破坏) the area they are in, but the same can be said of some old buildings too. Yet people still speak against new buildings in historic areas. I think this is simply because people are naturally conservative(保守的)and do not like change.

    Although we have to respect people's feelings as fellow users of the buildings, I believe that it is the duty of the architect and planner to move things forward. If we always reproduced what was there before, we would all still be living in caves. Thus, I would argue against copying previous architectural styles and choose something fresh and different, even though that might be the more risky choice.

    Do you know how it is when you see someone yawn and you start yawning too? Or how hard it is to be among people laughing and not laugh yourself? Well, apparently it's because we have mirror neurons (神经元) in our brains.

    Put simply, the existence of mirror neurons suggests that every time we see someone else do something, our brains imitate it, whether or not we actually perform the same action. This explains a great deal about how we learn to smile, talk, walk, dance or play sports. But the idea goes further: mirror neurons not only appear to explain physical actions, they also tell us that there is a biological basis for the way we understand other people.

    Mirror neurons can undoubtedly be found all over our brains, but especially in the area which relate to our ability to use languages, and to understand how other people feel. Researchers have found that mirror neurons relate strongly to language. A group of researchers discovered that if they gave people sentences to listen to (for example: “The hand took hold of the ball”), the same mirror neurons were triggered as when the action was actually performed (in this example, actually taking hold of a ball).

    Any problems with mirror neurons may well result in problems with behavior. Much research suggests that people with social and behavioral problems have mirror neurons which are not fully functioning. However, it is not yet known exactly how these discoveries might help find treatments for social disorders.

    Research into mirror neurons seems to provide us with ever more information concerning how humans behave and interact. Indeed, it may turn out to be the equivalent for neuroscience of what Einstein's theory of relativity was for physics. And the next time you feel the urge to cough in the cinema when someone else does-well, perhaps you'll understand why.

    NEW HAVEN, Connecticut—A surprise awaited students in Yale who showed up for Professor Laurie Santos's class. They got slips of paper that said, "No class today." There was only one rule for the students' unexpected free time—They were not allowed to study, but to relax. Since exams and papers were coming up, everyone was tired and stressed. At this moment they were touched. With around applause, nine students hugged Santos, and two burst into tears.

    Yet, cancelling class was not just a break. It was also a challenge, as she was asking them to stop worrying about their grades, even if it was just an hour. One student went to the Yale University Art Gallery for the first time in her four years at Yale. A group of students went to a recording studio and played a new song. More people were outside, and more were smiling. That's why about 1, 200 students were taking Santos's class, called "Psychology and the Good Life," the largest class in Yale's 317-year history. Even non-Yale students had the chance to take Santos's class. It was offered as an online course and she immediately became an Internet hit.

    Skyler Robinson, one of her students, was at a loss for a while about what to do during his break, and then decided to take a nap. "It was a great nap," he commented. Santos designed the class after she realized that her students kept busy through long days that seemed far more depressing and joyless than her own college years. "They feel they're in this crazy rat race. They're working so hard that they can't take a single hour off. That's awful."

    The ideas behind the class are simple. Santos said, "It is the hope that science can help students find peace among all the stresses and difficulties they face at college." The lessons include showing more gratitude, performing acts of kindness and increasing social connections. The students really wanted to learn to lead a happy life in a science -driven way. Santos also noted the psychological happening of "mis-wanting", which led people to work towards the wrong goals in life.

    One week, Santo asked students to exercise. Another week, she wanted them to get more sleep. They worked hard to keep some new habits. Social science research led to many new understandings of how people find happiness. She thinks her class can change Yale, or rather, not just Yale.

It's generally believed that people act the way they do because of their personalities and attitudes .They recycle their garbage because the care about the environment .They pay $5 for a caramel brulée latte because they like expensive coffee drinks.

It's undeniable that behavior comes from our inner dispositions (性情), but in many instances we also draw inferences about who we are, as suggested by the social psychologist Daryl Bem , by observing our own behavior .We can be strangers to ourselves .If we knew our own minds, why would we need to guess what our preferences are from our behavior? If our minds were an open book, we would know exactly how much we care about the environment or like lattes .Actually, we often need to look to our behavior to figure out who we are.

Moreover, we don't just use our behavior to learn about our particular types of character—we infer characters that weren't there before .Our behavior is often shaped by little pressures around us, which we fail to recognize .Maybe we recycle because our wives and neighbors would disapprove if we didn't .Maybe we buy lattes in order to impress the people around us .We should not mistakenly believe that we always behave as a result of some inner disposition.

Whatever pressures there can be or inferences one can make, people become what they do, though it may not be in compliance (符合) with their true desires .Therefore, we should all bear in mind Kurt Vonnegut's advice: "We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be."

A new study examined scientists' peer reviews, or researchers' official statements on others' work, across multiple AI-related conferences. At one such conference, those peer reviews used the word "meticulous" — a buzzword often associated with generative A.I., like ChatGPT — almost 3,400 percent more than the previous year. Other major conferences showed similar patterns. In other words, many researchers were handing, at least, parts of their peer review over to A.I.

What's going on in science is a slice of a much bigger problem. Any viral post on social media now almost certainly includes A.I.-generated elements. There are synthetic videos for children on YouTube, like music videos about parrots where the birds have eyes within eyes, singing in an unnatural voice. The narratives make no sense, and characters appear and disappear randomly.

As a neuroscientist, this worries me. Isn't it possible that human culture contains within it cognitive micronutrients — things like reasonable sentences, narrations and character continuity — that developing brains need? Einstein supposedly said: "If you want your children to be intelligent, read them fairy tales. If you want them to be very intelligent, read them more fairy tales." But what happens when a child is consuming mostly A.I.-generated waste? We find ourselves in the middle of a vast developmental experiment.

A.I.'s cultural pollution is driven by a desire to fill the Internet's appetite for content as cheaply as possible, which in turn pollutes our culture. And despite public appeals to act against it, A.I. companies are dragging their feet because it goes against the industry's bottom line to have detectable products, which they fear might weaken the model's performance, although there is no current evidence.

To deal with this general refusal to act, we need a Clean Internet Act. Perhaps the simplest solution would be to force built-in watermarking to A.I. generated outputs, like patterns not easily removable. Just as the 20th century required action to protect the shared environment, the 21st century is going to require actions to protect a different but equally critical resource: our shared human culture.