There's no doubt that our character has a profound effect on ourfuture. What we must remember, however, is not merely how powerful character isin influencing our fate (命运), but how powerful we are in shaping our own character and, therefore, our own fate. Character may determine our fate, but character is not determined by fate.

    It's a common mistake to think of character as something that is fully formed and fixed very early in life. It calls to mind old proverbs like“A leopard can't change its spots” and “You can't teach an old dog new tricks.”

    This perspective that our character is “etched in stone” is supported by a great deal of modern psychology emphasizing self-acceptance. As Popeye says, “I am what I am.” The hidden message is: Don't expect me to bemore, better, or different.

    Ultimately, these views of humanity totally under value the lifelong potential for growth that comes with the power of reflection and choice.

    How depressing it would be to believe that we can't choose to be better, more honest, more respectful, more responsible, and more caring. Noneof us should give up the personal seeking to improve our character. Not because we're bad, we don't have to be sick to get better, but because we're not asgood as we could be.

    There are so many things in life we can't control, whether we're beautiful or smart, whether we had good parents or bad, whether we grew up with affirmation or negation. It's inspiring to remember that nothing but moral willpower is needed to make us better.

    No, it isn't easy. But if we make a great effort to become moreaware of the habits of heart and mind that drive our behavior, we can begin to place new emphasis on our higher values so that we become what we want our children to think we are.

In 1974, after filling out fifty applications, going through four interviews, and winning one offer, I took what I could get —- a teaching job at what I considered a distant wild area: western New Jersey. My characteristic optimism was alive only when I reminded myself that I would be doing what I had wanted to do since I was fourteen —— teaching English.

    School started, but I felt more and more as if I were in a foreign country. Was this rural area really New Jersey? My students took a week off when hunting season began. I was told they were also frequently absent in late October to help their fathers make hay on the farms. I was a young woman from New York City, who thought that “Make hay while the sun shines” just meant to have a good time.

But, still, I was teaching English. I worked hard, taking time off only to eat and sleep. And then there was my sixth-grade class — seventeen boys and five girls who were only six years younger than me. I had a problem long before I knew it. I was struggling in my work as a young idealistic teacher. I wanted to make literature come alive and to promote a love of the written word. The students wanted to throw spitballs and whisper dirty words in the back of the room.

    In college I had been taught that a successful educator should ignore bad behavior. So I did, confident that, as the textbook had said, the bad behavior would disappear as I gave my students positive attention. It sounds reasonable, but the text evidently ignored the fact that humans, particularly teenagers, rarely seems reasonable. By the time my boss, who was also my taskmaster, known to be the strictest, most demanding, most quick to fire inexperienced teachers, came into the classroom to observe me, the students exhibited very little good behavior to praise.

    My boss sat in the back of the room. The boys in the class were making animal noises, hitting each other while the girls filed their nails or read magazines. I just pretended it all wasn't happening, and went on lecturing and tried to ask some inspiring questions. My boss, sitting in the back of the classroom, seemed to be growing bigger and bigger. After twenty minutes he left, silently. Visions of unemployment marched before my eyes.

    I felt mildly victorious that I got through the rest of class without crying, but at my next free period I had to face him. I wondered if he would let me finish out the day. I walked to his office, took a deep breath, and opened the door.

He was sitting in his chair, and he looked at me long and hard. I said nothing. All I could think of was that I was not an English teacher; I had been lying to myself, pretending that everything was fine.

    When he spoke, he said simply, without accusation, “You had nothing to say to them.”

     “You had nothing to say to them”. he repeated.” No wonder they are bored. Why not get to the meat of literature and stop talking about symbolism. Talk with them, not at them. And more important, why do you ignore their bad behavior”? We talked. He named my problems and offered solutions. We role-played. He was the bad student, and I was the forceful, yet, warm, teacher. 
       As the year progressed, we spent many hours discussing literature and ideas about human beings and their motivations. He helped me identify my weaknesses and strengths. In short, he made a teacher of me by teaching me the reality of Emerson's words: “The secret to education lies in respecting the pupil.”

    Fifteen years later I still drive that same winding road to the same school. Thanks to the help I received that difficult first year, the school is my home now.

    Most people agree that honesty is a good thing. But does Mother Nature agree? Animals can't talk, but can they lie in other ways? Can they lie with their bodies and behavior? Animal experts may not call it lying, but they do agree that many animals, from birds to chimpanzees, behave dishonestly to fool other animals. Why? Dishonesty often helps them survive.

    Many kinds of birds are very successful at fooling other animals. For example, a bird called the plover sometimes pretends to be hurt in order to protect its young. When a predator（猎食动物）gets close to its nest, the plover leads the predator away from the nest. How? It pretends to have a broken wing. The predator follows the "hurt" adult, leaving the baby birds safe in the nest.

    Another kind of bird, the scrub jay, buries its food so it always has something to eat. Scrub jays are also thieves. They watch where others bury their food and steal it. But clever scrub jays seem to know when a thief is watching them. So they go back later, unbury the food, and bury it again somewhere else.

    Birds called cuckoos have found a way to have babies without doing much work. How? They don't make nests. Instead, they get into other birds' nests secretly. Then they lay their eggs and fly away. When the baby birds come out, their adoptive parents feed them.

    Chimpanzees, or chimps, can also be sneaky. After a fight, the losing chimp will give its hand to the other. When the winning chimp puts out its hand, too, the chimps are friendly again. But an animal expert once saw a losing chimp take the winner's hand and start fighting again.

    Chimps are sneaky in other ways, too. When chimps find food that they love, such as bananas, it is natural for them to cry out. Then other chimps come running. But some clever chimps learn to cry very softly when they find food. That way, other chimps don't hear them,  and they don't need to share their food.

    As children, many of us learn the saying "You can't fool Mother Nature." But maybe you can't trust her, either.

    It has been found that plastic that finds itself into UK's waters can find its way to the Arctic within just two years. UK researchers have used a current-tracking tool to follow the waste as it was carried by the waters of the northern hemisphere.

    The team at Imperial College London used PlasticAdrift.org to track ocean currents(洋流) and follow the trail of plastic north to the freezing Arctic waters. Their study revealed that the majority of plastic waste which didn't end up on the UK's coastline, or sink to the ocean floor, was carried through the Barents Sea, north of Norway, before being carried into the Arctic Ocean.

    Large pockets of the world's oceans are now choked with a soup of discarded plastics, made up of everything from shopping bags to old children's toys, brought to these trash “islands” by the currents. Over time larger chunks (厚块，大块) are broken down by the sun's ultraviolet rays (紫外线) and the saltwater, leaving plenty of micro plastics which can kill fish and other wildlife.

    Dr. Erik Van Sebille, a lecturer in oceanography (海洋学) and climate change at Imperial, said, “We're only just beginning to understand the effect that plastic waste has on the weak Arctic ecosystem(生态系统), but we know enough about the damage done by oceanic plastic pollution to act and reduce its impact on our oceans and coastlines. From seabirds caught in loops of plastic packaging to polystyrene particles(聚苯乙烯粒子) blocking the digestive(消化的) systems of fish, plastic causes a continuous path of destruction from surface to seafloor. This analysis shows how in the UK we're part of the problem.”

    Dr. Erik continued, “It would be impossible to ban plastic, and undesirable as it is, it's a useful material that offers many benefits. We should instead have a holistic (整体的) approach to improving the situation, including social and behavioral, chemical and engineering solutions. Our aim is to have the least amount of plastic that ends up in the oceans and make sure it degrades (降解) quickly and safely if it does. ”

    Everyone knows that if a dog's ears are up and its tail is wagging vigorously, it is definitely pleased to see you, but now scientists using a robot have found that the way dogs use their tails is more complicated than we thought, and that dogs which wag them to the left may he more friendly. The animal psychologists discovered that when real dogs approached a life-sized robot dog, they were less cautious about it when it was wagging its tail to the left, while if it was wagging its tail to the right, far fewer dogs approached it in a confident manner.

    In the first experiments, 56 percent of the animals approached the model without hesitation when the tail was wagged to the left, while only 21 percent did so in the other situation. When the researchers excluded (排除) owners from being present, the result were: 31 percent of the dogs approached continuously when the tail was wagging to the left, while only 18 percent did so when it was on the right.

    Animal psychologist Roger Mugford said it added to the growing evidence that does were even more complicated communicators than the animals more closely related to man such as monkeys. He said, "We know that dogs, in a sense, have languages, but it is more complicated because it is not just them wagging their tails, but also giving out chemical displays."

    He adds, "The research confirms earlier studies suggesting that dogs, like humans, had a left-side preference. If you are going to present a signal to a dog, it is sensible to put it on your left-hand side because that is where dogs, unlike most other animals, tend to look. It is another example of the similarity between dogs and humans. They are a lot more human than we give them credit for."

The following 4 famous paintings — from Jan van Eyck's portrait to Pablo Picasso's masterpiece — have stood the test of time.

The Amolfini Portrait

Jan van Eyck's Amolfini Portrait, an oil painting on wood produced in 1434, in which a man and a woman hold hands with a window behind him and a bed behind her, is undoubtedly one of the masterpieces in the National Gallery, London. This painting is as visually interesting as it is famed. It is also an informative document on fifteenth-century society, through van Eyck's heavy use of symbolism — while husbands went out to engage in business, wives concerned themselves with domestic duties.

The Starry Night

Vincent van Gogh painted The Starry Night, oil on canvas (帆布), a moderately abstract landscape painting of an expressive night sky over a small hillside village, during his 12-month stay at the mental hospital near Saint–Remy-de-Provence, France between 1889 and 1890. When the Museum of Modem Art in New York City purchased the painting from a private collector in 1941, it was not well known, but it has since become one of van Gogh's most famous works.

The Harvesters

The Harvesters is an oil painting on wood completed by Pieter Bruegel the Elder in 1565. It depicts the harvest time which most commonly occurred within the months of August and September. Nicolaes Jonghelinck, a merchant banker and art collector from Antwerp, commissioned this painting. The painting has been at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City since 1919.

Guernica

Guernica, a large black-and-white oil painting, was painted by the Cubist Spanish painter, Pablo Picasso in 1937. The title 'Guernica' refers to the city that was bombed by Nazi planes during the Spanish Civil War. The painting depicts the horrors of war and as a result, has come to be an anti-war symbol and a reminder of the tragedies of war. Today, the painting is housed at the Museo Nacional Centro de Arte Reina Sofia in Madrid.