1 . For a place with a reputation for bottling up feelings, Britain is remarkably honest about mental health problems. The British are more likely than people in any other rich country to think that mental illness is a disease like any other and that support should be sought. Only the Swedes hold the idea that a history of mental health problems should not disqualify someone from public office.

Much of the rich world has struggled with rising rates of self-reported mental health problems. But the numbers in Britain are frightening. Around 4.5 million Britons were in contact with mental health services in 2021-2022, which was almost 1 million higher than five years ago. A National Health Service (NHS) survey in 2023 found that one in five 8-to 16-year-olds in England had a probable mental disorder, up from one in eight in 2017. In 17-to 19-year-olds the figure had increased from one in ten to one in four.

It is good that people do not feel they must bottle things up. Awareness of mental health has raised public knowledge of mental health disorders and revealed that many Britons’ needs are not met, but it has caused damage, too.

Despite the best intentions, campaigns intended to raise awareness are leading some people to combine normal responses to life’s difficulties with mental health disorders. Special treatment creates motivations for people to seek diagnoses (诊断) and to medicalise problems unnecessarily. The need to treat people with milder conditions competes with care for those who have the most severe ones. Medicalising mild worry may not benefit patients; instead, normal teaching is just as good for mental health. But the great harm from over diagnosis is to those who most need help.

Britons’ approaches to mental health require several changes. More money should go on research so that individuals are treated appropriately. More time and effort should be given to those most in need of help. All suffering should be taken seriously, but a diagnosis is not always in someone’s best interests.

2 . When the Zimbabwean editor Irene Staunton and her husband Murray McCartney set up their publishing business in 1998, it seemed natural to call it Weaver Press. Their modest headquarters in the back garden of their home looked out on the landscape that was peppered with many complex nests of the weaver birds (织布鸟).

For more than 25 years, the company’s location has not changed and the number of the team member has rarely been more than two. But in the words of one distinguished Zimbabwean scholar, Weaver Press has “quietly shaped post-independence Zimbabwean literature”. “Publishing in Zimbabwe has always mainly focused on textbooks, with very few exceptions,” McCartney says. “Weaver was one of those exceptions. We focused on literary fiction and academic nonfiction and in doing so, we tried to put Zimbabwe on the map — not because we’ve published hundreds of books, but because we presented a complex and sweeping picture of Zimbabwe that may otherwise not have existed to the outside world.”

One of the first books Weaver published was The Stone Virgins, a novel by Yvonne Vera that won the Macmillan Prize for African Adult Fiction in 2002. “Fiction is an important form of truth-telling, because a good writer will look at a situation from many different points of view — you don’t want the social history of a country to come out of a single description,” Staunton says.

Among the most successful writers Weaver has worked with is No Violet Bulawayo, author of Glory, shortlisted for the Booker Prize in 2022. Bulawayo stresses Staunton’s editing skill. “Her sharp eye, intelligence and honesty helped me define my own ethics (道德标准) around reading and editing mine and the work of others, which I especially needed when I was a young writer,”she says. Despite the praise, Staunton says she doesn’t want to be center stage. “Editors are backroom people, like stagehands, doing everything they can to push the author to be front and center.”

3 . Would you take a trip if you couldn’t use your cellphone? A new tour company called Off the Grid is asking travellers to put their cellphones away and not even use them for photos. The company founder, Zach Beattie, is developing his business, using money he saved from a tech job at a mapping company. He’s hired guides for every trip but will help lead the first few himself.

The first trip is to Lisbon, Portugal, in July. It takes 7 to 10 days, with small groups of up to 16 people. Prices range from $1,500 to $1,650, including accommodations, meals and ground transportation. The plan includes at least three excursions (远足) and two social events, with an emphasis on unique experiences over bucket-list sightseeing. The tour also includes surfing lessons, yoga on the beach, a day of sailing and dinner with a local family.

“When you’re somewhere new, there’s a lot to see and a lot of cool and interesting people to meet,” Beattie said. “Your phone can distract (使分心) you.” The phone ban won’t be enforced quite as strictly as it seems at first glance. “We want it to be voluntary,” he said. “We’re not collecting phones and throwing them in a locked trunk. It’s held by you, but put in your pocket, and you state your intentions for the week, whether that’s checking your social media once or twice a day or a total blackout.”

Tour-goers also get a “dumbphone” without Internet access that’s loaded with numbers for group leaders and other participants, both for emergencies and to promote socializing. Participants may bring regular cameras, but Beattie is hiring a photographer for each tour so there will be plenty of photos to remember the trip. Once the trip is over, participants will have access to those photos for use in social media posts.

6 . This question has fascinated behavioural scientists for decades: why do we give money to charity?

The explanations for charitable giving fall into three broad categories, from the purely altruisic (利他的)— I donate because I value the social good done by the charity. The “impurely” altruistic— I donate because I extract value from knowing I contribute to the social good for the charity. And the not-at-all altruistic— I donate because I want to show off to potential mates how rich I am.

But are these motives strong enough to enable people to donate as much as they would want to? Most people support charities in one way or another, but often we struggle to make donations as often as we think we should. Although many people would like to leave a gift to charity in their will, they forget about it when the time comes.

Many people are also aware that they should donate to the causes that have the highest impact, but facts and figures are less attractive than narratives. In a series of experiments, it was found that people are much more responsive to charitable pleas that feature a single, identifiable beneficiary(受益者), than they are to statistical information about the scale of the problem being faced. When it comes to charitable giving, we are often ruled by our hearts and not our heads.

The good news is that charitable giving is contagious—seeing others give makes an individual more likely to give and gentle encouragement from an important person in your life can also make a big difference to your donation decisions— more than quadrupling them in our recent study. Habit also plays a part— in three recent experiments those who volunteered before were more likely to do donate their time than those who had not volunteered before.

In summary, behavioural science identifies a range of factors that influence our donations, and can help us to keep giving in the longer term. This is great news not just for charities, but also for donors.

8 . Pullman is a superb writer and Seagull is a brilliant communicator. They had a debate after Seagull posted a question on his social media platform: “When you were trying to create an environment for learning, what were your best pieces of classical music to listen to?” He received hundreds of suggestions — and one negative reply, from Pullman: “That’s not what classical music is for. Treat it with respect.”

That did it! Everyone — professional musicians, students, teachers — weighed into the argument, and the majority supported Seagull and were criticizing Pullman.

It’s easy to see why people are annoyed. We all want classical music to be as accessible as possible, especially to the young. If some of them are using Bach or Schubert as a tool to help them study, what’s the problem? They may also develop an attachment to classical music.

So is Pullman ridiculous and supercilious by objecting to classical music being used as background music? At first sight, his idea seems stuffy and extreme. By suggesting that classical music should be “treated with respect” and not used as background music, Pullman seems to be closing classical music of to millions of people.

It’s worth pointing out, however, that he isn’t the first to express concerns about classical music being devalued by becoming too commonplace in today’s technologically shaped world. In Benjamin Britten’s 1964 speech, the composer expressed exactly the same worries as Pullman. Britten suggested, “The true musical experience demands some preparation, some effort, a journey to a special place, saving up for a ticket, some homework perhaps”. In short, it demands as much effort from listeners as from composers and performers.

I don’t agree with such an extreme viewpoint, but I do think it touches on a reality. You will never fully grasp the beauty of classical music if you half-hear it only in the background. That doesn’t necessarily matter. Music can be enjoyed on many levels. What Pullman and Britten are really saying is that, in a drive for “accessibility”, we shouldn’t deny the emotional and intellectual complexity underpinning (构成) much classical music.

9 . The Internet is a global network, which allows digital information to travel around the world. Let’s view some most popular uses of the Internet.

Information search

We search for information every day.     1    . Search engines then provide us with valuable and useful data, information and knowledge at any time, instantly upon our request.

    2    

One of the most significant and popular use of the Internet is email. Email is a common thing that a majority of people check after they have logged (登录) on to the Internet.     3    . Besides the email, today, there are many other online tools and online chat software apps for audio and video chat.

Online shopping

    4    . In the beginning, many people didn’t have trust in the e-commerce website, but that has changed over time. Now we can order anything like clothing, fashion accessories, machines, books, technology things and so on without visiting physical stores.

Education

The Internet plays an important role in effectively shaping today’s school education process. It has the availability and the quality of learning for many students. They can study what they want and whenever they feel the most productive.     5    .

We are witnessing the rise of informal education where college graduates have online access and can sharpen their skills and get faster progress in a specific field.