Set off meaning的問題，透過圖書和論文來找解法和答案更準確安心。 我們找到下列各種有用的問答集和懶人包

Breathtaking: How One Family Cycled Around the World for Clean Air and Asthma

為了解決Set off meaning的問題，作者Bike for Breath LLC 這樣論述：

Geared up with two tents, six panniers, two tandem bicycles and one stuffed pink pig, Paula and Lorenz Eber set off from Seattle, Washington to cycle the world with their two daughters, eleven-year old Yvonne, and her thirteen year old sister, Anya. Their dream: to pedal in a complete circle arou

nd the world using a carbon free, environmentally friendly way to travel. Their goal: to raise awareness of asthma - a disease that Paula has suffered from her entire life - and the world’s desperate need for clean air. Breathtaking is the exciting and inspiring true story of their adventures. Reade

rs follow the Ebers across Europe, Asia, the South Pacific and North America as they raise their daughters around the globe. School is conducted outdoors on mountaintops. The responsibilities of parenting have been expanded to include hunting for an English copy of the latest Harry Potter book. And

family togetherness takes on a new meaning as the Ebers must work together to survive a 100-degree heat wave in Italy, drug smugglers in Russia, a broken foot in New Zealand and a tornado in the U.S. Yet, as the family pedals farther and farther away from home, they realize that the greatest challen

ge they face is the journey that they must undergo within themselves. The Ebers returned home twenty-four countries and 14,931 km (9,332 miles) later - raising ＄65,000 for the non-profit organization, World Bike for Breath. They spoke about clean air and asthma to more than 150 newspapers, magazines

, and TV stations, including Time for Kids, NPR, and PBS’s Roadtrip Nation. They are the only family on record to complete a full circumnavigation of the world by bicycle.

Set off meaning進入發燒排行的影片

本來面目何在？──自我探尋的生命學習心旅

為了解決Set off meaning的問題，作者賴傳喆 這樣論述：

此論是「我」，藉由敘事書寫，而展開自我對「死亡、生命存在意義、自我認同」等課題之學習歷程及自我對話。這裡的對話，不僅是現在的自己對現在的自我，也是對著過去的自己對話。藉由現在的「客我」與過去「主我」的對話與詮釋過程，延伸出對過往生命的自我再認識，以及不同視角下的自我再重整。生命旅程，有如時間長流下的列車，相續連結至現在與未來的自我。但是否有可能，在生命當中的某一站月台，可以重整或換掛車廂，重新出發？敘事，或許就能扮演這種月台的角色。我相信禪修可以，而敘事會不會也是一種「字裡行間」的禪修？每一個人的生命課題，都是獨一無二；一如生命中的障礙難關，也如獨享餐一般的冷暖自知。人們從剛出生時的單一樣貌

，逐漸到社會化後的多重面貌。是否，能給自己一個進入月台重整的機會，逐漸回歸到那生命初始前的本來面目。那份回歸的難，雖然無法一蹴可及，但或許可以從這一站月台，作為開始。

Drucker on Totalitarianism and Salvation by Society

為了解決Set off meaning的問題，作者Peter F. Drucker 這樣論述：

　　TO OUR READERS 　　I have long wanted to compile a volume that brings together Peter Drucker’s discourses on totalitarianism and salvation by society to make them easily accessible to readers. Now the work has finally been completed. 　　The book is comprised of selections from five of Peter Drucker

’s works, The End of Economic Man, The Ecological Vision, Landmarks of Tomorrow, Adventures of a Bystander, and A Functioning Society. My job was to sort the content into nine chapters, draw up titles, and write related introductions to the chapters. Drucker’s reflections on and critiques of totalit

arianism run through most of his works, but they are more focused and systematic in the five books mentioned above. Known as “the father of modern management”, Peter Drucker had a lifelong hatred of totalitarianism. He studied management because he felt that only the effective management of pluralis

tic social organizations—including non-profit organizations, industrial and commercial enterprises, and government agencies—could provide options or alternatives to resist totalitarian rule. 　　Totalitarianism is an ugly phenomenon in human society and politics, and it is also a terrifying disease.

It has caused more suffering to humankind than any other tyranny in history. What it seeks is to fully and thoroughly manipulate and control every individual, both in body and mind, turning humans not only into animals but also into machines and tools as well. Totalitarianism aims for absolute power

, but no one except the Creator has such power. Hence, it manifests as a state of absurdity and madness in which “the movement (persecution) is everything, yet there is no purpose.” By its nature, totalitarianism cannot tolerate the existence of even a tiny bit of humanity. The Nazis’ “final solutio

n” (genocide), the mass murder of Jews, is its logical result. Today, highly developed new technologies are also providing imaginative physical and psychological methods of manipulation, giving those with totalitarian ambitions the means to carry out a “final solution,” the extinction of unmankind (

the extinction of human nature; that is, essentially exterminating the human species.) Totalitarianism is the result of the failure of “salvation by society”. 　　History has repeatedly proven that any perfect, or nearly perfect society that claims to have no conflict, no class differences, complete

fairness, justice, benevolence, and harmony, is a utopia. However, using society to eliminate evil in human nature, to save human beings from depravity, and transform them into perfect people, is merely a naïve fantasy. Marxism is the most recent, most rigorous, and most alluring social rescue plan

but also the utmost failure at “salvation by society”. Today, political parties and nations still under the banner of Marxist communism or socialism have essentially sunken into totalitarianism. 　　From the perspective of philosophy, “Salvation by society” belongs to the category of absolute rationa

lism. It originates from human beings’ pride and conceit, is the notion that people can grasp absolute truth and become the master of everything in the world, including their own destiny. 　　Tracing their respective roots in different fields of knowledge, people regard their discoveries as the only

correctness. They develop various “isms,” including progressivism, scientism, economic utilitarianism, rational liberalism, nationalism or ethnocentrism, and socialism and communism. 　　 　　These doctrines may be impeccable logically, and some are emotionally moving. But they all have an a priori hypo

thesis that cannot be empirically proven or falsified—that is, human beings can be absolutely rational and can comprehend absolute truth. 　　Now we finally know this priori hypothesis is wrong, not because of logic’s merits or demerits, but because it simply doesn’t work in real life. So, where is t

he way out? Peter Drucker suggested that we return to spiritual values and faith: to experience and recognize there is a higher authority beyond society and above human beings. That authority has already planted compassion and justice in human’s hearts, what we usually call “conscience.” If humans i

ndeed have a purely rational nature, conscience is its master. With conscience derived from faith, rationality can perform its beneficial functions. Like the conservatism’s counterrevolutionary movement that took place in the United States and Great Britain more than two hundred years ago, it shines

with the glory of true freedom and genuine rationality: Those movements were constructive, not destructive; they appealed to the love, faith, and humility of Christ. Based on religious conviction, they firmly rejected human’s absolute rationality, or irrational absolutism, and were solemnly committ

ed to human dignity.   　　 　　Peter Drucker inherited the tradition of the conservatism’s counterrevolution in the United States and Great Britain. Inspired by observing social and political realities in the United States, he formed a social concept that differs from a social rescue plan (salvation by

society): lesser evils instead of greater good. Although imperfect, it would create a less painful and tolerable society. Such a society should have the following characteristics: 　　1. It would replace solipsistic “isms” with an open and tolerant attitude. 　　2. It would replace centralized and uni

form structures with diversified social organization and decentralized power centers. 　　3. It would replace revolutionary dogma with experimental, gradual improvement and review from time to time. 　　4. It would replace the rigid social relationship that mutually exclude and negate between individual

and the whole, or between the different parts of the society, with the principle of mutual dependence and mutual benefit to establish a dynamic equilibrium between the individuals and society, freedom and order. 　　Such a society would not follow a preset scientific design, nor would it need to rel

y on charismatic leaders or supermen. It would not be perfect, but it would be better and achievable. 　　It should be emphasized that Drucker’s openness, tolerance, diversity, and eclecticism are not without a bottom line. The bottom line is that he will never tolerate any form of totalitarian autoc

racy. Drucker noted that human beings have two essential qualities that other creatures don’t have—knowledge and power. These attributes can neither be removed nor avoided, and their aims and uses must be regulated and restricted. He was wary of sovereign states and modern governments. He believed t

hat regardless of whether they adopted a democratic system or an autocratic system, they were essentially the same but only different in extent, to which they infringed on individual rights and freedoms. Therefore, within every sovereign state and modern government, there exists a gene for the growt

h of totalitarianism. When any nation abuses its knowledge and power to violate human rights, the international community must restrict or even deprive it of its sovereignty. 　　However, Drucker believed that thus far, the United States may be the only country that has never entirely accepted the co

ncept and system of a sovereign state. Therefore, as the leader of the free world and developed countries in the West, the United States is best suited to be the first to serve as a model for global actions to resist totalitarianism. Constructive frontiers of work are more important and decisive tha

n confrontations in the military sphere. Such frontiers are not found in the East, where totalitarianism is firmly rooted and far-reaching, but in the free world, especially in the West, where the U.S. has an advantage. These “West” frontiers are: 　　• the educated society; 　　• the world economy of

dynamic development; 　　• the new political concepts and institutions needed in this pluralist age, internationally, 　　nationally and locally; and civilizations that can take the place of the East that has vanished. 　　Ultimately, when the “West” constructive endeavors bring forth the tolerable new s

ociety that Ducker envisioned, restoring confidence in freedom and equality, totalitarianism will evaporate just as the sun rises and the dew will naturally be disappeared, losing its deceptive magic. 　　For those who are not free today, who unfortunately live under totalitarian rule or in totalitar

ian revolutionary movements, Drucker offers advice on how to deal with the environment based on his personal experiences in Europe as a teenager. The first is what not to do. Power has the potential for absolute and comprehensive control, and human nature is weak, unable to withstand the threats and

temptations of power, let alone face the opening of “Pandora’sBox”—totalitarianism. If a person is not ready to stand up, fight, and sacrifice him—or herself for righteousness— and it is only the few of the best, noblest, and courageous among us who can do that—the wisest thing to do is to break of

f with totalitarianism. 　　If some people try to control it with ambition or to make a deal with it by using wisdom and ingenuity, whether out of selfish motives or sincere goodwill, totalitarianism will use them, and they will become accomplices to its evildoing. In “The Monster and the Lamb” of th

is book, Drucker termed the former type “monster” and the latter “lamb.” Compared with above two types of people who voluntarily join the totalitarian camp, the other type of people is often the majority. Although they do not participate in themselves, they acquiesce totalitarianism to abuse others,

they turn their heads, safely latch their door then enjoy “peace and quiet.” Totalitarian careerists derive their greatest encouragement from public indifference, which is an “endorsement” to behave unscrupulously and do whatever they please. 　　As for what people should do vs what should not do, D

rucker didn’t give an easy answer. He didn’t tell us what proactive actions we can take under the terror, pressure, and false propaganda of totalitarianism that would effectively weaken totalitarian rule while protecting as much as possible ourselves and families. The situation is similar to the Bib

lical story of Abraham, who accepted God’s order to sacrifice his son. Abraham felt compelled to obey God’s command, yet also wanted to save his beloved son Isaac. Considering and formulating what strategies and courses of action is the responsibility of every entrepreneur, teacher, scholar, media p

erson, government official, professional knowledge worker, and citizen. However, the principles and directions have been given, and the constraints of the objective environment are also clear. Therefore, we can at least know the understanding of ethics, morals, and performance are required for holdi

ng a position or running a business in a totalitarian country are different than they would be for the same position or business in a democratic country. For example, if you have to set up a business in a totalitarian country, your goal should not be to contribute to the country’s GDP or tax revenue

. Nor should you aid in strengthening its national defense or “stabilizing” its society. And, not to mention that you should never use the national ideology to educate employees and unite them.   　　Lastly, I’d like to point out that the book ends on an optimistic note, which Drucker wrote in 1959.

He was fifty years old then, vigorous and confident. He saw a pluralistic and autonomous organizational new society taking shape in the United States and the West. The boom in modern　management and the emergence of an educated group of knowledge workers (also known as the “middle class”) complementi

ng each other at that time. But on the other hand, he also noticed that mankind had begun to master knowledge of the natural science and behavioral science that could end up destroying humanity. And that kind of knowledge was creating conditions for the exercise of absolute power. In that era of gre

at change, he urged society, human beings, and individuals to “return to spiritual values and return to religion,” and he emphasized knowledge workers’ responsibilities, because in inherence, “knowledge is power, and power is responsibility.” It is also because only through the specific and subtle p

ractice of assuming responsibility and thus realizing dignity at the individual level could humankind’s long-standing grand and lofty ideal of “freedom and equality” be achieved. Hereby, I would like to revisit with the readers on Drucker’s clarion call that he made sixty years ago as encouragement

for us all: 　　“Everyone must be ready to take over alone and without notice, and show himself saint or hero, villain or coward... played out in one’s daily life, in one’s work, in one’s citizenship, in one’s　compassion or lack of it, in one’s courage to stick to an unpopular principle, and in one’s

refusal to sanction man’s inhumanity to man in an age of cruelty and moral numbness. 　　In a time of change and challenge, new vision and new danger, new frontiers and permanent crisis, suffering and achievement, in a time of overlap such as ours, the individual is both all-powerless and all-powerf

ul. He is powerless, however exalted his station, if he believes that he can impose his will, that he can command the tides of history. He is all-powerful, no matter how lowly, if he knows himself to be responsible.” 　　Ming Lo Shao, Editor 　　October 2020, in Los Angeles, USA   編者簡介 　　FOREWORD O

N BEHALF OF THE AUTHOR 　　If the author of this book, Peter Drucker, were still alive, faced with the reality of the current rifts in American politics and society, I believe he would warn and advise us all, particularly the young and enthusiastic among us, with the following words from the preface

of The End of Economic Man, reprinted in 1969: 　　But can we still be sure? Or are there not signs around us that totalitarianism may re-infest us, may indeed overwhelm us again? The problems of our times are very different from those of the ’twenties and ’thirties, and so are our realities. But som

e of our reactions to these problems are ominously reminiscent of the “despair of the masses” that plunged Europe into Hitler’s totalitarianism and into World War II. In their behavior some groups—they racists, white and black, but also some of the student “activists” on the so-called Left—are frigh

teningly reminiscent of Hitler’s stormtroopers—in their refusal to grant any rights, free speech for instance, to anyone else; in their use of character assassination; in their joy in destruction and vandalism. 　　In their rhetoric these groups are odiously similar to Hitler’s speeches and so is the

dreary nihilism of their prophets to hatred from Mao to Marcus. But above all, these groups on the “Right” as well as on the “Left,” like the totalitarians of the generation ago, believe that to say “no” is a positive policy; that to have compassion is to be weak; and that to manipulate idealism fo

r the pursuit of power is to be “idealistic.” They have not learned the one great lesson of our recent past: hatred is no answer to despair. 　　Understanding of the dynamics of the totalitarianism of yesterday may help us better to understand today and to prevent a recurrence of yesterday. It may, I

hope above all, help young people today to turn their idealism, their genuine distress over the horrors of this world, and their desire for a better and braver tomorrow into constructive action for, rather than into totalitarian nihilism as their predecessors did thirty years ago. For at the end of

this road there could only be another Hitler and another “ultimate solution” with its gas chambers and extermination camps. 　　Those words not only embody the book’s practical significance today but also the historical importance it will have in the future. 　　Editor     　　November 2, 2020, America

n Presidential Election Eve 　　Los Angeles, USA   CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS PREFACE PREFACE TO OUR READERS FOREWORD ON BEHALF OF THE AUTHOR   CHAPTER ONE The Morbid Phenomena of Totalitarian Countries Introduction 1 The Totalitarian Economic System and the “Noneconomic Society” 2 By Justifying Per

sonal Sacrifice to Deny the Meaning of Life and Society 3 Create Enemies and Incite Hatred Between Classes, Races, and Nations 4 Control the Entire Country and Society by One Top-to-bottom Totalitarian Organization 5 Mystifying Leader, Creating an Atmosphere of Personal Worship 6 Encourage Informers

and Undermine Traditional Ethical Values   CHAPTER TWO The Origins and Essence of Totalitarianism from the Prospective of Society and Politics Introduction 1 The Total Failure of Marxism Had Been a Main Reason for the Europe’s Masses to Supported Totalitarianism 2 Why Can Totalitarianism Win the Su

pport of the Masses? 3 No Revolutionary Leader Can Oppose the Inner Dynamic of the Revolution or Impose Measures That Go Against Public Opinion   CHAPTER THREE Totalitarianism Inevitably be Replaced by a New Noneconomic Society Based on Individual Freedom and Equality Introduction   CHAPTER FOUR The

Origins and Essence of Totalitarianism from the Perspective of Rationality and Faith Introduction 1 From Rousseau to Hitler 2 Why Society Is Not Enough: Introduction to The Unfashionable Kierkegaard 3 The Unfashionable Kierkegaard   CHAPTER FIVE The Origins and Essence of Totalitarianism from the P

erspective of Technology Progress Introduction Abstraction Part One of The Human Situation Today   CHAPTER SIX Criticism of Marxism Introduction 1 How Did Marxist “Political Economics” Be Debunked? 2 Marxism’s Failure   CHAPTER SEVEN Do We Want “Salvation by Society” or a Society That Is Not Perfec

t but Tolerable? Introduction 1 No More Salvation by Society 2 A Society that May Be the Best We Can Possibly Hope For   CHAPTER EIGHT The Free World’s “West” Strategy to Resist Totalitarianism Introduction 1 “The Work to Be Done”—The Overview of the “West” Strategy 2 Discussion on the Frontiers of

“West” Strategy   CHAPTER NINE How Should Individuals Deal with the Threat and Temptation of Totalitarianism? Introduction 1 The Maverick Young Drucker 2 The Monster and the Lamb 3 Abstraction Part Two of The Human Situation Today   推薦序 PREFACE 　　Peter Drucker was a friend and advisor to me duri

ng my leadership years at ServiceMaster. Minglo Shao has become a very special friend of mine. We first met as he became a partner of ServiceMaster, assisting us in expanding our business to China and other countries in the Far East. I later had the privilege of introducing him to Peter Drucker, and

the two of them developed a good friendship which extended over the balance of Peter’s life. 　　Minglo Shao has now developed an abstract of Drucker’s writings reflecting Drucker’s view on “totalitarianism and salvation by society.” As you read this, it is well to reflect upon the application of th

ese thoughts—especially to the young people of today—providing appropriate warnings and excellent advice. Thank you, Minglo, for the example of your life and your continued friendship. C. William Pollard November 2, 2020 American Presidential Election Eve Chicago, Illinois, USA 2 By Justifying Pe

rsonal Sacrifice to Deny the Meaning of Life and SocietyThe consistent new concept of society which totalitarianism proclaims is nothing but a mirage unless war is accepted not only as legitimate but as supreme. Man’s function and his place in war must lay the basis of his function and place in soci

ety altogether. Hitler’s and Mussolini’s entire social and political edifices are necessarily built upon Heroic Man as the concept of man’s true nature.* * * * *The anonymous soldier in the trenches, the equally anonymous worker on the assembly line, are fundamental symbols of this new concept of ma

n. And Ernst Juenger, the one really profound German philosopher of the totalitarian state, has therefore consciously based his new society upon the figure of the Worker-Soldier; physical pain and the ability to endure it are the basis of his new order of values.

企業社會責任懷疑與求職者應徵意圖及負面口碑之關聯：以組織吸引力為中介

為了解決Set off meaning的問題，作者李文婷 這樣論述：

隨著社會對企業行為期望的變化，CSR的概念包含了更廣泛的責任，社會大眾不僅提高對企業在社會和道德責任上的期望，而且對公司如何執行企業社會責任也更加關注（Dawkins & Lewis, 2003；Schmeltz, 2012）。當CSR的支持聲浪與正面價值一面倒的同時，由於資訊流通越來越快速，現今人們對企業行為變得更加了解，再加上近來媒體上披露企業的不當行為與假新聞，種種因素造成社會大眾對企業的信心下降（Edelman, 2015；Skarmeas & Leonidou, 2013），進而使人們傾向於質疑企業從事企業社會責任的「動機」與「目的」，社會大眾產生對CSR的動機歸因與懷疑態度，將使

得關於CSR懷疑論的議題之重要性和影響日益增加。此外，對於公司而言，由於知識型工作者的需求增加，員工的角色與重要性也日益增加（Hejjas, Miller & Scarles, 2019）。因此，吸引優秀的人才對組織帶來優勢的重要性不言可喻（Ployhart, 2006；Harari, 1998），而CSR懷疑對求職者行為造成之影響亦是企業於徵才過程中需考量的重大因素。本研究以臺灣地區之潛在求職者為樣本，探討求職者感知CSR動機與CSR懷疑之關係，並以組織吸引力為中介變項，分別探討CSR懷疑和求職者應徵意圖及CSR懷疑和負面口碑間之中介效果。本研究於臺灣地區透過人際網絡進行立意與滾雪球抽樣並發

放紙本問卷，有效問卷為208份，並使用SPSS與AMOS統計軟體進行資料分析。從研究結果可以得知（一）CSR懷疑與利己、策略、利益相關者驅動動機呈正相關，而與價值驅動動機呈負相關；（二）CSR懷疑與組織吸引力呈負向關係；（三）組織吸引力與求職者應徵意圖呈正相關，與負面口碑呈負相關；（四）組織吸引力為CSR懷疑與求職者應徵意圖之間的中介變項，且為部分中介。根據研究結果，本研究建議企業可透過宣傳或舉辦活動等方式改善其CSR活動在求職者心目中之動機，同時亦能提升求職者對CSR活動的印象，以建立良好的信任關係，進而提高組織吸引力。此外，藉由較高的組織吸引力，可以帶動求職者應徵意圖的提升，使企業於徵才時

更具優勢，同時亦能減少企業之負面口碑，以提升企業形象。