专题06 阅读理解之议论文15篇（北京专用）（高考典例+热点话题练习）-2026届高考英语总复习

专题06 阅读理解之议论文15篇 (北京专用) 【题型知识点细目表】 题号 难度 知识点 1 适中 天体和宇宙,议论文,短语猜测,目的意图,逻辑推理,观点态度 2 适中 科学技术 ,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 3 较难 人与环境,环境保护,议论文 4 较难 环境保护,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 5 适中 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 6 较难 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 7 较难 哲理感悟,议论文 8 适中 情绪,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 9 较难 情绪,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 10 较难 社会问题与社会现象,议论文,语意转化,目的意图,逻辑推理,观点态度 11 适中 情绪,议论文 12 较难 环境保护,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 13 适中 哲理感悟,议论文 14 较难 社会问题与社会现象,方法/策略,议论文 15 适中 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 【高考典例】 The notion that we live in someone else’s video game is irresistible to many. Searching the term “simulation hypothesis” (模拟假说) returns numerous results that debate whether the universe is a computer simulation — a concept that some scientists actually take seriously. Unfortunately, this is not a scientific question. We will probably never know whether it’s true. We can, instead, use this idea to advance scientific knowledge. The 18th-century philosopher Kant argued that the universe ultimately consists of things-in-themselves that are unknowable. While he held the notion that objective reality exists, he said our mind plays a necessary role in structuring and shaping our perceptions. Modern sciences have revealed that our perceptual experience of the world is the result of many stages of processing by sensory systems and cognitive (认知的) functions in the brain. No one knows exactly what happens within this black box. If empirical (实证的) experience fails to reveal reality, reasoning won’t reveal reality either since it relies on concepts and words that are contingent on our social, cultural and psychological histories. Again, a black box. So, if we accept that the universe is unknowable, we also accept we will never know if we live in a computer simulation. And then, we can shift our inquiry from “Is the universe a computer simulation? ” to “Can we model the universe as a computer simulation? ” Modelling reality is what we do. To facilitate our comprehension of the world, we build models based on conceptual metaphors (隐喻) that are familiar to us. In Newton’s era, we imagined the universe as a clock. In Einstein’s, we uncovered the standard model of particle (粒子) physics. Now that we are in the information age, we have new concepts such as the computer, information processing, virtual reality, and simulation. Unsurprisingly, these new concepts inspire us to build new models of the universe. Models are not the reality, however. There is no point in arguing if the universe is a clock, a set of particles or an output of computation. All these models are tools to deal with the unknown and to make discoveries. And the more tools we have, the more effective and insightful we can become. It can be imagined that comparable to the process of building previous scientific models, developing the “computer simulation” metaphor-based model will also be a hugely rewarding exercise. 1．What does the author intend to do by challenging a hypothesis? A．Make an assumption. B．Illustrate an argument. C．Give a suggestion. D．Justify a comparison. 2．What does the phrase “contingent on” underlined in Paragraph 2 probably mean? A．Accepted by. B．Determined by. C．Awakened by. D．Discovered by. 3．As for Kant’s argument, the author is _________. A．appreciative B．doubtful C．unconcerned D．disapproving 4．It is implied in this passage that we should _________. A．compare the current models with the previous ones B．continue exploring the classical models in history C．stop arguing whether the universe is a simulation D．turn simulations of the universe into realities up. Quantum ( 量子 ) computers have been on my mind a lot lately. A friend has been sending me articles on how quantum computers might help solve some of the biggest challenges we face as humans. I’ve also had exchanges with two quantum-computing experts. One is computer scientist Chris Johnson who I see as someone who helps keep the field honest. The other is physicist Philip Taylor. For decades, quantum computing has been little more than a laboratory curiosity. Now, big tech companies have invested in quantum computing, as have many smaller ones. According to Business Weekly, quantum machines could help us “cure cancer, and even take steps to turn climate change in the opposite direction.” This is the sort of hype ( 炒作 ) that annoys Johnson. He worries that researchers are making promises they can’t keep. “What’s new,” Johnson wrote, “is that millions of dollars are now potentially available to quantum computing researchers.” As quantum computing attracts more attention and funding, researchers may mislead investors, journalists, the public and, worst of all, themselves about their work’s potential. If researchers can’t keep their promises, excitement might give way to doubt, disappointment and anger, Johnson warns. Lots of other technologies have gone through stages of excitement. But something about quantum computing makes it especially prone to hype, Johnson suggests, perhaps because “‘quantum’ stands for something cool you shouldn’t be able to understand.” And that brings me back to Taylor, who suggested that I read his book Q for Quantum. After I read the book, Taylor patiently answered my questions about it. He also answered my questions about PyQuantum, the firm he co-founded in 2016. Taylor shares Johnson’s concerns about hype, but he says those concerns do not apply to PyQuantum. The company, he says, is closer than any other firm “by a very large margin ( 幅度 )” to building a “useful” quantum computer, one that “solves an impactful problem that we would not have been able to solve otherwise.” He adds, “People will naturally discount my opinions, but I have spent a lot of time quantitatively comparing what we are doing with others.” Could PyQuantum really be leading all the competition “by a wide margin”, as Taylor claims? I don’t know. I’m certainly not going to advise my friend or anyone else to invest in quantum computers. But I trust Taylor, just as I trust Johnson. 1．Regarding Johnson’s concerns, the author feels ________. A．sympathetic B．unconcerned C．doubtful D．excited 2．What leads to Taylor’s optimism about quantum computing? A．His dominance in physics. B．The competition in the field. C．His confidence in PyQuantum. D．The investment of tech companies. 3．What does the underlined word “prone” in Paragraph 3 most probably mean? A．Open. B．Cool. C．Useful. D．Resistant. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Is Johnson More Competent Than Taylor? B．Is Quantum Computing Redefining Technology? C．Will Quantum Computers Ever Come into Being? D．Will Quantum Computing Ever Live Up to Its Hype? Early fifth-century philosopher St．Augustine famously wrote that he knew what time was unless someone asked him．Albert Einstein added another wrinkle when he theorized that time varies depending on where you measure it．Today's state-of-the-art atomic（原子的） clocks have proven Einstein right．Even advanced physics can't decisively tell us what time is, because the answer depends on the question you're asking． Forget about time as an absolute．What if，instead of considering time in terms of astronomy,we related time to ecology？What if we allowed environmental conditions to set the tempo（节奏） of human life？We're increasingly aware of the fact that we can't control Earth systems with engineering alone，and realizing that we need to moderate（调节）our actions if we hope to live in balance．What if our definition of time reflected that？ Recently，I conceptualized a new approach to timekeeping that's connected to circumstances on our planet，conditions that might change as a result of global warming．We're now building a clock at the Anchorage Museum that reflects the total flow of several major Alaskan rivers，which are sensitive to local and global environmental changes．We've programmed it to match an atomic clock if the waterways continue to flow at their present rate．If the rivers run faster in the future on average，the clock will get ahead of standard time．If they run slower，you'll see the opposite effect． The clock registers both short-term irregularities and long-term trends in river dynamics．It's a sort of observatory that reveals how the rivers are behaving from their own temporal frame（时间框架），and allows us to witness those changes on our smartwatches or phones．Anyone who opts to go on Alaska Mean River Time will live in harmony with the planet．Anyone who considers river time in relation to atomic time will encounter a major imbalance and may be motivated to counteract it by consuming less fuel or supporting greener policies． Even if this method of timekeeping is novel in its particulars，early agricultural societies also connected time to natural phenomena．In pre-Classical Greece，for instance，people“corrected”official calendars by shifting dates forward or backward to reflect the change of season．Temporal connection to the environment was vital to their survival．Likewise，river time and other timekeeping systems we're developing may encourage environmental awareness． When St．Augustine admitted his inability to define time， he highlighted one of time 's most noticeable qualities：Time becomes meaningful only in a defined context．Any timekeeping system is valid，and each is as praiseworthy as its purpose． 1．What is the main idea of Paragraph 1？ A．Timekeeping is increasingly related to nature． B．Everyone can define time on their own terms． C．The qualities of time vary with how you measure it． D．Time is a major concern of philosophers and scientists． 2．The author raises three questions in Paragraph 2 mainly to________． A．present an assumption B．evaluate an argument C．highlight an experiment D．introduce an approach 3．What can we learn from this passage？ A．Those who do not go on river time will live an imbalanced life． B．New ways of measuring time can help to control Earth systems． C．Atomic time will get ahead of river time if the rivers run slower． D．Modern technology may help to shape the rivers’ temporal frame． 4．What can we infer from this passage？ A．It is crucial to improve the definition of time． B．A fixed frame will make time meaningless． C．We should live in harmony with nature． D．History is a mirror reflecting reality． 【热点话题练习】 In the 20th century, the definition of progress seemed clear. It was growth, measured in terms of national income, or gross domestic product (GDP). And that growth was to be endless, an ever-rising curve. No matter how rich a nation already was, its politicians and economists would consistently claim that the solutions to its problems — from poverty to pollution — depended on yet more growth. But unfortunately, this promise has not been delivered on. First, it’s useful to recognize that growth, after all, is a wonderful, healthy phase of life, which is why people the world over love to see children, gardens and trees grow. No wonder the western mind so readily accepted it as the shape of economic progress, too, and simultaneously adopted the very 20th-century mantra that “more is better”, both personally and nationally. Yet if we look to nature, it’s clear that nothing succeeds by growing forever: anything that seeks to do so will, in the process, destroy itself or the system on which it depends. Things that succeed grow until they are grown up, at which point they mature, enabling them to thrive, sometimes for hundreds of years. As the biomimicry (仿生学) pioneer Janine Benyus reminds us, a tree keeps growing only up to the point that it is still capable of sending nutrients to the leaves at the outermost tips of its branches, at which point it stops. Its pursuit of growth is bounded by a greater goal of distributing and circulating the resources that nurture and sustain the health of its whole being. Although we can easily appreciate the limits of growth in the living world, when it comes to our economies, we have a harder time. Thanks to the availability of cheap fossil fuel-based energy in the 20th century, rapid economic growth came to be seen as normal and natural, indeed as essential. Its continuation over many decades led to the creation of institutional designs and policies that are dependent on growth without end. In other words, we have inherited economies that need to grow, whether or not they make us thrive. This requirement has become so locked into economic theories, political narratives and public expectations that, over recent decades, we’ve witnessed desperate and often destructive measures designed to reboot growth when it becomes elusive. Instead of excessively pursuing growth, it is time to pursue well-being for all people as part of a thriving world, with policymaking that is designed in the service of this goal. This results in a very different conception of progress: in the place of endless growth we seek a dynamic balance, one that aims to meet the essential needs of every person while protecting the life-supporting systems of our planetary home. Tackling inequality needs to be at the heart of a new eco-social contract. Not only does this bring benefits in terms of improving life satisfaction; it helps us reduce the size of our national ecological footprints, via the well-documented links between greater fairness and more moderate consumption. It can also help to block the concentration of wealth and economic power in the hands of a few, therefore avoiding a system that advantages the already wealthy. When we turn away from growth as the goal, we can focus directly on asking what it would take to deliver social and ecological well-being, through an economy that is regenerative and distributive by design. There are many possibilities — such as driving a low-carbon, zero-waste industrial transformation, with a green jobs guarantee, alongside personal carbon allowances and progressive wealth taxes. Policies like these were, only a decade ago, considered too radical to be realistic. Today they look nothing less than essential. 1．The author cites Janine Benyus to illustrate that . A．unlimited growth is not necessarily sustainable B．growth should be limited to protect the resources C．the view that “more is better” also applies to nature D．nature provides a perfect model for economic growth 2．What does the underlined word “elusive” in Paragraph 5 probably mean? A．Hard to tell. B．Tricky to tackle. C．Tough to achieve. D．Difficult to understand. 3．It can be inferred from the passage that . A．people tend to use resources more reasonably with improved equality B．wealth and power should be distributed to the advantage of rich people C．the requirement for growth is easily adaptable to changing economic conditions D．a balance between social and ecological well-being can be reached within endless growth 4．Which of the following best describes the organization of this article? A．Identifying a pressing problem, offering various solutions, and evaluating their effectiveness. B．Explaining a natural process, relating it to human activities, and suggesting a change in view. C．Presenting a traditional view, discussing its appeal and limitations, and proposing a new approach. D．Introducing a well-known theory, comparing it with another theory, and suggesting improvements. Will there ever be another Einstein? This is the undercurrent of conversation at Einstein memorial meetings throughout the year. A new Einstein will emerge, scientists say. But it may take a long time. After all, more than 200 years separated Einstein from his nearest rival, Isaac Newton. Many physicists say the next Einstein hasn’t been born yet, or is a baby now. That’s because the quest for a unified theory that would account for all the forces of nature has pushed current mathematics to its limits. New math must be created before the problem can be solved. But researchers say there are many other factors working against another Einstein emerging anytime soon. For one thing, physics is a much different field today. In Einstein’s day, there were only a few thousand physicists worldwide, and the theoreticians who could intellectually rival Einstein probably would fit into a streetcar with seats to spare. Education is different, too. One crucial aspect of Einstein’s training that is overlooked is the years of philosophy he read as a teenager — Kant, Schopenhauer and Spinoza, among others. It taught him how to think independently and abstractly about space and time, and it wasn’t long before he became a philosopher himself. “The independence created by philosophical insight is — in my opinion — the mark of distinction between a mere artisan (工匠) or specialist and a real seeker after truth,” Einstein wrote in 1944. And he was an accomplished musician. The interplay between music and math is well known. Einstein would furiously play his violin as a way to think through a knotty physics problem. Today, universities have produced millions of physicist s. There aren’t many jobs in science for them, so they go to Wall Street and Silicon Valley to apply their analytical skills to more practical — and rewarding — efforts. “Maybe there is an Einstein out there today,” said Columbia University physicist Brian Greene “but it would be a lot harder for him to be heard.” Especially considering what Einstein was proposing. “The actual fabric of space and time curving? My God, what an idea!” Greene said at a recent gathering at the Aspen Institute. “It takes a certain type of person who will bang his head against the wall because you believe you’ll find the solution.” Perhaps the best examples are the five scientific papers Einstein wrote in his “miracle year” of1905. These “thought experiments” were pages of calculations signed and submitted to the prestigious journal Annalen der Physik by a virtual unknown. There were no footnotes or citations. What might happen to such a submission today? “We all get papers like those in the mail,” Greene said. “We put them in the junk file.” 1．What do scientists seem to agree upon, judging from the first two paragraphs? A．Einstein pushed mathematics almost to its limits. B．It will be some time before a new Einstein emerges. C．It will take another Einstein to build a unified theory. D．No physicist is likely to surpass Einstein in the next 200 years. 2．What was critical to Einstein’s success? A．His solid foundation in math theory. B．His independent and abstract thinking. C．His talent as an accomplished musician. D．His untiring effort to fulfill his potential. 3．What does the author tell us about physicist s today? A．They tend to neglect training in analytical skills. B．They are very good at solving practical problems. C．They often go into fields yielding greater financial benefits. D．They attach great importance to publishing academic papers. The Invisible Tapestry: How Immigrants Weave Bicultural Identities into Society Every year, over 281 million people worldwide leave their home countries — equivalent to the entire population of Brazil — seeking safety, opportunity, or a better life. Yet beyond the statistical headlines lies a quieter, more profound reality: for many immigrants, the greatest challenge is not crossing borders, but navigating the fragile space between two cultures. This “bicultural identity”—the ability to move between one’s heritage culture and the adopted society — has long been misunderstood as a “split” or “conflict,” but emerging research reveals it as a strength that reshapes both individuals and the communities they join. A 2023 Stanford University study tracking 1,200 Latinx immigrant families in the U.S. offers striking insights. Researchers found that families who maintained “selective assimilation” — preserving core traditions like weekly tamal-making or Spanish-language storytelling while embracing American norms such as community volunteering — reported 47% higher life satisfaction than those who fully abandoned their heritage to “fit in.” More surprisingly, the children of these families showed greater academic resilience: 62% graduated high school with honors, compared to 38% of peers from families that prioritized complete cultural absorption. “Biculturalism isn’t about choosing one culture over the other,” explains Dr. Elena Marquez, lead researcher. “It’s about building a third space — one where a teenager can explain Día de los Muertos to their classmates while also cheering for their school’s football team.” This third space, however, is not without friction. For first-generation immigrants, the tension often arises from “cultural guilt”: a Nigerian mother working double shifts to afford her daughter’s ballet lessons may feel she’s failing to pass down Yoruba values; a Vietnamese father teaching his son to fix cars in their garage may worry the boy is losing touch with his roots. Meanwhile, second-generation immigrants face their own battle: labeled “too foreign” by peers in their adopted country and “too Americanized” by relatives back home. A 2024 survey of 500 Asian American young adults found that 73% had been asked, “Where are you really from?” — a question that erases their sense of belonging in the only country they’ve ever known. Critics of immigration often frame cultural diversity as a threat to social cohesion, arguing that immigrants “dilute” national identity. But economic data tells a different story. The Migration Policy Institute reports that immigrant-owned small businesses in the U.S. generate $885 billion annually, and in Europe, skilled immigrants fill 30% of jobs in healthcare and engineering — fields facing severe labor shortages. More importantly, bicultural individuals act as “cultural bridges”: a Mexican American nurse translating for elderly Spanish-speaking patients, a Somali American community organizer connecting refugee families to local resources. These acts of translation, both linguistic and cultural, strengthen social bonds rather than weaken them. At its core, the debate over immigration misses a fundamental truth: cultures have never been static. The U.S. “melting pot” was never just about assimilation — it was about German beer halls blending with Irish pubs, African rhythms shaping jazz, and Chinese dumplings becoming a staple of American takeout. Today’s bicultural immigrants are continuing that tradition, not as outsiders, but as weavers adding new threads to the tapestry of society. Their identities are not a problem to solve, but a resource to celebrate — proof that belonging doesn’t require choosing one culture, but creating space for both. 1．What did the Stanford University study reveal about “selective assimilation” among Latinx immigrant families? A．It leads to lower academic performance compared to complete cultural absorption. B．It helps families achieve higher life satisfaction and children build academic resilience. C．It causes significant conflict between parents and children over cultural values. D．It requires families to abandon most heritage traditions to adapt to American society. 2．What can be inferred from the survey of Asian American young adults? A．Most second-generation Asian Americans feel a strong sense of belonging in the U.S. B．Peers in the U.S. often recognize and respect the cultural heritage of Asian Americans. C．Relatives back home fully accept the “Americanized” lifestyle of second-generation immigrants. D．Second-generation immigrants frequently face questions that challenge their national identity. 3．What is the main argument of the fourth paragraph? A．Immigrant-owned businesses are more profitable than those owned by native citizens. B．Critics of immigration are correct to worry about the dilution of national identity. C．Bicultural individuals and immigrants make important economic and social contributions. D．Skilled immigrants in Europe are primarily employed in the healthcare industry. 4．What is the author’s attitude toward bicultural identity among immigrants? A．Supportive B．Neutral C．Critical D．Skeptical A few years ago, the City Council of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners from keeping goldfish in curved fishbowls. The sponsors of the measure explained that it is cruel to keep a fish in such a bowl because the curved sides give the fish a distorted view of reality. Aside from the measure’s significance to the poor goldfish, the story raises an interesting philosophical question: How do we know that the reality we perceive is true? Physicists are finding themselves in a similar trouble to the goldfish’s. For decades they have been pursuing an ultimate theory of everything—one complete and consistent set of fundamental laws of nature that explain every aspect of reality. It now appears that this pursuit may generate not a single theory but a family of interconnected theories, each describing its own version of reality, as if it viewed the universe through its own fishbowl. This concept may be difficult for many people to accept. Most people believe that there is an objective reality out there and that our senses and our science directly convey information about the material world. In philosophy, that belief is called realism. In physics, realism is becoming difficult to defend. Instead, the idea of alternative realities is a mainstay of today’s popular culture. For example, in the science-fiction film The Matrix the human race is unknowingly living in a simulated virtual reality created by intelligent computers. How do we know we are not just computer-generated characters living in a Matrix-like world? If — like us — the beings in the simulated world could not observe their universe from the outside, they would have no reason to doubt their own pictures of reality. Similarly, the goldfish’s view is not the same as ours from outside their curved bowl. For instance, because light bends as it travels from air to water, a freely moving object that we would observe to move in a straight line would be observed by the goldfish to move along a curved path. The goldfish could form scientific laws from their frame of reference that would always hold true and that would enable them to make predictions about the future motion of objects outside the bowl. If the goldfish formed such a theory, we would have to admit the goldfish’s view as a reasonable picture of reality. The goldfish example shows that the same physical situation can be modeled in different ways, each employing different fundamental elements and concepts. It might be that to describe the universe we have to employ different theories in different situations. It is not the physicist’s traditional expectation for a theory of nature, nor does it correspond to our everyday idea of reality. But it might be the way of the universe. 1．What does Paragraph 2 mainly tell us? A．The need for a complete theory. B．The lasting conflict in physics. C．The existence of the material world. D．The conventional insight of reality. 2．What can we learn from the passage? A．Nature’s mysteries are best left undiscovered. B．An external world is independent of the observers. C．People’s theories are influenced by their viewpoints. D．It is essential to figure out which picture of reality is better. 3．According to the passage, the author may agree that ________. A．various interpretations of the universe are welcomed B．physicists have a favorite candidate for the final theory C．multiple realities can be pieced together to show the real world D．there is still possibility to unify different theories into a single one Many people associate their self-worth with their work. The more successful their career, the better they feel about themselves. Work-related self-esteem is therefore a worthy ideal to pursue with vigor, right? Well, not always. According to recent research, in which psychologists interviewed 370 full-time workers over a period of three weeks, the reality is a little more complicated. And it involves negative as well as positive consequences. It’s natural to be drawn towards pleasure and to step away from pain. In the workplace, if that pleasure comes from a triumph which boosts our self-respect, people will try to repeat that accomplishment. But repeating that accomplishment is often not realistic, which can lead to severe negative emotional consequences when it doesn’t reoccur. This form of motivation is widely regarded as a negative type of motivation. It can set back other more positive motivation types, such as completing a task purely because it’s fulfilling or enjoyable. What consumes the employees instead is a pressing need to feel mighty and sure of themselves. They then take on only tasks and objectives which serve that ego-driven need. As a result, to avoid feelings of shame and worthlessness associated with failure, they extend themselves to such a degree that there’s a subsequent adverse effect on their well-being. This internal pressure to succeed at all costs demands a lot of effort. It exhausts their energy, terminating in disproportionate levels of damaging sentiment. Those negative emotions mount into heightened anxiety, impacting their ability to make the most of their personal life. Their desire to avoid feeling inferior ends up making them feel inferior when it comes to their diminished (减弱的) capacity for friendship and leisure. They end up dissatisfied both at work and outside of it. But thankfully, for those people forced almost entirely by this specific form of motivation, the news isn’t all bad, or bad at all. The study also discovered several positive outcomes that can actually outweigh the harmful ones. Though these types of employees are motivated by the desire to avoid negative consequences, they are also motivated by the excitement of pursuing emotional rewards. This excitement makes pursuing goals enjoyable and stimulates pleasure and pride that would result from success. An effect of the positive motivation is that it neutralizes the existence of negative motivation. Sure, it affects people’s personal lives to an unhealthy extent, because leisure activities are often seen as a part of life that must be sacrificed to manage work and family demands. However, the way people feel about their work has less to do with whether they’re motivated by the preservation of self-esteem but more with the fact that they’ re simply motivated. 1．What do employees tend to do in pursuing work-related self-esteem? A．Stretch their sense of shame and worthlessness. B．Turn to all means regardless of the consequences. C．Take on tasks well beyond their actual capabilities. D．Strive to succeed at the expense of their well-being. 2．What do we learn about people over-concerned with work-related self-esteem? A．They cannot enjoy their personal life to the full. B．They may often feel inferior to their colleagues. C．They are never satisfied with their achievements. D．They have their own view of friendship and leisure. 3．What can we learn from the recent research? A．The goal of boosting self-esteem can be achieved if one keeps trying. B．The emotional rewards from goal pursuit are worth the pains taken. C．The negative consequences of goal pursuit can mostly be avoided. D．The pursuit of goals may turn out to be enjoyable and pleasant. In a recent article, Markham Heid shares with us an unusual life crisis. At 41, he has built what many would regard as the good life: he has a family; he is healthy, productive, and creative; he has time to travel, read, exercise, and see friends. Yet, he feels that “something is off.” To fight against this feeling, some of his friends have turned to special retreats, while others try to solve it through fitness. What makes Heid’s problem somewhat odd is that it does not seem to arise from anything specific. If he had lost his job, had no time for himself, or was struggling in his marriage, the feeling would be understandable. In the history of philosophy, there have been many attempts to understand such a powerful but objectless feeling. Boredom, anxiety, depression and despair are some of the descriptions this mood has received. Heid ends up attributing his crisis to the lack of new experiences. The Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard calls this the “illusion of crop rotation”, the idea that changing the environment frequently can save us from this mood. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger also describes a similar state: one may still be surrounded by the same people and activities, but these no longer engage us as they used to. He calls it a kind of “anxiety” created by nothing in particular. No wonder the psychologist Sigmund Freud once described anxiety as a “riddle.” But what really drives this mood is not the need for new experiences. It is not even the particulars of our individual lives or the cultures we belong to, but that we have been given a life to live in the first place, the taste of possibility that comes with being alive. This mood is not due to doubts like “Do I have enough hobbies?” or “Have I achieved my goal?” It is related to the more fundamental questions like “What does it mean to be human?” “What am I supposed to do with the fact that I was given a life?” and “What kind of life is possible for me?” This is why this mood is likely to appear frequently in our life. This is why once many of our life goals are fulfilled, we begin to wonder what life itself is for. These questions never have a final answer and they can always leave us with a great sense of anguish about who we are and how we should go on. Nevertheless, recognizing that these doubts are there, and that they matter, can at least allow us to know what may be missing, even when everything is good. 1．The author shares Markham Heid’s crisis mainly to________. A．present an argument B．introduce a topic C．make an assumption D．evaluate an event 2．According to the author, how can the crisis in the passage be dealt with? A．By studying philosophy. B．By developing new hobbies. C．By going travelling frequently. D．By embracing the objectless feeling. 3．What does the word “anguish” underlined in the last paragraph most probably mean? A．Pain. B．Wonder. C．Direction. D．Achievement. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．What leads to a Life Crisis B．Letting Go of Dark Moods C．Boredom Makes Us Human D．Anxiety Gives Us Life Goals What are you doing later: wandering through Van Gogh’s landscapes, time-travelling to ancient Egypt? These are the kinds of “immersive” experiences we are increasingly flooded with. The immersive entertainment market globally was valued at around $114 billion in 2024, and it is predicted to almost quadruple to roughly $442 billion by 2030. As a journalist and life-long pop culture fan, I am simultaneously fascinated and unsettled by immersive entertainment. My most memorable experiences of it were personalised and powerfully emotive, making me exhilarated, tearful, even “cybersick”. When we are wrapped up in a narrative, particularly one relayed through a headset, we are removed from real time. It isn’t the escapism that worries me, though — great culture frees us from everyday constraints — it is the insularity (孤立). Immersive events stress the subjective viewpoint, often at the expense of the communal energy that fuels social atmosphere, so even packed-out immersive shows can seem like solitary pursuits, with human companions resembling NPCs (non-playable video game characters). The cultural academic Keren Zaiontz coined a sharp term for our consumption of immersive entertainment: “narcissistic spectatorship”. One study found VR use induced dissociative symptoms in 83.9 percent of participants. The long-term effects remain undefined, but research has highlighted recurring themes of addiction to the experience and isolation. Over at London’s Barbican Centre, Feel the Sound is a new immersive exhibition whose installations offer imaginative personalised features, including Your Inner Symphony’s “sensing stations”, which generate unique visuals by tracking our bodily reactions to music. Luke Kemp, who heads up the Barbican’s immersive programming, says these experiences respond to our need for “playful” cultural spaces, accessible regardless of prior knowledge: “It allows the audience to feel part of something”. Robyn Landau at Kinda Studios, co-developer of Your Inner Symphony, points out the link to interoception — our awareness of our body’s inner senses. “When we have these transformative experiences individually that connect us to ourselves, they actually transform how we show up in the world and the way we connect to others,” she says. According to psychologist Sophie Janicke-Bowles, immersive experiences “can have an incredible recovery effect on our mind, where we can detach from our everyday concerns and cognitively, emotionally and even physiologically get absorbed into something different”. But for me, there is still a curious tension at play in immersive entertainment, and I am torn about where the rapidly developing scene is taking us. It does give us an opportunity to tune into ourselves, but I am less convinced it amplifies our bond with those around us. If we remain fixated by our own reflections, then we are missing the bigger picture. Immersive entertainment might make VIPs of us all, but culture should also bring us together. 1．What can we learn about the author’s immersive experiences? A．They free the author from restrictions. B．They lift the author out of an awful mood. C．They leave the author feeling alone in the crowd. D．They cause the author to be emotionally unstable. 2．What can be inferred about Luke Kemp’s view on immersive experiences? A．They make people feel included. B．They lead to self-focused perspectives. C．They help with mental wellness. D．They transform our social interactions. 3．The author mentions Your Inner Symphony mainly to ________. A．restate an argument B．propose a concept C．provide an example D．present an opinion 4．The author considers Sophie Janicke-Bowles’s view ________. A．partial B．insightful C．confusing D．practical Why do we get angry, fearful, joyful, or anxious? What’s the point in having emotions? In many instances in life we wish we could do away with emotions altogether, particularly the unpleasant ones like fear, anxiety, and anger. Remaining calm and peaceful often feels preferable to experiencing extreme ups and downs. But what if we regard emotions as key to decision making — and start to see that without them we would start to make some truly unwise choices? Emotions then become more than childlike yelps (joy) and screams (anger); instead, they are bodily processes that signal value, influence risk assessment, and speed up judgements in uncertain situations. Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio developed the “somatic marker hypothesis” in response to observations made in neurological patients who had suffered damage to the brain’s frontal lobe. Before the onset of brain damage, the patients were intelligent, creative, and successful— but after damage the patients struggled to organise their workday, had problems planning their future over immediate, medium and long-range goals, and could no longer choose suitable friends, partners, and activities. The plans they organised, the groups they elected to join, or the activities they undertook often led to financial losses, losses in social standing, and losses to family and friends, Damasio writes in his paper, The Somatic marker Hypothesis and the Possible Functions of the Prefrontal Cortex. Not only were the choices made by patients no longer personally advantageous, but they were also demonstrably different from the choices the patients were known to have made prior to brain damage. But in all other aspects of intellect— basic attention and working memory, the ability to use logic in the solution of problems, the learning of factual knowledge and skills, even their knowledge of social issues — the patients were otherwise perfectly fine. Interestingly, in conjunction with impaired decision making, patients also suffered a compromised ability to express emotion and to experience feelings. “Along with normal intellect and abnormal decision making, there were abnormalities in emotion and feeling,” writes Damasio. When we feel joy, rage, disgust — the entire body’s internal environment, including muscles, organs, fluids, and physiological states including blood pressure and temperature, shift in response, and this “somatic” response is what drives decision making. We meet someone who gives us a “bad taste in the mouth” and we don’t invite them around for dinner. Without emotion and the accompanying somatic markers — a pounding heart rate, tight face, lump in the throat, dry mouth, butterflies in the stomach, sweaty hands, and so forth — we would, more often than not, according to Damasio’s hypothesis, make sub-optimal decisions in our everyday life. 1．What did Damasio find about patients with frontal lobe damage? A．Failure to learn some social skills. B．Decline in their working memory. C．Inability to express their emotions. D．Difficulty in making wise decisions. 2．What does the word “somatic” underlined in Para.3 most possibly mean? A．Intellectual. B．Emotional. C．Bodily. D．Logical. 3．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Feeling Our Way B．Head Ruling Heart C．Trusting the Senses D．Calm Before Storm In the fall of 1944, Norman Borlaug moved to Mexico to produce a new variety of wheat. Finally, he got lucky. His wheat proved to be not just high-yielding (高产的) but also surprisingly varied. But, as proud as he was of his seeds, Borlaug also saw their limits. When he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, he used his Nobel address to caution against self-satisfaction. The new varieties of wheat he had reproduced represented, he said, only a “temporary success in man’s war against hunger.” The world’s population, he worried out loud, would continue to grow, and eventually the demand for food would again outpace the supply. Now in 2025, Michael Grunwald says in his new book, We Are Eating the Earth, that humanity is facing “some terrible math.” On one side of the equation is the growing need for food. On the other side is climate change. Agriculture is a major source of greenhouse gases, depending on how you calculate it. We need to “feed the world without frying the world” is how Grunwald puts it. What’s to be done? A good first step, Grunwald advocates, would be to stop making things worse. We could start with biofuels. Every year in the US, some fourteen billion gallons of a corn-based additive get mixed in gas. The practice is supposed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Almost certainly, though, it has the opposite outcome. Redirecting corn from grocery stores to gas tanks pushes up goods prices — which, in turn, encourages farmers to change forests into cropland. Since forests store a lot of carbon, cutting down them increases atmospheric \( CO_2 \). Grunwald quotes a song: Biofuel use is gonna burn up all my food Deforestation can only ruin our nation. Immoral men with that bad intention What is your plan? Is it life or ruination? Were it not for Borlaug, the world in the late twentieth century would have been a very different place. In the eight years since Borlaug arrived in Mexico, farming in much of the world has been transformed. New tools that could make farms even more productive are constantly being developed. At the same time, the world, too, has been transformed, by such things as climate change, groundwater exhaustion, and soil pollution. The new tools and the new threats are bound up in each other—two sides, as it were, of the same leaf. If it is reasonable to imagine that we will, somehow or other, find ways to feed ten billion people, it is also reasonable to fear how much damage will be done in the process. 1．What are the first two paragraphs mainly about? A．The downstream consequences of food shortage. B．The significance of inventing high-productive seeds. C．The problems humans face in the course of development. D．Two contrary perspectives on the growing demand for food. 2．Why does the author mention the song? A．To illustrate a current attempt of biofuels. B．To reveal convention is still better than innovation. C．To raise public awareness of redirecting food for fuel. D．To prove good intentions may bring about bad results. 3．What can we learn from the passage? A．Farming transformation lacks recognition. B．The issue of hunger should be prioritized. C．It is urgent to treat human-caused damage. D．We need view food and environment as one. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Can We Satisfy Our Growing Appetites? B．Farming: Will It Be Life without Ruination? C．Is Agriculture to Blame for Climate Change? D．Environment: Are We Transforming or Harming It? In the early 1900s, French chemist, Edouard Benedictus, invented shatterproof (防碎的) glass by chance. But its significance and relevance didn’t emerge until the car market created the problem for which he had already found the answer. Such moments of serendipity reveal the unpredictable nature of innovation. Yet, even in cases where chance plays a role, as in Benedictus’s story, the broader question remains: Are such discoveries truly born of luck, or were they somehow “in the air,” waiting for the right person to seize them? Some argue all the discoveries would have been made by other people. They believe if the time was ripe in conceptual and technological terms, someone would have got there sooner or later. This is the used and abused understanding of theories that were “in the air”. independently, Charles Darwin and Alfred R. Wallace (the latter 15 years behind Darwin) arrived at the theory of evolution by natural selection, both counting on similar data. There existed slight differences in the theory, but the coincidences of thought were astonishing. This phenomenon, which also exists in biological evolution, is called convergence: two non-closely related species develop similar functional adaptations. This occurs because the environment poses similar survival problems to both, namely similar selective pressures. This is an important clue that can help explain why this dynamic also exists in scientific knowledge: There are similar selective pressures and different research groups that compete to come up with the solutions. If we analyze the steps undertaken that led to the result, we can see that there were in fact some accidental elements. The overall dynamic was not accidental, though. Yet is it really possible that all discoveries were in the air? Let us assume for a moment that this is true and that the most luck can do is speed up the inevitable. All scientists are standing on the shoulders of the giants who have gone before them, and there is objectively a cumulative (积累的) element in science. Nevertheless, at some point and in the right circumstances, it was the unknown scientists, not the giants, who managed to see a little farther. The mind of the giant was imprisoned by prior knowledge and so trapped within the framework of established habits, research questions, and established methods. The new, little-known scientist, on the other hand, will in one way or another have been able to break free of the chains of established knowledge. And so it will have been possible for them to imagine other worlds. This suggests that it will be innovators, with their prepared minds, who have a better chance of making accidental discoveries, namely that are irregular and unexpected. 1．In Paragraph 2, “serendipity” refers to __________. A．accidental invention B．emergence of problems C．late recognition D．chemical innovation 2．The example of Darwin and Wallace is given to illustrate __________. A．the fierce competition among biological scientists B．the important role of similar data in intentional research C．independent but similar solutions under shared pressures D．limited resources and technological dependency in science 3．Which statement best reflects the main idea of the passage? A．All discoveries are inevitable results of technological progress. B．Serendipity alone drives groundbreaking scientific achievements. C．Traditional methods prevent innovation and should be abandoned. D．Breakthroughs arise when ready thinkers meet opportunities. “Assume you are wrong.” The advice came from Brian Nosek, a psychology professor, who was offering a strategy for pursuing better science. To understand the context for Nosek’s advice, we need to take a step back to the nature of science itself. You see despite what many of us learned in elementary school, there is no single scientific method. Just as scientific theories become elaborated and change, so do scientific methods. But methodological reform hasn't come without some fretting. Nasty things have been said by and about methodological reformers. Few people like having the value of their life’s work called into question. On the other side, few people are good at voicing criticisms in kind and constructive ways. So, part of the challenge is figuring out how to bake critical self-reflection into the culture of science itself, so it unfolds as a welcome and integrated part of the process, and not an embarrassing sideshow. What Nosek recommended was a strategy for changing the way we offer and respond to critique. Assuming you are right might be a motivating force, sustaining the enormous effort that conducting scientific work requires. But it also makes it easy to interpret criticisms as personal attacks. Beginning, instead, from the assumption you are wrong, a criticism is easier to interpret as a constructive suggestion for how to be less wrong — a goal that your critic probably shares. One concern about this approach is that it could be demoralizing for scientists. Striving to be less wrong might be a less effective motivation than the promise of being right. Another concern is that a strategy that works well within science could backfire when it comes to communicating science with the public. Without an appreciation for how science works, it’s easy to take uncertainty or disagreements as marks against science, when in fact they reflect some of the very features of science that make it our best approach to reaching reliable conclusions about the world. Science is reliable because it responds to evidence: as the quantity and quality of our evidence improves, our theories can and should change, too. Despite these worries, I like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. It also builds in a sense of community — we’re all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right. Unfortunately, this still leaves us with an untested hypothesis: that assuming one is wrong can change community norms for the better, and ultimately support better science and even, perhaps, better decisions in life. I don’t know if that’s true. In fact, I should probably assume that it’s wrong. But with the benefit of the scientific community and our best methodological tools, I hope we can get it less wrong, together. 1．What is the function of Paragraph 3 in the passage? A．To introduce the concept of intellectual modesty. B．To criticize the conservative mindset of scientists. C．To illustrate the challenges scientific community faces. D．To explain why methodological reformers need self-reflection. 2．What does the word “demoralizing” underlined in Paragraph 5 most probably mean? A．Worrying. B．Confusing. C．Destructive. D．Discouraging. 3．What will the author probably agree with? A．Nosek’s strategy is among the best methodological tools. B．Nosek’s strategy can increase the motivation of scientists. C．The public should not be informed of scientific uncertainty. D．Intellectual modesty might drive collective progress in science. 4．What is the main purpose of the passage? A．To show self-reflection is also part of science. B．To suggest a humble attitude in doing science. C．To explain why the public misunderstands science. D．To argue against adopting a single method in science. I never planned to fake my data. My project involved interviewing the customers who were visiting a games shop in central London, then measuring the distance they had travelled. Arriving at the location with a clipboard, I realized that I didn’t have the nerve. I went home and began to dream up some realistic-seeming numbers. I am a little ashamed of myself. However, I was about 14 years old at the time. I am confident that the scientific record has not been corrupted by my sins. I wish I could say that only school children fake data, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Stuart Ritchie’s book Science Fictions argues that “fraud in science is not the rare scenario that we desperately hope it to be”. This matters. Fraudulent research wastes the time of scientists who try to build on it, as well as the money of funding agencies that support it. It undermines the reputation of good science. Above all, if the insights produced by good science make the world better, then false beliefs produced by fraudulent science make the world worse. Consider the desperate search for treatments for the flu. Medical researchers have struggled to test out treatments from vitamin D to the deworming (除虫) drug ivermectin, but the results have often been small or flawed studies. However, an influential working paper, published late last year, described a large trial with very positive results for ivermectin. It gave a lot of people hope and inspired the use of ivermectin around the world, although the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration advise against ivermectin’s use to treat the disease. The research paper was withdrawn on July 14, after several researchers discovered anomalies (反常现象) in the underlying data. Some patients appeared to have died before the study even began, while other patient records seemed to be duplicates. There may be an innocent explanation for this but it certainly raises questions. On August 17, there was an unsettling development in a quite different field, behavioral science. Data detectives Uri Simonsohn, Joe Simmons, Leif Nelson and anonymous co-authors published a forensic analysis of a well-known experiment about dishonesty. The experiment, published in 2012, was based on data from a motor insurer in which customers had supplied information about mileage along with a declaration that the information was true. Some signed the declaration at the top of the document, while others signed at the bottom — and those who signed at the top were more likely to tell the truth. It’s an intuitive and influential discovery. The only problem with this, according to Simonsohn and his colleagues, is that it is apparently based on faked data. “There is very strong evidence that the data were fabricated,” they conclude. Several of the authors of the original article have published statements agreeing. What remains to be seen is who or what was behind the suspected fabrication. Dan Ariely, the most famous of the authors of the original study, was the one who brought the data to the collaboration. He told me in an email that “at no point did I knowingly use unreliable, inaccurate, or manipulated data in our research”, expressing regret that he did not sufficiently check the data that were supplied to him by the insurance company. Both episodes are disheartening: science is hard enough when everyone involved is acting in good faith. Scientists need to get back the traditional values of the field, which include the open sharing of scientific ideas and data, and rigorous scrutiny of those ideas. 1．Why did the author fake his data in the school project? A．Because he wanted to impress his teacher. B．Because he lacked the tools to collect real data. C．Because he was afraid of interacting with the customers. D．Because he was too young to understand the impact of his actions. 2．Which of the following is NOT a consequence of faking data as described in the passage? A．The waste of time and funding. B．The misuse of the research facilities. C．The corruption of the integrity of science. D．The promotion of false beliefs that harm society. 3．It can be inferred from the passage that ________. A．The ivermectin study’s flaws were discovered by health authorities. B．The issue of faking data is more widespread in the medical field. C．The behavioral study’s data was initially believed to be reliable. D．The intention of the insurance company remains to be known. 4．The following part of the passage will most likely discuss ________. A．reasons for data fabrication B．effects of fraud on scientific progress C．case studies of scientific fraud in various fields D．measures to preserve the traditional values of science 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $ 专题06 阅读理解之议论文15篇 (北京专用) 【题型知识点细目表】 题号 难度 知识点 1 适中 天体和宇宙,议论文,短语猜测,目的意图,逻辑推理,观点态度 2 适中 科学技术 ,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 3 较难 人与环境,环境保护,议论文 4 较难 环境保护,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 5 适中 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 6 较难 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 7 较难 哲理感悟,议论文 8 适中 情绪,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 9 较难 情绪,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 10 较难 社会问题与社会现象,议论文,语意转化,目的意图,逻辑推理,观点态度 11 适中 情绪,议论文 12 较难 环境保护,社会问题与社会现象,议论文 13 适中 哲理感悟,议论文 14 较难 社会问题与社会现象,方法/策略,议论文 15 适中 社会问题与社会现象,议论文 【高考典例】 The notion that we live in someone else’s video game is irresistible to many. Searching the term “simulation hypothesis” (模拟假说) returns numerous results that debate whether the universe is a computer simulation — a concept that some scientists actually take seriously. Unfortunately, this is not a scientific question. We will probably never know whether it’s true. We can, instead, use this idea to advance scientific knowledge. The 18th-century philosopher Kant argued that the universe ultimately consists of things-in-themselves that are unknowable. While he held the notion that objective reality exists, he said our mind plays a necessary role in structuring and shaping our perceptions. Modern sciences have revealed that our perceptual experience of the world is the result of many stages of processing by sensory systems and cognitive (认知的) functions in the brain. No one knows exactly what happens within this black box. If empirical (实证的) experience fails to reveal reality, reasoning won’t reveal reality either since it relies on concepts and words that are contingent on our social, cultural and psychological histories. Again, a black box. So, if we accept that the universe is unknowable, we also accept we will never know if we live in a computer simulation. And then, we can shift our inquiry from “Is the universe a computer simulation? ” to “Can we model the universe as a computer simulation? ” Modelling reality is what we do. To facilitate our comprehension of the world, we build models based on conceptual metaphors (隐喻) that are familiar to us. In Newton’s era, we imagined the universe as a clock. In Einstein’s, we uncovered the standard model of particle (粒子) physics. Now that we are in the information age, we have new concepts such as the computer, information processing, virtual reality, and simulation. Unsurprisingly, these new concepts inspire us to build new models of the universe. Models are not the reality, however. There is no point in arguing if the universe is a clock, a set of particles or an output of computation. All these models are tools to deal with the unknown and to make discoveries. And the more tools we have, the more effective and insightful we can become. It can be imagined that comparable to the process of building previous scientific models, developing the “computer simulation” metaphor-based model will also be a hugely rewarding exercise. 1．What does the author intend to do by challenging a hypothesis? A．Make an assumption. B．Illustrate an argument. C．Give a suggestion. D．Justify a comparison. 2．What does the phrase “contingent on” underlined in Paragraph 2 probably mean? A．Accepted by. B．Determined by. C．Awakened by. D．Discovered by. 3．As for Kant’s argument, the author is _________. A．appreciative B．doubtful C．unconcerned D．disapproving 4．It is implied in this passage that we should _________. A．compare the current models with the previous ones B．continue exploring the classical models in history C．stop arguing whether the universe is a simulation D．turn simulations of the universe into realities up. 【答案】1．C 2．B 3．A 4．C 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要讨论了哲学家对于宇宙的认知和信息时代下的作者对于宇宙争论的看法。 1．推理判断题。根据第一段“Searching the term “simulation hypothesis” (模拟假说) returns numerous results that debate whether the universe is a computer simulation —— a concept that some scientists actually take seriously. Unfortunately, this is not a scientific question. We will probably never know whether it’s true. We can, instead, use this idea to advance scientific knowledge.(搜索“模拟假说”这一术语会得到许多关于宇宙是否是计算机模拟的争论结果——一些科学家实际上认真对待这个概念。不幸的是，这不是一个科学问题。我们可能永远都不知道这是不是真的。相反，我们可以利用这个想法来推进科学知识)”可知，作者对于模拟假说提出质疑，是为了提出自己的建议，建议使用这一想法来推进科学知识。故选C项。 2．词句猜测题。根据第二段“If empirical (实证的) experience fails to reveal reality, reasoning won’t reveal reality either since it relies on concepts and words that are contingent on our social, cultural and psychological histories. Again, a black box.(如果经验不能揭示现实，推理也不会揭示现实，因为它依赖于contingent on我们的社会、文化和心理历史的概念和词语)”可知，句中that引导限制性定语从句，指代先行词concepts and words，且结合常识，概念和词语取决于我们的社会、文化和心理历史，推测划线短语表示“取决于”，与determined by意义相近。故选B项。 3．推理判断题。根据第二段“The 18th-century philosopher Kant argued that the universe ultimately consists of things-in-themselves that are unknowable. While he held the notion that objective reality exists, he said our mind plays a necessary role in structuring and shaping our perceptions. (18世纪的哲学家康德认为，宇宙最终由不可知的事物本身组成。虽然他认为客观现实是存在的，但他说，我们的大脑在构建和塑造我们的感知方面发挥着必要的作用)”以及第三段“So, if we accept that the universe is unknowable, we also accept we will never know if we live in a computer simulation.(因此，如果我们接受宇宙是不可知的，我们也接受我们永远不会知道我们是否生活在计算机模拟中)”可知，作者引用康德的观点，并在客观陈述后利用该观点来构建自己的论述，由此可知，作者对康德的论点持欣赏的态度。故选A项。 4．推理判断题。根据第四段“There is no point in arguing if the universe is a clock, a set of particles or an output of computation. All these models are tools to deal with the unknown and to make discoveries. And the more tools we have, the more effective and insightful we can become. (争论宇宙是否是一个时钟、一组粒子还是计算输出的产物是没有意义的。所有这些模型都是处理未知事物和发现事物的工具。我们拥有的工具越多，我们就能变得越有效、越有洞察力)”以及第五段“It can be imagined that comparable to the process of building previous scientific models, developing the “computer simulation” metaphor-based model will also be a hugely rewarding exercise.(可以想象，与之前构建科学模型的过程相比，开发基于“计算机模拟”隐喻的模型也将是一项非常有益的工作)”可知，作者认为争论宇宙是否是虚拟的，这是没有意义的，我们应该停止争论宇宙是否为模拟，而应该着手于将其作为一个模型来探索和理解，这样会更有助于科学的进步。故选C项。 Quantum ( 量子 ) computers have been on my mind a lot lately. A friend has been sending me articles on how quantum computers might help solve some of the biggest challenges we face as humans. I’ve also had exchanges with two quantum-computing experts. One is computer scientist Chris Johnson who I see as someone who helps keep the field honest. The other is physicist Philip Taylor. For decades, quantum computing has been little more than a laboratory curiosity. Now, big tech companies have invested in quantum computing, as have many smaller ones. According to Business Weekly, quantum machines could help us “cure cancer, and even take steps to turn climate change in the opposite direction.” This is the sort of hype ( 炒作 ) that annoys Johnson. He worries that researchers are making promises they can’t keep. “What’s new,” Johnson wrote, “is that millions of dollars are now potentially available to quantum computing researchers.” As quantum computing attracts more attention and funding, researchers may mislead investors, journalists, the public and, worst of all, themselves about their work’s potential. If researchers can’t keep their promises, excitement might give way to doubt, disappointment and anger, Johnson warns. Lots of other technologies have gone through stages of excitement. But something about quantum computing makes it especially prone to hype, Johnson suggests, perhaps because “‘quantum’ stands for something cool you shouldn’t be able to understand.” And that brings me back to Taylor, who suggested that I read his book Q for Quantum. After I read the book, Taylor patiently answered my questions about it. He also answered my questions about PyQuantum, the firm he co-founded in 2016. Taylor shares Johnson’s concerns about hype, but he says those concerns do not apply to PyQuantum. The company, he says, is closer than any other firm “by a very large margin ( 幅度 )” to building a “useful” quantum computer, one that “solves an impactful problem that we would not have been able to solve otherwise.” He adds, “People will naturally discount my opinions, but I have spent a lot of time quantitatively comparing what we are doing with others.” Could PyQuantum really be leading all the competition “by a wide margin”, as Taylor claims? I don’t know. I’m certainly not going to advise my friend or anyone else to invest in quantum computers. But I trust Taylor, just as I trust Johnson. 1．Regarding Johnson’s concerns, the author feels ________. A．sympathetic B．unconcerned C．doubtful D．excited 2．What leads to Taylor’s optimism about quantum computing? A．His dominance in physics. B．The competition in the field. C．His confidence in PyQuantum. D．The investment of tech companies. 3．What does the underlined word “prone” in Paragraph 3 most probably mean? A．Open. B．Cool. C．Useful. D．Resistant. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Is Johnson More Competent Than Taylor? B．Is Quantum Computing Redefining Technology? C．Will Quantum Computers Ever Come into Being? D．Will Quantum Computing Ever Live Up to Its Hype? 【答案】1．A 2．C 3．A 4．D 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。主要论述了“量子计算真的会像它的宣传那样成功吗？”，计算机科学家克里斯·约翰逊和物理学家菲利普·泰勒分别阐明了自己的观点。 1．推理判断题。根据第三自然段“As quantum computing attracts more attention and funding, researchers may mislead investors, journalists, the public and, worst of all, themselves about their work’s potential. If researchers can’t keep their promises, excitement might give way to doubt, disappointment and anger, Johnson warns. （随着量子计算吸引了更多的关注和资金，研究人员可能会误导投资者、记者、公众，最糟糕的是，他们自己的工作潜力。约翰逊警告说，如果研究人员不能兑现承诺，兴奋可能会让位于怀疑、失望和愤怒）”根据最后一段“ But I trust Taylor, just as I trust Johnson.”（但我相信泰勒，就像我相信约翰逊一样）可知，关于约翰逊的担忧，作者是支持的。A. sympathetic同情的，赞同的；B. unconcerned不关心的；C. doubtful怀疑的；D. excited激动的。故选A。 2．细节理解题。根据倒数第二段“The company, he says, is closer than any other firm “by a very large margin ( 幅度 )” to building a “useful” quantum computer, one that “solves an impactful problem that we would not have been able to solve otherwise.” He adds, “People will naturally discount my opinions, but I have spent a lot of time quantitatively comparing what we are doing with others.”（ 他说，这家公司比其他任何公司都“在很大程度上”接近于制造出“有用的”量子计算机，它“解决了一个有影响力的问题，否则我们无法解决这个问题”。他补充说:“人们自然会不相信我的观点，但我已经花了很多时间来定量地比较我们与他人的做法）”可知，泰勒对量子计算的乐观来源于他对PyQuantum的信心。故选C。 3．词义猜测题。根据第三自然段“But something about quantum computing makes it especially prone to hype, Johnson suggests, perhaps because “‘quantum’ stands for something cool you shouldn’t be able to understand.”（ 但约翰逊表明，量子计算的某些方面使得它特别 prone被炒作，可能是因为“量子”代表了一些你不应该理解的酷东西。”）”可知，本句中含有一个原因状语从句，因为““量子”代表了一些你不应该理解的酷东西”，所以它特别容易被炒作。故prone意为“易于……的”。A. Open.开放的；易受损害的；B. Cool. 酷的；C. Useful. 有用的；D. Resistant. 有抵抗力的。故选A。 4．主旨大意题。根据第二自然段“Now, big tech companies have invested in quantum computing, as have many smaller ones. According to Business Weekly, quantum machines could help us “cure cancer, and even take steps to turn climate change in the opposite direction. This is the sort of hype ( 炒作 ) that annoys Johnson.”（ 现在，大型科技公司和许多小型公司都在量子计算领域进行了投资。据《商业周刊》报道，量子机器可以帮助我们“治愈癌症，甚至采取措施将气候变化转向相反的方向。这种炒作让约翰逊感到恼火。”）”以及最后一段“Could PyQuantum really be leading all the competition “by a wide margin”, as Taylor claims? I don’t know. I’m certainly not going to advise my friend or anyone else to invest in quantum computers.（PyQuantum真的能像泰勒所说的那样“以巨大的优势”领先所有竞争对手吗？我不知道。我当然不会建议我的朋友或其他人投资量子计算机。但我信任泰勒，就像我信任约翰逊一样。）”可知，本文主要论述了“量子计算真的会像它的宣传那样成功吗？”，计算机科学家克里斯·约翰逊和物理学家菲利普·泰勒分别阐明了自己的观点。所以短文的最佳标题为“量子计算真的会像它的宣传那样成功吗？”。故选D。 Early fifth-century philosopher St．Augustine famously wrote that he knew what time was unless someone asked him．Albert Einstein added another wrinkle when he theorized that time varies depending on where you measure it．Today's state-of-the-art atomic（原子的） clocks have proven Einstein right．Even advanced physics can't decisively tell us what time is, because the answer depends on the question you're asking． Forget about time as an absolute．What if，instead of considering time in terms of astronomy,we related time to ecology？What if we allowed environmental conditions to set the tempo（节奏） of human life？We're increasingly aware of the fact that we can't control Earth systems with engineering alone，and realizing that we need to moderate（调节）our actions if we hope to live in balance．What if our definition of time reflected that？ Recently，I conceptualized a new approach to timekeeping that's connected to circumstances on our planet，conditions that might change as a result of global warming．We're now building a clock at the Anchorage Museum that reflects the total flow of several major Alaskan rivers，which are sensitive to local and global environmental changes．We've programmed it to match an atomic clock if the waterways continue to flow at their present rate．If the rivers run faster in the future on average，the clock will get ahead of standard time．If they run slower，you'll see the opposite effect． The clock registers both short-term irregularities and long-term trends in river dynamics．It's a sort of observatory that reveals how the rivers are behaving from their own temporal frame（时间框架），and allows us to witness those changes on our smartwatches or phones．Anyone who opts to go on Alaska Mean River Time will live in harmony with the planet．Anyone who considers river time in relation to atomic time will encounter a major imbalance and may be motivated to counteract it by consuming less fuel or supporting greener policies． Even if this method of timekeeping is novel in its particulars，early agricultural societies also connected time to natural phenomena．In pre-Classical Greece，for instance，people“corrected”official calendars by shifting dates forward or backward to reflect the change of season．Temporal connection to the environment was vital to their survival．Likewise，river time and other timekeeping systems we're developing may encourage environmental awareness． When St．Augustine admitted his inability to define time， he highlighted one of time 's most noticeable qualities：Time becomes meaningful only in a defined context．Any timekeeping system is valid，and each is as praiseworthy as its purpose． 1．What is the main idea of Paragraph 1？ A．Timekeeping is increasingly related to nature． B．Everyone can define time on their own terms． C．The qualities of time vary with how you measure it． D．Time is a major concern of philosophers and scientists． 2．The author raises three questions in Paragraph 2 mainly to________． A．present an assumption B．evaluate an argument C．highlight an experiment D．introduce an approach 3．What can we learn from this passage？ A．Those who do not go on river time will live an imbalanced life． B．New ways of measuring time can help to control Earth systems． C．Atomic time will get ahead of river time if the rivers run slower． D．Modern technology may help to shape the rivers’ temporal frame． 4．What can we infer from this passage？ A．It is crucial to improve the definition of time． B．A fixed frame will make time meaningless． C．We should live in harmony with nature． D．History is a mirror reflecting reality． 【答案】1．B 2．D 3．C 4．C 【分析】本文是议论文。文章通过讨论时间的定义，讲述了人们应该和大自然和谐相处，保护环境。 1．主旨大意题。根据第一段最后一句“Even advanced physics can't decisively tell us what time is, because the answer depends on the question you're asking．(即使是先进的物理学也不能决定性地告诉我们时间是什么，因为答案取决于你要问的问题)”以及上文列举的哲学家St．Augustine和爱因斯坦对于时间的定义可推断，第一段主要讲述每个人都可以用自己的话来定义时间。故选B项。 2．推理判断题。根据第二段的“We're increasingly aware of the fact that we can't control Earth systems with engineering alone，and realizing that we need to moderate（调节）our actions if we hope to live in balance．(我们越来越意识到，我们不能只是用工程学来控制地球系统，意识到，如果我们希望保持平衡，我们就需要调节我们的行动。)”进而提出问题“What if our definition of time reflected that？(如果时间的定义反映那些会怎么样呢)”，结合前两个问题“What if，instead of considering time in terms of astronomy, we related time to ecology？What if we allowed environmental conditions to set the tempo（节奏） of human life？(如果我们不考虑天文学方面的时间，而是将时间与生态学联系起来呢？如果我们允许环境条件来设定人类生活的节奏呢)”可推断，第二段提出的三个问题是为了介绍方法。故选D项。 3．细节理解题。根据第三段的“We've programmed it to match an atomic clock if the waterways continue to flow at their present rate．If the rivers run faster in the future on average，the clock will get ahead of standard time．If they run slower，you'll see the opposite effect．（如果水道继续以目前的速度流动，我们对它进行了编程，匹配了一个原子时间。如果河流在未来的平均运行速度更快，时间就会超过标准时间。如果它们的运行速度较慢，你就会看到相反的效果。）”可知，如果河流运行速度得较慢，原子时间将超过河流时间。故选C项。 4．推理判断题。根据第二段的“We're increasingly aware of the fact that we can't control Earth systems with engineering alone，and realizing that we need to moderate（调节）our actions if we hope to live in balance．(我们越来越意识到，我们不能只是用工程学来控制地球系统，意识到，如果我们希望保持平衡，我们就需要调节我们的行动。)”和倒数第二段的“Temporal connection to the environment was vital to their survival．Likewise，river time and other timekeeping systems we're developing may encourage environmental awareness(时间与环境的暂时联系对它们的生存至关重要。同样，河流时间和我们正在开发的其他时间保护系统也可能会鼓励人们提高环境意识)”可推断，从这篇文章中我们知道我们应该与自然和谐共处，保护环境。故选C。 【热点话题练习】 In the 20th century, the definition of progress seemed clear. It was growth, measured in terms of national income, or gross domestic product (GDP). And that growth was to be endless, an ever-rising curve. No matter how rich a nation already was, its politicians and economists would consistently claim that the solutions to its problems — from poverty to pollution — depended on yet more growth. But unfortunately, this promise has not been delivered on. First, it’s useful to recognize that growth, after all, is a wonderful, healthy phase of life, which is why people the world over love to see children, gardens and trees grow. No wonder the western mind so readily accepted it as the shape of economic progress, too, and simultaneously adopted the very 20th-century mantra that “more is better”, both personally and nationally. Yet if we look to nature, it’s clear that nothing succeeds by growing forever: anything that seeks to do so will, in the process, destroy itself or the system on which it depends. Things that succeed grow until they are grown up, at which point they mature, enabling them to thrive, sometimes for hundreds of years. As the biomimicry (仿生学) pioneer Janine Benyus reminds us, a tree keeps growing only up to the point that it is still capable of sending nutrients to the leaves at the outermost tips of its branches, at which point it stops. Its pursuit of growth is bounded by a greater goal of distributing and circulating the resources that nurture and sustain the health of its whole being. Although we can easily appreciate the limits of growth in the living world, when it comes to our economies, we have a harder time. Thanks to the availability of cheap fossil fuel-based energy in the 20th century, rapid economic growth came to be seen as normal and natural, indeed as essential. Its continuation over many decades led to the creation of institutional designs and policies that are dependent on growth without end. In other words, we have inherited economies that need to grow, whether or not they make us thrive. This requirement has become so locked into economic theories, political narratives and public expectations that, over recent decades, we’ve witnessed desperate and often destructive measures designed to reboot growth when it becomes elusive. Instead of excessively pursuing growth, it is time to pursue well-being for all people as part of a thriving world, with policymaking that is designed in the service of this goal. This results in a very different conception of progress: in the place of endless growth we seek a dynamic balance, one that aims to meet the essential needs of every person while protecting the life-supporting systems of our planetary home. Tackling inequality needs to be at the heart of a new eco-social contract. Not only does this bring benefits in terms of improving life satisfaction; it helps us reduce the size of our national ecological footprints, via the well-documented links between greater fairness and more moderate consumption. It can also help to block the concentration of wealth and economic power in the hands of a few, therefore avoiding a system that advantages the already wealthy. When we turn away from growth as the goal, we can focus directly on asking what it would take to deliver social and ecological well-being, through an economy that is regenerative and distributive by design. There are many possibilities — such as driving a low-carbon, zero-waste industrial transformation, with a green jobs guarantee, alongside personal carbon allowances and progressive wealth taxes. Policies like these were, only a decade ago, considered too radical to be realistic. Today they look nothing less than essential. 1．The author cites Janine Benyus to illustrate that . A．unlimited growth is not necessarily sustainable B．growth should be limited to protect the resources C．the view that “more is better” also applies to nature D．nature provides a perfect model for economic growth 2．What does the underlined word “elusive” in Paragraph 5 probably mean? A．Hard to tell. B．Tricky to tackle. C．Tough to achieve. D．Difficult to understand. 3．It can be inferred from the passage that . A．people tend to use resources more reasonably with improved equality B．wealth and power should be distributed to the advantage of rich people C．the requirement for growth is easily adaptable to changing economic conditions D．a balance between social and ecological well-being can be reached within endless growth 4．Which of the following best describes the organization of this article? A．Identifying a pressing problem, offering various solutions, and evaluating their effectiveness. B．Explaining a natural process, relating it to human activities, and suggesting a change in view. C．Presenting a traditional view, discussing its appeal and limitations, and proposing a new approach. D．Introducing a well-known theory, comparing it with another theory, and suggesting improvements. 【答案】1．A 2．C 3．A 4．C 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。主要批判以无限经济增长定义进步的传统观念，指出其不可持续性，并提出以全民福祉和生态平衡为核心的新发展理念。 1．推理判断题。根据第三段中的“As the biomimicry pioneer Janine Benyus reminds us, a tree keeps growing only up to the point that it is still capable of sending nutrients to the leaves at the outermost tips of its branches, at which point it stops. Its pursuit of growth is bounded by a greater goal of distributing and circulating the resources that nurture and sustain the health of its whole being. (正如仿生学先驱简宁·贝尼乌斯提醒我们的那样，一棵树只会生长到它仍能将养分输送到树枝最顶端的叶子的程度，之后就会停止生长。它对生长的追求，受制于一个更宏大的目标，即分配和循环那些滋养并维持其整体健康的资源。)”可知，作者引用简宁·贝尼乌斯的观点，是为了说明无限制的增长并非具有可持续性。故选A项。 2．词句猜测题。根据第五段中的“This requirement has become so locked into economic theories, political narratives and public expectations that, over recent decades, we’ve witnessed desperate and often destructive measures designed to reboot growth when it becomes elusive. (这种增长需求已经深深植根于经济理论、政治叙事和公众期望之中，以至于近几十年来，当增长变得elusive时，我们看到了种种孤注一掷且往往具有破坏性的举措，旨在重新推动增长。)”可知，人们会采取极端措施重启增长，由此推测“elusive”的含义是“难以实现的”，与“tough to achieve”意思相近。故选C项。 3．推理判断题。根据第七段中的“Not only does this bring benefits in terms of improving life satisfaction; it helps us reduce the size of our national ecological footprints, via the well-documented links between greater fairness and more moderate consumption. (这不仅能提升生活满意度，还有充分证据表明，更大程度的公平与更为适度的消费之间存在关联，因此这也有助于我们缩小国家的生态足迹。)”可知，社会公平度的提升会促使人们消费更适度，进而更合理地利用资源。故选A项。 4．推理判断题。通读全文，第一段先提出20世纪以GDP增长定义进步的传统观念；第二、三段论述该观念的由来及自然界中增长存在边界的局限性；第四、五段指出无限增长需求对经济和社会的负面影响；第六至八段提出以全民福祉和生态平衡为目标的新发展理念及相关政策。因此文章的结构是“提出传统观点—探讨其吸引力与局限性—提出新方案”。故选C项。 Will there ever be another Einstein? This is the undercurrent of conversation at Einstein memorial meetings throughout the year. A new Einstein will emerge, scientists say. But it may take a long time. After all, more than 200 years separated Einstein from his nearest rival, Isaac Newton. Many physicists say the next Einstein hasn’t been born yet, or is a baby now. That’s because the quest for a unified theory that would account for all the forces of nature has pushed current mathematics to its limits. New math must be created before the problem can be solved. But researchers say there are many other factors working against another Einstein emerging anytime soon. For one thing, physics is a much different field today. In Einstein’s day, there were only a few thousand physicists worldwide, and the theoreticians who could intellectually rival Einstein probably would fit into a streetcar with seats to spare. Education is different, too. One crucial aspect of Einstein’s training that is overlooked is the years of philosophy he read as a teenager — Kant, Schopenhauer and Spinoza, among others. It taught him how to think independently and abstractly about space and time, and it wasn’t long before he became a philosopher himself. “The independence created by philosophical insight is — in my opinion — the mark of distinction between a mere artisan (工匠) or specialist and a real seeker after truth,” Einstein wrote in 1944. And he was an accomplished musician. The interplay between music and math is well known. Einstein would furiously play his violin as a way to think through a knotty physics problem. Today, universities have produced millions of physicist s. There aren’t many jobs in science for them, so they go to Wall Street and Silicon Valley to apply their analytical skills to more practical — and rewarding — efforts. “Maybe there is an Einstein out there today,” said Columbia University physicist Brian Greene “but it would be a lot harder for him to be heard.” Especially considering what Einstein was proposing. “The actual fabric of space and time curving? My God, what an idea!” Greene said at a recent gathering at the Aspen Institute. “It takes a certain type of person who will bang his head against the wall because you believe you’ll find the solution.” Perhaps the best examples are the five scientific papers Einstein wrote in his “miracle year” of1905. These “thought experiments” were pages of calculations signed and submitted to the prestigious journal Annalen der Physik by a virtual unknown. There were no footnotes or citations. What might happen to such a submission today? “We all get papers like those in the mail,” Greene said. “We put them in the junk file.” 1．What do scientists seem to agree upon, judging from the first two paragraphs? A．Einstein pushed mathematics almost to its limits. B．It will be some time before a new Einstein emerges. C．It will take another Einstein to build a unified theory. D．No physicist is likely to surpass Einstein in the next 200 years. 2．What was critical to Einstein’s success? A．His solid foundation in math theory. B．His independent and abstract thinking. C．His talent as an accomplished musician. D．His untiring effort to fulfill his potential. 3．What does the author tell us about physicist s today? A．They tend to neglect training in analytical skills. B．They are very good at solving practical problems. C．They often go into fields yielding greater financial benefits. D．They attach great importance to publishing academic papers. 【答案】1．B 2．B 3．C 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要探讨是否会再出现爱因斯坦式的科学伟人及相关制约因素。 1．细节理解题。根据第一段中的“A new Einstein will emerge, scientists say. But it may take a long time. After all, more than 200 years separated Einstein from his nearest rival, Isaac Newton. (科学家们说，一个新的爱因斯坦将会出现。但这可能需要很长时间。毕竟，爱因斯坦和他最接近的对手艾萨克・牛顿相隔了200多年)”以及第二段中的“Many physicists say the next Einstein hasn’t been born yet, or is a baby now. (许多物理学家说，下一个爱因斯坦还没有出生，或者现在还是个婴儿)”可知，科学家们一致认为新的爱因斯坦式人物的出现还需要很长时间。故选B项。 2．细节理解题。根据第五段中的“One crucial aspect of Einstein’s training that is overlooked is the years of philosophy he read as a teenage — Kant, Schopenhauer and Spinoza, among others. It taught him how to think independently and abstractly about space and time, and it wasn’t long before he became a philosopher himself. (爱因斯坦成长过程中一个被忽视的关键因素是他青少年时期读过的多年哲学著作 —— 康德、叔本华、斯宾诺莎等人的作品。这教会了他如何独立且抽象地思考空间和时间，不久之后他自己也成了一名哲学家)”可知，独立且抽象的思维能力是爱因斯坦成功的关键。故选B项。 3．细节理解题。根据第八段中的“Today, universities have produced millions of physicists. There aren’t many jobs in science for them, so they go to Wall Street and Silicon Valley to apply their analytical skills to more practical — and rewarding — efforts. (如今，大学已经培养了数百万名物理学家。科学领域的工作岗位并不多，所以他们去了华尔街和硅谷，将自己的分析技能应用到更实际且回报更高的工作中)”可知，如今的物理学家们往往会进入经济效益更高的领域。故选C项。 The Invisible Tapestry: How Immigrants Weave Bicultural Identities into Society Every year, over 281 million people worldwide leave their home countries — equivalent to the entire population of Brazil — seeking safety, opportunity, or a better life. Yet beyond the statistical headlines lies a quieter, more profound reality: for many immigrants, the greatest challenge is not crossing borders, but navigating the fragile space between two cultures. This “bicultural identity”—the ability to move between one’s heritage culture and the adopted society — has long been misunderstood as a “split” or “conflict,” but emerging research reveals it as a strength that reshapes both individuals and the communities they join. A 2023 Stanford University study tracking 1,200 Latinx immigrant families in the U.S. offers striking insights. Researchers found that families who maintained “selective assimilation” — preserving core traditions like weekly tamal-making or Spanish-language storytelling while embracing American norms such as community volunteering — reported 47% higher life satisfaction than those who fully abandoned their heritage to “fit in.” More surprisingly, the children of these families showed greater academic resilience: 62% graduated high school with honors, compared to 38% of peers from families that prioritized complete cultural absorption. “Biculturalism isn’t about choosing one culture over the other,” explains Dr. Elena Marquez, lead researcher. “It’s about building a third space — one where a teenager can explain Día de los Muertos to their classmates while also cheering for their school’s football team.” This third space, however, is not without friction. For first-generation immigrants, the tension often arises from “cultural guilt”: a Nigerian mother working double shifts to afford her daughter’s ballet lessons may feel she’s failing to pass down Yoruba values; a Vietnamese father teaching his son to fix cars in their garage may worry the boy is losing touch with his roots. Meanwhile, second-generation immigrants face their own battle: labeled “too foreign” by peers in their adopted country and “too Americanized” by relatives back home. A 2024 survey of 500 Asian American young adults found that 73% had been asked, “Where are you really from?” — a question that erases their sense of belonging in the only country they’ve ever known. Critics of immigration often frame cultural diversity as a threat to social cohesion, arguing that immigrants “dilute” national identity. But economic data tells a different story. The Migration Policy Institute reports that immigrant-owned small businesses in the U.S. generate $885 billion annually, and in Europe, skilled immigrants fill 30% of jobs in healthcare and engineering — fields facing severe labor shortages. More importantly, bicultural individuals act as “cultural bridges”: a Mexican American nurse translating for elderly Spanish-speaking patients, a Somali American community organizer connecting refugee families to local resources. These acts of translation, both linguistic and cultural, strengthen social bonds rather than weaken them. At its core, the debate over immigration misses a fundamental truth: cultures have never been static. The U.S. “melting pot” was never just about assimilation — it was about German beer halls blending with Irish pubs, African rhythms shaping jazz, and Chinese dumplings becoming a staple of American takeout. Today’s bicultural immigrants are continuing that tradition, not as outsiders, but as weavers adding new threads to the tapestry of society. Their identities are not a problem to solve, but a resource to celebrate — proof that belonging doesn’t require choosing one culture, but creating space for both. 1．What did the Stanford University study reveal about “selective assimilation” among Latinx immigrant families? A．It leads to lower academic performance compared to complete cultural absorption. B．It helps families achieve higher life satisfaction and children build academic resilience. C．It causes significant conflict between parents and children over cultural values. D．It requires families to abandon most heritage traditions to adapt to American society. 2．What can be inferred from the survey of Asian American young adults? A．Most second-generation Asian Americans feel a strong sense of belonging in the U.S. B．Peers in the U.S. often recognize and respect the cultural heritage of Asian Americans. C．Relatives back home fully accept the “Americanized” lifestyle of second-generation immigrants. D．Second-generation immigrants frequently face questions that challenge their national identity. 3．What is the main argument of the fourth paragraph? A．Immigrant-owned businesses are more profitable than those owned by native citizens. B．Critics of immigration are correct to worry about the dilution of national identity. C．Bicultural individuals and immigrants make important economic and social contributions. D．Skilled immigrants in Europe are primarily employed in the healthcare industry. 4．What is the author’s attitude toward bicultural identity among immigrants? A．Supportive B．Neutral C．Critical D．Skeptical 【答案】1．B 2．D 3．C 4．A 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要论述了移民的双重文化身份及其积极意义。 1．细节理解题。根据第二段中“Researchers found that families who maintained ‘selective assimilation’ — preserving core traditions lz'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'z'zvolunteering — reported 47% higher life satisfaction than those who fully abandoned their heritage to ‘fit in.’ More surprisingly, the children of these families showed greater academic resilience: 62% graduated high school with honors, compared to 38% of peers from families that prioritized complete cultural absorption.(研究人员发现，那些保持“选择性同化”的家庭——在接受美国规范（如社区志愿服务）的同时，保留每周制作玉米粽或用西班牙语讲故事等核心传统——报告的生活满意度比那些为了“融入”而完全放弃自己文化传统的家庭高出47%。更令人惊讶的是，这些家庭的孩子表现出更强的学术韧性：62%的人高中毕业时成绩优异，而那些优先考虑完全文化吸收的家庭的孩子中，这一比例只有38%)”可知，斯坦福大学的研究揭示了拉丁裔移民家庭中的“选择性同化”有助于家庭获得更高的生活满意度，并帮助孩子建立学术韧性。故选B。 2．推理判断题。根据第三段中“A 2024 survey of 500 Asian American young adults found that 73% had been asked, ‘Where are you really from?’ — a question that erases their sense of belonging in the only country they’ve ever known.(2024年对500名亚裔美国年轻人的调查发现，73%的人被问过“你到底从哪里来？”——这个问题抹去了他们在这个他们所知道的唯一国家的归属感)”可推断出，第二代移民经常面临挑战他们国家身份的问题。故选D。 3．段落大意题。根据第四段中“Critics of immigration often frame cultural diversity as a threat to social cohesion, arguing that immigrants ‘dilute’ national identity. But economic data tells a different story. The Migration Policy Institute reports that immigrant-owned small businesses in the U.S. generate $885 billion annually, and in Europe, skilled immigrants fill 30% of jobs in healthcare and engineering — fields facing severe labor shortages. More importantly, bicultural individuals act as ‘cultural bridges’: a Mexican American nurse translating for elderly Spanish-speaking patients, a Somali American community organizer connecting refugee families to local resources. These acts of translation, both linguistic and cultural, strengthen social bonds rather than weaken them.(移民批评者常常将文化多样性视为对社会凝聚力的威胁，认为移民“稀释”了国家身份。但经济数据却讲述了另一个故事。移民政策研究所报告称，美国移民拥有的小企业每年创造8850亿美元的收入，而在欧洲，技术移民填补了医疗保健和工程领域30%的职位空缺，这些领域面临着严重的劳动力短缺。更重要的是，具有双重文化背景的人充当着“文化桥梁”：一位墨西哥裔美国护士为说西班牙语的老年患者翻译，一位索马里裔美国社区组织者将难民家庭与当地资源联系起来。这些语言和文化上的翻译行为加强了社会联系，而不是削弱了它们)”可知，第四段的主要论点是具有双重文化背景的人和移民做出了重要的经济和社会贡献。故选C。 4．推理判断题。根据最后一段中“At its core, the debate over immigration misses a fundamental truth: cultures have never been static. The U.S. ‘melting pot’ was never just about assimilation — it was about German beer halls blending with Irish pubs, African rhythms shaping jazz, and Chinese dumplings becoming a staple of American takeout. Today’s bicultural immigrants are continuing that tradition, not as outsiders, but as weavers adding new threads to the tapestry of society. Their identities are not a problem to solve, but a resource to celebrate — proof that belonging doesn’t require choosing one culture, but creating space for both.(关于移民的争论忽略了一个基本事实：文化从来都不是静态的。美国的“大熔炉”从来不仅仅是关于同化——它是关于德国啤酒馆与爱尔兰酒吧的融合，非洲节奏塑造爵士乐，以及中国饺子成为美国外卖的主食。今天的双重文化移民正在延续这一传统，他们不是作为外来者，而是作为织工，为社会这幅织锦增添新的丝线。他们的身份不是一个需要解决的问题，而是一种值得庆祝的资源——这证明了归属感并不需要选择一种文化，而是为两种文化都创造空间)”可知，作者对移民的双重文化身份持支持态度。故选A。 A few years ago, the City Council of Monza, Italy, barred pet owners from keeping goldfish in curved fishbowls. The sponsors of the measure explained that it is cruel to keep a fish in such a bowl because the curved sides give the fish a distorted view of reality. Aside from the measure’s significance to the poor goldfish, the story raises an interesting philosophical question: How do we know that the reality we perceive is true? Physicists are finding themselves in a similar trouble to the goldfish’s. For decades they have been pursuing an ultimate theory of everything—one complete and consistent set of fundamental laws of nature that explain every aspect of reality. It now appears that this pursuit may generate not a single theory but a family of interconnected theories, each describing its own version of reality, as if it viewed the universe through its own fishbowl. This concept may be difficult for many people to accept. Most people believe that there is an objective reality out there and that our senses and our science directly convey information about the material world. In philosophy, that belief is called realism. In physics, realism is becoming difficult to defend. Instead, the idea of alternative realities is a mainstay of today’s popular culture. For example, in the science-fiction film The Matrix the human race is unknowingly living in a simulated virtual reality created by intelligent computers. How do we know we are not just computer-generated characters living in a Matrix-like world? If — like us — the beings in the simulated world could not observe their universe from the outside, they would have no reason to doubt their own pictures of reality. Similarly, the goldfish’s view is not the same as ours from outside their curved bowl. For instance, because light bends as it travels from air to water, a freely moving object that we would observe to move in a straight line would be observed by the goldfish to move along a curved path. The goldfish could form scientific laws from their frame of reference that would always hold true and that would enable them to make predictions about the future motion of objects outside the bowl. If the goldfish formed such a theory, we would have to admit the goldfish’s view as a reasonable picture of reality. The goldfish example shows that the same physical situation can be modeled in different ways, each employing different fundamental elements and concepts. It might be that to describe the universe we have to employ different theories in different situations. It is not the physicist’s traditional expectation for a theory of nature, nor does it correspond to our everyday idea of reality. But it might be the way of the universe. 1．What does Paragraph 2 mainly tell us? A．The need for a complete theory. B．The lasting conflict in physics. C．The existence of the material world. D．The conventional insight of reality. 2．What can we learn from the passage? A．Nature’s mysteries are best left undiscovered. B．An external world is independent of the observers. C．People’s theories are influenced by their viewpoints. D．It is essential to figure out which picture of reality is better. 3．According to the passage, the author may agree that ________. A．various interpretations of the universe are welcomed B．physicists have a favorite candidate for the final theory C．multiple realities can be pieced together to show the real world D．there is still possibility to unify different theories into a single one 【答案】1．D 2．C 3．A 【导语】这是一篇议论文。以意大利蒙扎市禁止用弧形鱼缸养金鱼的政策为切入点，探讨了“我们感知的现实是否为客观真实”的哲学与物理学问题，提出不同视角下可能存在多元现实的观点。 1．主旨大意题。根据第二段“Most people believe that there is an objective reality out there and that our senses and our science directly convey information about the material world. In philosophy, that belief is called realism. (大多数人相信客观现实存在，我们的感官和科学能直接传递物质世界的信息。在哲学中，这种信念被称为实在论)”可知，该段主要介绍了关于“现实”的传统认知(即实在论)。故选D项。 2．推理判断题。根据第四段“For instance, because light bends as it travels from air to water, a freely moving object that we would observe to move in a straight line would be observed by the goldfish to move along a curved path. (例如，由于光从空气进入水中会发生折射，我们观察到沿直线运动的物体，在金鱼眼中会沿曲线运动)”以及“The goldfish could form scientific laws from their frame of reference (金鱼可以从它们的参照系中总结科学规律)”可知，不同视角会影响人们构建的理论。故选C项。 3．推理判断题。根据第二段“It now appears that this pursuit may generate not a single theory but a family of interconnected theories, each describing its own version of reality, as if it viewed the universe through its own fishbowl. (现在看来，这种追求可能产生的不是一个单一的理论，而是一系列相互关联的理论，每一个理论都描述它自己版本的真实，就好像每一种理论都透过它自己的鱼缸来看宇宙)”、最后一段“The goldfish example shows that the same physical situation can be modeled in different ways, each employing different fundamental elements and concepts. It might be that to describe the universe we have to employ different theories in different situations. (金鱼的例子表明，同一个物理情境可以用不同的方式建模，每一种方式都使用不同的基本元素和概念。也许要描述宇宙，我们必须在不同情境中使用不同的理论)”以及通读全文可知，作者承认目前物理学界存在“多重现实”的理论视角，以“鱼缸”为隐喻，指出同一物理情境可用不同方式建模，暗示多种理论并存的现实。说明作者认可对宇宙的多种解读。故选A项。 Many people associate their self-worth with their work. The more successful their career, the better they feel about themselves. Work-related self-esteem is therefore a worthy ideal to pursue with vigor, right? Well, not always. According to recent research, in which psychologists interviewed 370 full-time workers over a period of three weeks, the reality is a little more complicated. And it involves negative as well as positive consequences. It’s natural to be drawn towards pleasure and to step away from pain. In the workplace, if that pleasure comes from a triumph which boosts our self-respect, people will try to repeat that accomplishment. But repeating that accomplishment is often not realistic, which can lead to severe negative emotional consequences when it doesn’t reoccur. This form of motivation is widely regarded as a negative type of motivation. It can set back other more positive motivation types, such as completing a task purely because it’s fulfilling or enjoyable. What consumes the employees instead is a pressing need to feel mighty and sure of themselves. They then take on only tasks and objectives which serve that ego-driven need. As a result, to avoid feelings of shame and worthlessness associated with failure, they extend themselves to such a degree that there’s a subsequent adverse effect on their well-being. This internal pressure to succeed at all costs demands a lot of effort. It exhausts their energy, terminating in disproportionate levels of damaging sentiment. Those negative emotions mount into heightened anxiety, impacting their ability to make the most of their personal life. Their desire to avoid feeling inferior ends up making them feel inferior when it comes to their diminished (减弱的) capacity for friendship and leisure. They end up dissatisfied both at work and outside of it. But thankfully, for those people forced almost entirely by this specific form of motivation, the news isn’t all bad, or bad at all. The study also discovered several positive outcomes that can actually outweigh the harmful ones. Though these types of employees are motivated by the desire to avoid negative consequences, they are also motivated by the excitement of pursuing emotional rewards. This excitement makes pursuing goals enjoyable and stimulates pleasure and pride that would result from success. An effect of the positive motivation is that it neutralizes the existence of negative motivation. Sure, it affects people’s personal lives to an unhealthy extent, because leisure activities are often seen as a part of life that must be sacrificed to manage work and family demands. However, the way people feel about their work has less to do with whether they’re motivated by the preservation of self-esteem but more with the fact that they’ re simply motivated. 1．What do employees tend to do in pursuing work-related self-esteem? A．Stretch their sense of shame and worthlessness. B．Turn to all means regardless of the consequences. C．Take on tasks well beyond their actual capabilities. D．Strive to succeed at the expense of their well-being. 2．What do we learn about people over-concerned with work-related self-esteem? A．They cannot enjoy their personal life to the full. B．They may often feel inferior to their colleagues. C．They are never satisfied with their achievements. D．They have their own view of friendship and leisure. 3．What can we learn from the recent research? A．The goal of boosting self-esteem can be achieved if one keeps trying. B．The emotional rewards from goal pursuit are worth the pains taken. C．The negative consequences of goal pursuit can mostly be avoided. D．The pursuit of goals may turn out to be enjoyable and pleasant. 【答案】1．D 2．A 3．D 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要探讨了职场自尊对员工的正负影响，指出其可能危害身心健康，但也存在积极作用。 1．细节理解题。根据第三段中“As a result, to avoid feelings of shame and worthlessness associated with failure, they extend themselves to such a degree that there’s a subsequent adverse effect on their well-being.(因此，为了避免与失败相关的羞耻感和无价值感，他们过度透支自己，进而对身心健康产生不利影响)”可知，员工为追求职场自尊，会不惜以健康为代价努力成功。故选D。 2．细节理解题。根据第四段中“Those negative emotions mount into heightened anxiety, impacting their ability to make the most of their personal life.(这些负面情绪逐渐加剧为严重的焦虑，影响他们充分享受个人生活的能力)”可知，过度关注职场自尊的人无法充分享受个人生活。故选A。 3．推理判断题。根据第五段中“Though these types of employees are motivated by the desire to avoid negative consequences, they are also motivated by the excitement of pursuing emotional rewards. This excitement makes pursuing goals enjoyable and stimulates pleasure and pride that would result from success.(尽管这类员工的动机是避免负面后果，但他们也受到追求情感回报的兴奋感所驱动。这种兴奋感让追求目标变得愉快，并激发成功带来的愉悦感和自豪感)”可推知，追求目标可能会变得愉快且令人愉悦。故选D。 In a recent article, Markham Heid shares with us an unusual life crisis. At 41, he has built what many would regard as the good life: he has a family; he is healthy, productive, and creative; he has time to travel, read, exercise, and see friends. Yet, he feels that “something is off.” To fight against this feeling, some of his friends have turned to special retreats, while others try to solve it through fitness. What makes Heid’s problem somewhat odd is that it does not seem to arise from anything specific. If he had lost his job, had no time for himself, or was struggling in his marriage, the feeling would be understandable. In the history of philosophy, there have been many attempts to understand such a powerful but objectless feeling. Boredom, anxiety, depression and despair are some of the descriptions this mood has received. Heid ends up attributing his crisis to the lack of new experiences. The Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard calls this the “illusion of crop rotation”, the idea that changing the environment frequently can save us from this mood. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger also describes a similar state: one may still be surrounded by the same people and activities, but these no longer engage us as they used to. He calls it a kind of “anxiety” created by nothing in particular. No wonder the psychologist Sigmund Freud once described anxiety as a “riddle.” But what really drives this mood is not the need for new experiences. It is not even the particulars of our individual lives or the cultures we belong to, but that we have been given a life to live in the first place, the taste of possibility that comes with being alive. This mood is not due to doubts like “Do I have enough hobbies?” or “Have I achieved my goal?” It is related to the more fundamental questions like “What does it mean to be human?” “What am I supposed to do with the fact that I was given a life?” and “What kind of life is possible for me?” This is why this mood is likely to appear frequently in our life. This is why once many of our life goals are fulfilled, we begin to wonder what life itself is for. These questions never have a final answer and they can always leave us with a great sense of anguish about who we are and how we should go on. Nevertheless, recognizing that these doubts are there, and that they matter, can at least allow us to know what may be missing, even when everything is good. 1．The author shares Markham Heid’s crisis mainly to________. A．present an argument B．introduce a topic C．make an assumption D．evaluate an event 2．According to the author, how can the crisis in the passage be dealt with? A．By studying philosophy. B．By developing new hobbies. C．By going travelling frequently. D．By embracing the objectless feeling. 3．What does the word “anguish” underlined in the last paragraph most probably mean? A．Pain. B．Wonder. C．Direction. D．Achievement. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．What leads to a Life Crisis B．Letting Go of Dark Moods C．Boredom Makes Us Human D．Anxiety Gives Us Life Goals 【答案】1．B 2．D 3．A 4．C 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要讲述了以Markham Heid的危机为例，探讨一种强大但无明确对象的情绪及其产生原因和应对方式。 1．推理判断题。根据第一段“In a recent article, Markham Heid shares with us an unusual life crisis.(在最近的一篇文章中，Markham Heid与我们分享了一场不寻常的生活危机)”以及后文对这种无明确原因的情绪的探讨可知，作者分享Markham Heid的危机主要是为了引入一个话题。故选B。 2．推理判断题。根据最后一段“Nevertheless, recognizing that these doubts are there, and that they matter, can at least allow us to know what may be missing, even when everything is good.(尽管如此，认识到这些疑虑的存在，并且它们很重要，至少可以让我们知道，即使一切都好，可能还缺少什么)”可知，作者认为要接受这种无明确对象的情绪，这样才能知道可能缺少什么。故选D。 3．词义猜测题。根据最后一段“These questions never have a final answer and they can always leave us with a great sense of anguish about who we are and how we should go on.(这些问题永远没有最终的答案，它们总是会让我们对自己是谁以及该如何继续下去产生一种巨大的anguish感)”可知，这些问题没有答案，会让人对自己和未来感到痛苦，“anguish”意思是“痛苦”。A. Pain痛苦；B. Wonder惊奇；C. Direction方向；D. Achievement成就。故选A。 4．主旨大意题。根据第二段“In the history of philosophy, there have been many attempts to understand such a powerful but objectless feeling. (在哲学史中，人们曾多次试图去理解这种强大却无具体对象感的现象)”并结合文章讲述一位生活顺利的中年人却陷入无明显原因的“人生危机”可知，通过哲学与心理学视角，作者指出这种“无对象的焦虑”源于对生命意义的追问，而非外部环境。认识这种情绪本身，有助于理解生活的缺失与价值。所以，C选项“Boredom Makes Us Human(无聊使我们成为人类)”最符合文章标题。故选C项。 What are you doing later: wandering through Van Gogh’s landscapes, time-travelling to ancient Egypt? These are the kinds of “immersive” experiences we are increasingly flooded with. The immersive entertainment market globally was valued at around $114 billion in 2024, and it is predicted to almost quadruple to roughly $442 billion by 2030. As a journalist and life-long pop culture fan, I am simultaneously fascinated and unsettled by immersive entertainment. My most memorable experiences of it were personalised and powerfully emotive, making me exhilarated, tearful, even “cybersick”. When we are wrapped up in a narrative, particularly one relayed through a headset, we are removed from real time. It isn’t the escapism that worries me, though — great culture frees us from everyday constraints — it is the insularity (孤立). Immersive events stress the subjective viewpoint, often at the expense of the communal energy that fuels social atmosphere, so even packed-out immersive shows can seem like solitary pursuits, with human companions resembling NPCs (non-playable video game characters). The cultural academic Keren Zaiontz coined a sharp term for our consumption of immersive entertainment: “narcissistic spectatorship”. One study found VR use induced dissociative symptoms in 83.9 percent of participants. The long-term effects remain undefined, but research has highlighted recurring themes of addiction to the experience and isolation. Over at London’s Barbican Centre, Feel the Sound is a new immersive exhibition whose installations offer imaginative personalised features, including Your Inner Symphony’s “sensing stations”, which generate unique visuals by tracking our bodily reactions to music. Luke Kemp, who heads up the Barbican’s immersive programming, says these experiences respond to our need for “playful” cultural spaces, accessible regardless of prior knowledge: “It allows the audience to feel part of something”. Robyn Landau at Kinda Studios, co-developer of Your Inner Symphony, points out the link to interoception — our awareness of our body’s inner senses. “When we have these transformative experiences individually that connect us to ourselves, they actually transform how we show up in the world and the way we connect to others,” she says. According to psychologist Sophie Janicke-Bowles, immersive experiences “can have an incredible recovery effect on our mind, where we can detach from our everyday concerns and cognitively, emotionally and even physiologically get absorbed into something different”. But for me, there is still a curious tension at play in immersive entertainment, and I am torn about where the rapidly developing scene is taking us. It does give us an opportunity to tune into ourselves, but I am less convinced it amplifies our bond with those around us. If we remain fixated by our own reflections, then we are missing the bigger picture. Immersive entertainment might make VIPs of us all, but culture should also bring us together. 1．What can we learn about the author’s immersive experiences? A．They free the author from restrictions. B．They lift the author out of an awful mood. C．They leave the author feeling alone in the crowd. D．They cause the author to be emotionally unstable. 2．What can be inferred about Luke Kemp’s view on immersive experiences? A．They make people feel included. B．They lead to self-focused perspectives. C．They help with mental wellness. D．They transform our social interactions. 3．The author mentions Your Inner Symphony mainly to ________. A．restate an argument B．propose a concept C．provide an example D．present an opinion 4．The author considers Sophie Janicke-Bowles’s view ________. A．partial B．insightful C．confusing D．practical 【答案】1．C 2．A 3．D 4．A 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要讨论了沉浸式娱乐体验的利弊，包括其带来的情感冲击、孤立感及对个体与社会关系的影响。 1．细节理解题。根据第三段中“Immersive events stress the subjective viewpoint, often at the expense of the communal energy that fuels social atmosphere, so even packed-out immersive shows can seem like solitary pursuits, with human companions resembling NPCs (non-playable video game characters). (沉浸式活动强调主观观点，往往以牺牲激发社会氛围的集体能量为代价，因此即使是座无虚席的沉浸式表演也可能看起来像是孤独的追求，人类同伴就像非玩家角色。)”可知，作者的沉浸式体验让作者感到在人群中很孤独。故选C。 2．推理判断题。根据第五段中“Luke Kemp, who heads up the Barbican’s immersive programming, says these experiences respond to our need for “playful” cultural spaces, accessible regardless of prior knowledge: “It allows the audience to feel part of something”. (负责巴比肯沉浸式节目策划的卢克·肯普表示，这些体验满足了我们对“有趣”文化空间的需求，无论是否有先验知识都可以参与其中：“它让观众感受到自己是其中的一部分”。)”可知，卢克·肯普认为沉浸式体验让观众感受到自己是其中的一部分，即让观众感到被包含在内。故选A。 3．推理判断题。根据第五段中“Over at London’s Barbican Centre, Feel the Sound is a new immersive exhibition whose installations offer imaginative personalised features, including Your Inner Symphony’s “sensing stations”, which generate unique visuals by tracking our bodily reactions to music. Luke Kemp, who heads up the Barbican’s immersive programming, says these experiences respond to our need for “playful” cultural spaces, accessible regardless of prior knowledge: “It allows the audience to feel part of something”. (在伦敦巴比肯艺术中心，一场名为“聆听声音”的全新沉浸式展览正在举办。展览中的装置作品兼具创意与个性化特色，其中《内心交响曲》项目的“感知站”，能通过追踪人体对音乐的反应生成独特视觉效果。巴比肯中心沉浸式项目负责人卢克・肯普表示，这些体验满足了人们对“富有趣味性”的文化空间的需求，无论是否有相关知识储备都能参与：“它让观众感觉自己是某件事的一部分。”)”可知，作者提及该作品是为了通过开发者的表述，传递沉浸式体验与自我、社交相关的观点。故选D。 4．推理判断题。根据第七段中“According to psychologist Sophie Janicke-Bowles, immersive experiences “can have an incredible recovery effect on our mind, where we can detach from our everyday concerns and cognitively, emotionally and even physiologically get absorbed into something different”. (根据心理学家索菲·贾尼克-鲍尔斯的说法，沉浸式体验“可以对我们的心灵产生令人难以置信的恢复效果，我们可以摆脱日常的烦恼，在认知、情感甚至生理上投入到不同的东西中”。)”以及最后一段中作者的观点“It does give us an opportunity to tune into ourselves, but I am less convinced it amplifies our bond with those around us. (它确实给了我们关注自我的机会，但我不太相信它能加强我们与周围人的联结。)”可知，作者认可该观点中沉浸式体验对心灵的修复作用，但认为其未提及社交联结层面，观点不够全面。故选A。 Why do we get angry, fearful, joyful, or anxious? What’s the point in having emotions? In many instances in life we wish we could do away with emotions altogether, particularly the unpleasant ones like fear, anxiety, and anger. Remaining calm and peaceful often feels preferable to experiencing extreme ups and downs. But what if we regard emotions as key to decision making — and start to see that without them we would start to make some truly unwise choices? Emotions then become more than childlike yelps (joy) and screams (anger); instead, they are bodily processes that signal value, influence risk assessment, and speed up judgements in uncertain situations. Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio developed the “somatic marker hypothesis” in response to observations made in neurological patients who had suffered damage to the brain’s frontal lobe. Before the onset of brain damage, the patients were intelligent, creative, and successful— but after damage the patients struggled to organise their workday, had problems planning their future over immediate, medium and long-range goals, and could no longer choose suitable friends, partners, and activities. The plans they organised, the groups they elected to join, or the activities they undertook often led to financial losses, losses in social standing, and losses to family and friends, Damasio writes in his paper, The Somatic marker Hypothesis and the Possible Functions of the Prefrontal Cortex. Not only were the choices made by patients no longer personally advantageous, but they were also demonstrably different from the choices the patients were known to have made prior to brain damage. But in all other aspects of intellect— basic attention and working memory, the ability to use logic in the solution of problems, the learning of factual knowledge and skills, even their knowledge of social issues — the patients were otherwise perfectly fine. Interestingly, in conjunction with impaired decision making, patients also suffered a compromised ability to express emotion and to experience feelings. “Along with normal intellect and abnormal decision making, there were abnormalities in emotion and feeling,” writes Damasio. When we feel joy, rage, disgust — the entire body’s internal environment, including muscles, organs, fluids, and physiological states including blood pressure and temperature, shift in response, and this “somatic” response is what drives decision making. We meet someone who gives us a “bad taste in the mouth” and we don’t invite them around for dinner. Without emotion and the accompanying somatic markers — a pounding heart rate, tight face, lump in the throat, dry mouth, butterflies in the stomach, sweaty hands, and so forth — we would, more often than not, according to Damasio’s hypothesis, make sub-optimal decisions in our everyday life. 1．What did Damasio find about patients with frontal lobe damage? A．Failure to learn some social skills. B．Decline in their working memory. C．Inability to express their emotions. D．Difficulty in making wise decisions. 2．What does the word “somatic” underlined in Para.3 most possibly mean? A．Intellectual. B．Emotional. C．Bodily. D．Logical. 3．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Feeling Our Way B．Head Ruling Heart C．Trusting the Senses D．Calm Before Storm 【答案】1．D 2．C 3．A 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要论述了情绪对决策的关键作用，结合相关假说展开说明。 1．细节理解题。根据第三段中“Before the onset of brain damage, the patients were intelligent, creative, and successful— but after damage the patients struggled to organise their workday, had problems planning their future over immediate, medium and long-range goals, and could no longer choose suitable friends, partners, and activities.(在脑损伤发作之前，这些患者都很聪明、有创造力且成功，但在脑损伤后，患者很难安排自己的工作日程，在规划近期、中期和长期目标方面存在问题，也无法再选择合适的朋友、伴侣和活动。)”可知，Damasio发现额叶受损的患者难以做出明智的决定。故选D。 2．词句猜测题。根据第三段中“Neuroscientist Antonio Damasio developed the “somatic marker hypothesis” in response to observations made in neurological patients who had suffered damage to the brain’s frontal lobe.(神经科学家Antonio Damasio提出了“somatic标记假说”，以回应在对大脑额叶受损的神经患者的观察中所发现的情况。)”以及第五段中“When we feel joy, rage, disgust — the entire body’s internal environment, including muscles, organs, fluids, and physiological states including blood pressure and temperature, shift in response, and this “somatic” response is what drives decision making.(当我们感到喜悦、愤怒、厌恶时——整个身体的内部环境，包括肌肉、器官、体液和包括血压和体温在内的生理状态都会发生相应的变化，而这种‘somatic’反应正是驱动决策的因素。)”可知，somatic与身体的内部环境、肌肉、器官等生理状态相关，故推测somatic意为“身体的”。故选C。 3．主旨大意题。通读全文，尤其是根据第二段“But what if we regard emotions as key to decision making — and start to see that without them we would start to make some truly unwise choices? Emotions then become more than childlike yelps (joy) and screams (anger); instead, they are bodily processes that signal value, influence risk assessment, and speed up judgements in uncertain situations.(但是，如果我们把情绪看作是决策的关键，并开始意识到没有情绪我们就会做出一些真正不明智的选择呢？那么，情绪就不仅仅是孩子般的欢呼（喜悦）和尖叫（愤怒）；相反，它们是在不确定情况下发出价值信号、影响风险评估和加速判断的身体过程。)”以及第五段中“When we feel joy, rage, disgust — the entire body’s internal environment, including muscles, organs, fluids, and physiological states including blood pressure and temperature, shift in response, and this “somatic” response is what drives decision making.(当我们感到喜悦、愤怒、厌恶时——整个身体的内部环境，包括肌肉、器官、体液和包括血压和体温在内的生理状态都会发生相应的变化，而这种‘躯体’反应正是驱动决策的因素。)”可知，文章核心围绕“情绪通过躯体反应影响决策”展开，强调感受（情绪）对行动（决策）的指引作用。A选项“Feeling Our Way(凭感觉行事)”最符合文章主旨。故选A。 In the fall of 1944, Norman Borlaug moved to Mexico to produce a new variety of wheat. Finally, he got lucky. His wheat proved to be not just high-yielding (高产的) but also surprisingly varied. But, as proud as he was of his seeds, Borlaug also saw their limits. When he received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970, he used his Nobel address to caution against self-satisfaction. The new varieties of wheat he had reproduced represented, he said, only a “temporary success in man’s war against hunger.” The world’s population, he worried out loud, would continue to grow, and eventually the demand for food would again outpace the supply. Now in 2025, Michael Grunwald says in his new book, We Are Eating the Earth, that humanity is facing “some terrible math.” On one side of the equation is the growing need for food. On the other side is climate change. Agriculture is a major source of greenhouse gases, depending on how you calculate it. We need to “feed the world without frying the world” is how Grunwald puts it. What’s to be done? A good first step, Grunwald advocates, would be to stop making things worse. We could start with biofuels. Every year in the US, some fourteen billion gallons of a corn-based additive get mixed in gas. The practice is supposed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Almost certainly, though, it has the opposite outcome. Redirecting corn from grocery stores to gas tanks pushes up goods prices — which, in turn, encourages farmers to change forests into cropland. Since forests store a lot of carbon, cutting down them increases atmospheric \( CO_2 \). Grunwald quotes a song: Biofuel use is gonna burn up all my food Deforestation can only ruin our nation. Immoral men with that bad intention What is your plan? Is it life or ruination? Were it not for Borlaug, the world in the late twentieth century would have been a very different place. In the eight years since Borlaug arrived in Mexico, farming in much of the world has been transformed. New tools that could make farms even more productive are constantly being developed. At the same time, the world, too, has been transformed, by such things as climate change, groundwater exhaustion, and soil pollution. The new tools and the new threats are bound up in each other—two sides, as it were, of the same leaf. If it is reasonable to imagine that we will, somehow or other, find ways to feed ten billion people, it is also reasonable to fear how much damage will be done in the process. 1．What are the first two paragraphs mainly about? A．The downstream consequences of food shortage. B．The significance of inventing high-productive seeds. C．The problems humans face in the course of development. D．Two contrary perspectives on the growing demand for food. 2．Why does the author mention the song? A．To illustrate a current attempt of biofuels. B．To reveal convention is still better than innovation. C．To raise public awareness of redirecting food for fuel. D．To prove good intentions may bring about bad results. 3．What can we learn from the passage? A．Farming transformation lacks recognition. B．The issue of hunger should be prioritized. C．It is urgent to treat human-caused damage. D．We need view food and environment as one. 4．Which would be the best title for the passage? A．Can We Satisfy Our Growing Appetites? B．Farming: Will It Be Life without Ruination? C．Is Agriculture to Blame for Climate Change? D．Environment: Are We Transforming or Harming It? 【答案】1．C 2．D 3．D 4．B 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要讨论了农业在满足食物需求的同时对环境造成的影响，特别是气候变化。 1．主旨大意题。根据第一段“The new varieties of wheat he had reproduced represented, he said, only a “temporary success in man’s war against hunger.” The world’s population, he worried out loud, would continue to grow, and eventually the demand for food would again outpace the supply. (他说，他培育的小麦新品种只是“人类对抗饥饿战争的暂时成功”。他大声地担心，世界人口将继续增长，最终对食物的需求将再次超过供应。)”和第二段“On one side of the equation is the growing need for food. On the other side is climate change. Agriculture is a major source of greenhouse gases, depending on how you calculate it. We need to “feed the world without frying the world” is how Grunwald puts it. (一方面是对食物日益增长的需求。另一方面是气候变化。农业是温室气体的主要来源，这取决于你如何计算。格伦沃尔德说，我们需要“在不破坏世界的情况下养活世界”。)”可知第一段提到Norman Borlaug的高产小麦虽暂时应对饥饿，但人口增长会让粮食需求再次超过供给；第二段指人类面临“粮食需求增长”与“气候变化”的“可怕平衡”，核心都是人类发展过程中遭遇的问题。故选C。 2．推理判断题。第三段“Every year in the US, some fourteen billion gallons of a corn-based additive get mixed in gas. The practice is supposed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Almost certainly, though, it has the opposite outcome. Redirecting corn from grocery stores to gas tanks pushes up goods prices — which, in turn, encourages farmers to change forests into cropland. Since forests store a lot of carbon, cutting down them increases atmospheric \( CO_2 \). (在美国，每年大约有140亿加仑的玉米添加剂混入汽油中。这种做法旨在减少温室气体排放。然而，几乎可以肯定的是，它会产生相反的结果。将玉米从杂货店转到汽油罐中推高了商品价格，这反过来又鼓励农民把森林变成农田。由于森林储存了大量的碳，砍伐它们会增加大气中的二氧化碳。)”可知生物燃料的使用本意是为了减少温室气体排放，但实际上却导致了食物价格上涨和森林砍伐，进而增加了大气中的二氧化碳。那首歌的歌词直接表达了生物燃料使用可能带来的不良后果，即食物被消耗和森林被砍伐，从而证明了好意可能带来不良后果。故选D。 3．推理判断题。文章核心矛盾是“满足粮食需求”与“保护地球环境”的冲突，再根据最后一段“New tools that could make farms even more productive are constantly being developed. At the same time, the world, too, has been transformed, by such things as climate change, groundwater exhaustion, and soil pollution. The new tools and the new threats are bound up in each other — two sides, as it were, of the same leaf. (能够提高农场生产力的新工具不断被开发出来。与此同时，由于气候变化、地下水枯竭和土壤污染等原因，世界也发生了变化。新的工具和新的威胁是相互联系在一起的——就像一片叶子的两面一样。)”可知新工具和新威胁是相互交织的，需要综合看待。因此，我们需要将食物和环境视为一个整体。故选D。 4．主旨大意题。文章主要讨论了农业在满足食物需求的同时对环境造成的影响，特别是气候变化。文章通过Norman Borlaug的故事和Michael Grunwald的观点，以及生物燃料使用的例子，强调了农业发展需要平衡食物需求和环境保护。因此，最佳标题是B，即“农业：会是生存而无毁灭吗？”，这个标题既概括了文章的主题，又提出了一个引人深思的问题。故选B。 In the early 1900s, French chemist, Edouard Benedictus, invented shatterproof (防碎的) glass by chance. But its significance and relevance didn’t emerge until the car market created the problem for which he had already found the answer. Such moments of serendipity reveal the unpredictable nature of innovation. Yet, even in cases where chance plays a role, as in Benedictus’s story, the broader question remains: Are such discoveries truly born of luck, or were they somehow “in the air,” waiting for the right person to seize them? Some argue all the discoveries would have been made by other people. They believe if the time was ripe in conceptual and technological terms, someone would have got there sooner or later. This is the used and abused understanding of theories that were “in the air”. independently, Charles Darwin and Alfred R. Wallace (the latter 15 years behind Darwin) arrived at the theory of evolution by natural selection, both counting on similar data. There existed slight differences in the theory, but the coincidences of thought were astonishing. This phenomenon, which also exists in biological evolution, is called convergence: two non-closely related species develop similar functional adaptations. This occurs because the environment poses similar survival problems to both, namely similar selective pressures. This is an important clue that can help explain why this dynamic also exists in scientific knowledge: There are similar selective pressures and different research groups that compete to come up with the solutions. If we analyze the steps undertaken that led to the result, we can see that there were in fact some accidental elements. The overall dynamic was not accidental, though. Yet is it really possible that all discoveries were in the air? Let us assume for a moment that this is true and that the most luck can do is speed up the inevitable. All scientists are standing on the shoulders of the giants who have gone before them, and there is objectively a cumulative (积累的) element in science. Nevertheless, at some point and in the right circumstances, it was the unknown scientists, not the giants, who managed to see a little farther. The mind of the giant was imprisoned by prior knowledge and so trapped within the framework of established habits, research questions, and established methods. The new, little-known scientist, on the other hand, will in one way or another have been able to break free of the chains of established knowledge. And so it will have been possible for them to imagine other worlds. This suggests that it will be innovators, with their prepared minds, who have a better chance of making accidental discoveries, namely that are irregular and unexpected. 1．In Paragraph 2, “serendipity” refers to __________. A．accidental invention B．emergence of problems C．late recognition D．chemical innovation 2．The example of Darwin and Wallace is given to illustrate __________. A．the fierce competition among biological scientists B．the important role of similar data in intentional research C．independent but similar solutions under shared pressures D．limited resources and technological dependency in science 3．Which statement best reflects the main idea of the passage? A．All discoveries are inevitable results of technological progress. B．Serendipity alone drives groundbreaking scientific achievements. C．Traditional methods prevent innovation and should be abandoned. D．Breakthroughs arise when ready thinkers meet opportunities. 【答案】1．A 2．C 3．D 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。主要探讨创新中偶然与必然的关系，分析偶然发现背后的积累与思考的作用。 1．词义猜测题。根据第一段中的“In the early 1900s, French chemist, Edouard Benedictus, invented shatterproof (防碎的) glass by chance. But its significance and relevance didn’t emerge until...(20世纪初，法国化学家爱德华·本尼迪克特偶然发明了防碎玻璃。但它的意义和相关性直到……才显现)”以及第二段中的“Such moments of serendipity reveal the unpredictable nature of innovation. Yet, even in cases where chance plays a role, as in Benedictus’s story...(这种serendipity的时刻揭示了创新的不可预测性。然而，即便在像本尼迪克特的故事这样“偶然”起作用的案例中……)”可知，“serendipity”指代前文提到的“偶然发明”（本尼迪克特偶然发明防碎玻璃）。故选A项。 2．推理判断题。根据第三段中的“Some argue all the discoveries would have been made by other people. They believe if the time was ripe in conceptual and technological terms, someone would have got there sooner or later. This is the used and abused understanding of theories that were “in the air”. independently, Charles Darwin and Alfred R. Wallace (the latter 15 years behind Darwin) arrived at the theory of evolution by natural selection, both counting on similar data. There existed slight differences in the theory, but the coincidences of thought were astonishing. This phenomenon, which also exists in biological evolution, is called convergence: two non-closely related species develop similar functional adaptations. This occurs because the environment poses similar survival problems to both, namely similar selective pressures. This is an important clue that can help explain why this dynamic also exists in scientific knowledge: There are similar selective pressures and different research groups that compete to come up with the solutions.(一些人认为，所有的发现即便不是由这些人完成，也会有其他人来实现。他们相信，一旦概念和技术层面的时机成熟，总有人迟早会取得这些成果。这是对那些‘已在空气中弥漫’的理论的常用且滥用的理解。查尔斯·达尔文和阿尔弗雷德·拉塞尔·华莱士（后者比达尔文晚15年）各自独立地依靠相似的数据，得出了自然选择的进化理论。虽然他们的理论存在细微差异，但思维上的巧合却令人惊讶。这种现象在生物进化中也同样存在，被称为趋同：两个亲缘关系较远的物种发展出相似的功能适应性。出现这种情况是因为环境给它们带来了相似的生存问题，即相似的选择压力。这是一条重要线索，有助于解释为什么这种动态也存在于科学知识领域：存在相似的选择压力，不同的研究小组竞相提出解决方案。)”可知，举达尔文和华莱士的例子，是为了说明“在共同的压力（相似需求/问题）下，不同研究者会独立得出相似的解决方案”。故选C项。 3．主旨大意题。通读全文以及最后一段“This suggests that it will be innovators, with their prepared minds, who have a better chance of making accidental discoveries, namely that are irregular and unexpected.(这表明，那些具备有备思维的创新者，更有可能做出偶然性的发现，也就是说，这些发现是不合常规且出乎意料的)”可知，D选项“当有准备的思考者遇到机遇时，突破就会出现”反映了文章的大意。故选D项。 “Assume you are wrong.” The advice came from Brian Nosek, a psychology professor, who was offering a strategy for pursuing better science. To understand the context for Nosek’s advice, we need to take a step back to the nature of science itself. You see despite what many of us learned in elementary school, there is no single scientific method. Just as scientific theories become elaborated and change, so do scientific methods. But methodological reform hasn't come without some fretting. Nasty things have been said by and about methodological reformers. Few people like having the value of their life’s work called into question. On the other side, few people are good at voicing criticisms in kind and constructive ways. So, part of the challenge is figuring out how to bake critical self-reflection into the culture of science itself, so it unfolds as a welcome and integrated part of the process, and not an embarrassing sideshow. What Nosek recommended was a strategy for changing the way we offer and respond to critique. Assuming you are right might be a motivating force, sustaining the enormous effort that conducting scientific work requires. But it also makes it easy to interpret criticisms as personal attacks. Beginning, instead, from the assumption you are wrong, a criticism is easier to interpret as a constructive suggestion for how to be less wrong — a goal that your critic probably shares. One concern about this approach is that it could be demoralizing for scientists. Striving to be less wrong might be a less effective motivation than the promise of being right. Another concern is that a strategy that works well within science could backfire when it comes to communicating science with the public. Without an appreciation for how science works, it’s easy to take uncertainty or disagreements as marks against science, when in fact they reflect some of the very features of science that make it our best approach to reaching reliable conclusions about the world. Science is reliable because it responds to evidence: as the quantity and quality of our evidence improves, our theories can and should change, too. Despite these worries, I like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. It also builds in a sense of community — we’re all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right. Unfortunately, this still leaves us with an untested hypothesis: that assuming one is wrong can change community norms for the better, and ultimately support better science and even, perhaps, better decisions in life. I don’t know if that’s true. In fact, I should probably assume that it’s wrong. But with the benefit of the scientific community and our best methodological tools, I hope we can get it less wrong, together. 1．What is the function of Paragraph 3 in the passage? A．To introduce the concept of intellectual modesty. B．To criticize the conservative mindset of scientists. C．To illustrate the challenges scientific community faces. D．To explain why methodological reformers need self-reflection. 2．What does the word “demoralizing” underlined in Paragraph 5 most probably mean? A．Worrying. B．Confusing. C．Destructive. D．Discouraging. 3．What will the author probably agree with? A．Nosek’s strategy is among the best methodological tools. B．Nosek’s strategy can increase the motivation of scientists. C．The public should not be informed of scientific uncertainty. D．Intellectual modesty might drive collective progress in science. 4．What is the main purpose of the passage? A．To show self-reflection is also part of science. B．To suggest a humble attitude in doing science. C．To explain why the public misunderstands science. D．To argue against adopting a single method in science. 【答案】1．C 2．D 3．D 4．B 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。文章主要讨论了心理学教授Brian Nosek提出的“假设自己错了”这一策略，及其对科学界和公众理解科学的影响。 1．推理判断题。根据第三段“So, part of the challenge is figuring out how to bake critical self-reflection into the culture of science itself, so it unfolds as a welcome and integrated part of the process, and not an embarrassing sideshow. (因此，部分挑战在于如何将批判性的自我反思融入科学文化本身，使其成为这一过程中受欢迎且不可或缺的一部分，而非尴尬的插曲。)”可知，第三段主要阐述了科学界面临的将自我反思融入科学文化的挑战。故选C。 2．词句猜测题。根据第五段“Striving to be less wrong might be a less effective motivation than the promise of being right. (努力减少错误可能比“证明自己是对的”这一预期，激励效果更弱。)”可知，“demoralizing”指这种方法可能削弱科学家的积极性，即“令人气馁的”。故选D。 3．推理判断题。根据倒数第二段“Despite these worries, I like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. It also builds in a sense of community — we’re all in the same boat when it comes to falling short of getting things right. (尽管有这些担忧，我还是喜欢Nosek的建议，因为它融入了认知谦逊，同时让我们意识到自己可以做得更好。它还融入了社群意识 —— 在无法完全正确地处理事情时，我们都在同一条船上。)”可知，作者认为认知谦逊可能推动科学界的集体进步。故选D。 4．主旨大意题。根据文章内容，尤其是第一段““Assume you are wrong.” The advice came from Brian Nosek, a psychology professor, who was offering a strategy for pursuing better science. (“假设你错了。”这条建议来自心理学教授Brian Nosek，他提出了一种追求更好科学的策略。)”以及倒数第二段中“Despite these worries, I like Nosek’s suggestion because it builds in cognitive humility along with a sense that we can do better. (尽管有这些担忧，我还是喜欢Nosek的建议，因为它既包含了认知上的谦逊，又让我们觉得自己可以做得更好。)”可知，文章主要建议了在做科学时保持谦逊的态度。故选B。 I never planned to fake my data. My project involved interviewing the customers who were visiting a games shop in central London, then measuring the distance they had travelled. Arriving at the location with a clipboard, I realized that I didn’t have the nerve. I went home and began to dream up some realistic-seeming numbers. I am a little ashamed of myself. However, I was about 14 years old at the time. I am confident that the scientific record has not been corrupted by my sins. I wish I could say that only school children fake data, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Stuart Ritchie’s book Science Fictions argues that “fraud in science is not the rare scenario that we desperately hope it to be”. This matters. Fraudulent research wastes the time of scientists who try to build on it, as well as the money of funding agencies that support it. It undermines the reputation of good science. Above all, if the insights produced by good science make the world better, then false beliefs produced by fraudulent science make the world worse. Consider the desperate search for treatments for the flu. Medical researchers have struggled to test out treatments from vitamin D to the deworming (除虫) drug ivermectin, but the results have often been small or flawed studies. However, an influential working paper, published late last year, described a large trial with very positive results for ivermectin. It gave a lot of people hope and inspired the use of ivermectin around the world, although the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration advise against ivermectin’s use to treat the disease. The research paper was withdrawn on July 14, after several researchers discovered anomalies (反常现象) in the underlying data. Some patients appeared to have died before the study even began, while other patient records seemed to be duplicates. There may be an innocent explanation for this but it certainly raises questions. On August 17, there was an unsettling development in a quite different field, behavioral science. Data detectives Uri Simonsohn, Joe Simmons, Leif Nelson and anonymous co-authors published a forensic analysis of a well-known experiment about dishonesty. The experiment, published in 2012, was based on data from a motor insurer in which customers had supplied information about mileage along with a declaration that the information was true. Some signed the declaration at the top of the document, while others signed at the bottom — and those who signed at the top were more likely to tell the truth. It’s an intuitive and influential discovery. The only problem with this, according to Simonsohn and his colleagues, is that it is apparently based on faked data. “There is very strong evidence that the data were fabricated,” they conclude. Several of the authors of the original article have published statements agreeing. What remains to be seen is who or what was behind the suspected fabrication. Dan Ariely, the most famous of the authors of the original study, was the one who brought the data to the collaboration. He told me in an email that “at no point did I knowingly use unreliable, inaccurate, or manipulated data in our research”, expressing regret that he did not sufficiently check the data that were supplied to him by the insurance company. Both episodes are disheartening: science is hard enough when everyone involved is acting in good faith. Scientists need to get back the traditional values of the field, which include the open sharing of scientific ideas and data, and rigorous scrutiny of those ideas. 1．Why did the author fake his data in the school project? A．Because he wanted to impress his teacher. B．Because he lacked the tools to collect real data. C．Because he was afraid of interacting with the customers. D．Because he was too young to understand the impact of his actions. 2．Which of the following is NOT a consequence of faking data as described in the passage? A．The waste of time and funding. B．The misuse of the research facilities. C．The corruption of the integrity of science. D．The promotion of false beliefs that harm society. 3．It can be inferred from the passage that ________. A．The ivermectin study’s flaws were discovered by health authorities. B．The issue of faking data is more widespread in the medical field. C．The behavioral study’s data was initially believed to be reliable. D．The intention of the insurance company remains to be known. 4．The following part of the passage will most likely discuss ________. A．reasons for data fabrication B．effects of fraud on scientific progress C．case studies of scientific fraud in various fields D．measures to preserve the traditional values of science 【答案】1．C 2．B 3．C 4．D 【导语】本文是一篇议论文。作者从自己14岁时为学校项目伪造数据的经历切入，引出科学研究中数据造假这一严肃问题，通过列举流感治疗药物研究、行为科学实验两个数据造假案例，阐述数据造假的危害，并呼吁科学界重拾开放共享、严谨审查等传统价值观。 1．细节理解题。根据第一段中的“My project involved interviewing the customers who were visiting a games shop in central London, then measuring the distance they had travelled. Arriving at the location with a clipboard, I realized that I didn’t have the nerve. I went home and began to dream up some realistic-seeming numbers. (我的课题需要采访伦敦市中心一家游戏店的顾客，然后记录他们前来时所行驶的距离。可当我拿着资料夹赶到现场后，才发现自己根本没有勇气（上前采访）。于是我回了家，开始编造一些看起来真实可信的数据)”可知，作者伪造数据是因为害怕与顾客交流。故选C项。 2．细节理解题。根据第三段中的“Fraudulent research wastes the time of scientists who try to build on it, as well as the money of funding agencies that support it. It undermines the reputation of good science. Above all, if the insights produced by good science make the world better, then false beliefs produced by fraudulent science make the world worse.(造假研究浪费了试图在此基础上开展工作的科学家的时间，也浪费了支持它的资助机构的资金。它损害了优质科学的声誉。最重要的是，若优质科学带来的认知能让世界变得更好，那么造假科学产生的错误认知则会让世界变得更糟）”可知，数据造假的后果包括浪费时间和资金（A项）、破坏科学诚信（C项）、传播危害社会的错误认知（D项）。B项“研究设施的滥用”原文未提及，不属于数据造假的后果。故选B项。 3．推理判断题。根据第七段中的“It’s an intuitive and influential discovery. (这是一项直观且具有影响力的发现)”可知，这项行为科学研究最初被认为是可靠的，因此才具有“影响力”。故选C项。 4．推理判断题。根据最后一段中的“Scientists need to get back the traditional values of the field, which include the open sharing of scientific ideas and data, and rigorous scrutiny of those ideas.(科学家需要重拾该领域的传统价值观，包括科学观点和数据的开放共享，以及对这些观点的严谨审查)”可知，文章结尾提出了“重拾传统价值观”的呼吁，由此可推断，接下来最可能讨论“维护科学传统价值观的具体措施”。故选D项。 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $