专题04 阅读理解D 篇（说明文）（专项训练）（北京专用）2026年高考英语真题题源解密

**基本信息** 聚焦北京高考英语D篇高阶文本，构建“考向分类-题型拆解-技巧提炼”三维训练体系，通过真题研析与模拟精练，提升批判性思维与深层文本解读能力，落实语言能力与思维品质培育。 **专项设计** |模块|题量/典例|方法提炼|知识逻辑| |----|-----------|----------|----------| |深度人文社会思辨议论类|4篇真题+8篇模拟题|态度题抓“评价标志词”（如Importantly）、词义题依“语境逻辑”（因果/对比）、推理题“原文合理延伸”|以“提出误区—辩证剖析—提炼启示”行文脉络为核心，关联观点态度、主旨归纳等题型与文本逻辑的对应| |前沿学术科研说明类|1篇真题+8篇模拟题|实验题梳“变量与逻辑”、词义题“左顾右盼”、启示题“科研价值推导”|围绕“科研背景—实验过程—结论启示”框架，衔接实验细节、因果分析等题型与科研逻辑的关联|

专题04 阅读理解D 篇（说明文）内容导览 考情概览：摸清命题规律，锁定复习重点 2026真题研析：拆解最新真题，示范分析路径 3年真题精练：精练近年真题，吃透常见考法 最新模拟探源：跟进模拟新题，预判考查风向 区别于C篇“社会议论+科学说明”轮换，北京D篇主打高阶深度文本，两大固定考向，紧扣新课标“人与自我、人与社会、人与自然”三大语境，侧重学术思辨与人文深度探究，是高考批判性思维核心载体。 考向一：深度人文社会思辨议论文（高频压轴） 题材：社会现象反思、认知思维重构、文化价值思辨、教育理念革新、人类行为心理探究；特点：观点辩证、立场隐晦、无绝对对错、侧重作者隐性态度与思辨逻辑，反对片面评判。 考向二：前沿学术科研深度说明文（难点压轴） 题材：前沿认知科学、社会实验研究、人文社科调研、科技伦理探究、行为科学新发现；特点：科研逻辑复杂、新旧观点对冲、实验辩证分析、结论开放、侧重梳理科研脉络与深层启示。 年份 试卷类型 D篇原文主题 归属考向 核心考查题型 考查要点总结 2026 北京卷 探究现代数字时代“注意力碎片化危机”，剖析注意力稀缺的社会成因、个体危害，提出主动管控注意力的深度人文思辨 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 细节推理1道 + 观点态度1道 + 深层主旨1道 + 写作意图1道 推导注意力流失的深层社会诱因、辨析作者批判与建构的双重立场、拆解“问题—危害—对策”高阶议论架构、精准提炼文本人文育人主旨、区分表层现象与深层本质、把握隐性写作目的 2025 北京卷 围绕“创造性借鉴与原创边界”展开深度思辨，打破“绝对原创”误区，论证借鉴、重构、创新的辩证关系 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 例证推理1道 + 词义思辨1道 + 主旨归纳1道 + 作者立场1道 辨析事例与核心论点的逻辑关联、结合语境破解抽象思辨词汇、推翻大众固有认知、推导作者辩证中立的价值立场、梳理否定误区—建构新认知的完整议论逻辑 2024 北京卷 依托社会行为学对照实验，探究人类“利他行为与自我价值”的内在关联，解析利他行为的心理机制与社会意义 考向二 前沿学术科研说明类 实验细节推理1道 + 因果推演1道 + 科研主旨1道 + 启示推断1道 精准梳理实验变量与研究逻辑、推导实验现象背后的深层心理成因、区分传统认知与科研新结论、归纳科研成果的社会价值、提炼文本客观严谨的学术基调与现实启示 2023 北京卷 深度反思现代社会“功利化速成思维”，批判急功近利的社会心态，阐释长期深耕、延迟价值的人生与社会意义 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 深层推理2道 + 写作手法1道 + 升华主旨1道 挖掘社会功利心态的核心危害、推断作者隐性批判与价值倡导、辨析文本对比论证的写作手法、突破表层文意提炼人生思辨主旨、把握文本人文反思与价值引领的核心立意 作为阅读板块压轴篇目，D 篇承接 C 篇思维爬坡层级，是全卷区分度最高的题型，以高阶批判性思辨为核心命题导向，严格遵循 A-D 由浅入深的难度梯度排布中国网教育...。全篇词数控制在 430—480 词，固定 4 道单选题、满分 8 分，长难句嵌套密集，熟词生义、抽象思辨词汇占比显著高于前三篇，语言难度全面升级。 文体以人文思辨议论文为主，交替穿插前沿社科研究说明文，紧扣新课标三大主题语境。2026 年选材围绕传统传承与创新突破的辩证关系展开，借助隐喻手法探讨创新边界与理性探索的价值，将中华传统守正创新思想融入英文语篇，兼具人文底蕴与时代思考，落实立德树人育人目标中国网教育...。 题型排布固定：细节推理 1 道、作者态度 1 道、篇章主旨 1 道、写作意图 1 道，几乎无原文原句照搬的浅层细节题，所有题目均需整合段落逻辑推导作答。命题侧重区分大众固有认知与作者辩证观点，规避绝对化表述，着重考查考生梳理 “提出误区 — 辩证剖析 — 提炼启示” 完整行文脉络的能力。 整体命题立足核心素养，顺应人工智能时代人才选拔需求，重点考查 AI 难以替代的价值判断、逻辑思辨能力，引导考生跳出表层信息阅读，学会客观审视社会议题，既精准测评英语语言功底，又实现思维品质与文化意识的双重培育新京报。 考向：深度人文社会议论类 2026年高考英语北京卷阅读理解D篇 The 21st century has created a whole range of new types of professionals that we have never had before — or if not quite new, at least newly repackaged. The world has always had influential people, for instance, but only now do we have "Influencer". Similarly, the corporate world has certainly known its fair share of disruption, yet it is only in the last couple of decades that the "Disruptor" has become a recognisable figure in the way we talk about big business. In an earlier era, the Disruptor would have been called an Innovator. Yet while an Innovator creates something new, the Disruptor is defined as much by what they destroy as by what they create. The Disruptor forces change; the clean-up is somebody else's problem. It's an attitude best summed up as "Move fast and break things." Back in 1929, G. K. Chesterton identified the core problem with moving fast and breaking things through a thought experiment. Imagine there is a fence along a road. Suppose it's been there a long time, and was put there for some purpose. But that purpose is lost over time. To us, now, the fence seems to be nothing but an impediment. Why not remove it? When faced with such a fence, Chesterton thinks the fact that we can't see the point of the fence is why we should not tear it down. Some fences keep foxes out of henhouses, for instance. If you think you can do without the fence because you've never seen a fox, consider if the existence of the fence is precisely why you've never seen one. Importantly, Chesterton is not saying that things can never be reformed. His is a preventive principle rather than an outright prohibition. We could rephrase it like this: understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them. If we're too impetuous, we can end up tearing out things we don't yet realise we rely upon. But uncritical devotion to the "way things are done" can also deny us the possibility of better days. What is required, then, is not the fearlessness of the Disruptor, but the humility to stop and ask questions and to know that our own perspective is neither unique nor comprehensive. Disruption can be a force for good. It can also just leave a big mess. We need the ability to work out which messes are worth avoiding — because however impressively fast you move, some things can't be easily unbroken. 第31题 Regarding Chesterton's principle, the author is ________. A. Supportive B. doubtful C. conflicted D. disappointed 答案：A 详细解析： 本题问的是“作者对Chesterton原则的态度”，属于作者态度题。考生容易误选C（纠结的），因为文章确实讨论了“不能盲目破坏”和“不能盲目守旧”两个方面，但这是Chesterton原则本身的辩证性，而非作者对它的态度矛盾。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位原文。 涉及Chesterton原则的描述集中在第三至第五段。Chesterton的“栅栏原则”核心主张是：正因为我们不知道栅栏当初存在的理由，才不应该贸然拆除它。 第二步：查找作者评价。 第五段第一句明确说“Importantly, Chesterton is not saying that things can never be reformed. His is a preventive principle rather than an outright prohibition.”——作者首先肯定了Chesterton不是极端保守派，他的原则是“预防性”而非“禁止性”。随后，第六段作者明确表明自己的主张：“What is required, then, is not the fearlessness of the Disruptor, but the humility to stop and ask questions...”这恰恰与Chesterton倡导的“先理解再行动”一脉相承。 第三步：结合命题意图。 官方试题评析指出，本文“将'守正创新'的思想精髓转化为可感知的成长智慧，倡导在理解传统中寻求突破的理性精神”。这正是Chesterton原则的内核——作者借用了这一原则来支撑自己的观点，态度显然是支持的。 干扰项分析： B（怀疑）：文中无任何证据表明作者对Chesterton原则持怀疑态度，恰恰相反，作者用它来论证自己的核心观点。 C（纠结）：虽然文章讨论了改革与守旧之间的张力，但这是话题本身的复杂性，不是作者对Chesterton原则态度的矛盾。 D（失望）：无文本依据。 第32题 What does the word "impetuous" underlined in Paragraph 5 most probably mean? A. Short-sighted B. Narrow-minded C. Hot-headed D. Old-fashioned 答案：C 详细解析： 本题是词义猜测题，考查上下文推断能力。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位原句。 第五段：“If we're too impetuous, we can end up tearing out things we don't yet realise we rely upon.” 第二步：分析语境逻辑。 句子结构是“If we're too X, we can end up doing Y（如果我们太X，最终就会做Y）”，Y是“拆掉我们其实依赖的东西”——这显然是个负面后果。那么X应当是一个描述“导致冲动行为”的形容词。 往前看，前一句说“understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them”——在拒绝之前先理解。如果跳过这一步就直接动手，那就是冒失、冲动。 往后看，第六段说需要“humility to stop and ask questions（停下来提问的谦卑）”作为对立面——与“停下来提问”相反的正是“急躁冒进、不加思考就行动”。 第三步：辨析选项。 C. Hot-headed（急躁的、冲动的）：正好对应“不加思考就贸然行动”的语义，正确。 A. Short-sighted（目光短浅的）：强调缺乏远见，但上下文强调的是行动上的急躁，而非视野上的狭窄。 B. Narrow-minded（心胸狭隘的）：强调思想封闭，与上下文无关。 D. Old-fashioned（过时的）：强调守旧，恰恰与impetuous（冒进）相反。 第33题 What can we infer from this passage about the Disruptor? A. They may clear up other people's mess. B. They are in favour of the preventive principle. C. They preserve more traditions than they break. D. They may create more problems than they solve. 答案：D 详细解析： 本题是推理判断题，要求根据文章信息推断Disruptor的特征。A和C与原文明显相反，B是张冠李戴。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位Disruptor的描写。 集中在第二段：“the Disruptor is defined as much by what they destroy as by what they create. The Disruptor forces change; the clean-up is somebody else's problem.” 第二步：逐项比对。 A（他们会清理别人的烂摊子）：原文明确说“clean-up is somebody else's problem”——清理是别人的事，所以他们不会清理。排除。 B（他们支持预防性原则）：Disruptor的特点是“Move fast and break things”（快速行动，打破一切），而Chesterton的预防性原则恰恰是“先理解再行动”，两者针锋相对。排除。 C（他们保留的传统比打破的多）：原文强调Disruptor“由破坏来定义”，且“Move fast and break things”——打破是他们的标志，不是说他们保留得多。排除。 D（他们可能制造的问题比解决的多）：由“destroy”“clean-up is somebody else's problem”可以合理推断——他们只管破坏，不管善后，结果自然是问题被制造出来留给别人处理。第六段更明确说“Disruption can...just leave a big mess”——可能留下一堆烂摊子。综合可推出D正确。 第34题 What does the author intend to tell us? A. Humility should be a driving force for human progress. B. Innovation should move forward the wheel of tradition. C. Reform should draw from the wellspring of past wisdom. D. Disruption should be given priority in social development. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题是主旨大意题，也是最难的一道。需要区分A和C——两者都在文章末尾出现，但侧重点不同。 解题步骤： 第一步：整体把握文章结构。 段落 内容 功能 第1-2段 引入“Disruptor”概念，描述其特征 提出问题 第3-4段 介绍Chesterton的栅栏思想实验 提供论证工具 第5段 阐释Chesterton原则的真正含义（预防性原则） 深化论证 第6段 提出作者主张 得出结论 第二步：抓住第六段的核心主张。 第六段说需要的“不是Disruptor的无所畏惧，而是停下来提问的谦卑，并认识到自己的视角既不独特也不全面”。紧接着说“Disruption can be a force for good. It can also just leave a big mess.”——作者不是在倡导谦卑本身，而是在倡导用谦卑来指导改革：先理解，再行动。 第三步：结合第五段的关键句。 “understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them”——在拒绝传统之前，先理解其中的智慧。这是全文论述的落脚点。 第四步：辨析A与C。 A（谦卑应成为人类进步的驱动力）：这句话本身没错，但偏离了文章重心。文章讲的是“改革应该怎么做”，谦卑是方法，而“从过去的智慧中汲取养分”才是核心主张。 C（改革应从过去的智慧源泉中汲取养分）：精准概括了全文的论证逻辑——Chesterton的栅栏原则说明过去的选择可能有未被看到的智慧，改革前应先理解它们，这正是“从过去智慧中汲取”的含义。 官方试题评析也印证了这一点：本文“倡导在理解传统中寻求突破的理性精神”-3-6。 干扰项分析： B（创新应该推动传统的车轮）：文章强调的是“理解传统”而非“推动传统”，且“move forward the wheel”暗示一种单向推动，忽视了作者倡导的“停下来审视”。 D（破坏应在社会发展中被优先考虑）：与作者立场完全相反，作者恰恰在警示盲目优先破坏的风险。 三、文章结构与解题策略总结 本文是一篇典型的批判反思型议论文，结构如下： 引入现象（第1-2段）：Disruptor成为时代标志，其特点是“破坏大于建设” 引入反例/质疑（第3-4段）：Chesterton的栅栏思想实验——看不见栅栏的理由，恰恰是不该拆除它的理由 深化论证（第5段）：预防性原则——既不盲目破坏，也不盲目守旧 得出结论（第6段）：改革需要谦卑，理解过去智慧后再行动 考场应对建议： 主旨题看首尾段：作者最后一段的主张就是全文核心 态度题看转折词：文中“Importantly”“rather than”等词后往往是作者真实态度 推理题避免过度脑补：答案必须有文本依据，不能凭常识 词义题看上下文逻辑：impetuous的破解关键是前后句的因果关系和对比关系 【技巧点拨】 一、态度题要找“评价标志词” 态度题切忌凭感觉，必须锁定作者对核心对象的直接评价。本文中，作者用“Importantly”引出对Chesterton原则的正面阐释，用“rather than”排除误解，末段用“not...but...”结构表明自己的主张与Chesterton一致——这都是“支持”态度的明确证据。若文中出现转折（but/however）、让步（although）、强调（indeed/importantly），其后的内容往往是态度核心。 二、词义题要“左顾右盼” 生词的含义不在单词本身，而在其语境逻辑。impetuous出现在“If we're too X, we can end up doing Y”的条件结构中，Y是负面结果，X就是导致该结果的原因；往前看有“before you reject”中的before，暗示“跳过事前理解”的冒失行为；往后看有“stop and ask questions”作为对立面。由此可确定是“急躁冲动”。记住：四个选项若有三项指向“人的品质缺陷”，需根据因果、对比、解释三种逻辑关系精确定位。 三、推理题要“差之毫厘，谬以千里” 推断题答案往往是原文信息的合理延伸，而非重复。第33题中，D项“制造问题多于解决问题”就是从“clean-up is somebody else's problem”和“leave a big mess”综合推出的深层含义。而A项（清理别人烂摊子）恰恰是原文的反面，属于“反向干扰”；C项“保留传统多”原文从未提及，属于“无中生有”。推理时，严格以原文为起点，只推一步，绝不脑补。 【深度人文社会思辨议论文】 Passage 1 2025 年普通高等学校招生全国统一考试（北京卷）阅读 D 篇 主题：人与自我・人生叙事与自我认同（心理学人文思辨） The call to “know yourself” has been there since ancient times, but our sense of self doesn’t always match what others perceive. Considering the stories we tell about ourselves can help us to change our minds for better. For many years, psychologists saw identity as a combination of someone’s values, beliefs, goals and social roles. Then, in the 1980s, Bob Johnson created the life story model of identity, in which he proposes that, as we go through life, these core features are built in our memories to create a personal story through which we understand our lives. Our life story is something that starts coming together in our teenage years, when we begin to organise our lives into chapters around key events or life changes, and begin to see ourselves as both the central character and, to a varying extent, the story’s author. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. Johnson has also investigated the link between well-being and certain story themes. He discovered that whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important factor. Those who believe they shaped their own past experiences usually enjoy higher mental health. However, psychologist Lisa Green reminds us that rigid life stories can also hold us back. If we stick firmly to a fixed narrative about who we are, we may refuse to accept new experiences that could help us grow. Our past does not have to lock our future. Green argues that we can rewrite our personal stories gently instead of completely abandoning them. Total rejection of past memories will cut us off from our identity roots, while tiny, gradual adjustments allow us to adapt to life changes without losing ourselves. At its heart, the life story theory tells us: we are not merely victims of our past experiences. We are the ongoing writers of our own life tales. 31. What is the main topic of the passage? A. How self-identity is shaped by personal life stories B. How professional storytellers construct narrative works C. How personal memories raise doubts about the past D. How time sequence changes people’s life schedules 32. What benefit will people get from consistent life stories? A. They can completely ignore others’ opinions. B. They gain clearer life purpose and higher satisfaction. C. They are free from all life troubles and pressure. D. They can control all unexpected life events. 33. Why does Lisa Green warn against rigid personal narratives? A. They will damage people’s childhood memories totally. B. They prevent individuals from growing through new experiences. C. They make people misunderstand their past achievements. D. They cause people to lose interest in telling life stories. 34. What is the author’s attitude towards rewriting life stories? A. Strongly opposed B. Doubtful and uncertain C. Cautiously supportive D. Totally indifferent 答案：31.A 32.B 33.B 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 主旨大意题 ✅正确答案：A 篇章逻辑梳理：开篇提出 “自我认知可通过自述人生故事优化”；第二段介绍约翰逊的人生故事塑造自我认同理论；第三段讲述连贯人生叙事的积极作用；第四段辩证指出固化叙事的弊端、温和改写的必要性；结尾升华：人是自身人生故事的书写者。全文核心：人生叙事塑造自我身份认同。 干扰项拆解： B：文章未提及职业说书人，偏离人文心理学主题； C：原文没有 “记忆引发对过去质疑” 的内容； D：时间顺序、日程安排属于无中生有。 32 细节理解题 ✅正确答案：B 定位句（第三段）：People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. 翻译：拥有连贯人生叙事的人自我认同感更强，拥有更清晰的人生意义、方向与目标，生活满意度更高。 干扰项拆解： A：completely ignore（完全无视）绝对化表述，原文无依据； C：free from all troubles（摆脱所有烦恼）极端错误； D：control all events（掌控所有事件）曲解原文 “拥有过往掌控感” 的含义。 33 细节推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位句（第四段）：If we stick firmly to a fixed narrative about who we are, we may refuse to accept new experiences that could help us grow. 翻译：固守固化人生叙事，会使人拒绝能够助力自身成长的全新人生体验，阻碍个人成长。 干扰项拆解： A：totally damage memories（彻底摧毁记忆）程度过重，原文只是不要全盘抛弃过往； C：误解过往成就、D：失去讲故事兴趣，均未在文中提及。 34 作者态度题 ✅正确答案：C 谨慎支持 作者立场辩证：先肯定连贯人生故事的价值，再指出僵化叙事的危害，赞同温和渐进改写人生故事（而非全盘推翻），态度审慎且支持改写行为。 词汇辨析： A 强烈反对 / B 怀疑不确定 / D 漠不关心 均不符合文本基调。 Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（同源命题：传统与创新辩证思辨） 主题：人与社会・守正与创新的理性边界（哲学思辨议论文） Nowadays, the idea of “disruptive innovation” has swept across society. Many young people believe that meaningful progress can only be achieved by breaking down old rules, abandoning traditional systems and overturning established norms. Radical reform is widely praised, while sticking to tradition is easily labeled conservative and backward. Yet the British philosopher G.K. Chesterton put forward the famous “fence principle” to remind us to think twice before tearing down existing traditions. Chesterton used a vivid metaphor: suppose you see a fence built across a country road, blocking the path. Anyone eager for convenience will want to pull it down immediately. But a wise person will first ask: Why was this fence built here in the first place? The fence must have been set up to solve certain hidden problems — to stop wild animals rushing into villages, to prevent cars from falling off cliffs, or to protect fragile farmland. Without figuring out the original purpose of the fence, tearing it down blindly will only bring new troubles instead of progress. This principle perfectly applies to social traditions and old institutions. Every lasting social custom, moral norm and cultural tradition has gradually formed after long-term social practice, to balance the interests of different groups and maintain social stability. Those who advocate total disruption often only see the slight imperfections of traditions, ignoring the protective functions they have served for generations. That does not mean we should preserve everything old without change. Blind conservatism is equally harmful. Some outdated rules can no longer adapt to modern social development and need proper adjustment. The wise choice lies in a middle ground: fully understand the value and original function of traditions first, then carry out targeted innovation and revision on the basis of inheritance. We should remove the outdated parts while preserving the valuable core, rather than choosing total destruction or rigid conservation. Progress never comes from extreme choices. True innovation is rooted in rational inheritance, not reckless overturning. 31. What is the purpose of mentioning the popular “disruptive innovation” at the beginning? A. To prove radical reform always leads to social progress B. To introduce the background for explaining the fence principle C. To criticize all young people’s ideas about social development D. To list various successful cases of breaking old traditions 32. What does the “fence” in Chesterton’s metaphor stand for? A. Unnecessary barriers on rural roads B. Temporary measures for traffic management C. Long-standing social traditions and old norms D. Artificial obstacles designed to limit freedom 33. What is the author’s opinion on tradition and innovation? A. We must keep all traditions unchanged forever B. Total destruction of traditions is the only way to innovate C. Understand traditions first, then innovate selectively based on inheritance D. Modern society needs no traditional norms any longer 34. Which word best describes the author’s writing tone? A. Biased B. Radical C. Objective and dialectical D. Pessimistic 答案：31.B 32.C 33.C 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 篇章结构推理题 ✅正确答案：B 开篇先铺垫当下社会推崇颠覆性激进创新、贬低传统的普遍思潮，以此作为背景，引出切斯特顿的栅栏原则，对极端创新观进行辩证反思，是典型北京卷 “反向铺垫引入核心论点” 结构。 干扰项： A：作者并未认可激进改革总能进步；C：criticize all 全盘批判年轻人，绝对化错误；D：无成功案例列举。 32 词义指代题（隐喻理解，北京卷高频考点） ✅正确答案：C 第二段栅栏是喻体，第三段明确将隐喻迁移至社会范畴：This principle perfectly applies to social traditions and old institutions. 栅栏指代存续已久的社会传统、道德准则与旧制度。 干扰项：A 只是表层字面含义，并非隐喻内涵；B 临时交通措施、D 限制自由的人为阻碍均曲解本意。 33 主旨态度细节题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第四段核心句：The wise choice lies in a middle ground: fully understand the value and original function of traditions first, then carry out targeted innovation and revision on the basis of inheritance. 核心要义：先读懂传统价值，在传承基础上选择性创新，不走全盘固守 / 全盘推翻两个极端。 A 全盘固守、B 彻底摧毁、D 摒弃所有传统，均属于二元极端立场，与作者折中辩证思想相悖。 34 作者语气判断题 ✅正确答案：C objective and dialectical 客观辩证 作者既反对盲目激进颠覆传统，也批判僵化保守不思变革，兼顾双方利弊，中立客观、辩证思考问题，是北京卷 D 篇标志性行文风格。 A 偏见的 / B 激进的 / D 悲观的 均不符合文本基调。 Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（人文思辨：幸福感与人生意义辩证） 主题：人与自我・幸福感与生命意义的取舍思辨 For decades, positive psychology has centered its research on happiness. Countless books, online courses and lifestyle guides teach people how to chase pleasure, avoid negative emotions and maximize daily comfort. The mainstream view holds that a happy life equals a fulfilling life. However, a growing number of psychologists have begun to draw a clear line between happiness and meaning, arguing that the two are not identical, and pursuing them brings totally different life experiences. Happiness refers to short-term pleasant feelings gained from satisfying personal desires: delicious food, relaxing leisure time, material comforts and easy daily routines. It is passive and easy to disappear once external favorable conditions fade away. People who only pursue happiness tend to avoid hardships, challenges and painful experiences, for suffering will directly destroy their sense of pleasure. A life with meaning, by contrast, focuses on long-term value creation rather than instant pleasure. It comes from devoting oneself to a goal beyond personal interests: caring for family, contributing to communities, pursuing lifelong hobbies or taking social responsibilities. The pursuit of meaning often includes unavoidable hardship, tiredness and setbacks. A volunteer helping poor children may feel exhausted and stressed every day, yet he still gains a strong sense of life worth that temporary happiness cannot provide. Neither pursuit is perfect. A life full of mere happiness lacks inner depth and will easily fall into emptiness when pleasures end. A life totally devoted to pursuing meaning may bring too much pressure and neglect personal physical and mental relaxation. The ideal life does not choose one over the other, but strikes a healthy balance between instant joy and long-term spiritual value. Chasing happiness satisfies our immediate needs, while seeking meaning anchors our soul. Only combining both can we live a complete and fulfilling life. 31. What is the passage mainly about? A. The methods psychologists use to study positive emotions B. The differences and balanced relationship between happiness and life meaning C. Various ways for modern people to get rid of negative feelings D. The reasons why short-term pleasure is hard to last long 32. Which of the following belongs to the source of pure happiness? A. Devoting spare time to community volunteer services B. Sticking to academic research for public benefits C. Enjoying a comfortable weekend vacation at home D. Persisting in public welfare work for disadvantaged groups 33. What can we infer about pursuing life meaning? A. It never involves any painful experiences or pressure B. It offers lasting inner value beyond temporary pleasure C. It can be easily achieved without any efforts D. It is totally useless for people’s mental health 34. What is the author’s suggestion for a fulfilling life? A. Put instant happiness above everything else B. Give up personal pleasure to pursue meaning completely C. Keep a proper balance between happiness and life meaning D. Ignore both pleasure and spiritual value in daily life 答案：31.B 32.C 33.B 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 主旨大意题 ✅正确答案：B 行文脉络：引出主流幸福至上观念→区分幸福感（短期愉悦）与生命意义（长期价值）各自内涵→分析二者利弊→提出平衡二者才是圆满人生。全文围绕二者差异与辩证平衡关系展开。 干扰项：A 研究方法、C 排解负面情绪、D 愉悦难以持久均为局部细节，非全文主旨。 32 细节定位题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第二段：Happiness refers to short-term pleasant feelings gained from satisfying personal desires: delicious food, relaxing leisure time, material comforts and easy daily routines. 居家舒适度假属于个人休闲愉悦，是幸福感来源；ABD 均属于超越个人利益的奉献行为，是生命意义的来源。 33 推理判断题 ✅正确答案：B 第三段点明：追求意义伴随辛劳挫折，却能获得短暂幸福无法给予的长久生命价值，对应选项表述。 干扰项：A 绝不包含痛苦、C 无需努力、D 毫无心理健康益处，均与原文内容完全相反。 34 作者建议细节题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第四段：The ideal life does not choose one over the other, but strikes a healthy balance between instant joy and long-term spiritual value. 作者核心建议：平衡即时幸福感与长远生命意义，拒绝非此即彼的极端选择。 A 优先享乐、B 彻底舍弃愉悦、D 二者全部忽视，均错误。 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 2023 年北京高考英语真题・阅读理解 D 篇 主题：人与自然・前沿生命科学：人工生命科研探究（基础生物学 + 哲学思辨科研说明文） What is life? Like most great questions, this one is easy to ask but difficult to answer. The reason is simple: we know of just one type of life—the kind that exists on Earth—and it’s challenging to develop a general theory of life when you have only one example to study. For decades, biologists have struggled to pin down a clear definition shared by all scientists. In recent years, a new field called artificial life (ALife) has arisen to solve this puzzle. Unlike traditional biology, which studies existing living creatures, ALife researchers aim to create entirely new forms of life inside computers or physical machines, so they can test what essential features make something alive. If scientists can build artificial life that behaves and evolves like natural life, they will finally figure out the universal rules governing all life forms. Early ALife experiments began with simple digital organisms in the 1990s. These virtual creatures could eat digital food, reproduce and mutate inside computer programs. They gradually adapted to digital environments through generations of evolution, just like plants and animals on Earth. At first, many scientists regarded these digital creations merely as computer simulations, not real life. They argued that digital beings lacked physical bodies and organic cells, which were essential markers of true life. Yet modern ALife studies have blurred this boundary greatly. Today’s researchers have constructed cell-like physical structures with chemical materials that can grow, split and pass down chemical information to offspring. These physical artificial systems show all core biological traits of natural life. Meanwhile, debates never stop. Some scholars warn that ALife cannot fully copy the complexity of Earth’s billions-year-old life system; artificial creations are always simplified versions with hidden limits. Others worry about potential risks if highly evolved artificial life gets out of human control. The value of artificial life research lies not only in defining life itself. It helps us rethink the origin of life on Earth, search for possible life on other planets, and even inspire new designs for medical robots and sustainable materials. Though a perfect definition of life remains beyond our reach, ALife keeps pushing human science forward step by step. 31. Why is it hard for scientists to define life clearly? A. Life on Earth has too many diverse species B. Humans only know terrestrial life as the single sample C. Traditional biology refuses to study living creatures D. Digital organisms have replaced natural life gradually 32. What is the main goal of artificial life research? A. To produce advanced medical robots for clinical use B. To replace all natural creatures with digital life forms C. To discover universal fundamental rules of life D. To eliminate all risks brought by biological evolution 33. What was the early scientists’ attitude toward 1990s digital ALife creations? A. Fully accepted as real living life B. Doubtful and refused to recognize them as true life C. Excited about their perfect biological complexity D. Worried about their threat to human society 34. What can we learn about modern ALife from the passage? A. It has completely solved the definition puzzle of life B. Physical artificial cell systems own key features of natural life C. All scholars agree on the safety and value of ALife research D. It can help humans find life on other planets immediately 标准答案：31.B 32.C 33.B 34.B 逐题超详细解析 31 细节理解题 ✅正确答案：B 原文定位段 1：it’s challenging to develop a general theory of life when you have only one example to study（we know of just one type of life—the kind that exists on Earth） 翻译：人类只知晓地球生命这唯一生命样本，因此难以提炼普适的生命定义。 干扰项拆解： A：地球物种繁多不是定义困难原因；C：传统生物学恰恰以研究现存生物为核心，表述完全相反；D：数字生命并未取代自然生命，无中生有。 32 细节主旨题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第二段核心句：they can test what essential features make something alive...figure out the universal rules governing all life forms ALife 核心目标：探明支配所有生命形态的通用底层规律，破解生命定义难题。 干扰项： A：医疗机器人只是科研衍生价值，并非核心目标；B：彻底取代自然生命违背原文表述；D：消除进化风险属于极端错误表述。 33 态度推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第三段：At first, many scientists regarded these digital creations merely as computer simulations, not real life. 早期科学家仅将数字生命体视作电脑模拟程序，并不认可其为真正生命，持质疑否定态度。 A 全盘接纳、C 赞叹其完备复杂性、D 担忧生存威胁均不符合早期学界立场。 34 综合推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第四段：Today’s researchers have constructed cell-like physical structures...These physical artificial systems show all core biological traits of natural life. 现代实体人工细胞系统具备自然生命全部核心生物特征。 干扰项： A：完美生命定义仍未实现；C：学界始终存在巨大争议，并未达成共识；D：只能助力外星生命探索，无法立刻找到外星生命，程度绝对化错误。 篇章逻辑梳理 提出难题（生命难以定义）→诞生人工生命交叉学科→早期数字生命实验 + 学界质疑→现代实体生命突破 + 科研争议→总结科研多元价值与发展前景（北京卷科研文经典辩证收尾） Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿环境科研：微塑料饮用水污染治理研究） 主题：人与自然・环境科学：微塑料污染去除方法对比科研报告 Microplastics, tiny plastic fragments smaller than 5 millimeters, have become a widespread global environmental crisis over the past two decades. These tiny particles invade soil, oceans, air and even daily drinking water. Multiple global surveys confirm that adults and children unintentionally consume dozens of thousands of microplastic particles every year, which may cause potential damage to human digestive and immune systems. For a long time, environmental scientists believed that ordinary household drinking methods could hardly remove microplastics from tap water efficiently. In 2024, a research team composed of Chinese environmental scientists published a series of controlled experiments on drinking water microplastic removal. The team divided tap water samples from 67 regions worldwide into three experimental groups. Group 1 drank raw tap water directly; Group 2 boiled tap water for 5 minutes then drank it hot; Group 3 boiled water for 5 minutes, cooled it down completely and filtered it simply with ordinary household filter cloth before drinking. Researchers counted remaining microplastic particles in each group and recorded final data. The experimental outcomes were striking. Direct drinking kept nearly all microplastics in water. Simply boiling water only removed about 35% of microplastics. However, boiling followed by cooling and simple household filtering eliminated around 84% of microplastic particles in tap water. The scientific explanation lies in calcium carbonate precipitation: boiling changes water chemical properties, solid calcium carbonate forms during cooling, and these solid sediments wrap microplastics and carry them to the bottom of containers, so filtering can easily separate the bundled microplastics out. The research has brought practical guidance for ordinary families, yet scientists also remind the public of the study’s limitations. The method works well for common tap water, but its effect declines obviously for heavily polluted industrial wastewater. Besides, this household solution cannot cut off microplastic sources fundamentally. Reducing global plastic production and waste discharge remains the essential long-term way to solve microplastic pollution thoroughly. Rather than relying on expensive high-end water purifiers blindly, people can adopt this low-cost daily drinking habit to lower microplastic intake effectively, based on solid scientific experimental evidence. 31. What was the traditional belief about removing microplastics from tap water? A. Household ways could hardly get rid of microplastics efficiently B. Boiling water alone could clear most microplastic particles C. Simple cloth filtering was the most effective household method D. Microplastics in tap water would not harm human bodies 32. Which group achieved the best microplastic removal effect in the experiment? A. Group 1 B. Group 2 C. Group 3 D. All groups had equal effects 33. What is the scientific principle behind boiling-cooling-filtering method? A. High temperature directly burns and decomposes plastic fragments B. Calcium carbonate sediments bind microplastics for separation C. Filters can dissolve tiny plastic particles completely D. Cooling process makes microplastics evaporate into the air 34. What is the author’s attitude toward this household drinking method? A. Totally useless and unreliable B. Effective temporarily but not a fundamental solution C. Able to solve global plastic pollution thoroughly D. Far inferior to expensive professional water purifiers 标准答案：31.A 32.C 33.B 34.B 逐题详细解析 31 传统观点细节题 ✅正确答案：A 定位第一段尾句：For a long time, environmental scientists believed that ordinary household drinking methods could hardly remove microplastics from tap water efficiently. 长久以来学界传统认知：普通居家饮水方式很难高效去除自来水中微塑料。 干扰项：B/C 均为新实验结论，非传统观点；D 原文明确微塑料存在健康隐患，错误。 32 实验数据细节题 ✅正确答案：C 第三段数据对比：直饮留存全部微塑料；单纯煮沸去除 35%；煮沸 + 冷却 + 简易过滤去除 84%，第三组效果最优。 33 科研原理细节题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第三段原理句：solid calcium carbonate forms during cooling, and these solid sediments wrap microplastics and carry them to the bottom of containers 碳酸钙沉淀物包裹微塑料沉降，后续过滤即可分离二者。 干扰项：A 高温无法分解塑料；C 过滤器不能溶解塑料；D 微塑料不会蒸发，均违背科学原理与原文。 34 作者辩证态度题 ✅正确答案：B 作者立场分层：居家煮沸过滤可有效减少微塑料摄入（短期有效）；但无法从源头根治塑料污染，长期治本需要削减塑料排放。态度客观辩证，契合北京卷风格。 A 完全无用、C 彻底解决全球污染、D 远不如高端净水器均片面极端。 篇章结构：环境问题背景→对照实验设计→实验数据结果 + 科学机理→研究局限 + 长远对策总结 Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿认知心理学科研：多任务并行对大脑专注力的影响） 主题：人与自我・脑科学：碎片化多任务处理损害专注力的长期追踪研究 Modern digital life has turned simultaneous multitasking into a daily routine for most teenagers: chatting on social apps while doing homework, watching short videos during meals, and replying to messages while reading articles. Many young people take pride in their ability to handle several tasks at once, assuming multitasking improves brain efficiency and time-management skills. This popular view has dominated public understanding for over 20 years. Cognitive neuroscientists launched a 10-year longitudinal tracking study to test the real influence of habitual multitasking on human brains. Researchers selected over 2,000 adolescents aged 13 to 16 and divided them into two cohorts. The high-multitasking group regularly switched between digital tasks every few minutes; the low-multitasking group focused on one single task each time without frequent interruption. Scientists scanned participants’ brain regions related to attention and memory yearly, and carried out standardized concentration tests. After ten years of continuous observation, the research drew clear contrary conclusions. Those who kept frequent multitasking for years showed thinner cerebral cortex in the prefrontal lobe—the brain area responsible for sustained focus and deep thinking. They performed much worse on long reading, logical reasoning and deep memory tests. In contrast, participants who stuck to single-task focus maintained stronger sustained attention and better cognitive flexibility when facing complex intellectual challenges. Neurologists further explained the brain mechanism: every time people switch tasks rapidly, the brain has to restart cognitive processing repeatedly, which gradually wears down the brain’s focus muscle over time. However, the research does not advocate absolute rejection of temporary multitasking. Occasional quick task switching brings no lasting harm; the damage only comes from lifelong habitual fragmented attention. The study offers a vital reminder for young generations: digital convenience should not be exchanged for our core cognitive ability. Building the habit of sustained single-task focus is essential for long-term brain development and academic growth. 31. What is the common public opinion about multitasking before the study? A. It weakens people’s ability to concentrate deeply B. It helps raise work efficiency and time management capacity C. It causes permanent damage to teenagers’ brain structure D. It is only suitable for simple physical daily work 32. How did researchers carry out the cognitive study? A. By collecting short-term online questionnaires from adults B. By observing two groups of teenagers for a decade with brain scans C. By testing elderly people’s memory under multitasking situations D. By comparing different teaching methods in middle schools 33. Why does habitual frequent multitasking harm brain sustained attention? A. Task switching makes the brain repeatedly restart cognitive work and consume focus capacity B. Digital screen radiation directly destroys the prefrontal lobe nerve cells C. Multitasking forces the brain to store too much useless information D. The brain cannot finish more than two tasks within one day naturally 34. Which statement would the author most probably agree with? A. We must never switch between different tasks in daily life B. Temporary occasional multitasking will severely damage brain cognition C. Forming sustained single-task focus benefits teenagers’ long-term brain growth D. Modern digital life makes single-task concentration impossible nowadays 标准答案：31.B 32.B 33.A 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 大众传统观点题 ✅正确答案：B 第一段：assuming multitasking improves brain efficiency and time-management skills 大众普遍认为：多任务并行可以提升大脑效率、时间管理能力。 其余三项均为科研得出的新结论，并非此前大众认知。 32 实验过程细节题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第二段：a 10-year longitudinal tracking study；2000+ teens split into two groups；yearly brain scans + concentration tests 研究方式：十年长期追踪两组青少年，每年脑部扫描 + 专注力测试。 A 短期问卷、C 老年人实验、D 教学方法对比均与原文实验设计不符。 33 大脑机理推理题 ✅正确答案：A 第四段机理句：every time people switch tasks rapidly, the brain has to restart cognitive processing repeatedly, which gradually wears down the brain’s focus muscle 频繁切换任务让大脑反复重启认知流程，持续消耗专注力储备，损伤长久专注能力。 B 屏幕辐射无提及；C 储存冗余信息非原因；D 大脑单日无法处理两项任务表述绝对化错误。 34 作者观点主旨题 ✅正确答案：C 尾段总结：Building the habit of sustained single-task focus is essential for long-term brain development and academic growth. 养成持续单任务专注习惯，有益于青少年大脑长远发育。 A 绝不切换任务、B 临时多任务危害极大、C 单专注在数字时代无法实现均属于极端片面表述。 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） For millennia, we have expected dogs to guard our property and protect our family at night. Now they are also asked to be friendly around strangers, rest quietly through the night and keep their feet off sofas. “It’s an evolutionary mismatch,” says Hare, an anthropologist at Duke University. The good news is that this problem is solvable. Recent studies indicate that selective breeding and careful training can help dogs adapt to indoor life. A “puppy kindergarten” research was set up by Hare’s team to illustrate the heritability of behavioural traits in dogs by observing what service dogs’ behaviour looks like before intensive training begins. Service dogs were selected as the subject for they can always naturally adapt well to the mismatch compared to other kinds. They can pull wheelchairs, operate light switches and interact gently with children. By collecting data from 1,500 dog owners on the behaviour of their pets, which belonged to 36 breeds, Hare’s team discovered that genetics explained 45 percent of the variation in dogs’ self-control, 16 percent of the variation in reasoning about the physical world, and a mere 0.01 percent of the variation in short-term memory—which manifests that some desirable behaviours are heritable to certain degree, and selective breeding for temperament is worthwhile. “Genetics is important, but its relative importance is different for different behavioural traits,” says Gitanjali from Emory University. Besides, Hare’s work also illustrates selective breeding can’t guarantee some highly desirable traits, such as a good memory. So they have devised techniques that owners can use to help train their pets and build better relationships with them. One habit that is especially important in training is making eye contact. “The dog’s gaze may be a causal factor in inducing good feelings in the owner,” says Kikusui at Azabu University in Japan, “and the longer a dog gazes at its owner, the stronger those good feelings become.” Hare also found that pups could solve some “impossible tasks” by appealing to human for help, and the appeal was made through eye contact. So he suggested puppy owners finish “impossible tasks” with their pets every two weeks to strengthen the emotional connection with them. “Doing so can help you learn where your dog’s cognitive strengths lie,” he says. And as the puppy kindergarten project has made clear, dog training as well as selective breeding is crucial to foster those behaviours we would like our pets to exhibit in our homes. 31. What can we learn from Hare‘s research? A. Service dogs were observed while accepting intensive training. B. Genetics may explain differences in dogs’ self-control ability. C. Service dogs were chosen for they were trained from an early age. D. Selective breeding can guarantee all desirable behavioural traits. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。定位第二段“puppy kindergarten”研究是在intensive training begins before（强化训练开始前）观察服务犬行为，据此排除A。第三段明确指出“genetics explained 45 percent of the variation in dogs’ self-control”——遗传特征解释了犬类自控力差异的45%，B项为正确同义替换。第二段说明选择服务犬是因为它们“naturally adapt well to the mismatch”（天生适应这种不匹配），而非C项“训练得早”。第四段指出选择性育种“can‘t guarantee some highly desirable traits”（无法保证某些理想特质），排除D项的绝对化表述。 32. What is the author’s purpose in quoting Gitanjali‘s words? A. To reveal the limitations of Hare’s research methods. B. To suggest that factors beyond genetics also need consideration. C. To prove that selective breeding is of little practical value. D. To emphasize that genetics determines all behavioural traits. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。Gitanjali的话“Genetics is important, but its relative importance is different for different behavioural traits”（遗传重要，但相对重要性因行为特征而异）紧接在第三段数据之后——该段已说明遗传对不同行为的解释力差异巨大（45% vs 0.01%）。引用此话的目的是提示读者：除遗传外，还有其他因素值得讨论。第四段随后即介绍研究者“devised techniques that owners can use to help train their pets”（设计了主人可用于训练宠物的技术）。B项正确。A项“揭示研究方法局限”过度引申；C项“证明选择性育种无价值”与原文“worthwhile”矛盾；D项与Gitanjali话中“but”转折相反。 33. What is the best title for the passage? A. Service Dogs: Acquiring Desirable Traits through Breeding Alone B. Smart Dogs: Adapting Well to Indoor Life through Training C. Good Dogs: Evolving through Selective Breeding and Training D. Modern Dogs: Training through Eye Contact with Owners 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。文章开篇提出“evolutionary mismatch”问题，第二至三段论述选择性育种的作用（遗传特征对行为的影响），第四至五段论述后天训练的重要性（包括眼神交流、“不可能任务”练习等）。末句总结“dog training as well as selective breeding is crucial”——两者并举。只有C项“通过选择性育种和训练”完整覆盖全文双主线。A项“only breeding”忽略训练；B项“only training”忽略遗传；D项“eye contact”仅为末段局部细节，无法概括全文。 34. What does the author suggest dog owners do according to the passage? A. Avoid giving dogs tasks that are too difficult to solve. B. Choose breeds based primarily on memory capability. C. Engage in interactive tasks regularly to strengthen bonding. D. Focus exclusively on genetic testing before adopting a dog. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段明确指出Hare“suggested puppy owners finish ‘impossible tasks‘ with their pets every two weeks to strengthen the emotional connection with them”（建议狗主人每两周与宠物一起完成“不可能任务”以加强情感联系），C项“定期参与互动任务以加强纽带”为同义表述。A项“避免难题”与原文相反（原文鼓励完成“impossible tasks”）；B项“根据记忆力选品种”与第四段“can’t guarantee good memory”矛盾；D项“仅关注基因检测”与全文“育种+训练”并重的主旨不符。 Passage 2 （朝阳区2026年一模·改编） Whether artists or scientists, investigators strike out from what is known to brave the unknown in acts of creative discovery. Think of artists and scientists as users of three modes of discovery: knowing, seeing, and telling. We are all seeking knowledge—epistemologists who question what we think we know, how we come to know it, and whether we can prove what we think we know. Meanwhile, we are all seers—aestheticists who confront what we perceive in natural and created appearances. Finally, we are all tellers and listeners—narrativists who tell about what we have found and listen to the findings of others. The epistemologist‘s attention to knowing resonated in physicist Andrea Califano’s precision-medicine discoveries in cancer biology. His philosopher-physicist mind is the creative ground to discover new treatments for cancer. “A lot of ideas end up being very, very simple-minded in hindsight. But it‘s very difficult to foresee whether simple-minded ideas will work in the end. There’s nothing magical about what we do. It‘s just that nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way,” said Califano. The aestheticists want to face the material world with all the capacities of the human to see and imagine. Tissue engineer Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic exposed the creative powers of aesthetics in the practice of a scientist. It was the novel Alexandria Quartet that gave her the idea of her work as “sliding planes”: “Each of the sliding planes is a body of knowledge. Then they travel past each other, and somehow connect with each other. There were three sliding planes that are three different characters’ perspectives. And then the fourth plane was the time. That is how the book was constructed, I believe, and this is how we do science.” Knowing and seeing require connections between the internal world of the seer or knower, the external world of the seeable and knowable, and the world of witnesses who receive what becomes seen or known. These connections, what I call “telling”, are achieved through narrative acts like speech. It creates a network, bridging from person to person. Nabila El-Bassel, an international leader in studying the most hard-to-deal-with global health problems, confirmed the necessity of listening to all “telling” voices. El-Bassel and her teams are listeners of their subjects’ lived experiences, making sure that suffering individuals are heard and valued. Recognising the fundamental roles of epistemology, aesthetics, and narrative studies is essential to fully understanding the creative process—whether in a laboratory or a studio. 31. According to the passage, the three modes of discovery are ________. A. knowing, creating, and evaluating B. seeing, telling, and listening C. knowing, seeing, and telling D. questioning, perceiving, and narrating 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为直接细节题。第一段第二句明确：“Think of artists and scientists as users of three modes of discovery: knowing, seeing, and telling.” C项为原文原词复现。A项“creating”和“evaluating”未作为三种模式出现；B项“listening”是“telling”的延伸（叙述包含讲述和倾听），但非三种模式之一；D项“questioning”属于“knowing”的组成部分，“perceiving”属于“seeing”的组成部分，不完整。 32. What can be inferred about Andrea Califano‘s approach to cancer research? A. He relies on magical thinking to generate new ideas. B. He values the ability to question established assumptions. C. He believes simple-minded ideas are always ineffective. D. He prioritizes practical applications over theoretical inquiry. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第二段Califano说“nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way”（没有人这样想过癌症）——他之所以有突破，是因为他以别人未曾尝试的方式思考。这与“提问已知假设”的本质一致，对应前文“epistemologist‘s attention to knowing”和“question what we think we know”（质疑我们认为已知的）。B项正确。A项“依赖魔法思维”与Califano说“There’s nothing magical about what we do”直接相反；C项“简单想法总是无效”与原文“difficult to foresee whether simple-minded ideas will work”矛盾（难以预见不等于总是无效）；D项“优先应用而非理论”文中未提及。 33. The example of Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic is used to illustrate ________. A. how literature can inspire scientific creativity B. how aestheticists ignore practical concerns C. how scientists avoid using artistic methods D. how novels are superior to scientific papers 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段Vunjak-Novakovic从小说《亚历山大四重奏》的“滑动平面”结构中获得科学工作的灵感——“That is how the book was constructed, I believe, and this is how we do science”（我相信书是这样构建的，我们做科学也是这样）。例子的目的是说明“aestheticists want to face the material world with all the capacities of the human to see and imagine”（审美主义者用人类全部看和想象的能力面对物质世界），即文学如何激发科学创造力。A项正确。B项“忽视实际问题”与原文“creative powers of aesthetics in the practice of a scientist”矛盾（美学在科学家实践中具有创造力量）；C项“避免艺术方法”与例子本身相反；D项“小说优于科学论文”无依据。 34. What does the author imply about “telling” in the last paragraph? A. It is less important than knowing and seeing. B. It connects individual perspectives into a shared understanding. C. It only occurs in formal scientific publications. D. It is a passive process of receiving information. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。末段定义“telling”为“achieved through narrative acts like speech. It creates a network, bridging from person to person”（通过言语等叙述行为实现，创造网络，将人与人连接起来）。El-Bassel的例子说明通过倾听“telling voices”让受苦者的经历“heard and valued”（被听见、被重视）。因此“telling”的本质是将个体视角连接成共享理解。B项正确。A项“不如knowing和seeing重要”与末句“essential to fully understanding”矛盾（三者同等重要）；C项“仅出现在正式科学出版物”过于狭隘；D项“被动的信息接收”与“narrative acts”（叙述行为）的主动性不符。 Passage 3 （西城区2026年二模·改编） What is life? Like most great questions this one is easy to ask but difficult to answer. The reason is simple: we know of just one type of life and it’s challenging to do science with a sample size of one. The field of artificial life—called ALife for short—is the systematic attempt to spell out life‘s fundamental principles. Many of these practitioners, so-called ALifers, think that somehow making life is the surest way to really understand what life is. So far no one has convincingly made artificial life. This track record makes ALife a ripe target for criticism, such as declarations of the field’s doubtful scientific value. Alan Smith, a complexity scientist, is tired of such complaints. Asking about “the point” of ALife might be, well, missing the point entirely, he says. “The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything.” Alan says. “Some people ask me, ‘So what‘s the worth of artificial life?’ Do you ever think, ‘What is the worth of your grandmother?’” As much as many ALifers hate emphasizing their research’s applications, the attempts to create artificial life could have practical payoffs. Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution. This is the capacity for a system to create essentially endless complexity, to be a sort of “novelty generator”. The only system known to exhibit this is Earth‘s biosphere. If the field of ALife manages to reproduce life’s endless “creativity” in some virtual model, those same principles could give rise to truly inventive machines. Compared with the developments of AI, advances in ALife are harder to recognize. One reason is that ALife is a field in which the central concept—life itself—is undefined. The lack of agreement among ALifers doesn‘t help either. The result is a diverse line of projects that each advance along their unique paths. For better or worse, ALife mirrors the very subject it studies. Its muddled progression is a striking parallel to the evolutionary struggles that have shaped Earth’s biosphere. Undefined and uncontrolled, ALife drives its followers to repurpose old ideas and generate novelty. It may be, of course, that these characteristics aren‘t in any way surprising or singular. They may apply universally to all acts of evolution. Ultimately ALife may be nothing special. But even this dismissal suggests something: perhaps, just like life itself throughout the universe, the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable. 31. Regarding Alan Smith’s defence of ALife, the author is ________. A. Supportive B. puzzled C. unconcerned D. doubtful 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。Smith在第二段用反问“What is the worth of your grandmother?”来反驳对ALife“无实用价值”的批评——认为追问“意义何在”本身就偏离了重点。第三段开头作者用转折词“As much as...hate emphasizing...applications, the attempts...could have practical payoffs”承接——尽管ALifers不愿谈应用，但创造人工生命的尝试确实可能有实际回报。这说明作者认同Smith的辩护立场：ALife的价值不应以短期应用来衡量。A项“支持的”正确。B项“困惑的”、C项“不关心的”、D项“怀疑的”均无文本依据，且第三段“could have practical payoffs”表明作者明确表达肯定倾向。 32. What does the word “enamored” underlined in Paragraph 3 most probably mean? A. Shocked. B. Protected. C. Attracted. D. Challenged. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“enamored”所在句：“Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution.”（人工智能可能被视为ALife的表亲，因为两个领域的研究者都________于一个叫作“开放演化”的概念。）“表亲”关系暗示两个领域有共同兴趣点，即都被同一概念所吸引。结合“open-ended evolution”（开放演化）在随后的定义中被描述为系统创造无限复杂性的能力，是一个吸引人的研究目标。C项“Attracted”（被吸引）最贴切。A项“震惊”、B项“保护”、D项“挑战”代入后均无法形成合理的因果关系。 33. What can we learn from this passage? A. ALife holds the key to human future. B. ALife and AI share a common feature. C. AI mirrors the developments of ALife. D. AI speeds up the process of human evolution. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第三段明确：“Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution.”——两个领域的研究者都着迷于“开放演化”概念，这是它们的共同特征。B项正确。A项“ALife掌握人类未来的关键”过度拔高，原文只说可能“give rise to truly inventive machines”（催生有创造力的机器）；C项“AI反映ALife的发展”与第四段“advances in ALife are harder to recognize”语境不符，且原文未说AI反映ALife；D项“AI加速人类进化”无依据。 34. Which would be the best title for the passage? A. Life Is Undefined. Can AI Be a Way Out? B. Life Evolves. Can AI Help ALife Evolve, Too? C. Life Is Undefined. Can ALife Be Defined One Day? D. Life Evolves. Can Attempts to Create ALife Evolve, Too? 答案：D 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。全文围绕ALife自身的演化展开讨论：首段提出ALife试图理解生命本质；第二至三段介绍ALife面临的批评和潜在价值；第四段指出ALife“mirrors the very subject it studies”（反映了它所研究的主题），“muddled progression is a striking parallel to evolutionary struggles”（混乱进展与进化斗争平行）；末段提出“these characteristics...may apply universally to all acts of evolution”并得出结论“the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable”。核心问题是：ALife是否也在不断演化？D项“生命在演化。创造ALife的尝试也在演化吗？”精准捕捉了这一主旨。A项和C项聚焦“life is undefined”（生命未被定义），这只是第四段提到的一个细节理由；B项将重心放在“AI帮助ALife演化”，但AI在文中仅作为类比（“cousin”）出现，非全文主线。 Passage 4 （东城区2026年二模·改编） Cracks are very common in concrete structures due to various chemical and physical phenomena that occur during everyday use. And tiny cracks can be quite harmful because they provide an easy route in for liquids and gases—and the harmful substances they might contain. For instance, micro-cracks can allow water and oxygen to infiltrate and then corrode the steel reinforcement, leading to structural failure. Continuous maintenance and repair work is difficult because it usually requires an enormous amount of labor and investment. Scientists have been trying to figure out how these harmful cracks could heal themselves without human intervention. The idea was originally inspired by the amazing ability of the human body to heal itself of cuts, bruises and broken bones. A person takes in nutrients which the body uses to produce new substitutes to heal damaged tissues. In the same way, can we provide necessary products to concrete to fill in cracks when damage happens? Through long-time research, scientists have found an unusual candidate to help concrete heal itself: a fungus called T. reesei. It is found that as calcium hydroxide from concrete dissolved in water, the pH of the fungal growth medium increased from a close-to-neutral original value of 6.5 all the way to a very alkaline 13.0. Of all the fungi tested, only T. reesei could survive this environment. Despite the drastic pH increase, its spores germinated into threadlike hyphal mycelium and grew equally well with or without concrete. Scientists propose including fungal spores, together with nutrients, during the initial mixing process when building a new concrete structure. When the inevitable cracking occurs and water finds its way in, the dormant fungal spores will germinate. As they grow, they’ll work as a catalyst within the calcium-rich conditions of the concrete to promote precipitation of calcium carbonate crystals. These mineral deposits can fill in the cracks. When the cracks are completely caulked and no more water can enter, the fungi will again form spores. If cracks form again and environmental conditions become favorable, the spores could wake up and repeat the process. T. reesei is eco-friendly, posing no known risk to human health. In fact T. reesei has a long history of safe use in industrial-scale production of carbohydrase enzymes, such as cellulase, which plays an important role in fermentation processes during winemaking. Of course, researchers will need to conduct a thorough assessment to investigate any possible immediate and long-term effects on the environment and human health prior to its use as a healing agent in concrete infrastructure. 31. According to the passage, tiny cracks in concrete structures may lead to ________. A. reduced labor costs for maintenance B. the complete failure of steel reinforcement C. improved resistance to chemical substances D. the immediate collapse of the entire building 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段明确指出“micro-cracks can allow water and oxygen to infiltrate and then corrode the steel reinforcement, leading to structural failure”（微裂纹让水和氧气渗入，腐蚀钢筋，导致结构性失效）。B项“钢筋完全失效”是对“corrode...leading to structural failure”的合理同义替换。A项“降低维护人工成本”与原文“requires enormous labor and investment”相反；C项“提高抗化学物质能力”与原文“harmful”相反；D项“整栋建筑立即倒塌”过度夸大——“立即”和“整栋”在文中均未提及。 32. What inspired scientists to look for self-healing concrete? A. The high cost of concrete production. B. The natural healing process of human body. C. The discovery of a new type of fungus. D. The chemical properties of calcium hydroxide. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段明确说明：“The idea was originally inspired by the amazing ability of the human body to heal itself of cuts, bruises and broken bones.”（这一想法最初受到人体自愈能力的启发。）B项为原文同义替换。A项“混凝土生产成本高”、C项“发现新型真菌”（真菌是后来找到的候选物，非最初灵感）、D项“氢氧化钙的化学性质”均非最初灵感来源。 33. What makes T. reesei suitable for self-healing concrete? A. It can survive in highly alkaline environments. B. It produces large amounts of calcium hydroxide. C. It grows only in the absence of water. D. It is sensitive to changes in temperature. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段核心信息：混凝土中氢氧化钙溶解使pH值升高至13.0（高碱性），“Of all the fungi tested, only T. reesei could survive this environment.”——在所测试的真菌中，只有T. reesei能在这种环境中存活。正是这一耐高碱性使其适合在混凝土内部工作。A项正确。B项“产生大量氢氧化钙”与事实相反——它利用混凝土中的钙离子促进碳酸钙沉淀，而非产生氢氧化钙；C项“只在无水时生长”与原文“grew equally well with or without concrete”（无论有无混凝土生长一样好）不符；D项“对温度变化敏感”文中未提及。 34. What is the author‘s attitude towards using T. reesei in concrete infrastructure? A. Fully confident about its immediate application. B. Cautiously optimistic with necessary precautions. C. Strongly opposed due to potential health risks. D. Indifferent about its environmental impact. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。末段先肯定T. reesei的“eco-friendly”“posing no known risk to human health”并已有“long history of safe use”——这是积极方面。但紧接着用“Of course”转折：“researchers will need to conduct a thorough assessment to investigate any possible immediate and long-term effects...prior to its use”——在应用前仍需全面评估。这种“积极前景+审慎前提”的表述即“谨慎乐观”。B项“谨慎乐观，有必要的预防措施”准确。A项“对其立即应用完全自信”忽略了末段的审慎要求；C项“强烈反对”与“eco-friendly”等肯定性评价矛盾；D项“对环境影响漠不关心”与“thorough assessment to investigate effects”相反。 Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） Arif Pujianto couldn‘t sleep. When dawn broke, the area where he lives on the low-lying Pari Island in Indonesia was damaged. Eventually, he decided to do something about it. He filed a lawsuit against cement manufacturer Holcim. At first sight, this might seem unreasonable. After all, the company has no operations in Indonesia and is headquartered 12,000 kilometres from Pari, in Switzerland. Yet Pujianto’s case is on top of a wave of lawsuits supported by innovative climate attribution models. Computer simulations have been the backbone of climate science since the 1960s. Scientists run them to predict how the planet will warm as the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere increases. But climate models can be put to another use if they are run in a slightly different way. The idea is to simulate counterfactual scenarios and compare them with how things really turned out. How would the world look if we had left fossil fuels which we consumed in the ground, for example? Climate scientists have spent decades using this technique to figure out the consequences of carbon emissions, in a field that is broadly called attribution science. Climate models can be extremely complex and often require supercomputers to run. But two advances have started to change that. One is the development of “reduced complexity” climate models. Instead of modelling Earth‘s precise physical, chemical and biological processes, these simpler models simulate them on average, which reduces processing power. The second advance boils down to innovations in the way we account for emissions and join the links in the causal chain between emissions and harms. That includes, for example, smarter ways of differentiating between historical emissions. A gigatonne of carbon emitted today, when oceans are more acidic, has different consequences to a gigatonne of carbon emitted in 1850. In 2022, climate scientists Christopher Callahan at Indiana University and Justin Mankin at Dartmouth College put these two advances together to create an end-to-end climate attribution model, one that stretches from the individual packets of emissions, perhaps from a single company, all the way to the effects of climate change on a community. Mankin is aware that the research may be used in court and pursuing climate action through climate lawsuits may be necessary. A proper test of how attribution science holds up in court in these “polluter-pays” cases hasn‘t yet taken place. But such a test may not be too far off, says Noah Walker-Crawford, a legal advisor, especially given how many fresh cases are starting to come before judges. If a precedent is set by even a single successful polluter-pays case, it could open the floodgates to a huge number of similar claims. In each case, the individual damages demanded may be relatively small, but it could, nonetheless, be significant. 31. What can be inferred about the climate attribution model? A. It can simulate a world without carbon emissions. B. It predicts the exact timeline of future extreme weather events. C. It has shifted its primary aim from science to legal advocacy. D. It requires less computing power than traditional climate models. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第二段解释归因模型运行“counterfactual scenarios”（反事实情景）并与现实对比——“How would the world look if we had left fossil fuels which we consumed in the ground?”（如果我们把已消耗的化石燃料留在地下，世界会怎样？）这说明模型可以模拟无碳排放或低碳排放的世界。A项正确。B项“预测极端天气的确切时间线”——模型模拟的是总体后果（consequences），而非具体事件时间线；C项“主要目的从科学转向法律倡导”与末段“research may be used in court”中的“may”（可能）不符，且第三段明确说模型原本用于预测气候变暖；D项“比传统模型需要更少算力”——第三段“reduced complexity”模型降低了算力需求，但这是模型的一种分支，不能说归因模型整体上需要更少算力。 32. Regarding the future of “polluter-pays” cases, the author is ________. A. worried about their increasing number B. cautiously optimistic about their potential C. strongly opposed to their legal basis D. indifferent to their outcome 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。末段表述：“A proper test...hasn‘t yet taken place. But such a test may not be too far off”（恰当的测试尚未进行，但可能不会太远）——“but”转折后的积极预期；“If a precedent is set...it could open the floodgates”（若开创先例，可能打开闸门）——“could”加“floodgates”暗示潜在重大影响；“it could, nonetheless, be significant”（尽管如此，可能意义重大）——“nonetheless”加强肯定的语气。综合判断作者对“污染者付费”案件的未来持谨慎乐观态度。B项正确。A项“担忧数量增加”——文中“open the floodgates”中性表述，无“担忧”色彩；C项“强烈反对”无依据；D项“漠不关心”与“significant”评价矛盾。 33. What does the author mainly do in this passage? A. Anticipate a novel trend in climate litigation. B. Illustrate the historical development of computer simulations. C. Criticize the scientific validity of climate models. D. Defend the cement manufacturer against the lawsuit. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为写作意图题。全文从Pujianto诉讼引入，介绍归因科学的技术原理和最新进展（简化模型、历史排放区分），再说明科学家创建了从单一公司排放到社区影响的“端到端”归因模型，最后讨论该模型在法庭上的前景（“may not be too far off”“could open the floodgates”）。核心脉络是：展示归因科学如何为气候诉讼这一新兴法律趋势提供技术支撑。A项“预见气候诉讼的新趋势”准确。B项“说明计算机模拟的历史发展”——文章虽提及模拟，但重心在于其在法律领域的应用前景；C项“批评气候模型科学有效性”——文章无批评，持肯定态度；D项“为水泥制造商辩护”——恰恰相反，文章说明诉讼有科学支撑。 34. What does the underlined phrase “open the floodgates” in the last paragraph most probably mean? A. Start a massive flow of similar legal claims. B. Release a large amount of scientific data. C. Prevent further environmental damage. D. Simplify the court procedures for lawsuits. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“open the floodgates”所在句：“If a precedent is set by even a single successful polluter-pays case, it could open the floodgates to a huge number of similar claims.”——如果一个“污染者付费”案件成功确立了先例，就可能________大量类似的索赔诉讼。法律术语“precedent”与“similar claims”呼应，说明“open the floodgates”指开启大量类似诉讼的闸门。A项“启动大量类似法律索赔的流动”为比喻义的正确解读。B项“释放大量科学数据”——“claims”是法律索赔，非数据；C项“防止进一步环境损害”——“open the floodgates”通常指“开启”而非“防止”；D项“简化法庭程序”——偏离“floodgates”（闸门/洪水）的比喻意象。 Passage 6 （石景山区2026年一模·改编） The call to “know yourself” has been there since ancient times, but our sense of self doesn‘t always match what others perceive. Considering the stories we tell about ourselves can help us to change our minds for better. For many years, psychologists saw identity as a combination of someone’s values, beliefs, goals and social roles. Then, in the 1980s, Bob Johnson created the life story model of identity, in which he proposes that, as we go through life, these core features are built in with our memories to create a personal story through which we understand our lives. Our life story is something that starts coming together in our teenage years, when we begin to organise our lives into chapters around key events or life changes, and begin to see ourselves as both the central character and, to a varying extent, the story‘s author. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. Johnson has also investigated the link between well-being and certain story themes. He discovered that whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important predictor of a person’s mental health. Another key theme involves finding some kind of positive meaning after stressful events. The good news is that there is evidence we can learn to change our own story. Lisa Green, another researcher, sounds a few notes of caution. For instance, hearing about the power of redemptive stories, many people may feel forced to find a positive angle on horrible events. She says that Western culture already pushes people to look for the silver lining behind every cloud. If you want to turn over a new leaf, though, one top tip is that it helps to choose a significant date that signals the start of a new “chapter”. So, whether your goal is saving money or getting fit, there is no better time to become the author of our own destiny. 31. According to Johnson‘s research, a consistent personal story is associated with ________. A. stronger sense of identity and higher life satisfaction B. greater ability to memorize past events accurately C. more willingness to accept others’ opinions D. higher likelihood of experiencing stressful events 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段原句：“People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity...Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too.”（拥有更一致故事的人往往有更强的身份认同感……这些人也显示出更高的整体生活满意度。）A项为原文合并同义替换。B项“更准确记忆过去事件的能力”——文中讨论的是故事的“一致性”，非“准确性”；C项“更愿意接受他人意见”文中未提及；D项“更可能经历压力事件”与原文方向相反——一致的故事与更高的幸福感相关。 32. What does Lisa Green caution against? A. Overemphasizing positive interpretations of all negative events. B. Ignoring the importance of life story consistency. C. Rejecting Western cultural values in self-perception. D. Abandoning the search for meaning in life. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第五段Green的警示：“hearing about the power of redemptive stories, many people may feel forced to find a positive angle on horrible events. She says that Western culture already pushes people to look for the silver lining behind every cloud.”（听到拯救性故事的力量后，许多人可能被迫为可怕事件寻找积极角度。西方文化已经在迫使人们在每片乌云背后寻找一线希望。）Green警示的是“过度强调在所有事件中找积极意义”的文化压力。A项正确。B项“忽视故事一致性”不是Green讨论的议题；C项“拒绝西方文化价值观”过度解读；D项“放弃寻找生活意义”与Green讨论的“强迫找积极面”是不同概念。 33. The underlined phrase “turn over a new leaf” in the last paragraph is closest in meaning to ________. A. change one’s behavior or life in a positive way B. recall important events from the past C. write a completely new autobiography D. accept the unchangeable aspects of life 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“turn over a new leaf”出现在末段：“If you want to turn over a new leaf, though, one top tip is that it helps to choose a significant date that signals the start of a new ‘chapter‘.”（如果你想________，一个重要建议是选择一个标志着新“篇章”开始的重大日期。）结合“new chapter”（新篇章）和全文主题——通过修改人生故事来改变自我认知和生活方向，可以推断该短语意为“开始新生活、作出积极改变”。A项“以积极方式改变行为或生活”正确。B项“回忆过去重要事件”与“new”相反；C项“写全新自传”过于字面化；D项“接受生活中不可改变之处”与“change”含义相悖。 34. What is the passage mainly about? A. How life stories shape our identity and well-being. B. How psychologists disagree on the nature of identity. C. How Western culture influences personal narratives. D. How to write an effective autobiography. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。全文围绕“人生故事如何构建自我认知并影响幸福感”展开：第二段介绍“life story model of identity”；第三段说明一致的故事与身份认同感和幸福感的关联；第四段探讨故事主题与心理健康的关系；末段给出改变故事的方法。A项“人生故事如何塑造身份认同和幸福感”准确概括。B项“心理学家如何对身份本质存在分歧”仅涉及Johnson与Green的局部对比，非全文主线；C项“西方文化如何影响个人叙事”仅为Green警示的一个层面；D项“如何写有效的自传”将比喻（life story）误解为字面意义的写作指导。 Passage 7 （通州区2026年一模·改编） The field of artificial life—ALife for short—has long been a target of criticism. Its practitioners try to create life from scratch, yet so far no one has convincingly succeeded. Critics declare the field‘s scientific value doubtful. But Alan Smith, a complexity scientist, argues that asking about “the point” of ALife might be missing the point entirely. “The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything,” he says. Despite the critics, ALife research may have practical payoffs. Artificial intelligence is often considered ALife’s cousin. Researchers in both fields share a fascination with a concept called open-ended evolution—the capacity for a system to generate endless novelty. Earth‘s biosphere is the only known system that exhibits this. If ALife can reproduce life’s creativity in virtual models, the same principles might give rise to truly inventive machines. However, advances in ALife are harder to recognize than those in AI. One reason is that ALife‘s central concept—life itself—remains undefined. The lack of consensus among ALifers adds to the confusion. The result is a diverse range of projects proceeding along their own paths. Interestingly, ALife mirrors its subject: its messy progression parallels the evolutionary struggles that shaped the biosphere. Some researchers argue that ALife’s undefined and uncontrollable nature is not a weakness but a strength. It forces practitioners to repurpose old ideas and generate novelty. These characteristics may apply universally to all acts of evolution. Perhaps ALife is nothing special. But even that dismissal suggests something: like life itself across the universe, the emergence of ALife may prove inevitable. 31. What is Alan Smith‘s attitude towards ALife critics? A. He completely agrees with their concerns. B. He finds their criticism misguided. C. He believes the critics are not harsh enough. D. He thinks the criticism is valuable for improvement. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为态度推断题。第一段Smith说“asking about ‘the point’ of ALife might be missing the point entirely”（追问ALife的“意义”可能完全偏离了要点），“The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything”（生命系统的存在与任何用途无关）。他用反问“What is the worth of your grandmother?”来表明：批评者以“有无应用价值”作为衡量标准是错误的。因此他认为批评方向错了。B项“他发现批评被误导了”准确。A项“完全同意”与引语相反；C项“批评不够严厉”无依据；D项“批评对改进有价值”与Smith的反驳语气不符。 32. What do ALife and AI have in common according to the passage? A. Both have achieved equally remarkable advances. B. Both focus on creating practical applications. C. Both share interest in open-ended evolution. D. Both have clearly defined core concepts. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段原句：“Artificial intelligence is often considered ALife‘s cousin. Researchers in both fields share a fascination with a concept called open-ended evolution.”（人工智能常被视为ALife的表亲。两个领域的研究者都着迷于一个叫作“开放演化”的概念。）C项“都对开放演化感兴趣”为原文同义替换。A项“取得了同样显著的进展”——第四段明确说“advances in ALife are harder to recognize than those in AI”（ALife的进展比AI更难被识别）；B项“都专注于创造实际应用”——ALife研究者“hate emphasizing their research‘s applications”（讨厌强调应用）；D项“都有明确定义的核心概念”——第四段说ALife“central concept...remains undefined”（核心概念未被定义）。 33. The word “consensus” in Paragraph 3 is closest in meaning to ________. A. general agreement among a group B. intense competition between researchers C. detailed description of a theory D. widespread criticism of a field 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“consensus”所在句：“The lack of consensus among ALifers adds to the confusion.”（ALifers之间缺乏________加剧了混乱。）结合前句“ALife‘s central concept—life itself—remains undefined”（核心概念未被定义）——概念未定义自然导致研究者之间缺乏共识/一致意见，从而加剧混乱。A项“群体中的普遍一致”为consensus的标准释义。B项“研究者间的激烈竞争”——“缺乏竞争”不会导致“概念未定义”的混乱；C项“理论的详细描述”与句意无逻辑关联；D项“对某领域的广泛批评”错位——批评是来自外界（critics），而非研究者内部。 34. Which of the following best expresses the author‘s conclusion about ALife? A. ALife is doomed to fail due to its undefined nature. B. ALife’s rise may be as unavoidable as life itself. C. ALife will eventually be replaced by AI. D. ALife‘s practical applications are its only value. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者观点/主旨题。末段末句：“But even this dismissal suggests something: perhaps, just like life itself throughout the universe, the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable.”（但即便是这种否定也暗示了一些东西：也许，就像宇宙中的生命本身一样，ALife的崛起将被证明是不可避免的。）作者用“perhaps...will prove unavoidable”表达结论：ALife的出现像生命本身一样不可避免。B项为原文改写。A项“注定失败”与“inevitable”相反；C项“最终被AI取代”文中未提及，AI仅作为类比存在；D项“实际应用是其唯一价值”与第二段“hate emphasizing applications”矛盾。 Passage 8 （大兴区2026年二模·改编） Creative discovery, whether in art or science, involves venturing from the known into the unknown. This process can be understood through three interconnected modes: knowing, seeing, and telling. The mode of knowing is epistemological—it questions what we think we know, how we come to know it, and whether we can prove it. Physicist Andrea Califano exemplifies this in his cancer research. His philosopher-physicist mindset led him to challenge established assumptions, resulting in new precision-medicine approaches. “There‘s nothing magical about what we do. It’s just that nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way,” he explains. The mode of seeing is aesthetic—it confronts the material world with human capacities for observation and imagination. Tissue engineer Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic drew inspiration from a novel‘s structure: the book used multiple “sliding planes” representing different characters’ perspectives, with time as the fourth plane. She adopted this framework for her scientific work, showing how aesthetic experience can shape scientific thinking. The mode of telling connects the internal world of the discoverer with the external world of the discoverable, and with the audience who receives the discovery. This is achieved through narrative—speech, writing, and other forms of communication. Researcher Nabila El-Bassel emphasizes listening to the voices of those affected by global health crises, ensuring their experiences are heard and valued. For her, telling is not one-way transmission but a network of mutual understanding. These three modes do not operate in isolation. They interact and reinforce each other. Knowing without seeing may be abstract; seeing without telling may remain private; telling without knowing may lack substance. True creative discovery requires the integration of all three. 31. According to the passage, the three modes of discovery are ________. A. independent and unrelated to each other B. hierarchical, with knowing as the most important C. interconnected and mutually reinforcing D. only applicable to scientific research 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段首句“These three modes do not operate in isolation. They interact and reinforce each other.”（这三种模式并非孤立运作，它们相互影响、相互加强。）C项“相互关联、相互加强”为原文同义替换。A项“独立且互不相关”与原文相反；B项“有层级关系，知道最重要”——文中无层级划分，三者并重；D项“仅适用于科学研究”——第一段明确说“whether in art or science”（无论在艺术还是科学中）。 32. The example of Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic is used to demonstrate ________. A. how literature can directly cure diseases B. how aesthetic experience can inform scientific thinking C. how scientists should avoid artistic influences D. how novels are more important than scientific papers 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段Vunjak-Novakovic从小说《亚历山大四重奏》的“滑动平面”结构中获得科学工作框架，作者总结：“showing how aesthetic experience can shape scientific thinking”（展示审美体验如何塑造科学思维）。B项“审美体验如何启发科学思维”为这一目的的精准概括。A项“文学如何直接治愈疾病”过度夸大——小说启发的是思维方式，非直接疗效；C项“科学家应避免艺术影响”与例子相反；D项“小说比科学论文更重要”无依据。 33. What does Nabila El-Bassel‘s work illustrate about the mode of “telling”? A. Telling should be a one-way transmission of expert knowledge. B. Telling requires a network of listening and mutual understanding. C. Telling is less important than knowing and seeing. D. Telling only applies to global health research. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段描述El-Bassel“emphasizes listening to the voices of those affected...ensuring their experiences are heard and valued”，作者总结“telling is not one-way transmission but a network of mutual understanding”（讲述不是单向传输，而是相互理解的网络）。B项“讲述需要倾听和相互理解的网络”准确。A项“单向传输专家知识”与“not one-way transmission”相反；C项“不如knowing和seeing重要”——末段说三者“interact and reinforce”（相互加强），无主次之分；D项“仅适用于全球健康研究”——El-Bassel的例子是说明telling mode，不意味着该模式仅限于此领域。 34. What is the best title for this passage? A. The Integration of Knowing, Seeing, and Telling in Discovery B. The Superiority of Scientific Method over Artistic Intuition C. How to Become a Successful Cancer Researcher D. The History of Epistemology in Western Philosophy 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。全文结构清晰：首段提出三种模式（knowing, seeing, telling）；第二至四段分别用三位研究者的案例阐释每种模式；末段总结三者“interact and reinforce each other...True creative discovery requires the integration of all three”（真正有创造力的发现需要三者的整合）。A项“knowing、seeing和telling在发现中的整合”完整覆盖全文主线。B项“科学方法优于艺术直觉”与全文主张的“并重”相反；C项“如何成为成功的癌症研究者”仅涉及Califano一个例子，无法概括全文；D项“西方哲学认识论史”偏离具体主题。 【深度人文社会思辨议论类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） Meritocracy—the idea that success is earned through talent and effort—has become the defining ideology of our time. We are told that our destiny is in our own hands, that we can achieve whatever we set our minds to. Yet this seemingly empowering belief carries a dark side. Michael Sandel argues that the meritocratic ideal has become a source of resentment and humiliation. Those who succeed believe their success is entirely their own doing, and therefore feel entitled to look down upon those who struggle. Conversely, those who fail internalize their failure as a personal deficiency. The result is a society that has lost the capacity for solidarity—we find it increasingly difficult to see ourselves as sharing a common fate with others. Sandel points to the role of luck in all human achievement. The circumstances of our birth, the talents we happen to possess, the opportunities that come our way—none of these are things we have earned. To claim full credit for our success is to ignore the vast lottery of life that placed us where we are. The successful often fail to recognize that their achievements are, in significant measure, gifts of fortune. Critics of Sandel argue that his critique undermines personal responsibility and the incentive to work hard. If success is largely a matter of luck, why strive at all? Sandel’s response is that recognizing the role of luck does not diminish the value of effort; it simply calls for humility. When we acknowledge that we are not solely responsible for our success, we become more open to sharing our good fortune with others and to reforming the conditions that make success so unevenly distributed. What makes the meritocratic ideal so tenacious is its moral appeal—it seems fairer than any alternative. But Sandel suggests that fairness alone is not enough. A healthy society requires citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate. This is not a call to abandon striving, but to temper it with gratitude and generosity. 31. According to the passage, what is the “dark side” of meritocracy? A. It discourages people from setting high goals for themselves. B. It makes successful people less sympathetic toward others. C. It denies the importance of personal effort and talent. D. It promotes competition at the expense of cooperation. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段明确指出meritocracy的“dark side”：“Those who succeed believe their success is entirely their own doing, and therefore feel entitled to look down upon those who struggle.”（成功者认为成功全凭自己，因此觉得有资格看不起那些挣扎的人。）紧接着说明结果是社会失去了团结的能力——“find it increasingly difficult to see ourselves as sharing a common fate”（越来越难看到自己与他人命运相连）。B项“使成功者对他人缺乏同情”是“look down upon”和“lost capacity for solidarity”的合理概括。A项“阻止人们设定高目标”文中未提及；C项“否认个人努力和才能的重要性”与Sandel“does not diminish the value of effort”矛盾；D项“以合作为代价促进竞争”文中未直接讨论竞争。 32. Why does Sandel emphasize the role of luck in human achievement? A. To prove that success is entirely undeserved. B. To encourage greater humility and generosity in society. C. To argue against the value of hard work. D. To justify redistributing all wealth equally. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解与推理综合题。第三段论述运气的作用后，第四段解释了Sandel的用意：“recognizing the role of luck does not diminish the value of effort; it simply calls for humility. When we acknowledge that we are not solely responsible for our success, we become more open to sharing our good fortune with others”（承认运气的作用并不贬低努力的价值，只是呼唤谦卑。当我们承认自己并非唯一对成功负责时，我们更愿意与他人分享好运）。第五段再次强调“citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate”（能认识到自己成功的偶然性并对不那么幸运者感到有义务的公民）。B项“鼓励社会中更大的谦卑和慷慨”准确概括。A项“证明成功完全不该被得到”过度极端；C项“反对努力的价值”与原文相反；D项“为平均分配财富辩护”过度引申，超出文本范围。 33. What can be inferred about Sandel‘s critics? A. They believe his theory may reduce motivation for hard work. B. They agree that luck plays a role in personal success. C. They propose alternative explanations for social inequality. D. They support stronger government intervention in education. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段明确记述批评者的论点：“Critics of Sandel argue that his critique undermines personal responsibility and the incentive to work hard. If success is largely a matter of luck, why strive at all?”（批评者认为Sandel的批判削弱了个人责任感和努力工作的动力。如果成功主要是运气，为什么还要努力？）由此可以合理推断：批评者担心他的理论可能降低努力工作的动机。A项正确。B项“他们同意运气在成功中起作用”——批评者的反驳恰恰建立在他们不认同“成功主要是运气”这一前提上；C项“他们为社会不平等提出其他解释”文中未提及；D项“支持政府干预教育”无依据。 34. Which of the following best expresses the author‘s conclusion about meritocracy? A. It should be abandoned entirely as an outdated idea. B. It remains valuable but needs to be tempered with humility. C. It is superior to all alternative social systems. D. It has no impact on how people view themselves. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨/作者观点题。末段是全文总结：“a healthy society requires citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate. This is not a call to abandon striving, but to temper it with gratitude and generosity.”（健康的社会需要能认识自己成功偶然性的公民，并对不那么幸运者感到有义务。这不是呼吁放弃奋斗，而是以感恩和慷慨来调和奋斗。）作者既未全盘否定meritocracy（未要求“abandon”），也未无条件推崇（要求“temper it”），而是主张“保留其价值，但以谦卑调和”——这正是B项“仍有价值，但需要以谦卑调和”。A项“应完全抛弃”与末句“not a call to abandon”相反；C项“优于所有其他制度”文中未作这种比较；D项“对人们如何看待自己没有影响”与全文论述完全相反。 Passage 2 （西城区2026年一模·改编） Tolerance is widely celebrated as a cornerstone of liberal democracy. Yet philosophers have long recognized a troubling paradox: if a society is tolerant of everything, it must also tolerate the intolerant. And the intolerant, given the opportunity, will destroy tolerance itself. This is known as the paradox of tolerance, most famously articulated by Karl Popper. Popper argued that unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend tolerance even to those who are intolerant, and if we do not defend tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed and tolerance with them. The paradox suggests that in the name of preserving tolerance, we may be justified in being intolerant toward the intolerant. But who decides who counts as “intolerant”? This is where the paradox becomes politically charged. In practice, the designation “intolerant” is often applied to those whose views are merely unpopular or uncomfortable. Historically, this label has been used to silence dissent, suppress minority voices, and consolidate power. The very principle meant to protect open debate can, in the wrong hands, become a tool for shutting it down. This suggests that the paradox of tolerance is not a neat logical puzzle with a single solution. Rather, it is a perennial challenge that requires judgment, context, and humility. There are no easy rules for drawing the line between legitimate dissent and intolerable intolerance. Societies must navigate this tension with an awareness of their own fallibility—always ready to re-examine their own decisions. The deeper lesson may be that tolerance is not a passive stance but an active practice. It requires constant vigilance, not only against the intolerant but also against our own tendency to label dissent as intolerance when it makes us uncomfortable. True tolerance, paradoxically, demands the courage to tolerate disagreement while having the wisdom to recognize genuine threats. 31. What is the paradox of tolerance? A. Tolerance requires being intolerant toward certain groups. B. Tolerance inevitably leads to social chaos. C. Tolerance makes people less willing to compromise. D. Tolerance is a concept only found in Western philosophy. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段定义悖论：“if a society is tolerant of everything, it must also tolerate the intolerant. And the intolerant, given the opportunity, will destroy tolerance itself.”（如果社会宽容一切，就必须也宽容不宽容者。而不宽容者有机会就会摧毁宽容本身。）第二段进一步阐述：“in the name of preserving tolerance, we may be justified in being intolerant toward the intolerant.”（为了维护宽容，对不宽容者不宽容可能是正当的。）因此悖论的核心是：维护宽容有时要求对某些群体不宽容，A项正确。B项“必然导致社会混乱”过于绝对，文中说的是“可能导致宽容消失”；C项“使人不愿妥协”未提及；D项“仅在西方哲学中存在”文中无此论断。 32. The author mentions the difficulty of defining “intolerant” primarily to ________. A. suggest that the paradox has no practical significance B. illustrate how the principle can be misused politically C. prove that tolerance is an outdated concept D. recommend abandoning the paradox altogether 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段提出“who decides who counts as ‘intolerant’? This is where the paradox becomes politically charged”（谁来决定谁算‘不宽容者’？这就是悖论变得具有政治敏感性的地方）。随后举例：“this label has been used to silence dissent, suppress minority voices, and consolidate power”（这个标签曾被用来压制异议、打压少数声音、巩固权力）。作者提及“定义困难”的目的是说明“宽容悖论”的原则可能被政治误用。B项“说明该原则如何被政治滥用”正确。A项“暗示悖论没有实际意义”——作者后文明确说“perennial challenge”（持久的挑战），说明有意义；C项“证明宽容过时”与全文维护宽容的立场相反；D项“建议完全放弃悖论”无依据。 33. Which word best describes the author‘s attitude toward the paradox of tolerance? A. Dismissive. B. Ambivalent. C. Pessimistic. D. Optimistic. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。全文呈现了对悖论的复杂立场：一方面承认其合理性（“may be justified in being intolerant”），另一方面警示其滥用风险（“used to silence dissent”），最终结论是“no easy rules...requires judgment, context, and humility”（没有简单的规则……需要判断、语境和谦卑）。这种既肯定又批判、既承认问题又提供解决方向的复杂态度，最接近B项“矛盾的/复杂的”（ambivalent）。A项“不屑的”——作者显然认真对待这一议题；C项“悲观的”——末段强调“active practice”和“vigilance”，表明仍有出路；D项“乐观的”——过于简单化，作者明确承认问题的复杂性。 34. What is the main idea of the passage? A. Tolerance is a fragile value that requires active defense and self-reflection. B. The paradox of tolerance proves that Western philosophy is self-contradictory. C. Societies should tolerate all views without exception. D. The intolerant should always be given equal rights. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。全文围绕“宽容悖论”展开：首段介绍悖论，第二段说明其逻辑，第三段警示定义被滥用的风险，第四段强调没有简单答案，末段得出结论——“tolerance is not a passive stance but an active practice. It requires constant vigilance, not only against the intolerant but also against our own tendency”（宽容不是被动立场，而是积极实践。它需要持续警觉，不仅警惕不宽容者，也要警惕我们自己将异议误判为不宽容的倾向）。A项“宽容是脆弱的价值观，需要积极捍卫和自我反思”精准概括。B项“证明西方哲学自相矛盾”偏离主旨；C项“社会应无例外地宽容所有观点”与悖论本身的逻辑矛盾；D项“不宽容者应永远享有平等权利”与第二段“may be justified in being intolerant”矛盾。 Passage 3 （东城区2026年一模·改编） The moral virtues praised by societies around the world—courage, honesty, cooperation, humility—show remarkable similarity. This observation has led some to argue for universal moral principles that transcend cultural boundaries. Others, however, insist that morality is fundamentally shaped by local conditions and traditions, and that no single moral framework can claim superiority over another. The debate between universalism and relativism is not merely academic. It has profound implications for how we understand human rights, international law, and cross-cultural dialogue. Universalists argue that certain practices—torture, slavery, genocide—are wrong regardless of cultural context. Relativists counter that what appears to be “wrong” from one cultural perspective may be justified by the unique historical circumstances and social needs of another. Consider the case of the Inuit peoples of the Canadian Arctic, whose moral code was shaped by the unforgiving environment in which they lived. Leadership, marriage, and interactions with other groups were loosely governed by tradition. Conflict was resolved through music or duels; angry quarrels were strongly discouraged because they could lead to chaos. The Inuit’s practical approach to morality made good sense given the demands of life in the far north. Yet does this mean that their moral code is merely a product of environment, or does it reveal something deeper about human social needs? Recent research in evolutionary psychology suggests that the similarity of moral virtues across cultures is striking, though the relative importance of various virtues may vary with a group’s history and environment. Cooperation, humility, and courage are nearly universally praised, while cruelty and deception are universally condemned. These norms long predate any moralizing religion or written law. They are rooted instead in the similarity of basic human needs and our shared mechanisms for learning and problem-solving. This suggests that morality has both universal and particular dimensions. The basic architecture of moral reasoning—the need for cooperation, the aversion to harm, the desire for belonging—appears to be part of our evolved human nature. But the specific content of moral codes, the particular rules and taboos, are shaped by local conditions. Understanding this dual nature may help us navigate cultural differences with both humility and conviction. 31. According to the passage, what is the central issue in the universalism-relativism debate? A. Whether moral codes are influenced by religion. B. Whether moral principles apply across all cultures or vary by context. C. Whether human nature is inherently good or evil. D. Whether traditional societies have moral codes at all. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段提出双方立场：“This observation has led some to argue for universal moral principles that transcend cultural boundaries. Others...insist that morality is fundamentally shaped by local conditions and traditions”（有人主张超越文化界限的普遍道德原则，另一些人则坚持道德根本上由本地条件和传统塑造）。第二段进一步说明：“has profound implications for how we understand human rights, international law, and cross-cultural dialogue”（对如何理解人权、国际法和跨文化对话有深远影响）。核心争议是：道德原则是否普遍适用，还是因文化而异，B项正确。A项“是否受宗教影响”是细枝末节；C项“人性本善还是本恶”文中未涉及；D项“传统社会是否有道德准则”与“Inuit moral code”的讨论相反。 32. Why does the author cite the Inuit example? A. To prove that environment determines all aspects of morality. B. To show that moral codes can adapt to specific living conditions. C. To argue that traditional societies lack universal moral values. D. To demonstrate that evolutionary psychology is unreliable. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段介绍Inuit的道德准则后总结：“The Inuit‘s practical approach to morality made good sense given the demands of life in the far north”（考虑到遥远北部生活的要求，因纽特人对道德的实际态度是有道理的）。作者随后用“Yet does this mean...”引出更深层问题。Inuit例子的目的是说明“道德准则可以适应特定生活条件”，即 relativism的立场——文化背景塑造道德规范的具体内容。B项正确。A项“证明环境决定道德的一切”过于绝对，作者随后即指出普遍维度；C项“论证传统社会缺乏普遍道德价值”与第四段“similarity of moral virtues across cultures”矛盾；D项“证明演化心理学不可靠”文中无此意。 33. What does the author suggest about the relationship between universal and particular moral dimensions? A. They are fundamentally incompatible. B. Universal principles should always override local traditions. C. Both exist and interact in shaping moral codes. D. Particular dimensions are more important for modern societies. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段给出结论：“morality has both universal and particular dimensions...The basic architecture of moral reasoning appears to be part of our evolved human nature. But the specific content of moral codes...are shaped by local conditions.”（道德既有普遍维度也有特殊维度……道德推理的基本架构似乎是我们演化人性的一部分，但道德规范的具体内容由本地条件塑造。）作者明确主张：两者并存且相互作用，C项正确。A项“根本不相容”与“both”矛盾；B项“普遍原则应始终凌驾于地方传统之上”作者未作这种价值判断；D项“特殊维度对现代社会更重要”文中无此比较。 34. Which would be the best title for the passage? A. Morality: Universal Roots, Local Branches B. Relativism: A Threat to Global Justice C. Inuit Wisdom: How Environment Shapes Ethics D. Evolutionary Psychology: The Science of Right and Wrong 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为标题题。全文论证道德既有普遍根基（“similarity of basic human needs and our shared mechanisms for learning”），又有地方差异（“specific content...shaped by local conditions”）。开头提出普遍主义与相对主义之争，中间以Inuit为例说明地方适应性，最后给出“both universal and particular dimensions”的结论。A项“道德：普遍之根，地方之枝”用比喻精准概括了全文核心论点。B项“相对主义：对全球正义的威胁”——全文并非批判相对主义，而是寻求整合；C项“因纽特智慧：环境如何塑造伦理”——这只是文章的一个例子，不足以概括全文；D项“演化心理学：对与错的科学”——演化心理学仅在第四段作为支持论据出现，非全文主题。 Passage 4 （朝阳区2026年二模·改编） The call to “know yourself” is ancient, but our self-perception often diverges from how others see us. Psychologist Bob Johnson’s life story model of identity offers a compelling framework: as we go through life, our values, beliefs, and goals merge with memories to create a personal narrative through which we understand ourselves. Our life story begins to cohere in adolescence, when we organize our lives into chapters around key events. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity and greater life satisfaction. Johnson also found that whether someone describes having had control over past events predicts mental health; finding positive meaning after stress is another key theme. The good news is that we can learn to change our own stories. But here lies a cultural trap. Researcher Lisa Green cautions that hearing about the power of “redemptive stories” can pressure people into finding positive angles on terrible events. Western culture already pushes individuals to look for the “silver lining behind every cloud.” This cultural expectation—what some call “toxic positivity”—can invalidate genuine suffering. When people feel they must reframe trauma as growth, their actual experience of pain is denied legitimacy. The healthy approach, then, is not to reject narrative change but to embrace it on one‘s own terms. The goal is not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one’s own. This requires the courage to resist cultural scripts that demand constant optimism, and the wisdom to recognize that not all stories need a happy ending—at least not immediately. Contrary to popular doubt, choosing a significant date—like a birthday or New Year‘s Day—can effectively signal the start of a new “chapter.” But the chapter’s content must be self-determined. The true author of one‘s destiny writes not to please an audience, but to live with integrity. 31. According to Johnson’s research, which of the following contributes to mental health? A. Having a life story that is entirely factual. B. Perceiving oneself as having control over past events. C. Avoiding any reflection on negative experiences. D. Conforming to others‘ expectations of one’s life story. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段：“whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important predictor of a person‘s mental health”（一个人是否描述自己对过去事件有过掌控是心理健康的重要预测指标），B项为原文同义替换。A项“完全真实的人生故事”——文中讨论的是“一致性”（consistent）而非“真实性”（factual）；C项“避免反思负面经历”——相反，Johnson认为“finding positive meaning after stress”是重要主题；D项“符合他人对人生故事的期望”——末段明确说应“not to please an audience”。 32. What does Lisa Green’s research caution against? A. The lack of optimism in modern culture. B. The social pressure to find positive meaning in all suffering. C. The tendency to overvalue negative life experiences. D. The rejection of traditional narrative structures. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第四段：“hearing about the power of ‘redemptive stories’ can pressure people into finding positive angles on terrible events. Western culture already pushes individuals to look for the ‘silver lining behind every cloud.’”（听到“拯救性故事”的力量会迫使人们在可怕事件中寻找积极角度。西方文化已经在迫使人们“在每片乌云背后寻找一线希望”。）Green警示的是“在所有痛苦中寻找积极意义的社会压力”，B项正确。A项“现代文化缺乏乐观”与“pushes people to look for silver lining”相反；C项“过度重视负面经历”与Green批评的“强制乐观”相反；D项“拒绝传统叙事结构”文中未涉及。 33. What does the author suggest about changing one‘s life story? A. It should be done only with professional help. B. It requires following widely accepted cultural patterns. C. It should be driven by personal authenticity, not external pressure. D. It is impossible for people who have experienced trauma. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解与推理题。末段：“The goal is not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one’s own. This requires the courage to resist cultural scripts that demand constant optimism”（目标不是产生一个符合文化期望的故事，而是创作一个让自己感到真实的故事。这需要勇气抵制要求不断乐观的文化剧本）。作者明确主张：改变人生故事应由个人真实性驱动，而非外部压力，C项正确。A项“只能由专业人士协助”文中未提及；B项“需遵循公认的文化模式”与“resist cultural scripts”相反；D项“受过创伤的人无法改变故事”与第四段“we can learn to change our own stories”矛盾。 34. What is the passage mainly about? A. How cultural expectations shape our sense of identity. B. How to balance personal authenticity with cultural pressure in self-narration. C. Why Western culture promotes toxic positivity. D. How psychologists disagree on the nature of identity. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。文章前半部分介绍Johnson的life story模型及其积极价值（一致的故事增强身份认同）；中间引入Green的警示（文化压力强迫人们寻找积极意义）；末段给出平衡方案——“not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one‘s own”（不产生符合文化期望的故事，而是创作真实属于自己的故事）。全文主线是：如何在自我叙事中平衡个人真实性与文化压力，B项准确概括。A项“文化期望如何塑造身份认同”——这仅是中间段的局部内容；C项“西方文化为何推动有毒的乐观主义”——文中未解释“为何”，仅描述现象；D项“心理学家如何在身份本质上存在分歧”——Johnson与Green的分歧是例证而非全文主线。 Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） Artificial intelligence has achieved what once seemed impossible: machines can now compose music, paint pictures, and even write poetry that moves human audiences. Yet a troubling question emerges: when a machine creates something beautiful, what does this reveal about human creativity? Consider the case of “the algorithm that paints like Rembrandt.” After analyzing thousands of Rembrandt‘s works, an AI system generated a new portrait in the master’s style. To the untrained eye, it is indistinguishable from an original. But art historians argue that something essential is missing—the intention, the struggle, the lived experience that shaped every brushstroke of the real Rembrandt. The AI mimics style; it does not embody the life behind it. This distinction between style and essence runs through all creative domains. Hemingway‘s prose is recognizable not because of a formula, but because it reflects a particular way of seeing the world—shaped by his experiences in war, in Paris, in the Cuban sea. No algorithm, however sophisticated, can replicate the suffering and joy that gave rise to his spare, powerful sentences. This is not to deny the value of AI-generated art. It can be beautiful, surprising, and thought-provoking. But it forces us to confront a question we have long avoided: what do we value in human creativity? Is it merely the product—the painting, the poem, the symphony—or is it the human story embedded in the act of creation? Perhaps the answer is that we value both, but for different reasons. We value the product for its aesthetic qualities; we value the process because it connects us to another human mind. When we admire a poem, we are not just admiring words—we are admiring the courage it took to write them, the vulnerability they reveal, the insight they offer into another soul. This is something no machine can provide, because machines have no souls to reveal. And this, in the end, may be the deepest argument for why human creativity will always matter. 31. According to the passage, art historians criticize AI-generated Rembrandt-style portraits because ________. A. the AI system was not trained on enough original works B. the portraits lack the artist‘s lived experience and intention C. the technology is too expensive for most museums D. the portraits are easily distinguishable as fakes 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段：“art historians argue that something essential is missing—the intention, the struggle, the lived experience that shaped every brushstroke of the real Rembrandt. The AI mimics style; it does not embody the life behind it.”（艺术史学家认为缺少了本质性的东西——塑造伦勃朗每一笔的意图、挣扎和生活经历。AI模仿风格，但没有体现背后的生命。）B项“缺乏艺术家的生活经历和意图”为原文同义替换。A项“训练不足”文中未提及；C项“技术太昂贵”文中未涉及；D项“容易辨认出是赝品”——原文说“indistinguishable from an original”（与原作无法区分），恰恰相反。 32. What does the author mean by “style and essence” in Paragraph 3? A. The difference between artistic technique and emotional depth. B. The distinction between classical and modern art forms. C. The relationship between art and technology. D. The contrast between professional and amateur creativity. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义/概念理解题。第三段以海明威为例：“Hemingway‘s prose is recognizable not because of a formula, but because it reflects a particular way of seeing the world—shaped by his experiences”（海明威的散文可被辨认不是因为公式，而是因为它反映了看待世界的特定方式——由他的经历塑造）。“style”指可模仿的技术形式（如语言风格、绘画笔法），“essence”指形式背后的情感深度和生命体验。A项“艺术技巧与情感深度的区别”最准确。B项“古典与现代艺术形式”——不相关；C项“艺术与技术的关系”——过于宽泛；D项“专业与业余创造力的对比”——文中未涉及。 33. What does the author imply about the value of AI-generated art? A. It has no artistic value at all. B. It can be aesthetically valuable but lacks human depth. C. It will eventually surpass human creativity. D. It should be banned from museums and galleries. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段：“This is not to deny the value of AI-generated art. It can be beautiful, surprising, and thought-provoking.”（这不是否认AI生成艺术的价值。它可以是美丽的、令人惊讶的、发人深省的。）但随后指出它缺少“the human story embedded in the act of creation”（创作行为中蕴含的人类故事）。末段进一步区分：“we value the product for its aesthetic qualities; we value the process because it connects us to another human mind”（我们因审美品质而珍视产品；我们因过程连接了另一个人类心智而珍视过程）。因此作者暗示：AI艺术有审美价值，但缺乏人性深度，B项正确。A项“完全没有艺术价值”与“not to deny”相反；C项“最终超越人类创造力”文中未提及，且末句“human creativity will always matter”暗示相反；D项“应被博物馆禁止”文中无此主张。 34. Which of the following best states the author‘s conclusion? A. AI-generated art threatens the survival of human artists. B. Human creativity is valuable precisely because of the human story behind it. C. Technology should be restricted in creative fields. D. The quality of art should be judged solely by its aesthetic appeal. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨/结论题。末段结论：“we value the process because it connects us to another human mind...This is something no machine can provide, because machines have no souls to reveal. And this, in the end, may be the deepest argument for why human creativity will always matter.”（我们因过程连接了另一个人类心智而珍视它……这是机器无法提供的，因为机器没有灵魂可揭示。而这最终可能是人类创造力永远重要的最深层论据。）B项“人类创造力之所以有价值，正是因为它背后的人类故事”为原文总结。A项“AI艺术威胁人类艺术家生存”——文中未讨论“威胁”问题；C项“技术应在创意领域受到限制”——文中承认AI艺术的价值；D项“艺术质量应仅以审美吸引力判断”——与“human story”的强调相反。 Passage 6 （石景山区2026年二模·改编） Time has always been measured by human-made systems—sundials, hourglasses, mechanical clocks. But the experience of time is far more subjective than these devices suggest. An hour waiting for news can feel eternal; an hour in good company can pass in a flash. This familiar observation points to a deeper truth: our relationship with time is as much psychological as it is physical. Phil$ 专题04 阅读理解D 篇（说明文）内容导览 考情概览：摸清命题规律，锁定复习重点 2026真题研析：拆解最新真题，示范分析路径 3年真题精练：精练近年真题，吃透常见考法 最新模拟探源：跟进模拟新题，预判考查风向 区别于C篇“社会议论+科学说明”轮换，北京D篇主打高阶深度文本，两大固定考向，紧扣新课标“人与自我、人与社会、人与自然”三大语境，侧重学术思辨与人文深度探究，是高考批判性思维核心载体。 考向一：深度人文社会思辨议论文（高频压轴） 题材：社会现象反思、认知思维重构、文化价值思辨、教育理念革新、人类行为心理探究；特点：观点辩证、立场隐晦、无绝对对错、侧重作者隐性态度与思辨逻辑，反对片面评判。 考向二：前沿学术科研深度说明文（难点压轴） 题材：前沿认知科学、社会实验研究、人文社科调研、科技伦理探究、行为科学新发现；特点：科研逻辑复杂、新旧观点对冲、实验辩证分析、结论开放、侧重梳理科研脉络与深层启示。 年份 试卷类型 D篇原文主题 归属考向 核心考查题型 考查要点总结 2026 北京卷 探究现代数字时代“注意力碎片化危机”，剖析注意力稀缺的社会成因、个体危害，提出主动管控注意力的深度人文思辨 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 细节推理1道 + 观点态度1道 + 深层主旨1道 + 写作意图1道 推导注意力流失的深层社会诱因、辨析作者批判与建构的双重立场、拆解“问题—危害—对策”高阶议论架构、精准提炼文本人文育人主旨、区分表层现象与深层本质、把握隐性写作目的 2025 北京卷 围绕“创造性借鉴与原创边界”展开深度思辨，打破“绝对原创”误区，论证借鉴、重构、创新的辩证关系 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 例证推理1道 + 词义思辨1道 + 主旨归纳1道 + 作者立场1道 辨析事例与核心论点的逻辑关联、结合语境破解抽象思辨词汇、推翻大众固有认知、推导作者辩证中立的价值立场、梳理否定误区—建构新认知的完整议论逻辑 2024 北京卷 依托社会行为学对照实验，探究人类“利他行为与自我价值”的内在关联，解析利他行为的心理机制与社会意义 考向二 前沿学术科研说明类 实验细节推理1道 + 因果推演1道 + 科研主旨1道 + 启示推断1道 精准梳理实验变量与研究逻辑、推导实验现象背后的深层心理成因、区分传统认知与科研新结论、归纳科研成果的社会价值、提炼文本客观严谨的学术基调与现实启示 2023 北京卷 深度反思现代社会“功利化速成思维”，批判急功近利的社会心态，阐释长期深耕、延迟价值的人生与社会意义 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 深层推理2道 + 写作手法1道 + 升华主旨1道 挖掘社会功利心态的核心危害、推断作者隐性批判与价值倡导、辨析文本对比论证的写作手法、突破表层文意提炼人生思辨主旨、把握文本人文反思与价值引领的核心立意 作为阅读板块压轴篇目，D 篇承接 C 篇思维爬坡层级，是全卷区分度最高的题型，以高阶批判性思辨为核心命题导向，严格遵循 A-D 由浅入深的难度梯度排布中国网教育...。全篇词数控制在 430—480 词，固定 4 道单选题、满分 8 分，长难句嵌套密集，熟词生义、抽象思辨词汇占比显著高于前三篇，语言难度全面升级。 文体以人文思辨议论文为主，交替穿插前沿社科研究说明文，紧扣新课标三大主题语境。2026 年选材围绕传统传承与创新突破的辩证关系展开，借助隐喻手法探讨创新边界与理性探索的价值，将中华传统守正创新思想融入英文语篇，兼具人文底蕴与时代思考，落实立德树人育人目标中国网教育...。 题型排布固定：细节推理 1 道、作者态度 1 道、篇章主旨 1 道、写作意图 1 道，几乎无原文原句照搬的浅层细节题，所有题目均需整合段落逻辑推导作答。命题侧重区分大众固有认知与作者辩证观点，规避绝对化表述，着重考查考生梳理 “提出误区 — 辩证剖析 — 提炼启示” 完整行文脉络的能力。 整体命题立足核心素养，顺应人工智能时代人才选拔需求，重点考查 AI 难以替代的价值判断、逻辑思辨能力，引导考生跳出表层信息阅读，学会客观审视社会议题，既精准测评英语语言功底，又实现思维品质与文化意识的双重培育新京报。 考向：深度人文社会议论类 2026年高考英语北京卷阅读理解D篇 The 21st century has created a whole range of new types of professionals that we have never had before — or if not quite new, at least newly repackaged. The world has always had influential people, for instance, but only now do we have "Influencer". Similarly, the corporate world has certainly known its fair share of disruption, yet it is only in the last couple of decades that the "Disruptor" has become a recognisable figure in the way we talk about big business. In an earlier era, the Disruptor would have been called an Innovator. Yet while an Innovator creates something new, the Disruptor is defined as much by what they destroy as by what they create. The Disruptor forces change; the clean-up is somebody else's problem. It's an attitude best summed up as "Move fast and break things." Back in 1929, G. K. Chesterton identified the core problem with moving fast and breaking things through a thought experiment. Imagine there is a fence along a road. Suppose it's been there a long time, and was put there for some purpose. But that purpose is lost over time. To us, now, the fence seems to be nothing but an impediment. Why not remove it? When faced with such a fence, Chesterton thinks the fact that we can't see the point of the fence is why we should not tear it down. Some fences keep foxes out of henhouses, for instance. If you think you can do without the fence because you've never seen a fox, consider if the existence of the fence is precisely why you've never seen one. Importantly, Chesterton is not saying that things can never be reformed. His is a preventive principle rather than an outright prohibition. We could rephrase it like this: understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them. If we're too impetuous, we can end up tearing out things we don't yet realise we rely upon. But uncritical devotion to the "way things are done" can also deny us the possibility of better days. What is required, then, is not the fearlessness of the Disruptor, but the humility to stop and ask questions and to know that our own perspective is neither unique nor comprehensive. Disruption can be a force for good. It can also just leave a big mess. We need the ability to work out which messes are worth avoiding — because however impressively fast you move, some things can't be easily unbroken. 第31题 Regarding Chesterton's principle, the author is ________. A. Supportive B. doubtful C. conflicted D. disappointed 第32题 What does the word "impetuous" underlined in Paragraph 5 most probably mean? A. Short-sighted B. Narrow-minded C. Hot-headed D. Old-fashioned 第33题 What can we infer from this passage about the Disruptor? A. They may clear up other people's mess. B. They are in favour of the preventive principle. C. They preserve more traditions than they break. D. They may create more problems than they solve. 第34题 What does the author intend to tell us? A. Humility should be a driving force for human progress. B. Innovation should move forward the wheel of tradition. C. Reform should draw from the wellspring of past wisdom. D. Disruption should be given priority in social development. 【技巧点拨】 一、态度题要找“评价标志词” 态度题切忌凭感觉，必须锁定作者对核心对象的直接评价。本文中，作者用“Importantly”引出对Chesterton原则的正面阐释，用“rather than”排除误解，末段用“not...but...”结构表明自己的主张与Chesterton一致——这都是“支持”态度的明确证据。若文中出现转折（but/however）、让步（although）、强调（indeed/importantly），其后的内容往往是态度核心。 二、词义题要“左顾右盼” 生词的含义不在单词本身，而在其语境逻辑。impetuous出现在“If we're too X, we can end up doing Y”的条件结构中，Y是负面结果，X就是导致该结果的原因；往前看有“before you reject”中的before，暗示“跳过事前理解”的冒失行为；往后看有“stop and ask questions”作为对立面。由此可确定是“急躁冲动”。记住：四个选项若有三项指向“人的品质缺陷”，需根据因果、对比、解释三种逻辑关系精确定位。 三、推理题要“差之毫厘，谬以千里” 推断题答案往往是原文信息的合理延伸，而非重复。第33题中，D项“制造问题多于解决问题”就是从“clean-up is somebody else's problem”和“leave a big mess”综合推出的深层含义。而A项（清理别人烂摊子）恰恰是原文的反面，属于“反向干扰”；C项“保留传统多”原文从未提及，属于“无中生有”。推理时，严格以原文为起点，只推一步，绝不脑补。 【深度人文社会思辨议论文】 Passage 1 2025 年普通高等学校招生全国统一考试（北京卷）阅读 D 篇 主题：人与自我・人生叙事与自我认同（心理学人文思辨） The call to “know yourself” has been there since ancient times, but our sense of self doesn’t always match what others perceive. Considering the stories we tell about ourselves can help us to change our minds for better. For many years, psychologists saw identity as a combination of someone’s values, beliefs, goals and social roles. Then, in the 1980s, Bob Johnson created the life story model of identity, in which he proposes that, as we go through life, these core features are built in our memories to create a personal story through which we understand our lives. Our life story is something that starts coming together in our teenage years, when we begin to organise our lives into chapters around key events or life changes, and begin to see ourselves as both the central character and, to a varying extent, the story’s author. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. Johnson has also investigated the link between well-being and certain story themes. He discovered that whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important factor. Those who believe they shaped their own past experiences usually enjoy higher mental health. However, psychologist Lisa Green reminds us that rigid life stories can also hold us back. If we stick firmly to a fixed narrative about who we are, we may refuse to accept new experiences that could help us grow. Our past does not have to lock our future. Green argues that we can rewrite our personal stories gently instead of completely abandoning them. Total rejection of past memories will cut us off from our identity roots, while tiny, gradual adjustments allow us to adapt to life changes without losing ourselves. At its heart, the life story theory tells us: we are not merely victims of our past experiences. We are the ongoing writers of our own life tales. 31. What is the main topic of the passage? A. How self-identity is shaped by personal life stories B. How professional storytellers construct narrative works C. How personal memories raise doubts about the past D. How time sequence changes people’s life schedules 32. What benefit will people get from consistent life stories? A. They can completely ignore others’ opinions. B. They gain clearer life purpose and higher satisfaction. C. They are free from all life troubles and pressure. D. They can control all unexpected life events. 33. Why does Lisa Green warn against rigid personal narratives? A. They will damage people’s childhood memories totally. B. They prevent individuals from growing through new experiences. C. They make people misunderstand their past achievements. D. They cause people to lose interest in telling life stories. 34. What is the author’s attitude towards rewriting life stories? A. Strongly opposed B. Doubtful and uncertain C. Cautiously supportive D. Totally indifferent Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（同源命题：传统与创新辩证思辨） 主题：人与社会・守正与创新的理性边界（哲学思辨议论文） Nowadays, the idea of “disruptive innovation” has swept across society. Many young people believe that meaningful progress can only be achieved by breaking down old rules, abandoning traditional systems and overturning established norms. Radical reform is widely praised, while sticking to tradition is easily labeled conservative and backward. Yet the British philosopher G.K. Chesterton put forward the famous “fence principle” to remind us to think twice before tearing down existing traditions. Chesterton used a vivid metaphor: suppose you see a fence built across a country road, blocking the path. Anyone eager for convenience will want to pull it down immediately. But a wise person will first ask: Why was this fence built here in the first place? The fence must have been set up to solve certain hidden problems — to stop wild animals rushing into villages, to prevent cars from falling off cliffs, or to protect fragile farmland. Without figuring out the original purpose of the fence, tearing it down blindly will only bring new troubles instead of progress. This principle perfectly applies to social traditions and old institutions. Every lasting social custom, moral norm and cultural tradition has gradually formed after long-term social practice, to balance the interests of different groups and maintain social stability. Those who advocate total disruption often only see the slight imperfections of traditions, ignoring the protective functions they have served for generations. That does not mean we should preserve everything old without change. Blind conservatism is equally harmful. Some outdated rules can no longer adapt to modern social development and need proper adjustment. The wise choice lies in a middle ground: fully understand the value and original function of traditions first, then carry out targeted innovation and revision on the basis of inheritance. We should remove the outdated parts while preserving the valuable core, rather than choosing total destruction or rigid conservation. Progress never comes from extreme choices. True innovation is rooted in rational inheritance, not reckless overturning. 31. What is the purpose of mentioning the popular “disruptive innovation” at the beginning? A. To prove radical reform always leads to social progress B. To introduce the background for explaining the fence principle C. To criticize all young people’s ideas about social development D. To list various successful cases of breaking old traditions 32. What does the “fence” in Chesterton’s metaphor stand for? A. Unnecessary barriers on rural roads B. Temporary measures for traffic management C. Long-standing social traditions and old norms D. Artificial obstacles designed to limit freedom 33. What is the author’s opinion on tradition and innovation? A. We must keep all traditions unchanged forever B. Total destruction of traditions is the only way to innovate C. Understand traditions first, then innovate selectively based on inheritance D. Modern society needs no traditional norms any longer 34. Which word best describes the author’s writing tone? A. Biased B. Radical C. Objective and dialectical D. Pessimistic Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（人文思辨：幸福感与人生意义辩证） 主题：人与自我・幸福感与生命意义的取舍思辨 For decades, positive psychology has centered its research on happiness. Countless books, online courses and lifestyle guides teach people how to chase pleasure, avoid negative emotions and maximize daily comfort. The mainstream view holds that a happy life equals a fulfilling life. However, a growing number of psychologists have begun to draw a clear line between happiness and meaning, arguing that the two are not identical, and pursuing them brings totally different life experiences. Happiness refers to short-term pleasant feelings gained from satisfying personal desires: delicious food, relaxing leisure time, material comforts and easy daily routines. It is passive and easy to disappear once external favorable conditions fade away. People who only pursue happiness tend to avoid hardships, challenges and painful experiences, for suffering will directly destroy their sense of pleasure. A life with meaning, by contrast, focuses on long-term value creation rather than instant pleasure. It comes from devoting oneself to a goal beyond personal interests: caring for family, contributing to communities, pursuing lifelong hobbies or taking social responsibilities. The pursuit of meaning often includes unavoidable hardship, tiredness and setbacks. A volunteer helping poor children may feel exhausted and stressed every day, yet he still gains a strong sense of life worth that temporary happiness cannot provide. Neither pursuit is perfect. A life full of mere happiness lacks inner depth and will easily fall into emptiness when pleasures end. A life totally devoted to pursuing meaning may bring too much pressure and neglect personal physical and mental relaxation. The ideal life does not choose one over the other, but strikes a healthy balance between instant joy and long-term spiritual value. Chasing happiness satisfies our immediate needs, while seeking meaning anchors our soul. Only combining both can we live a complete and fulfilling life. 31. What is the passage mainly about? A. The methods psychologists use to study positive emotions B. The differences and balanced relationship between happiness and life meaning C. Various ways for modern people to get rid of negative feelings D. The reasons why short-term pleasure is hard to last long 32. Which of the following belongs to the source of pure happiness? A. Devoting spare time to community volunteer services B. Sticking to academic research for public benefits C. Enjoying a comfortable weekend vacation at home D. Persisting in public welfare work for disadvantaged groups 33. What can we infer about pursuing life meaning? A. It never involves any painful experiences or pressure B. It offers lasting inner value beyond temporary pleasure C. It can be easily achieved without any efforts D. It is totally useless for people’s mental health 34. What is the author’s suggestion for a fulfilling life? A. Put instant happiness above everything else B. Give up personal pleasure to pursue meaning completely C. Keep a proper balance between happiness and life meaning D. Ignore both pleasure and spiritual value in daily life 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 2023 年北京高考英语真题・阅读理解 D 篇 主题：人与自然・前沿生命科学：人工生命科研探究（基础生物学 + 哲学思辨科研说明文） What is life? Like most great questions, this one is easy to ask but difficult to answer. The reason is simple: we know of just one type of life—the kind that exists on Earth—and it’s challenging to develop a general theory of life when you have only one example to study. For decades, biologists have struggled to pin down a clear definition shared by all scientists. In recent years, a new field called artificial life (ALife) has arisen to solve this puzzle. Unlike traditional biology, which studies existing living creatures, ALife researchers aim to create entirely new forms of life inside computers or physical machines, so they can test what essential features make something alive. If scientists can build artificial life that behaves and evolves like natural life, they will finally figure out the universal rules governing all life forms. Early ALife experiments began with simple digital organisms in the 1990s. These virtual creatures could eat digital food, reproduce and mutate inside computer programs. They gradually adapted to digital environments through generations of evolution, just like plants and animals on Earth. At first, many scientists regarded these digital creations merely as computer simulations, not real life. They argued that digital beings lacked physical bodies and organic cells, which were essential markers of true life. Yet modern ALife studies have blurred this boundary greatly. Today’s researchers have constructed cell-like physical structures with chemical materials that can grow, split and pass down chemical information to offspring. These physical artificial systems show all core biological traits of natural life. Meanwhile, debates never stop. Some scholars warn that ALife cannot fully copy the complexity of Earth’s billions-year-old life system; artificial creations are always simplified versions with hidden limits. Others worry about potential risks if highly evolved artificial life gets out of human control. The value of artificial life research lies not only in defining life itself. It helps us rethink the origin of life on Earth, search for possible life on other planets, and even inspire new designs for medical robots and sustainable materials. Though a perfect definition of life remains beyond our reach, ALife keeps pushing human science forward step by step. 31. Why is it hard for scientists to define life clearly? A. Life on Earth has too many diverse species B. Humans only know terrestrial life as the single sample C. Traditional biology refuses to study living creatures D. Digital organisms have replaced natural life gradually 32. What is the main goal of artificial life research? A. To produce advanced medical robots for clinical use B. To replace all natural creatures with digital life forms C. To discover universal fundamental rules of life D. To eliminate all risks brought by biological evolution 33. What was the early scientists’ attitude toward 1990s digital ALife creations? A. Fully accepted as real living life B. Doubtful and refused to recognize them as true life C. Excited about their perfect biological complexity D. Worried about their threat to human society 34. What can we learn about modern ALife from the passage? A. It has completely solved the definition puzzle of life B. Physical artificial cell systems own key features of natural life C. All scholars agree on the safety and value of ALife research D. It can help humans find life on other planets immediately Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿环境科研：微塑料饮用水污染治理研究） 主题：人与自然・环境科学：微塑料污染去除方法对比科研报告 Microplastics, tiny plastic fragments smaller than 5 millimeters, have become a widespread global environmental crisis over the past two decades. These tiny particles invade soil, oceans, air and even daily drinking water. Multiple global surveys confirm that adults and children unintentionally consume dozens of thousands of microplastic particles every year, which may cause potential damage to human digestive and immune systems. For a long time, environmental scientists believed that ordinary household drinking methods could hardly remove microplastics from tap water efficiently. In 2024, a research team composed of Chinese environmental scientists published a series of controlled experiments on drinking water microplastic removal. The team divided tap water samples from 67 regions worldwide into three experimental groups. Group 1 drank raw tap water directly; Group 2 boiled tap water for 5 minutes then drank it hot; Group 3 boiled water for 5 minutes, cooled it down completely and filtered it simply with ordinary household filter cloth before drinking. Researchers counted remaining microplastic particles in each group and recorded final data. The experimental outcomes were striking. Direct drinking kept nearly all microplastics in water. Simply boiling water only removed about 35% of microplastics. However, boiling followed by cooling and simple household filtering eliminated around 84% of microplastic particles in tap water. The scientific explanation lies in calcium carbonate precipitation: boiling changes water chemical properties, solid calcium carbonate forms during cooling, and these solid sediments wrap microplastics and carry them to the bottom of containers, so filtering can easily separate the bundled microplastics out. The research has brought practical guidance for ordinary families, yet scientists also remind the public of the study’s limitations. The method works well for common tap water, but its effect declines obviously for heavily polluted industrial wastewater. Besides, this household solution cannot cut off microplastic sources fundamentally. Reducing global plastic production and waste discharge remains the essential long-term way to solve microplastic pollution thoroughly. Rather than relying on expensive high-end water purifiers blindly, people can adopt this low-cost daily drinking habit to lower microplastic intake effectively, based on solid scientific experimental evidence. 31. What was the traditional belief about removing microplastics from tap water? A. Household ways could hardly get rid of microplastics efficiently B. Boiling water alone could clear most microplastic particles C. Simple cloth filtering was the most effective household method D. Microplastics in tap water would not harm human bodies 32. Which group achieved the best microplastic removal effect in the experiment? A. Group 1 B. Group 2 C. Group 3 D. All groups had equal effects 33. What is the scientific principle behind boiling-cooling-filtering method? A. High temperature directly burns and decomposes plastic fragments B. Calcium carbonate sediments bind microplastics for separation C. Filters can dissolve tiny plastic particles completely D. Cooling process makes microplastics evaporate into the air 34. What is the author’s attitude toward this household drinking method? A. Totally useless and unreliable B. Effective temporarily but not a fundamental solution C. Able to solve global plastic pollution thoroughly D. Far inferior to expensive professional water purifiers Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿认知心理学科研：多任务并行对大脑专注力的影响） 主题：人与自我・脑科学：碎片化多任务处理损害专注力的长期追踪研究 Modern digital life has turned simultaneous multitasking into a daily routine for most teenagers: chatting on social apps while doing homework, watching short videos during meals, and replying to messages while reading articles. Many young people take pride in their ability to handle several tasks at once, assuming multitasking improves brain efficiency and time-management skills. This popular view has dominated public understanding for over 20 years. Cognitive neuroscientists launched a 10-year longitudinal tracking study to test the real influence of habitual multitasking on human brains. Researchers selected over 2,000 adolescents aged 13 to 16 and divided them into two cohorts. The high-multitasking group regularly switched between digital tasks every few minutes; the low-multitasking group focused on one single task each time without frequent interruption. Scientists scanned participants’ brain regions related to attention and memory yearly, and carried out standardized concentration tests. After ten years of continuous observation, the research drew clear contrary conclusions. Those who kept frequent multitasking for years showed thinner cerebral cortex in the prefrontal lobe—the brain area responsible for sustained focus and deep thinking. They performed much worse on long reading, logical reasoning and deep memory tests. In contrast, participants who stuck to single-task focus maintained stronger sustained attention and better cognitive flexibility when facing complex intellectual challenges. Neurologists further explained the brain mechanism: every time people switch tasks rapidly, the brain has to restart cognitive processing repeatedly, which gradually wears down the brain’s focus muscle over time. However, the research does not advocate absolute rejection of temporary multitasking. Occasional quick task switching brings no lasting harm; the damage only comes from lifelong habitual fragmented attention. The study offers a vital reminder for young generations: digital convenience should not be exchanged for our core cognitive ability. Building the habit of sustained single-task focus is essential for long-term brain development and academic growth. 31. What is the common public opinion about multitasking before the study? A. It weakens people’s ability to concentrate deeply B. It helps raise work efficiency and time management capacity C. It causes permanent damage to teenagers’ brain structure D. It is only suitable for simple physical daily work 32. How did researchers carry out the cognitive study? A. By collecting short-term online questionnaires from adults B. By observing two groups of teenagers for a decade with brain scans C. By testing elderly people’s memory under multitasking situations D. By comparing different teaching methods in middle schools 33. Why does habitual frequent multitasking harm brain sustained attention? A. Task switching makes the brain repeatedly restart cognitive work and consume focus capacity B. Digital screen radiation directly destroys the prefrontal lobe nerve cells C. Multitasking forces the brain to store too much useless information D. The brain cannot finish more than two tasks within one day naturally 34. Which statement would the author most probably agree with? A. We must never switch between different tasks in daily life B. Temporary occasional multitasking will severely damage brain cognition C. Forming sustained single-task focus benefits teenagers’ long-term brain growth D. Modern digital life makes single-task concentration impossible nowadays 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） For millennia, we have expected dogs to guard our property and protect our family at night. Now they are also asked to be friendly around strangers, rest quietly through the night and keep their feet off sofas. “It’s an evolutionary mismatch,” says Hare, an anthropologist at Duke University. The good news is that this problem is solvable. Recent studies indicate that selective breeding and careful training can help dogs adapt to indoor life. A “puppy kindergarten” research was set up by Hare’s team to illustrate the heritability of behavioural traits in dogs by observing what service dogs’ behaviour looks like before intensive training begins. Service dogs were selected as the subject for they can always naturally adapt well to the mismatch compared to other kinds. They can pull wheelchairs, operate light switches and interact gently with children. By collecting data from 1,500 dog owners on the behaviour of their pets, which belonged to 36 breeds, Hare’s team discovered that genetics explained 45 percent of the variation in dogs’ self-control, 16 percent of the variation in reasoning about the physical world, and a mere 0.01 percent of the variation in short-term memory—which manifests that some desirable behaviours are heritable to certain degree, and selective breeding for temperament is worthwhile. “Genetics is important, but its relative importance is different for different behavioural traits,” says Gitanjali from Emory University. Besides, Hare’s work also illustrates selective breeding can’t guarantee some highly desirable traits, such as a good memory. So they have devised techniques that owners can use to help train their pets and build better relationships with them. One habit that is especially important in training is making eye contact. “The dog’s gaze may be a causal factor in inducing good feelings in the owner,” says Kikusui at Azabu University in Japan, “and the longer a dog gazes at its owner, the stronger those good feelings become.” Hare also found that pups could solve some “impossible tasks” by appealing to human for help, and the appeal was made through eye contact. So he suggested puppy owners finish “impossible tasks” with their pets every two weeks to strengthen the emotional connection with them. “Doing so can help you learn where your dog’s cognitive strengths lie,” he says. And as the puppy kindergarten project has made clear, dog training as well as selective breeding is crucial to foster those behaviours we would like our pets to exhibit in our homes. 31. What can we learn from Hare‘s research? A. Service dogs were observed while accepting intensive training. B. Genetics may explain differences in dogs’ self-control ability. C. Service dogs were chosen for they were trained from an early age. D. Selective breeding can guarantee all desirable behavioural traits. 32. What is the author’s purpose in quoting Gitanjali‘s words? A. To reveal the limitations of Hare’s research methods. B. To suggest that factors beyond genetics also need consideration. C. To prove that selective breeding is of little practical value. D. To emphasize that genetics determines all behavioural traits. 33. What is the best title for the passage? A. Service Dogs: Acquiring Desirable Traits through Breeding Alone B. Smart Dogs: Adapting Well to Indoor Life through Training C. Good Dogs: Evolving through Selective Breeding and Training D. Modern Dogs: Training through Eye Contact with Owners 34. What does the author suggest dog owners do according to the passage? A. Avoid giving dogs tasks that are too difficult to solve. B. Choose breeds based primarily on memory capability. C. Engage in interactive tasks regularly to strengthen bonding. D. Focus exclusively on genetic testing before adopting a dog. Passage 2 （朝阳区2026年一模·改编） Whether artists or scientists, investigators strike out from what is known to brave the unknown in acts of creative discovery. Think of artists and scientists as users of three modes of discovery: knowing, seeing, and telling. We are all seeking knowledge—epistemologists who question what we think we know, how we come to know it, and whether we can prove what we think we know. Meanwhile, we are all seers—aestheticists who confront what we perceive in natural and created appearances. Finally, we are all tellers and listeners—narrativists who tell about what we have found and listen to the findings of others. The epistemologist‘s attention to knowing resonated in physicist Andrea Califano’s precision-medicine discoveries in cancer biology. His philosopher-physicist mind is the creative ground to discover new treatments for cancer. “A lot of ideas end up being very, very simple-minded in hindsight. But it‘s very difficult to foresee whether simple-minded ideas will work in the end. There’s nothing magical about what we do. It‘s just that nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way,” said Califano. The aestheticists want to face the material world with all the capacities of the human to see and imagine. Tissue engineer Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic exposed the creative powers of aesthetics in the practice of a scientist. It was the novel Alexandria Quartet that gave her the idea of her work as “sliding planes”: “Each of the sliding planes is a body of knowledge. Then they travel past each other, and somehow connect with each other. There were three sliding planes that are three different characters’ perspectives. And then the fourth plane was the time. That is how the book was constructed, I believe, and this is how we do science.” Knowing and seeing require connections between the internal world of the seer or knower, the external world of the seeable and knowable, and the world of witnesses who receive what becomes seen or known. These connections, what I call “telling”, are achieved through narrative acts like speech. It creates a network, bridging from person to person. Nabila El-Bassel, an international leader in studying the most hard-to-deal-with global health problems, confirmed the necessity of listening to all “telling” voices. El-Bassel and her teams are listeners of their subjects’ lived experiences, making sure that suffering individuals are heard and valued. Recognising the fundamental roles of epistemology, aesthetics, and narrative studies is essential to fully understanding the creative process—whether in a laboratory or a studio. 31. According to the passage, the three modes of discovery are ________. A. knowing, creating, and evaluating B. seeing, telling, and listening C. knowing, seeing, and telling D. questioning, perceiving, and narrating 32. What can be inferred about Andrea Califano‘s approach to cancer research? A. He relies on magical thinking to generate new ideas. B. He values the ability to question established assumptions. C. He believes simple-minded ideas are always ineffective. D. He prioritizes practical applications over theoretical inquiry. 33. The example of Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic is used to illustrate ________. A. how literature can inspire scientific creativity B. how aestheticists ignore practical concerns C. how scientists avoid using artistic methods D. how novels are superior to scientific papers 34. What does the author imply about “telling” in the last paragraph? A. It is less important than knowing and seeing. B. It connects individual perspectives into a shared understanding. C. It only occurs in formal scientific publications. D. It is a passive process of receiving information. Passage 3 （西城区2026年二模·改编） What is life? Like most great questions this one is easy to ask but difficult to answer. The reason is simple: we know of just one type of life and it’s challenging to do science with a sample size of one. The field of artificial life—called ALife for short—is the systematic attempt to spell out life‘s fundamental principles. Many of these practitioners, so-called ALifers, think that somehow making life is the surest way to really understand what life is. So far no one has convincingly made artificial life. This track record makes ALife a ripe target for criticism, such as declarations of the field’s doubtful scientific value. Alan Smith, a complexity scientist, is tired of such complaints. Asking about “the point” of ALife might be, well, missing the point entirely, he says. “The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything.” Alan says. “Some people ask me, ‘So what‘s the worth of artificial life?’ Do you ever think, ‘What is the worth of your grandmother?’” As much as many ALifers hate emphasizing their research’s applications, the attempts to create artificial life could have practical payoffs. Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution. This is the capacity for a system to create essentially endless complexity, to be a sort of “novelty generator”. The only system known to exhibit this is Earth‘s biosphere. If the field of ALife manages to reproduce life’s endless “creativity” in some virtual model, those same principles could give rise to truly inventive machines. Compared with the developments of AI, advances in ALife are harder to recognize. One reason is that ALife is a field in which the central concept—life itself—is undefined. The lack of agreement among ALifers doesn‘t help either. The result is a diverse line of projects that each advance along their unique paths. For better or worse, ALife mirrors the very subject it studies. Its muddled progression is a striking parallel to the evolutionary struggles that have shaped Earth’s biosphere. Undefined and uncontrolled, ALife drives its followers to repurpose old ideas and generate novelty. It may be, of course, that these characteristics aren‘t in any way surprising or singular. They may apply universally to all acts of evolution. Ultimately ALife may be nothing special. But even this dismissal suggests something: perhaps, just like life itself throughout the universe, the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable. 31. Regarding Alan Smith’s defence of ALife, the author is ________. A. Supportive B. puzzled C. unconcerned D. doubtful 32. What does the word “enamored” underlined in Paragraph 3 most probably mean? A. Shocked. B. Protected. C. Attracted. D. Challenged. 33. What can we learn from this passage? A. ALife holds the key to human future. B. ALife and AI share a common feature. C. AI mirrors the developments of ALife. D. AI speeds up the process of human evolution. 34. Which would be the best title for the passage? A. Life Is Undefined. Can AI Be a Way Out? B. Life Evolves. Can AI Help ALife Evolve, Too? C. Life Is Undefined. Can ALife Be Defined One Day? D. Life Evolves. Can Attempts to Create ALife Evolve, Too? Passage 4 （东城区2026年二模·改编） Cracks are very common in concrete structures due to various chemical and physical phenomena that occur during everyday use. And tiny cracks can be quite harmful because they provide an easy route in for liquids and gases—and the harmful substances they might contain. For instance, micro-cracks can allow water and oxygen to infiltrate and then corrode the steel reinforcement, leading to structural failure. Continuous maintenance and repair work is difficult because it usually requires an enormous amount of labor and investment. Scientists have been trying to figure out how these harmful cracks could heal themselves without human intervention. The idea was originally inspired by the amazing ability of the human body to heal itself of cuts, bruises and broken bones. A person takes in nutrients which the body uses to produce new substitutes to heal damaged tissues. In the same way, can we provide necessary products to concrete to fill in cracks when damage happens? Through long-time research, scientists have found an unusual candidate to help concrete heal itself: a fungus called T. reesei. It is found that as calcium hydroxide from concrete dissolved in water, the pH of the fungal growth medium increased from a close-to-neutral original value of 6.5 all the way to a very alkaline 13.0. Of all the fungi tested, only T. reesei could survive this environment. Despite the drastic pH increase, its spores germinated into threadlike hyphal mycelium and grew equally well with or without concrete. Scientists propose including fungal spores, together with nutrients, during the initial mixing process when building a new concrete structure. When the inevitable cracking occurs and water finds its way in, the dormant fungal spores will germinate. As they grow, they’ll work as a catalyst within the calcium-rich conditions of the concrete to promote precipitation of calcium carbonate crystals. These mineral deposits can fill in the cracks. When the cracks are completely caulked and no more water can enter, the fungi will again form spores. If cracks form again and environmental conditions become favorable, the spores could wake up and repeat the process. T. reesei is eco-friendly, posing no known risk to human health. In fact T. reesei has a long history of safe use in industrial-scale production of carbohydrase enzymes, such as cellulase, which plays an important role in fermentation processes during winemaking. Of course, researchers will need to conduct a thorough assessment to investigate any possible immediate and long-term effects on the environment and human health prior to its use as a healing agent in concrete infrastructure. 31. According to the passage, tiny cracks in concrete structures may lead to ________. A. reduced labor costs for maintenance B. the complete failure of steel reinforcement C. improved resistance to chemical substances D. the immediate collapse of the entire building 32. What inspired scientists to look for self-healing concrete? A. The high cost of concrete production. B. The natural healing process of human body. C. The discovery of a new type of fungus. D. The chemical properties of calcium hydroxide. 33. What makes T. reesei suitable for self-healing concrete? A. It can survive in highly alkaline environments. B. It produces large amounts of calcium hydroxide. C. It grows only in the absence of water. D. It is sensitive to changes in temperature. 34. What is the author‘s attitude towards using T. reesei in concrete infrastructure? A. Fully confident about its immediate application. B. Cautiously optimistic with necessary precautions. C. Strongly opposed due to potential health risks. D. Indifferent about its environmental impact. Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） Arif Pujianto couldn‘t sleep. When dawn broke, the area where he lives on the low-lying Pari Island in Indonesia was damaged. Eventually, he decided to do something about it. He filed a lawsuit against cement manufacturer Holcim. At first sight, this might seem unreasonable. After all, the company has no operations in Indonesia and is headquartered 12,000 kilometres from Pari, in Switzerland. Yet Pujianto’s case is on top of a wave of lawsuits supported by innovative climate attribution models. Computer simulations have been the backbone of climate science since the 1960s. Scientists run them to predict how the planet will warm as the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere increases. But climate models can be put to another use if they are run in a slightly different way. The idea is to simulate counterfactual scenarios and compare them with how things really turned out. How would the world look if we had left fossil fuels which we consumed in the ground, for example? Climate scientists have spent decades using this technique to figure out the consequences of carbon emissions, in a field that is broadly called attribution science. Climate models can be extremely complex and often require supercomputers to run. But two advances have started to change that. One is the development of “reduced complexity” climate models. Instead of modelling Earth‘s precise physical, chemical and biological processes, these simpler models simulate them on average, which reduces processing power. The second advance boils down to innovations in the way we account for emissions and join the links in the causal chain between emissions and harms. That includes, for example, smarter ways of differentiating between historical emissions. A gigatonne of carbon emitted today, when oceans are more acidic, has different consequences to a gigatonne of carbon emitted in 1850. In 2022, climate scientists Christopher Callahan at Indiana University and Justin Mankin at Dartmouth College put these two advances together to create an end-to-end climate attribution model, one that stretches from the individual packets of emissions, perhaps from a single company, all the way to the effects of climate change on a community. Mankin is aware that the research may be used in court and pursuing climate action through climate lawsuits may be necessary. A proper test of how attribution science holds up in court in these “polluter-pays” cases hasn‘t yet taken place. But such a test may not be too far off, says Noah Walker-Crawford, a legal advisor, especially given how many fresh cases are starting to come before judges. If a precedent is set by even a single successful polluter-pays case, it could open the floodgates to a huge number of similar claims. In each case, the individual damages demanded may be relatively small, but it could, nonetheless, be significant. 31. What can be inferred about the climate attribution model? A. It can simulate a world without carbon emissions. B. It predicts the exact timeline of future extreme weather events. C. It has shifted its primary aim from science to legal advocacy. D. It requires less computing power than traditional climate models. 32. Regarding the future of “polluter-pays” cases, the author is ________. A. worried about their increasing number B. cautiously optimistic about their potential C. strongly opposed to their legal basis D. indifferent to their outcome 33. What does the author mainly do in this passage? A. Anticipate a novel trend in climate litigation. B. Illustrate the historical development of computer simulations. C. Criticize the scientific validity of climate models. D. Defend the cement manufacturer against the lawsuit. 34. What does the underlined phrase “open the floodgates” in the last paragraph most probably mean? A. Start a massive flow of similar legal claims. B. Release a large amount of scientific data. C. Prevent further environmental damage. D. Simplify the court procedures for lawsuits. Passage 6 （石景山区2026年一模·改编） The call to “know yourself” has been there since ancient times, but our sense of self doesn‘t always match what others perceive. Considering the stories we tell about ourselves can help us to change our minds for better. For many years, psychologists saw identity as a combination of someone’s values, beliefs, goals and social roles. Then, in the 1980s, Bob Johnson created the life story model of identity, in which he proposes that, as we go through life, these core features are built in with our memories to create a personal story through which we understand our lives. Our life story is something that starts coming together in our teenage years, when we begin to organise our lives into chapters around key events or life changes, and begin to see ourselves as both the central character and, to a varying extent, the story‘s author. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. Johnson has also investigated the link between well-being and certain story themes. He discovered that whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important predictor of a person’s mental health. Another key theme involves finding some kind of positive meaning after stressful events. The good news is that there is evidence we can learn to change our own story. Lisa Green, another researcher, sounds a few notes of caution. For instance, hearing about the power of redemptive stories, many people may feel forced to find a positive angle on horrible events. She says that Western culture already pushes people to look for the silver lining behind every cloud. If you want to turn over a new leaf, though, one top tip is that it helps to choose a significant date that signals the start of a new “chapter”. So, whether your goal is saving money or getting fit, there is no better time to become the author of our own destiny. 31. According to Johnson‘s research, a consistent personal story is associated with ________. A. stronger sense of identity and higher life satisfaction B. greater ability to memorize past events accurately C. more willingness to accept others’ opinions D. higher likelihood of experiencing stressful events 32. What does Lisa Green caution against? A. Overemphasizing positive interpretations of all negative events. B. Ignoring the importance of life story consistency. C. Rejecting Western cultural values in self-perception. D. Abandoning the search for meaning in life. 33. The underlined phrase “turn over a new leaf” in the last paragraph is closest in meaning to ________. A. change one’s behavior or life in a positive way B. recall important events from the past C. write a completely new autobiography D. accept the unchangeable aspects of life 34. What is the passage mainly about? A. How life stories shape our identity and well-being. B. How psychologists disagree on the nature of identity. C. How Western culture influences personal narratives. D. How to write an effective autobiography. Passage 7 （通州区2026年一模·改编） The field of artificial life—ALife for short—has long been a target of criticism. Its practitioners try to create life from scratch, yet so far no one has convincingly succeeded. Critics declare the field‘s scientific value doubtful. But Alan Smith, a complexity scientist, argues that asking about “the point” of ALife might be missing the point entirely. “The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything,” he says. Despite the critics, ALife research may have practical payoffs. Artificial intelligence is often considered ALife’s cousin. Researchers in both fields share a fascination with a concept called open-ended evolution—the capacity for a system to generate endless novelty. Earth‘s biosphere is the only known system that exhibits this. If ALife can reproduce life’s creativity in virtual models, the same principles might give rise to truly inventive machines. However, advances in ALife are harder to recognize than those in AI. One reason is that ALife‘s central concept—life itself—remains undefined. The lack of consensus among ALifers adds to the confusion. The result is a diverse range of projects proceeding along their own paths. Interestingly, ALife mirrors its subject: its messy progression parallels the evolutionary struggles that shaped the biosphere. Some researchers argue that ALife’s undefined and uncontrollable nature is not a weakness but a strength. It forces practitioners to repurpose old ideas and generate novelty. These characteristics may apply universally to all acts of evolution. Perhaps ALife is nothing special. But even that dismissal suggests something: like life itself across the universe, the emergence of ALife may prove inevitable. 31. What is Alan Smith‘s attitude towards ALife critics? A. He completely agrees with their concerns. B. He finds their criticism misguided. C. He believes the critics are not harsh enough. D. He thinks the criticism is valuable for improvement. 32. What do ALife and AI have in common according to the passage? A. Both have achieved equally remarkable advances. B. Both focus on creating practical applications. C. Both share interest in open-ended evolution. D. Both have clearly defined core concepts. 33. The word “consensus” in Paragraph 3 is closest in meaning to ________. A. general agreement among a group B. intense competition between researchers C. detailed description of a theory D. widespread criticism of a field 34. Which of the following best expresses the author‘s conclusion about ALife? A. ALife is doomed to fail due to its undefined nature. B. ALife’s rise may be as unavoidable as life itself. C. ALife will eventually be replaced by AI. D. ALife‘s practical applications are its only value. Passage 8 （大兴区2026年二模·改编） Creative discovery, whether in art or science, involves venturing from the known into the unknown. This process can be understood through three interconnected modes: knowing, seeing, and telling. The mode of knowing is epistemological—it questions what we think we know, how we come to know it, and whether we can prove it. Physicist Andrea Califano exemplifies this in his cancer research. His philosopher-physicist mindset led him to challenge established assumptions, resulting in new precision-medicine approaches. “There‘s nothing magical about what we do. It’s just that nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way,” he explains. The mode of seeing is aesthetic—it confronts the material world with human capacities for observation and imagination. Tissue engineer Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic drew inspiration from a novel‘s structure: the book used multiple “sliding planes” representing different characters’ perspectives, with time as the fourth plane. She adopted this framework for her scientific work, showing how aesthetic experience can shape scientific thinking. The mode of telling connects the internal world of the discoverer with the external world of the discoverable, and with the audience who receives the discovery. This is achieved through narrative—speech, writing, and other forms of communication. Researcher Nabila El-Bassel emphasizes listening to the voices of those affected by global health crises, ensuring their experiences are heard and valued. For her, telling is not one-way transmission but a network of mutual understanding. These three modes do not operate in isolation. They interact and reinforce each other. Knowing without seeing may be abstract; seeing without telling may remain private; telling without knowing may lack substance. True creative discovery requires the integration of all three. 31. According to the passage, the three modes of discovery are ________. A. independent and unrelated to each other B. hierarchical, with knowing as the most important C. interconnected and mutually reinforcing D. only applicable to scientific research 32. The example of Gordana Vunjak-Novakovic is used to demonstrate ________. A. how literature can directly cure diseases B. how aesthetic experience can inform scientific thinking C. how scientists should avoid artistic influences D. how novels are more important than scientific papers 33. What does Nabila El-Bassel‘s work illustrate about the mode of “telling”? A. Telling should be a one-way transmission of expert knowledge. B. Telling requires a network of listening and mutual understanding. C. Telling is less important than knowing and seeing. D. Telling only applies to global health research. 34. What is the best title for this passage? A. The Integration of Knowing, Seeing, and Telling in Discovery B. The Superiority of Scientific Method over Artistic Intuition C. How to Become a Successful Cancer Researcher D. The History of Epistemology in Western Philosophy 【深度人文社会思辨议论类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） Meritocracy—the idea that success is earned through talent and effort—has become the defining ideology of our time. We are told that our destiny is in our own hands, that we can achieve whatever we set our minds to. Yet this seemingly empowering belief carries a dark side. Michael Sandel argues that the meritocratic ideal has become a source of resentment and humiliation. Those who succeed believe their success is entirely their own doing, and therefore feel entitled to look down upon those who struggle. Conversely, those who fail internalize their failure as a personal deficiency. The result is a society that has lost the capacity for solidarity—we find it increasingly difficult to see ourselves as sharing a common fate with others. Sandel points to the role of luck in all human achievement. The circumstances of our birth, the talents we happen to possess, the opportunities that come our way—none of these are things we have earned. To claim full credit for our success is to ignore the vast lottery of life that placed us where we are. The successful often fail to recognize that their achievements are, in significant measure, gifts of fortune. Critics of Sandel argue that his critique undermines personal responsibility and the incentive to work hard. If success is largely a matter of luck, why strive at all? Sandel’s response is that recognizing the role of luck does not diminish the value of effort; it simply calls for humility. When we acknowledge that we are not solely responsible for our success, we become more open to sharing our good fortune with others and to reforming the conditions that make success so unevenly distributed. What makes the meritocratic ideal so tenacious is its moral appeal—it seems fairer than any alternative. But Sandel suggests that fairness alone is not enough. A healthy society requires citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate. This is not a call to abandon striving, but to temper it with gratitude and generosity. 31. According to the passage, what is the “dark side” of meritocracy? A. It discourages people from setting high goals for themselves. B. It makes successful people less sympathetic toward others. C. It denies the importance of personal effort and talent. D. It promotes competition at the expense of cooperation. 32. Why does Sandel emphasize the role of luck in human achievement? A. To prove that success is entirely undeserved. B. To encourage greater humility and generosity in society. C. To argue against the value of hard work. D. To justify redistributing all wealth equally. 33. What can be inferred about Sandel‘s critics? A. They believe his theory may reduce motivation for hard work. B. They agree that luck plays a role in personal success. C. They propose alternative explanations for social inequality. D. They support stronger government intervention in education. 34. Which of the following best expresses the author‘s conclusion about meritocracy? A. It should be abandoned entirely as an outdated idea. B. It remains valuable but needs to be tempered with humility. C. It is superior to all alternative social systems. D. It has no impact on how people view themselves. Passage 2 （西城区2026年一模·改编） Tolerance is widely celebrated as a cornerstone of liberal democracy. Yet philosophers have long recognized a troubling paradox: if a society is tolerant of everything, it must also tolerate the intolerant. And the intolerant, given the opportunity, will destroy tolerance itself. This is known as the paradox of tolerance, most famously articulated by Karl Popper. Popper argued that unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend tolerance even to those who are intolerant, and if we do not defend tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed and tolerance with them. The paradox suggests that in the name of preserving tolerance, we may be justified in being intolerant toward the intolerant. But who decides who counts as “intolerant”? This is where the paradox becomes politically charged. In practice, the designation “intolerant” is often applied to those whose views are merely unpopular or uncomfortable. Historically, this label has been used to silence dissent, suppress minority voices, and consolidate power. The very principle meant to protect open debate can, in the wrong hands, become a tool for shutting it down. This suggests that the paradox of tolerance is not a neat logical puzzle with a single solution. Rather, it is a perennial challenge that requires judgment, context, and humility. There are no easy rules for drawing the line between legitimate dissent and intolerable intolerance. Societies must navigate this tension with an awareness of their own fallibility—always ready to re-examine their own decisions. The deeper lesson may be that tolerance is not a passive stance but an active practice. It requires constant vigilance, not only against the intolerant but also against our own tendency to label dissent as intolerance when it makes us uncomfortable. True tolerance, paradoxically, demands the courage to tolerate disagreement while having the wisdom to recognize genuine threats. 31. What is the paradox of tolerance? A. Tolerance requires being intolerant toward certain groups. B. Tolerance inevitably leads to social chaos. C. Tolerance makes people less willing to compromise. D. Tolerance is a concept only found in Western philosophy. 32. The author mentions the difficulty of defining “intolerant” primarily to ________. A. suggest that the paradox has no practical significance B. illustrate how the principle can be misused politically C. prove that tolerance is an outdated concept D. recommend abandoning the paradox altogether 33. Which word best describes the author‘s attitude toward the paradox of tolerance? A. Dismissive. B. Ambivalent. C. Pessimistic. D. Optimistic. 34. What is the main idea of the passage? A. Tolerance is a fragile value that requires active defense and self-reflection. B. The paradox of tolerance proves that Western philosophy is self-contradictory. C. Societies should tolerate all views without exception. D. The intolerant should always be given equal rights. Passage 3 （东城区2026年一模·改编） The moral virtues praised by societies around the world—courage, honesty, cooperation, humility—show remarkable similarity. This observation has led some to argue for universal moral principles that transcend cultural boundaries. Others, however, insist that morality is fundamentally shaped by local conditions and traditions, and that no single moral framework can claim superiority over another. The debate between universalism and relativism is not merely academic. It has profound implications for how we understand human rights, international law, and cross-cultural dialogue. Universalists argue that certain practices—torture, slavery, genocide—are wrong regardless of cultural context. Relativists counter that what appears to be “wrong” from one cultural perspective may be justified by the unique historical circumstances and social needs of another. Consider the case of the Inuit peoples of the Canadian Arctic, whose moral code was shaped by the unforgiving environment in which they lived. Leadership, marriage, and interactions with other groups were loosely governed by tradition. Conflict was resolved through music or duels; angry quarrels were strongly discouraged because they could lead to chaos. The Inuit’s practical approach to morality made good sense given the demands of life in the far north. Yet does this mean that their moral code is merely a product of environment, or does it reveal something deeper about human social needs? Recent research in evolutionary psychology suggests that the similarity of moral virtues across cultures is striking, though the relative importance of various virtues may vary with a group’s history and environment. Cooperation, humility, and courage are nearly universally praised, while cruelty and deception are universally condemned. These norms long predate any moralizing religion or written law. They are rooted instead in the similarity of basic human needs and our shared mechanisms for learning and problem-solving. This suggests that morality has both universal and particular dimensions. The basic architecture of moral reasoning—the need for cooperation, the aversion to harm, the desire for belonging—appears to be part of our evolved human nature. But the specific content of moral codes, the particular rules and taboos, are shaped by local conditions. Understanding this dual nature may help us navigate cultural differences with both humility and conviction. 31. According to the passage, what is the central issue in the universalism-relativism debate? A. Whether moral codes are influenced by religion. B. Whether moral principles apply across all cultures or vary by context. C. Whether human nature is inherently good or evil. D. Whether traditional societies have moral codes at all. 32. Why does the author cite the Inuit example? A. To prove that environment determines all aspects of morality. B. To show that moral codes can adapt to specific living conditions. C. To argue that traditional societies lack universal moral values. D. To demonstrate that evolutionary psychology is unreliable. 33. What does the author suggest about the relationship between universal and particular moral dimensions? A. They are fundamentally incompatible. B. Universal principles should always override local traditions. C. Both exist and interact in shaping moral codes. D. Particular dimensions are more important for modern societies. 34. Which would be the best title for the passage? A. Morality: Universal Roots, Local Branches B. Relativism: A Threat to Global Justice C. Inuit Wisdom: How Environment Shapes Ethics D. Evolutionary Psychology: The Science of Right and Wrong Passage 4 （朝阳区2026年二模·改编） The call to “know yourself” is ancient, but our self-perception often diverges from how others see us. Psychologist Bob Johnson’s life story model of identity offers a compelling framework: as we go through life, our values, beliefs, and goals merge with memories to create a personal narrative through which we understand ourselves. Our life story begins to cohere in adolescence, when we organize our lives into chapters around key events. People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity and greater life satisfaction. Johnson also found that whether someone describes having had control over past events predicts mental health; finding positive meaning after stress is another key theme. The good news is that we can learn to change our own stories. But here lies a cultural trap. Researcher Lisa Green cautions that hearing about the power of “redemptive stories” can pressure people into finding positive angles on terrible events. Western culture already pushes individuals to look for the “silver lining behind every cloud.” This cultural expectation—what some call “toxic positivity”—can invalidate genuine suffering. When people feel they must reframe trauma as growth, their actual experience of pain is denied legitimacy. The healthy approach, then, is not to reject narrative change but to embrace it on one‘s own terms. The goal is not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one’s own. This requires the courage to resist cultural scripts that demand constant optimism, and the wisdom to recognize that not all stories need a happy ending—at least not immediately. Contrary to popular doubt, choosing a significant date—like a birthday or New Year‘s Day—can effectively signal the start of a new “chapter.” But the chapter’s content must be self-determined. The true author of one‘s destiny writes not to please an audience, but to live with integrity. 31. According to Johnson’s research, which of the following contributes to mental health? A. Having a life story that is entirely factual. B. Perceiving oneself as having control over past events. C. Avoiding any reflection on negative experiences. D. Conforming to others‘ expectations of one’s life story. 32. What does Lisa Green’s research caution against? A. The lack of optimism in modern culture. B. The social pressure to find positive meaning in all suffering. C. The tendency to overvalue negative life experiences. D. The rejection of traditional narrative structures. 33. What does the author suggest about changing one‘s life story? A. It should be done only with professional help. B. It requires following widely accepted cultural patterns. C. It should be driven by personal authenticity, not external pressure. D. It is impossible for people who have experienced trauma. 34. What is the passage mainly about? A. How cultural expectations shape our sense of identity. B. How to balance personal authenticity with cultural pressure in self-narration. C. Why Western culture promotes toxic positivity. D. How psychologists disagree on the nature of identity. Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） Artificial intelligence has achieved what once seemed impossible: machines can now compose music, paint pictures, and even write poetry that moves human audiences. Yet a troubling question emerges: when a machine creates something beautiful, what does this reveal about human creativity? Consider the case of “the algorithm that paints like Rembrandt.” After analyzing thousands of Rembrandt‘s works, an AI system generated a new portrait in the master’s style. To the untrained eye, it is indistinguishable from an original. But art historians argue that something essential is missing—the intention, the struggle, the lived experience that shaped every brushstroke of the real Rembrandt. The AI mimics style; it does not embody the life behind it. This distinction between style and essence runs through all creative domains. Hemingway‘s prose is recognizable not because of a formula, but because it reflects a particular way of seeing the world—shaped by his experiences in war, in Paris, in the Cuban sea. No algorithm, however sophisticated, can replicate the suffering and joy that gave rise to his spare, powerful sentences. This is not to deny the value of AI-generated art. It can be beautiful, surprising, and thought-provoking. But it forces us to confront a question we have long avoided: what do we value in human creativity? Is it merely the product—the painting, the poem, the symphony—or is it the human story embedded in the act of creation? Perhaps the answer is that we value both, but for different reasons. We value the product for its aesthetic qualities; we value the process because it connects us to another human mind. When we admire a poem, we are not just admiring words—we are admiring the courage it took to write them, the vulnerability they reveal, the insight they offer into another soul. This is something no machine can provide, because machines have no souls to reveal. And this, in the end, may be the deepest argument for why human creativity will always matter. 31. According to the passage, art historians criticize AI-generated Rembrandt-style portraits because ________. A. the AI system was not trained on enough original works B. the portraits lack the artist‘s lived experience and intention C. the technology is too expensive for most museums D. the portraits are easily distinguishable as fakes 32. What does the author mean by “style and essence” in Paragraph 3? A. The difference between artistic technique and emotional depth. B. The distinction between classical and modern art forms. C. The relationship between art and technology. D. The contrast between professional and amateur creativity. 33. What does the author imply about the value of AI-generated art? A. It has no artistic value at all. B. It can be aesthetically valuable but lacks human depth. C. It will eventually surpass human creativity. D. It should be banned from museums and galleries. 34. Which of the following best states the author‘s conclusion? A. AI-generated art threatens the survival of human artists. B. Human creativity is valuable precisely because of the human story behind it. C. Technology should be restricted in creative fields. D. The quality of art should be judged solely by its aesthetic appeal. Passage 6 （石景山区2026年二模·改编） Time has always been measured by human-made systems—sundials, hourglasses, mechanical clocks. But the experience of time is far more subjective than these devices suggest. An hour waiting for news can feel eternal; an hour in good company can pass in a flash. This familiar observation points to a deeper truth: our relationship with time is as much psychological as it is physical. Philosophers have long distinguished between chronos—clock time, measurable and uniform—and kairos—the qualitative, opportune moment that carries significance beyond its duration. The ancient Greeks recognized that these two forms of time coexist, yet modern life has become almost exclusively governed by chronos. We organize our days around schedules, plan our futures with calendars, and judge our productivity by the hour. In doing so, we may be losing touch with kairos—the moments that give life its meaning. Recent studies in psychology suggest that our perception of time is shaped by memory. Novel experiences seem to stretch time because they create more memories; routine experiences compress time because they leave fewer traces. This explains why childhood feels so long—everything was new—and why adulthood often feels like it races by. It also suggests that we can, to some extent, slow down time by cultivating new experiences and breaking routines. But there is a paradox here. The pursuit of more time—more productivity, more efficiency, more output—can paradoxically make time feel more scarce. When we measure every moment against some external standard of productivity, we create a sense of constant shortage. The solution, some suggest, is not to manage time more efficiently but to attend to it more mindfully—to be present in the moment rather than always looking ahead to the next task. Perhaps the deepest insight is this: time is not something we have; it is something we are. Our lives are not just measured in years; they are constituted by the moments we inhabit. To live well is not merely to fill time, but to be fully present within it. 31. What is the distinction between chronos and kairos according to the passage? A. Chronos is about quality; kairos is about quantity. B. Chronos is measurable time; kairos is meaningful moments. C. Chronos is modern; kairos is ancient. D. Chronos is objective; kairos is imaginary. 32. According to the passage, why does childhood feel longer than adulthood? A. Because adults have fewer responsibilities. B. Because childhood experiences are more novel and memorable. C. Because children measure time differently. D. Because adults have better memory skills. 33. What paradox about time does the author identify in Paragraph 4? A. Trying to save time can make it feel more scarce. B. More time leads to less productivity. C. Time is both physical and psychological. D. The past is longer than the future. 34. What is the author‘s main message about time? A. We should stop measuring time altogether. B. Life is constituted by the moments we inhabit. C. Technology has improved our experience of time. D. Time management is the key to happiness. Passage 7 （通州区2026年一模·改编） The pursuit of happiness has become a dominant cultural narrative. Self-help books promise fulfillment, positive psychology offers techniques for well-being, and social media displays curated images of joyful lives. Yet beneath this celebration of happiness lies a less comfortable truth: the constant pressure to be happy may itself be making us unhappy. This is what some researchers call the “happiness paradox.” When people believe they should be happy and evaluate their lives against this expectation, the gap between reality and aspiration can generate anxiety and dissatisfaction. Those who most strongly value happiness as a goal tend to experience lower well-being—not because they are less capable of joy, but because their relentless pursuit of it leaves little room for the ordinary, the painful, and the ambiguous experiences that constitute a full life. Cross-cultural studies reveal that the relationship between happiness and well-being is not universal. In East Asian cultures, where happiness is seen as something that emerges naturally from social harmony rather than a goal to be actively pursued, people report lower pressure to feel happy and, paradoxically, often experience higher life satisfaction. The Western emphasis on individual happiness as a personal achievement creates a burden that Eastern collectivism, with its focus on relational well-being, tends to avoid. This is not to argue that happiness is unimportant. Positive emotions have real benefits for health, relationships, and resilience. The issue is the mandate to be happy—the cultural expectation that happiness is not just desirable but obligatory. When happiness becomes a duty, its pursuit turns from liberation into surveillance. We begin to police our own emotions, judging sadness as a failure rather than as a natural human response. The deeper insight may be that a meaningful life is not one that maximizes happiness but one that embraces the full spectrum of human emotions. Joy matters, but so does grief, so does anger, so does the quiet contentment that requires no celebration. To live fully is to accept that life’s beauty includes its sorrows, and that the pursuit of happiness, taken too seriously, may be the very thing that keeps us from it. 31. What is the “happiness paradox” described in the passage? A. People who seek happiness most intensely often feel less satisfied. B. Happy people tend to be more anxious about the future. C. Wealth does not guarantee happiness. D. Happiness is impossible to define scientifically. 32. According to the passage, how does East Asian culture differ from Western culture regarding happiness? A. It views happiness as an individual achievement. B. It sees happiness as arising from social harmony. C. It rejects happiness as a goal entirely. D. It promotes emotional suppression in all contexts. 33. The word “mandate” in Paragraph 4 is closest in meaning to ________. A. freedom B. opportunity C. obligation D. tradition 34. What is the author‘s final conclusion about happiness? A. Happiness is the ultimate goal of human life. B. A meaningful life embraces both positive and negative emotions. C. Western culture has the best approach to happiness. D. People should stop using the word “happiness.” Passage 8 （大兴区2026年二模·改编） Across human societies, certain moral emotions appear universal: we feel disgust at cruelty, admiration for courage, anger at injustice. These responses are so immediate that they seem instinctive, woven into our biological nature. Yet the specific rules that govern behavior vary dramatically—what is considered honorable in one culture may be shameful in another. This tension between universal moral emotions and particular moral codes has puzzled thinkers for centuries. Charles Darwin was among the first to suggest that moral instincts evolved through natural selection, because groups that cooperated outcompeted those that did not. More recently, evolutionary psychologists have argued that our moral emotions are products of adaptations designed to solve recurrent problems of social living—how to cooperate, when to punish cheaters, whom to trust. The case of the Inuit provides a fascinating window into this interplay. In the harsh Canadian Arctic, the Inuit developed practical moral norms adapted to their environment. Dishonest and violent behavior was disapproved; leadership and interactions with other groups were loosely governed by tradition; conflict was resolved through music or duels; angry quarrels were strongly discouraged because they led to chaos. These norms made excellent sense given the demands of survival in an unforgiving land. But does this mean that Inuit morality is purely a product of environment? The evidence suggests otherwise. While the content of the norms varies, the underlying structure of moral reasoning—the categories of what counts as a virtue or a vice—remains remarkably consistent across cultures. Cooperation, humility, and courage are nearly universally praised; cruelty and deception are condemned wherever humans live. This suggests a dual inheritance model: we possess a biological capacity for moral learning that shapes which behaviors we find rewarding or aversive, but the specific content of what we learn is shaped by local conditions and traditions. Morality is neither purely innate nor purely cultural—it is the product of an evolved mind encountering a diverse world. Understanding this may help us approach cultural differences with both respect for their distinctiveness and recognition of our shared humanity. 31. According to the passage, why did Darwin believe moral instincts evolved? A. Because individuals who were kind lived longer. B. Because cooperative groups had survival advantages. C. Because moral rules were divinely revealed. D. Because all societies adopted the same rules. 32. The author mentions the Inuit example to ________. A. show how environment can shape specific moral norms B. prove that moral emotions are the same everywhere C. argue that the Inuit have no moral code D. demonstrate that tradition is irrelevant to morality 33. What does the “dual inheritance model” described in the last paragraph suggest? A. Morality is either purely biological or purely cultural. B. Our moral capacity is innate, but its content is shaped by culture. C. Cultural traditions are more important than biological instincts. D. Evolutionary psychology has proven Darwin wrong. 34. Which of the following best states the author‘s overall conclusion? A. Morality is primarily a product of cultural tradition. B. Human morality reflects both universal human nature and local adaptation. C. Cultural differences in morality are merely superficial. D. Evolutionary theories of morality are fundamentally flawed. 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 学科网（北京）股份有限公司4 / 13 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $ 专题04 阅读理解D 篇（说明文）内容导览 考情概览：摸清命题规律，锁定复习重点 2026真题研析：拆解最新真题，示范分析路径 3年真题精练：精练近年真题，吃透常见考法 最新模拟探源：跟进模拟新题，预判考查风向 区别于C篇“社会议论+科学说明”轮换，北京D篇主打高阶深度文本，两大固定考向，紧扣新课标“人与自我、人与社会、人与自然”三大语境，侧重学术思辨与人文深度探究，是高考批判性思维核心载体。 考向一：深度人文社会思辨议论文（高频压轴） 题材：社会现象反思、认知思维重构、文化价值思辨、教育理念革新、人类行为心理探究；特点：观点辩证、立场隐晦、无绝对对错、侧重作者隐性态度与思辨逻辑，反对片面评判。 考向二：前沿学术科研深度说明文（难点压轴） 题材：前沿认知科学、社会实验研究、人文社科调研、科技伦理探究、行为科学新发现；特点：科研逻辑复杂、新旧观点对冲、实验辩证分析、结论开放、侧重梳理科研脉络与深层启示。 年份 试卷类型 D篇原文主题 归属考向 核心考查题型 考查要点总结 2026 北京卷 探究现代数字时代“注意力碎片化危机”，剖析注意力稀缺的社会成因、个体危害，提出主动管控注意力的深度人文思辨 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 细节推理1道 + 观点态度1道 + 深层主旨1道 + 写作意图1道 推导注意力流失的深层社会诱因、辨析作者批判与建构的双重立场、拆解“问题—危害—对策”高阶议论架构、精准提炼文本人文育人主旨、区分表层现象与深层本质、把握隐性写作目的 2025 北京卷 围绕“创造性借鉴与原创边界”展开深度思辨，打破“绝对原创”误区，论证借鉴、重构、创新的辩证关系 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 例证推理1道 + 词义思辨1道 + 主旨归纳1道 + 作者立场1道 辨析事例与核心论点的逻辑关联、结合语境破解抽象思辨词汇、推翻大众固有认知、推导作者辩证中立的价值立场、梳理否定误区—建构新认知的完整议论逻辑 2024 北京卷 依托社会行为学对照实验，探究人类“利他行为与自我价值”的内在关联，解析利他行为的心理机制与社会意义 考向二 前沿学术科研说明类 实验细节推理1道 + 因果推演1道 + 科研主旨1道 + 启示推断1道 精准梳理实验变量与研究逻辑、推导实验现象背后的深层心理成因、区分传统认知与科研新结论、归纳科研成果的社会价值、提炼文本客观严谨的学术基调与现实启示 2023 北京卷 深度反思现代社会“功利化速成思维”，批判急功近利的社会心态，阐释长期深耕、延迟价值的人生与社会意义 考向一 深度人文社会思辨议论类 深层推理2道 + 写作手法1道 + 升华主旨1道 挖掘社会功利心态的核心危害、推断作者隐性批判与价值倡导、辨析文本对比论证的写作手法、突破表层文意提炼人生思辨主旨、把握文本人文反思与价值引领的核心立意 作为阅读板块压轴篇目，D 篇承接 C 篇思维爬坡层级，是全卷区分度最高的题型，以高阶批判性思辨为核心命题导向，严格遵循 A-D 由浅入深的难度梯度排布中国网教育...。全篇词数控制在 430—480 词，固定 4 道单选题、满分 8 分，长难句嵌套密集，熟词生义、抽象思辨词汇占比显著高于前三篇，语言难度全面升级。 文体以人文思辨议论文为主，交替穿插前沿社科研究说明文，紧扣新课标三大主题语境。2026 年选材围绕传统传承与创新突破的辩证关系展开，借助隐喻手法探讨创新边界与理性探索的价值，将中华传统守正创新思想融入英文语篇，兼具人文底蕴与时代思考，落实立德树人育人目标中国网教育...。 题型排布固定：细节推理 1 道、作者态度 1 道、篇章主旨 1 道、写作意图 1 道，几乎无原文原句照搬的浅层细节题，所有题目均需整合段落逻辑推导作答。命题侧重区分大众固有认知与作者辩证观点，规避绝对化表述，着重考查考生梳理 “提出误区 — 辩证剖析 — 提炼启示” 完整行文脉络的能力。 整体命题立足核心素养，顺应人工智能时代人才选拔需求，重点考查 AI 难以替代的价值判断、逻辑思辨能力，引导考生跳出表层信息阅读，学会客观审视社会议题，既精准测评英语语言功底，又实现思维品质与文化意识的双重培育新京报。 考向：深度人文社会议论类 2026年高考英语北京卷阅读理解D篇 第31题 答案：A 详细解析： 本题问的是“作者对Chesterton原则的态度”，属于作者态度题。考生容易误选C（纠结的），因为文章确实讨论了“不能盲目破坏”和“不能盲目守旧”两个方面，但这是Chesterton原则本身的辩证性，而非作者对它的态度矛盾。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位原文。 涉及Chesterton原则的描述集中在第三至第五段。Chesterton的“栅栏原则”核心主张是：正因为我们不知道栅栏当初存在的理由，才不应该贸然拆除它。 第二步：查找作者评价。 第五段第一句明确说“Importantly, Chesterton is not saying that things can never be reformed. His is a preventive principle rather than an outright prohibition.”——作者首先肯定了Chesterton不是极端保守派，他的原则是“预防性”而非“禁止性”。随后，第六段作者明确表明自己的主张：“What is required, then, is not the fearlessness of the Disruptor, but the humility to stop and ask questions...”这恰恰与Chesterton倡导的“先理解再行动”一脉相承。 第三步：结合命题意图。 官方试题评析指出，本文“将'守正创新'的思想精髓转化为可感知的成长智慧，倡导在理解传统中寻求突破的理性精神”。这正是Chesterton原则的内核——作者借用了这一原则来支撑自己的观点，态度显然是支持的。 干扰项分析： B（怀疑）：文中无任何证据表明作者对Chesterton原则持怀疑态度，恰恰相反，作者用它来论证自己的核心观点。 C（纠结）：虽然文章讨论了改革与守旧之间的张力，但这是话题本身的复杂性，不是作者对Chesterton原则态度的矛盾。 D（失望）：无文本依据。 第32题 答案：C 详细解析： 本题是词义猜测题，考查上下文推断能力。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位原句。 第五段：“If we're too impetuous, we can end up tearing out things we don't yet realise we rely upon.” 第二步：分析语境逻辑。 句子结构是“If we're too X, we can end up doing Y（如果我们太X，最终就会做Y）”，Y是“拆掉我们其实依赖的东西”——这显然是个负面后果。那么X应当是一个描述“导致冲动行为”的形容词。 往前看，前一句说“understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them”——在拒绝之前先理解。如果跳过这一步就直接动手，那就是冒失、冲动。 往后看，第六段说需要“humility to stop and ask questions（停下来提问的谦卑）”作为对立面——与“停下来提问”相反的正是“急躁冒进、不加思考就行动”。 第三步：辨析选项。 C. Hot-headed（急躁的、冲动的）：正好对应“不加思考就贸然行动”的语义，正确。 A. Short-sighted（目光短浅的）：强调缺乏远见，但上下文强调的是行动上的急躁，而非视野上的狭窄。 B. Narrow-minded（心胸狭隘的）：强调思想封闭，与上下文无关。 D. Old-fashioned（过时的）：强调守旧，恰恰与impetuous（冒进）相反。 第33题 答案：D 详细解析： 本题是推理判断题，要求根据文章信息推断Disruptor的特征。A和C与原文明显相反，B是张冠李戴。 解题步骤： 第一步：定位Disruptor的描写。 集中在第二段：“the Disruptor is defined as much by what they destroy as by what they create. The Disruptor forces change; the clean-up is somebody else's problem.” 第二步：逐项比对。 A（他们会清理别人的烂摊子）：原文明确说“clean-up is somebody else's problem”——清理是别人的事，所以他们不会清理。排除。 B（他们支持预防性原则）：Disruptor的特点是“Move fast and break things”（快速行动，打破一切），而Chesterton的预防性原则恰恰是“先理解再行动”，两者针锋相对。排除。 C（他们保留的传统比打破的多）：原文强调Disruptor“由破坏来定义”，且“Move fast and break things”——打破是他们的标志，不是说他们保留得多。排除。 D（他们可能制造的问题比解决的多）：由“destroy”“clean-up is somebody else's problem”可以合理推断——他们只管破坏，不管善后，结果自然是问题被制造出来留给别人处理。第六段更明确说“Disruption can...just leave a big mess”——可能留下一堆烂摊子。综合可推出D正确。 第34题 答案：C 详细解析： 本题是主旨大意题，也是最难的一道。需要区分A和C——两者都在文章末尾出现，但侧重点不同。 解题步骤： 第一步：整体把握文章结构。 段落 内容 功能 第1-2段 引入“Disruptor”概念，描述其特征 提出问题 第3-4段 介绍Chesterton的栅栏思想实验 提供论证工具 第5段 阐释Chesterton原则的真正含义（预防性原则） 深化论证 第6段 提出作者主张 得出结论 第二步：抓住第六段的核心主张。 第六段说需要的“不是Disruptor的无所畏惧，而是停下来提问的谦卑，并认识到自己的视角既不独特也不全面”。紧接着说“Disruption can be a force for good. It can also just leave a big mess.”——作者不是在倡导谦卑本身，而是在倡导用谦卑来指导改革：先理解，再行动。 第三步：结合第五段的关键句。 “understand the wisdom in past decisions before you reject them”——在拒绝传统之前，先理解其中的智慧。这是全文论述的落脚点。 第四步：辨析A与C。 A（谦卑应成为人类进步的驱动力）：这句话本身没错，但偏离了文章重心。文章讲的是“改革应该怎么做”，谦卑是方法，而“从过去的智慧中汲取养分”才是核心主张。 C（改革应从过去的智慧源泉中汲取养分）：精准概括了全文的论证逻辑——Chesterton的栅栏原则说明过去的选择可能有未被看到的智慧，改革前应先理解它们，这正是“从过去智慧中汲取”的含义。 官方试题评析也印证了这一点：本文“倡导在理解传统中寻求突破的理性精神”-3-6。 干扰项分析： B（创新应该推动传统的车轮）：文章强调的是“理解传统”而非“推动传统”，且“move forward the wheel”暗示一种单向推动，忽视了作者倡导的“停下来审视”。 D（破坏应在社会发展中被优先考虑）：与作者立场完全相反，作者恰恰在警示盲目优先破坏的风险。 三、文章结构与解题策略总结 本文是一篇典型的批判反思型议论文，结构如下： 引入现象（第1-2段）：Disruptor成为时代标志，其特点是“破坏大于建设” 引入反例/质疑（第3-4段）：Chesterton的栅栏思想实验——看不见栅栏的理由，恰恰是不该拆除它的理由 深化论证（第5段）：预防性原则——既不盲目破坏，也不盲目守旧 得出结论（第6段）：改革需要谦卑，理解过去智慧后再行动 考场应对建议： 主旨题看首尾段：作者最后一段的主张就是全文核心 态度题看转折词：文中“Importantly”“rather than”等词后往往是作者真实态度 推理题避免过度脑补：答案必须有文本依据，不能凭常识 词义题看上下文逻辑：impetuous的破解关键是前后句的因果关系和对比关系 【深度人文社会思辨议论文】 Passage 1 2025 年普通高等学校招生全国统一考试（北京卷）阅读 D 篇 答案：31.A 32.B 33.B 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 主旨大意题 ✅正确答案：A 篇章逻辑梳理：开篇提出 “自我认知可通过自述人生故事优化”；第二段介绍约翰逊的人生故事塑造自我认同理论；第三段讲述连贯人生叙事的积极作用；第四段辩证指出固化叙事的弊端、温和改写的必要性；结尾升华：人是自身人生故事的书写者。全文核心：人生叙事塑造自我身份认同。 干扰项拆解： B：文章未提及职业说书人，偏离人文心理学主题； C：原文没有 “记忆引发对过去质疑” 的内容； D：时间顺序、日程安排属于无中生有。 32 细节理解题 ✅正确答案：B 定位句（第三段）：People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity, and they feel their life has more meaning, direction and sense of purpose. Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too. 翻译：拥有连贯人生叙事的人自我认同感更强，拥有更清晰的人生意义、方向与目标，生活满意度更高。 干扰项拆解： A：completely ignore（完全无视）绝对化表述，原文无依据； C：free from all troubles（摆脱所有烦恼）极端错误； D：control all events（掌控所有事件）曲解原文 “拥有过往掌控感” 的含义。 33 细节推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位句（第四段）：If we stick firmly to a fixed narrative about who we are, we may refuse to accept new experiences that could help us grow. 翻译：固守固化人生叙事，会使人拒绝能够助力自身成长的全新人生体验，阻碍个人成长。 干扰项拆解： A：totally damage memories（彻底摧毁记忆）程度过重，原文只是不要全盘抛弃过往； C：误解过往成就、D：失去讲故事兴趣，均未在文中提及。 34 作者态度题 ✅正确答案：C 谨慎支持 作者立场辩证：先肯定连贯人生故事的价值，再指出僵化叙事的危害，赞同温和渐进改写人生故事（而非全盘推翻），态度审慎且支持改写行为。 词汇辨析： A 强烈反对 / B 怀疑不确定 / D 漠不关心 均不符合文本基调。 Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（同源命题：传统与创新辩证思辨） 答案：31.B 32.C 33.C 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 篇章结构推理题 ✅正确答案：B 开篇先铺垫当下社会推崇颠覆性激进创新、贬低传统的普遍思潮，以此作为背景，引出切斯特顿的栅栏原则，对极端创新观进行辩证反思，是典型北京卷 “反向铺垫引入核心论点” 结构。 干扰项： A：作者并未认可激进改革总能进步；C：criticize all 全盘批判年轻人，绝对化错误；D：无成功案例列举。 32 词义指代题（隐喻理解，北京卷高频考点） ✅正确答案：C 第二段栅栏是喻体，第三段明确将隐喻迁移至社会范畴：This principle perfectly applies to social traditions and old institutions. 栅栏指代存续已久的社会传统、道德准则与旧制度。 干扰项：A 只是表层字面含义，并非隐喻内涵；B 临时交通措施、D 限制自由的人为阻碍均曲解本意。 33 主旨态度细节题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第四段核心句：The wise choice lies in a middle ground: fully understand the value and original function of traditions first, then carry out targeted innovation and revision on the basis of inheritance. 核心要义：先读懂传统价值，在传承基础上选择性创新，不走全盘固守 / 全盘推翻两个极端。 A 全盘固守、B 彻底摧毁、D 摒弃所有传统，均属于二元极端立场，与作者折中辩证思想相悖。 34 作者语气判断题 ✅正确答案：C objective and dialectical 客观辩证 作者既反对盲目激进颠覆传统，也批判僵化保守不思变革，兼顾双方利弊，中立客观、辩证思考问题，是北京卷 D 篇标志性行文风格。 A 偏见的 / B 激进的 / D 悲观的 均不符合文本基调。 Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编题 D 篇（人文思辨：幸福感与人生意义辩证） 答案：31.B 32.C 33.B 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 主旨大意题 ✅正确答案：B 行文脉络：引出主流幸福至上观念→区分幸福感（短期愉悦）与生命意义（长期价值）各自内涵→分析二者利弊→提出平衡二者才是圆满人生。全文围绕二者差异与辩证平衡关系展开。 干扰项：A 研究方法、C 排解负面情绪、D 愉悦难以持久均为局部细节，非全文主旨。 32 细节定位题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第二段：Happiness refers to short-term pleasant feelings gained from satisfying personal desires: delicious food, relaxing leisure time, material comforts and easy daily routines. 居家舒适度假属于个人休闲愉悦，是幸福感来源；ABD 均属于超越个人利益的奉献行为，是生命意义的来源。 33 推理判断题 ✅正确答案：B 第三段点明：追求意义伴随辛劳挫折，却能获得短暂幸福无法给予的长久生命价值，对应选项表述。 干扰项：A 绝不包含痛苦、C 无需努力、D 毫无心理健康益处，均与原文内容完全相反。 34 作者建议细节题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第四段：The ideal life does not choose one over the other, but strikes a healthy balance between instant joy and long-term spiritual value. 作者核心建议：平衡即时幸福感与长远生命意义，拒绝非此即彼的极端选择。 A 优先享乐、B 彻底舍弃愉悦、D 二者全部忽视，均错误。 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 2023 年北京高考英语真题・阅读理解 D 篇 标准答案：31.B 32.C 33.B 34.B 逐题超详细解析 31 细节理解题 ✅正确答案：B 原文定位段 1：it’s challenging to develop a general theory of life when you have only one example to study（we know of just one type of life—the kind that exists on Earth） 翻译：人类只知晓地球生命这唯一生命样本，因此难以提炼普适的生命定义。 干扰项拆解： A：地球物种繁多不是定义困难原因；C：传统生物学恰恰以研究现存生物为核心，表述完全相反；D：数字生命并未取代自然生命，无中生有。 32 细节主旨题 ✅正确答案：C 定位第二段核心句：they can test what essential features make something alive...figure out the universal rules governing all life forms ALife 核心目标：探明支配所有生命形态的通用底层规律，破解生命定义难题。 干扰项： A：医疗机器人只是科研衍生价值，并非核心目标；B：彻底取代自然生命违背原文表述；D：消除进化风险属于极端错误表述。 33 态度推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第三段：At first, many scientists regarded these digital creations merely as computer simulations, not real life. 早期科学家仅将数字生命体视作电脑模拟程序，并不认可其为真正生命，持质疑否定态度。 A 全盘接纳、C 赞叹其完备复杂性、D 担忧生存威胁均不符合早期学界立场。 34 综合推理题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第四段：Today’s researchers have constructed cell-like physical structures...These physical artificial systems show all core biological traits of natural life. 现代实体人工细胞系统具备自然生命全部核心生物特征。 干扰项： A：完美生命定义仍未实现；C：学界始终存在巨大争议，并未达成共识；D：只能助力外星生命探索，无法立刻找到外星生命，程度绝对化错误。 篇章逻辑梳理 提出难题（生命难以定义）→诞生人工生命交叉学科→早期数字生命实验 + 学界质疑→现代实体生命突破 + 科研争议→总结科研多元价值与发展前景（北京卷科研文经典辩证收尾） Passage 2 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿环境科研：微塑料饮用水污染治理研究） 标准答案：31.A 32.C 33.B 34.B 逐题详细解析 31 传统观点细节题 ✅正确答案：A 定位第一段尾句：For a long time, environmental scientists believed that ordinary household drinking methods could hardly remove microplastics from tap water efficiently. 长久以来学界传统认知：普通居家饮水方式很难高效去除自来水中微塑料。 干扰项：B/C 均为新实验结论，非传统观点；D 原文明确微塑料存在健康隐患，错误。 32 实验数据细节题 ✅正确答案：C 第三段数据对比：直饮留存全部微塑料；单纯煮沸去除 35%；煮沸 + 冷却 + 简易过滤去除 84%，第三组效果最优。 33 科研原理细节题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第三段原理句：solid calcium carbonate forms during cooling, and these solid sediments wrap microplastics and carry them to the bottom of containers 碳酸钙沉淀物包裹微塑料沉降，后续过滤即可分离二者。 干扰项：A 高温无法分解塑料；C 过滤器不能溶解塑料；D 微塑料不会蒸发，均违背科学原理与原文。 34 作者辩证态度题 ✅正确答案：B 作者立场分层：居家煮沸过滤可有效减少微塑料摄入（短期有效）；但无法从源头根治塑料污染，长期治本需要削减塑料排放。态度客观辩证，契合北京卷风格。 A 完全无用、C 彻底解决全球污染、D 远不如高端净水器均片面极端。 篇章结构：环境问题背景→对照实验设计→实验数据结果 + 科学机理→研究局限 + 长远对策总结 Passage 3 2026 北京卷改编 D 篇（前沿认知心理学科研：多任务并行对大脑专注力的影响） 标准答案：31.B 32.B 33.A 34.C 逐题详细解析 31 大众传统观点题 ✅正确答案：B 第一段：assuming multitasking improves brain efficiency and time-management skills 大众普遍认为：多任务并行可以提升大脑效率、时间管理能力。 其余三项均为科研得出的新结论，并非此前大众认知。 32 实验过程细节题 ✅正确答案：B 定位第二段：a 10-year longitudinal tracking study；2000+ teens split into two groups；yearly brain scans + concentration tests 研究方式：十年长期追踪两组青少年，每年脑部扫描 + 专注力测试。 A 短期问卷、C 老年人实验、D 教学方法对比均与原文实验设计不符。 33 大脑机理推理题 ✅正确答案：A 第四段机理句：every time people switch tasks rapidly, the brain has to restart cognitive processing repeatedly, which gradually wears down the brain’s focus muscle 频繁切换任务让大脑反复重启认知流程，持续消耗专注力储备，损伤长久专注能力。 B 屏幕辐射无提及；C 储存冗余信息非原因；D 大脑单日无法处理两项任务表述绝对化错误。 34 作者观点主旨题 ✅正确答案：C 尾段总结：Building the habit of sustained single-task focus is essential for long-term brain development and academic growth. 养成持续单任务专注习惯，有益于青少年大脑长远发育。 A 绝不切换任务、B 临时多任务危害极大、C 单专注在数字时代无法实现均属于极端片面表述。 【前沿学术科研说明类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。定位第二段“puppy kindergarten”研究是在intensive training begins before（强化训练开始前）观察服务犬行为，据此排除A。第三段明确指出“genetics explained 45 percent of the variation in dogs’ self-control”——遗传特征解释了犬类自控力差异的45%，B项为正确同义替换。第二段说明选择服务犬是因为它们“naturally adapt well to the mismatch”（天生适应这种不匹配），而非C项“训练得早”。第四段指出选择性育种“can‘t guarantee some highly desirable traits”（无法保证某些理想特质），排除D项的绝对化表述。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。Gitanjali的话“Genetics is important, but its relative importance is different for different behavioural traits”（遗传重要，但相对重要性因行为特征而异）紧接在第三段数据之后——该段已说明遗传对不同行为的解释力差异巨大（45% vs 0.01%）。引用此话的目的是提示读者：除遗传外，还有其他因素值得讨论。第四段随后即介绍研究者“devised techniques that owners can use to help train their pets”（设计了主人可用于训练宠物的技术）。B项正确。A项“揭示研究方法局限”过度引申；C项“证明选择性育种无价值”与原文“worthwhile”矛盾；D项与Gitanjali话中“but”转折相反。 33. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。文章开篇提出“evolutionary mismatch”问题，第二至三段论述选择性育种的作用（遗传特征对行为的影响），第四至五段论述后天训练的重要性（包括眼神交流、“不可能任务”练习等）。末句总结“dog training as well as selective breeding is crucial”——两者并举。只有C项“通过选择性育种和训练”完整覆盖全文双主线。A项“only breeding”忽略训练；B项“only training”忽略遗传；D项“eye contact”仅为末段局部细节，无法概括全文。 34. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段明确指出Hare“suggested puppy owners finish ‘impossible tasks‘ with their pets every two weeks to strengthen the emotional connection with them”（建议狗主人每两周与宠物一起完成“不可能任务”以加强情感联系），C项“定期参与互动任务以加强纽带”为同义表述。A项“避免难题”与原文相反（原文鼓励完成“impossible tasks”）；B项“根据记忆力选品种”与第四段“can’t guarantee good memory”矛盾；D项“仅关注基因检测”与全文“育种+训练”并重的主旨不符。 Passage 2 （朝阳区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为直接细节题。第一段第二句明确：“Think of artists and scientists as users of three modes of discovery: knowing, seeing, and telling.” C项为原文原词复现。A项“creating”和“evaluating”未作为三种模式出现；B项“listening”是“telling”的延伸（叙述包含讲述和倾听），但非三种模式之一；D项“questioning”属于“knowing”的组成部分，“perceiving”属于“seeing”的组成部分，不完整。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第二段Califano说“nobody had kind of thought of cancer in this way”（没有人这样想过癌症）——他之所以有突破，是因为他以别人未曾尝试的方式思考。这与“提问已知假设”的本质一致，对应前文“epistemologist‘s attention to knowing”和“question what we think we know”（质疑我们认为已知的）。B项正确。A项“依赖魔法思维”与Califano说“There’s nothing magical about what we do”直接相反；C项“简单想法总是无效”与原文“difficult to foresee whether simple-minded ideas will work”矛盾（难以预见不等于总是无效）；D项“优先应用而非理论”文中未提及。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段Vunjak-Novakovic从小说《亚历山大四重奏》的“滑动平面”结构中获得科学工作的灵感——“That is how the book was constructed, I believe, and this is how we do science”（我相信书是这样构建的，我们做科学也是这样）。例子的目的是说明“aestheticists want to face the material world with all the capacities of the human to see and imagine”（审美主义者用人类全部看和想象的能力面对物质世界），即文学如何激发科学创造力。A项正确。B项“忽视实际问题”与原文“creative powers of aesthetics in the practice of a scientist”矛盾（美学在科学家实践中具有创造力量）；C项“避免艺术方法”与例子本身相反；D项“小说优于科学论文”无依据。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。末段定义“telling”为“achieved through narrative acts like speech. It creates a network, bridging from person to person”（通过言语等叙述行为实现，创造网络，将人与人连接起来）。El-Bassel的例子说明通过倾听“telling voices”让受苦者的经历“heard and valued”（被听见、被重视）。因此“telling”的本质是将个体视角连接成共享理解。B项正确。A项“不如knowing和seeing重要”与末句“essential to fully understanding”矛盾（三者同等重要）；C项“仅出现在正式科学出版物”过于狭隘；D项“被动的信息接收”与“narrative acts”（叙述行为）的主动性不符。 Passage 3 （西城区2026年二模·改编） 31. 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。Smith在第二段用反问“What is the worth of your grandmother?”来反驳对ALife“无实用价值”的批评——认为追问“意义何在”本身就偏离了重点。第三段开头作者用转折词“As much as...hate emphasizing...applications, the attempts...could have practical payoffs”承接——尽管ALifers不愿谈应用，但创造人工生命的尝试确实可能有实际回报。这说明作者认同Smith的辩护立场：ALife的价值不应以短期应用来衡量。A项“支持的”正确。B项“困惑的”、C项“不关心的”、D项“怀疑的”均无文本依据，且第三段“could have practical payoffs”表明作者明确表达肯定倾向。 32. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“enamored”所在句：“Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution.”（人工智能可能被视为ALife的表亲，因为两个领域的研究者都________于一个叫作“开放演化”的概念。）“表亲”关系暗示两个领域有共同兴趣点，即都被同一概念所吸引。结合“open-ended evolution”（开放演化）在随后的定义中被描述为系统创造无限复杂性的能力，是一个吸引人的研究目标。C项“Attracted”（被吸引）最贴切。A项“震惊”、B项“保护”、D项“挑战”代入后均无法形成合理的因果关系。 33. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第三段明确：“Artificial intelligence may be considered ALife‘s cousin in that researchers in both fields are enamored by a concept called open-ended evolution.”——两个领域的研究者都着迷于“开放演化”概念，这是它们的共同特征。B项正确。A项“ALife掌握人类未来的关键”过度拔高，原文只说可能“give rise to truly inventive machines”（催生有创造力的机器）；C项“AI反映ALife的发展”与第四段“advances in ALife are harder to recognize”语境不符，且原文未说AI反映ALife；D项“AI加速人类进化”无依据。 34. 答案：D 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。全文围绕ALife自身的演化展开讨论：首段提出ALife试图理解生命本质；第二至三段介绍ALife面临的批评和潜在价值；第四段指出ALife“mirrors the very subject it studies”（反映了它所研究的主题），“muddled progression is a striking parallel to evolutionary struggles”（混乱进展与进化斗争平行）；末段提出“these characteristics...may apply universally to all acts of evolution”并得出结论“the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable”。核心问题是：ALife是否也在不断演化？D项“生命在演化。创造ALife的尝试也在演化吗？”精准捕捉了这一主旨。A项和C项聚焦“life is undefined”（生命未被定义），这只是第四段提到的一个细节理由；B项将重心放在“AI帮助ALife演化”，但AI在文中仅作为类比（“cousin”）出现，非全文主线。 Passage 4 （东城区2026年二模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段明确指出“micro-cracks can allow water and oxygen to infiltrate and then corrode the steel reinforcement, leading to structural failure”（微裂纹让水和氧气渗入，腐蚀钢筋，导致结构性失效）。B项“钢筋完全失效”是对“corrode...leading to structural failure”的合理同义替换。A项“降低维护人工成本”与原文“requires enormous labor and investment”相反；C项“提高抗化学物质能力”与原文“harmful”相反；D项“整栋建筑立即倒塌”过度夸大——“立即”和“整栋”在文中均未提及。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段明确说明：“The idea was originally inspired by the amazing ability of the human body to heal itself of cuts, bruises and broken bones.”（这一想法最初受到人体自愈能力的启发。）B项为原文同义替换。A项“混凝土生产成本高”、C项“发现新型真菌”（真菌是后来找到的候选物，非最初灵感）、D项“氢氧化钙的化学性质”均非最初灵感来源。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段核心信息：混凝土中氢氧化钙溶解使pH值升高至13.0（高碱性），“Of all the fungi tested, only T. reesei could survive this environment.”——在所测试的真菌中，只有T. reesei能在这种环境中存活。正是这一耐高碱性使其适合在混凝土内部工作。A项正确。B项“产生大量氢氧化钙”与事实相反——它利用混凝土中的钙离子促进碳酸钙沉淀，而非产生氢氧化钙；C项“只在无水时生长”与原文“grew equally well with or without concrete”（无论有无混凝土生长一样好）不符；D项“对温度变化敏感”文中未提及。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。末段先肯定T. reesei的“eco-friendly”“posing no known risk to human health”并已有“long history of safe use”——这是积极方面。但紧接着用“Of course”转折：“researchers will need to conduct a thorough assessment to investigate any possible immediate and long-term effects...prior to its use”——在应用前仍需全面评估。这种“积极前景+审慎前提”的表述即“谨慎乐观”。B项“谨慎乐观，有必要的预防措施”准确。A项“对其立即应用完全自信”忽略了末段的审慎要求；C项“强烈反对”与“eco-friendly”等肯定性评价矛盾；D项“对环境影响漠不关心”与“thorough assessment to investigate effects”相反。 Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第二段解释归因模型运行“counterfactual scenarios”（反事实情景）并与现实对比——“How would the world look if we had left fossil fuels which we consumed in the ground?”（如果我们把已消耗的化石燃料留在地下，世界会怎样？）这说明模型可以模拟无碳排放或低碳排放的世界。A项正确。B项“预测极端天气的确切时间线”——模型模拟的是总体后果（consequences），而非具体事件时间线；C项“主要目的从科学转向法律倡导”与末段“research may be used in court”中的“may”（可能）不符，且第三段明确说模型原本用于预测气候变暖；D项“比传统模型需要更少算力”——第三段“reduced complexity”模型降低了算力需求，但这是模型的一种分支，不能说归因模型整体上需要更少算力。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。末段表述：“A proper test...hasn‘t yet taken place. But such a test may not be too far off”（恰当的测试尚未进行，但可能不会太远）——“but”转折后的积极预期；“If a precedent is set...it could open the floodgates”（若开创先例，可能打开闸门）——“could”加“floodgates”暗示潜在重大影响；“it could, nonetheless, be significant”（尽管如此，可能意义重大）——“nonetheless”加强肯定的语气。综合判断作者对“污染者付费”案件的未来持谨慎乐观态度。B项正确。A项“担忧数量增加”——文中“open the floodgates”中性表述，无“担忧”色彩；C项“强烈反对”无依据；D项“漠不关心”与“significant”评价矛盾。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为写作意图题。全文从Pujianto诉讼引入，介绍归因科学的技术原理和最新进展（简化模型、历史排放区分），再说明科学家创建了从单一公司排放到社区影响的“端到端”归因模型，最后讨论该模型在法庭上的前景（“may not be too far off”“could open the floodgates”）。核心脉络是：展示归因科学如何为气候诉讼这一新兴法律趋势提供技术支撑。A项“预见气候诉讼的新趋势”准确。B项“说明计算机模拟的历史发展”——文章虽提及模拟，但重心在于其在法律领域的应用前景；C项“批评气候模型科学有效性”——文章无批评，持肯定态度；D项“为水泥制造商辩护”——恰恰相反，文章说明诉讼有科学支撑。 34. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“open the floodgates”所在句：“If a precedent is set by even a single successful polluter-pays case, it could open the floodgates to a huge number of similar claims.”——如果一个“污染者付费”案件成功确立了先例，就可能________大量类似的索赔诉讼。法律术语“precedent”与“similar claims”呼应，说明“open the floodgates”指开启大量类似诉讼的闸门。A项“启动大量类似法律索赔的流动”为比喻义的正确解读。B项“释放大量科学数据”——“claims”是法律索赔，非数据；C项“防止进一步环境损害”——“open the floodgates”通常指“开启”而非“防止”；D项“简化法庭程序”——偏离“floodgates”（闸门/洪水）的比喻意象。 Passage 6 （石景山区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段原句：“People with more consistent stories tend to have a stronger sense of identity...Such people show greater overall life satisfaction, too.”（拥有更一致故事的人往往有更强的身份认同感……这些人也显示出更高的整体生活满意度。）A项为原文合并同义替换。B项“更准确记忆过去事件的能力”——文中讨论的是故事的“一致性”，非“准确性”；C项“更愿意接受他人意见”文中未提及；D项“更可能经历压力事件”与原文方向相反——一致的故事与更高的幸福感相关。 32. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第五段Green的警示：“hearing about the power of redemptive stories, many people may feel forced to find a positive angle on horrible events. She says that Western culture already pushes people to look for the silver lining behind every cloud.”（听到拯救性故事的力量后，许多人可能被迫为可怕事件寻找积极角度。西方文化已经在迫使人们在每片乌云背后寻找一线希望。）Green警示的是“过度强调在所有事件中找积极意义”的文化压力。A项正确。B项“忽视故事一致性”不是Green讨论的议题；C项“拒绝西方文化价值观”过度解读；D项“放弃寻找生活意义”与Green讨论的“强迫找积极面”是不同概念。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“turn over a new leaf”出现在末段：“If you want to turn over a new leaf, though, one top tip is that it helps to choose a significant date that signals the start of a new ‘chapter‘.”（如果你想________，一个重要建议是选择一个标志着新“篇章”开始的重大日期。）结合“new chapter”（新篇章）和全文主题——通过修改人生故事来改变自我认知和生活方向，可以推断该短语意为“开始新生活、作出积极改变”。A项“以积极方式改变行为或生活”正确。B项“回忆过去重要事件”与“new”相反；C项“写全新自传”过于字面化；D项“接受生活中不可改变之处”与“change”含义相悖。 34. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。全文围绕“人生故事如何构建自我认知并影响幸福感”展开：第二段介绍“life story model of identity”；第三段说明一致的故事与身份认同感和幸福感的关联；第四段探讨故事主题与心理健康的关系；末段给出改变故事的方法。A项“人生故事如何塑造身份认同和幸福感”准确概括。B项“心理学家如何对身份本质存在分歧”仅涉及Johnson与Green的局部对比，非全文主线；C项“西方文化如何影响个人叙事”仅为Green警示的一个层面；D项“如何写有效的自传”将比喻（life story）误解为字面意义的写作指导。 Passage 7 （通州区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为态度推断题。第一段Smith说“asking about ‘the point’ of ALife might be missing the point entirely”（追问ALife的“意义”可能完全偏离了要点），“The existence of a living system is not about the use of anything”（生命系统的存在与任何用途无关）。他用反问“What is the worth of your grandmother?”来表明：批评者以“有无应用价值”作为衡量标准是错误的。因此他认为批评方向错了。B项“他发现批评被误导了”准确。A项“完全同意”与引语相反；C项“批评不够严厉”无依据；D项“批评对改进有价值”与Smith的反驳语气不符。 32. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段原句：“Artificial intelligence is often considered ALife‘s cousin. Researchers in both fields share a fascination with a concept called open-ended evolution.”（人工智能常被视为ALife的表亲。两个领域的研究者都着迷于一个叫作“开放演化”的概念。）C项“都对开放演化感兴趣”为原文同义替换。A项“取得了同样显著的进展”——第四段明确说“advances in ALife are harder to recognize than those in AI”（ALife的进展比AI更难被识别）；B项“都专注于创造实际应用”——ALife研究者“hate emphasizing their research‘s applications”（讨厌强调应用）；D项“都有明确定义的核心概念”——第四段说ALife“central concept...remains undefined”（核心概念未被定义）。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“consensus”所在句：“The lack of consensus among ALifers adds to the confusion.”（ALifers之间缺乏________加剧了混乱。）结合前句“ALife‘s central concept—life itself—remains undefined”（核心概念未被定义）——概念未定义自然导致研究者之间缺乏共识/一致意见，从而加剧混乱。A项“群体中的普遍一致”为consensus的标准释义。B项“研究者间的激烈竞争”——“缺乏竞争”不会导致“概念未定义”的混乱；C项“理论的详细描述”与句意无逻辑关联；D项“对某领域的广泛批评”错位——批评是来自外界（critics），而非研究者内部。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者观点/主旨题。末段末句：“But even this dismissal suggests something: perhaps, just like life itself throughout the universe, the rise of ALife will prove unavoidable.”（但即便是这种否定也暗示了一些东西：也许，就像宇宙中的生命本身一样，ALife的崛起将被证明是不可避免的。）作者用“perhaps...will prove unavoidable”表达结论：ALife的出现像生命本身一样不可避免。B项为原文改写。A项“注定失败”与“inevitable”相反；C项“最终被AI取代”文中未提及，AI仅作为类比存在；D项“实际应用是其唯一价值”与第二段“hate emphasizing applications”矛盾。 Passage 8 （大兴区2026年二模·改编） 31. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段首句“These three modes do not operate in isolation. They interact and reinforce each other.”（这三种模式并非孤立运作，它们相互影响、相互加强。）C项“相互关联、相互加强”为原文同义替换。A项“独立且互不相关”与原文相反；B项“有层级关系，知道最重要”——文中无层级划分，三者并重；D项“仅适用于科学研究”——第一段明确说“whether in art or science”（无论在艺术还是科学中）。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段Vunjak-Novakovic从小说《亚历山大四重奏》的“滑动平面”结构中获得科学工作框架，作者总结：“showing how aesthetic experience can shape scientific thinking”（展示审美体验如何塑造科学思维）。B项“审美体验如何启发科学思维”为这一目的的精准概括。A项“文学如何直接治愈疾病”过度夸大——小说启发的是思维方式，非直接疗效；C项“科学家应避免艺术影响”与例子相反；D项“小说比科学论文更重要”无依据。 33. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段描述El-Bassel“emphasizes listening to the voices of those affected...ensuring their experiences are heard and valued”，作者总结“telling is not one-way transmission but a network of mutual understanding”（讲述不是单向传输，而是相互理解的网络）。B项“讲述需要倾听和相互理解的网络”准确。A项“单向传输专家知识”与“not one-way transmission”相反；C项“不如knowing和seeing重要”——末段说三者“interact and reinforce”（相互加强），无主次之分；D项“仅适用于全球健康研究”——El-Bassel的例子是说明telling mode，不意味着该模式仅限于此领域。 34. 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意/标题题。全文结构清晰：首段提出三种模式（knowing, seeing, telling）；第二至四段分别用三位研究者的案例阐释每种模式；末段总结三者“interact and reinforce each other...True creative discovery requires the integration of all three”（真正有创造力的发现需要三者的整合）。A项“knowing、seeing和telling在发现中的整合”完整覆盖全文主线。B项“科学方法优于艺术直觉”与全文主张的“并重”相反；C项“如何成为成功的癌症研究者”仅涉及Califano一个例子，无法概括全文；D项“西方哲学认识论史”偏离具体主题。 【深度人文社会思辨议论类】 Passage 1 （海淀区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段明确指出meritocracy的“dark side”：“Those who succeed believe their success is entirely their own doing, and therefore feel entitled to look down upon those who struggle.”（成功者认为成功全凭自己，因此觉得有资格看不起那些挣扎的人。）紧接着说明结果是社会失去了团结的能力——“find it increasingly difficult to see ourselves as sharing a common fate”（越来越难看到自己与他人命运相连）。B项“使成功者对他人缺乏同情”是“look down upon”和“lost capacity for solidarity”的合理概括。A项“阻止人们设定高目标”文中未提及；C项“否认个人努力和才能的重要性”与Sandel“does not diminish the value of effort”矛盾；D项“以合作为代价促进竞争”文中未直接讨论竞争。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解与推理综合题。第三段论述运气的作用后，第四段解释了Sandel的用意：“recognizing the role of luck does not diminish the value of effort; it simply calls for humility. When we acknowledge that we are not solely responsible for our success, we become more open to sharing our good fortune with others”（承认运气的作用并不贬低努力的价值，只是呼唤谦卑。当我们承认自己并非唯一对成功负责时，我们更愿意与他人分享好运）。第五段再次强调“citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate”（能认识到自己成功的偶然性并对不那么幸运者感到有义务的公民）。B项“鼓励社会中更大的谦卑和慷慨”准确概括。A项“证明成功完全不该被得到”过度极端；C项“反对努力的价值”与原文相反；D项“为平均分配财富辩护”过度引申，超出文本范围。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段明确记述批评者的论点：“Critics of Sandel argue that his critique undermines personal responsibility and the incentive to work hard. If success is largely a matter of luck, why strive at all?”（批评者认为Sandel的批判削弱了个人责任感和努力工作的动力。如果成功主要是运气，为什么还要努力？）由此可以合理推断：批评者担心他的理论可能降低努力工作的动机。A项正确。B项“他们同意运气在成功中起作用”——批评者的反驳恰恰建立在他们不认同“成功主要是运气”这一前提上；C项“他们为社会不平等提出其他解释”文中未提及；D项“支持政府干预教育”无依据。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨/作者观点题。末段是全文总结：“a healthy society requires citizens who can recognize the contingency of their own success and who feel a sense of obligation to those less fortunate. This is not a call to abandon striving, but to temper it with gratitude and generosity.”（健康的社会需要能认识自己成功偶然性的公民，并对不那么幸运者感到有义务。这不是呼吁放弃奋斗，而是以感恩和慷慨来调和奋斗。）作者既未全盘否定meritocracy（未要求“abandon”），也未无条件推崇（要求“temper it”），而是主张“保留其价值，但以谦卑调和”——这正是B项“仍有价值，但需要以谦卑调和”。A项“应完全抛弃”与末句“not a call to abandon”相反；C项“优于所有其他制度”文中未作这种比较；D项“对人们如何看待自己没有影响”与全文论述完全相反。 Passage 2 （西城区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段定义悖论：“if a society is tolerant of everything, it must also tolerate the intolerant. And the intolerant, given the opportunity, will destroy tolerance itself.”（如果社会宽容一切，就必须也宽容不宽容者。而不宽容者有机会就会摧毁宽容本身。）第二段进一步阐述：“in the name of preserving tolerance, we may be justified in being intolerant toward the intolerant.”（为了维护宽容，对不宽容者不宽容可能是正当的。）因此悖论的核心是：维护宽容有时要求对某些群体不宽容，A项正确。B项“必然导致社会混乱”过于绝对，文中说的是“可能导致宽容消失”；C项“使人不愿妥协”未提及；D项“仅在西方哲学中存在”文中无此论断。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段提出“who decides who counts as ‘intolerant’? This is where the paradox becomes politically charged”（谁来决定谁算‘不宽容者’？这就是悖论变得具有政治敏感性的地方）。随后举例：“this label has been used to silence dissent, suppress minority voices, and consolidate power”（这个标签曾被用来压制异议、打压少数声音、巩固权力）。作者提及“定义困难”的目的是说明“宽容悖论”的原则可能被政治误用。B项“说明该原则如何被政治滥用”正确。A项“暗示悖论没有实际意义”——作者后文明确说“perennial challenge”（持久的挑战），说明有意义；C项“证明宽容过时”与全文维护宽容的立场相反；D项“建议完全放弃悖论”无依据。 33. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为作者态度题。全文呈现了对悖论的复杂立场：一方面承认其合理性（“may be justified in being intolerant”），另一方面警示其滥用风险（“used to silence dissent”），最终结论是“no easy rules...requires judgment, context, and humility”（没有简单的规则……需要判断、语境和谦卑）。这种既肯定又批判、既承认问题又提供解决方向的复杂态度，最接近B项“矛盾的/复杂的”（ambivalent）。A项“不屑的”——作者显然认真对待这一议题；C项“悲观的”——末段强调“active practice”和“vigilance”，表明仍有出路；D项“乐观的”——过于简单化，作者明确承认问题的复杂性。 34. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。全文围绕“宽容悖论”展开：首段介绍悖论，第二段说明其逻辑，第三段警示定义被滥用的风险，第四段强调没有简单答案，末段得出结论——“tolerance is not a passive stance but an active practice. It requires constant vigilance, not only against the intolerant but also against our own tendency”（宽容不是被动立场，而是积极实践。它需要持续警觉，不仅警惕不宽容者，也要警惕我们自己将异议误判为不宽容的倾向）。A项“宽容是脆弱的价值观，需要积极捍卫和自我反思”精准概括。B项“证明西方哲学自相矛盾”偏离主旨；C项“社会应无例外地宽容所有观点”与悖论本身的逻辑矛盾；D项“不宽容者应永远享有平等权利”与第二段“may be justified in being intolerant”矛盾。 Passage 3 （东城区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第一段提出双方立场：“This observation has led some to argue for universal moral principles that transcend cultural boundaries. Others...insist that morality is fundamentally shaped by local conditions and traditions”（有人主张超越文化界限的普遍道德原则，另一些人则坚持道德根本上由本地条件和传统塑造）。第二段进一步说明：“has profound implications for how we understand human rights, international law, and cross-cultural dialogue”（对如何理解人权、国际法和跨文化对话有深远影响）。核心争议是：道德原则是否普遍适用，还是因文化而异，B项正确。A项“是否受宗教影响”是细枝末节；C项“人性本善还是本恶”文中未涉及；D项“传统社会是否有道德准则”与“Inuit moral code”的讨论相反。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段介绍Inuit的道德准则后总结：“The Inuit‘s practical approach to morality made good sense given the demands of life in the far north”（考虑到遥远北部生活的要求，因纽特人对道德的实际态度是有道理的）。作者随后用“Yet does this mean...”引出更深层问题。Inuit例子的目的是说明“道德准则可以适应特定生活条件”，即 relativism的立场——文化背景塑造道德规范的具体内容。B项正确。A项“证明环境决定道德的一切”过于绝对，作者随后即指出普遍维度；C项“论证传统社会缺乏普遍道德价值”与第四段“similarity of moral virtues across cultures”矛盾；D项“证明演化心理学不可靠”文中无此意。 33. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段给出结论：“morality has both universal and particular dimensions...The basic architecture of moral reasoning appears to be part of our evolved human nature. But the specific content of moral codes...are shaped by local conditions.”（道德既有普遍维度也有特殊维度……道德推理的基本架构似乎是我们演化人性的一部分，但道德规范的具体内容由本地条件塑造。）作者明确主张：两者并存且相互作用，C项正确。A项“根本不相容”与“both”矛盾；B项“普遍原则应始终凌驾于地方传统之上”作者未作这种价值判断；D项“特殊维度对现代社会更重要”文中无此比较。 34. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为标题题。全文论证道德既有普遍根基（“similarity of basic human needs and our shared mechanisms for learning”），又有地方差异（“specific content...shaped by local conditions”）。开头提出普遍主义与相对主义之争，中间以Inuit为例说明地方适应性，最后给出“both universal and particular dimensions”的结论。A项“道德：普遍之根，地方之枝”用比喻精准概括了全文核心论点。B项“相对主义：对全球正义的威胁”——全文并非批判相对主义，而是寻求整合；C项“因纽特智慧：环境如何塑造伦理”——这只是文章的一个例子，不足以概括全文；D项“演化心理学：对与错的科学”——演化心理学仅在第四段作为支持论据出现，非全文主题。 Passage 4 （朝阳区2026年二模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段：“whether someone describes having had some control over events in their past is an important predictor of a person‘s mental health”（一个人是否描述自己对过去事件有过掌控是心理健康的重要预测指标），B项为原文同义替换。A项“完全真实的人生故事”——文中讨论的是“一致性”（consistent）而非“真实性”（factual）；C项“避免反思负面经历”——相反，Johnson认为“finding positive meaning after stress”是重要主题；D项“符合他人对人生故事的期望”——末段明确说应“not to please an audience”。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第四段：“hearing about the power of ‘redemptive stories’ can pressure people into finding positive angles on terrible events. Western culture already pushes individuals to look for the ‘silver lining behind every cloud.’”（听到“拯救性故事”的力量会迫使人们在可怕事件中寻找积极角度。西方文化已经在迫使人们“在每片乌云背后寻找一线希望”。）Green警示的是“在所有痛苦中寻找积极意义的社会压力”，B项正确。A项“现代文化缺乏乐观”与“pushes people to look for silver lining”相反；C项“过度重视负面经历”与Green批评的“强制乐观”相反；D项“拒绝传统叙事结构”文中未涉及。 33. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为细节理解与推理题。末段：“The goal is not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one’s own. This requires the courage to resist cultural scripts that demand constant optimism”（目标不是产生一个符合文化期望的故事，而是创作一个让自己感到真实的故事。这需要勇气抵制要求不断乐观的文化剧本）。作者明确主张：改变人生故事应由个人真实性驱动，而非外部压力，C项正确。A项“只能由专业人士协助”文中未提及；B项“需遵循公认的文化模式”与“resist cultural scripts”相反；D项“受过创伤的人无法改变故事”与第四段“we can learn to change our own stories”矛盾。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。文章前半部分介绍Johnson的life story模型及其积极价值（一致的故事增强身份认同）；中间引入Green的警示（文化压力强迫人们寻找积极意义）；末段给出平衡方案——“not to produce a story that conforms to cultural expectations, but to author a story that feels authentically one‘s own”（不产生符合文化期望的故事，而是创作真实属于自己的故事）。全文主线是：如何在自我叙事中平衡个人真实性与文化压力，B项准确概括。A项“文化期望如何塑造身份认同”——这仅是中间段的局部内容；C项“西方文化为何推动有毒的乐观主义”——文中未解释“为何”，仅描述现象；D项“心理学家如何在身份本质上存在分歧”——Johnson与Green的分歧是例证而非全文主线。 Passage 5 （丰台区2026年一模·改编） 31 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段：“art historians argue that something essential is missing—the intention, the struggle, the lived experience that shaped every brushstroke of the real Rembrandt. The AI mimics style; it does not embody the life behind it.”（艺术史学家认为缺少了本质性的东西——塑造伦勃朗每一笔的意图、挣扎和生活经历。AI模仿风格，但没有体现背后的生命。）B项“缺乏艺术家的生活经历和意图”为原文同义替换。A项“训练不足”文中未提及；C项“技术太昂贵”文中未涉及；D项“容易辨认出是赝品”——原文说“indistinguishable from an original”（与原作无法区分），恰恰相反。 32. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为词义/概念理解题。第三段以海明威为例：“Hemingway‘s prose is recognizable not because of a formula, but because it reflects a particular way of seeing the world—shaped by his experiences”（海明威的散文可被辨认不是因为公式，而是因为它反映了看待世界的特定方式——由他的经历塑造）。“style”指可模仿的技术形式（如语言风格、绘画笔法），“essence”指形式背后的情感深度和生命体验。A项“艺术技巧与情感深度的区别”最准确。B项“古典与现代艺术形式”——不相关；C项“艺术与技术的关系”——过于宽泛；D项“专业与业余创造力的对比”——文中未涉及。 33. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为推理判断题。第四段：“This is not to deny the value of AI-generated art. It can be beautiful, surprising, and thought-provoking.”（这不是否认AI生成艺术的价值。它可以是美丽的、令人惊讶的、发人深省的。）但随后指出它缺少“the human story embedded in the act of creation”（创作行为中蕴含的人类故事）。末段进一步区分：“we value the product for its aesthetic qualities; we value the process because it connects us to another human mind”（我们因审美品质而珍视产品；我们因过程连接了另一个人类心智而珍视过程）。因此作者暗示：AI艺术有审美价值，但缺乏人性深度，B项正确。A项“完全没有艺术价值”与“not to deny”相反；C项“最终超越人类创造力”文中未提及，且末句“human creativity will always matter”暗示相反；D项“应被博物馆禁止”文中无此主张。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨/结论题。末段结论：“we value the process because it connects us to another human mind...This is something no machine can provide, because machines have no souls to reveal. And this, in the end, may be the deepest argument for why human creativity will always matter.”（我们因过程连接了另一个人类心智而珍视它……这是机器无法提供的，因为机器没有灵魂可揭示。而这最终可能是人类创造力永远重要的最深层论据。）B项“人类创造力之所以有价值，正是因为它背后的人类故事”为原文总结。A项“AI艺术威胁人类艺术家生存”——文中未讨论“威胁”问题；C项“技术应在创意领域受到限制”——文中承认AI艺术的价值；D项“艺术质量应仅以审美吸引力判断”——与“human story”的强调相反。 Passage 6 （石景山区2026年二模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段明确定义：“distinguished between chronos—clock time, measurable and uniform—and kairos—the qualitative, opportune moment that carries significance beyond its duration”（区分了chronos——可测量、均匀的时钟时间——和kairos——超越持续时间的、有品质的、恰当的时刻）。B项“Chronos是可测量的时间；Kairos是有意义的时刻”为原文准确概括。A项说反了，chronos是量，kairos是质；C项“chronos是现代，kairos是古代”——两者共存的观念是古希腊人的认识，不意味着chronos现代；D项“kairos是想像的”——kairos在哲学上是真实存在的概念，非想象。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段：“Novel experiences seem to stretch time because they create more memories; routine experiences compress time because they leave fewer traces. This explains why childhood feels so long—everything was new”（新奇体验似乎延长了时间，因为它们创造了更多记忆；常规体验压缩了时间，因为它们留下较少痕迹。这解释了为什么童年感觉如此漫长——一切都是新的）。B项“童年经历更新奇、更值得记忆”为原文解释的概括。A项“成年人责任更少”与事实相反且文中未提及；C项“儿童测量时间方式不同”文中未涉及测量方式；D项“成年人有更好的记忆力”与“adulthood often feels like it races by”矛盾——如果记忆更好，时间应该感觉更长才对。 33. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第四段：“The pursuit of more time—more productivity, more efficiency, more output—can paradoxically make time feel more scarce. When we measure every moment against some external standard of productivity, we create a sense of constant shortage.”（追求更多时间——更多生产力、更高效率、更多产出——反而可能让时间感觉更稀缺。当我们用某种外部生产力标准衡量每一刻时，就制造了一种持续短缺感。）这种“越追求越缺”的悖论正是A项“试图节省时间反而让它感觉更稀缺”。B项“更多时间导致更少产出”不是文中表述；C项“时间既是物理的也是心理的”是事实而非悖论；D项“过去比未来更长”无依据。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。末段给出全文结论：“time is not something we have; it is something we are. Our lives are not just measured in years; they are constituted by the moments we inhabit. To live well is not merely to fill time, but to be fully present within it.”（时间不是我们“拥有”的东西，而是我们“所是”的东西。我们的生命不仅以年来衡量，而是由我们栖居的时刻构成。好好生活不仅是填满时间，而是在时间中全然在场。）B项“生命由我们栖居的时刻构成”为作者核心信息。A项“应完全停止测量时间”过于极端，作者仅建议平衡chronos与kairos；C项“技术改善了时间体验”文中未提及；D项“时间管理是幸福的关键”——作者恰恰批评了过度的时间管理。 Passage 7 （通州区2026年一模·改编） 31. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段定义：“When people believe they should be happy and evaluate their lives against this expectation, the gap between reality and aspiration can generate anxiety and dissatisfaction. Those who most strongly value happiness as a goal tend to experience lower well-being”（当人们相信自己“应该”快乐并以这一期望来评价生活时，现实与愿望之间的差距会产生焦虑和不满。那些最强烈地将幸福视为目标的人往往幸福感更低）。A项“最强烈追求幸福的人往往感到更不满足”为准确概括。B项“幸福的人对未来更焦虑”文中未提及；C项“财富不保证幸福”是另一命题；D项“幸福无法科学定义”文中未涉及。 32. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第三段：“In East Asian cultures, where happiness is seen as something that emerges naturally from social harmony rather than a goal to be actively pursued”（在东亚文化中，幸福被视为从社会和谐中自然产生的东西，而不是一个要积极追求的目标）。B项“将幸福视为社会和谐自然产生的结果”为原文同义替换。A项“将幸福视为个人成就”——文中说这是西方文化的特点（“Western emphasis on individual happiness as a personal achievement”）；C项“完全拒绝幸福作为目标”——“not a goal to be actively pursued”不等于“reject entirely”；D项“在所有情境下促进情绪压抑”文中未提及。 33. 答案：C 详细解析： 本题为词义猜测题。“mandate”所在句：“The issue is the mandate to be happy—the cultural expectation that happiness is not just desirable but obligatory.”（问题在于快乐的——文化期望快乐不仅是可取的，而且是义务性的。）破折号后的解释“not just desirable but obligatory”（不仅是可取的，而且是义务性的）直接定义了mandate的含义——一种义务/必须。C项“obligation”（义务）最匹配。A项“自由”、B项“机会”与“obligatory”相反；D项“传统”侧重点不同，原文强调的是“强制性”而非“惯例性”。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨/结论题。末段：“the deeper insight may be that a meaningful life is not one that maximizes happiness but one that embraces the full spectrum of human emotions. Joy matters, but so does grief, so does anger”（更深刻的见解可能是，有意义的人生不是最大化快乐的人生，而是拥抱人类全部情感的人生。快乐重要，悲伤也重要，愤怒也重要）。作者最终结论是：有意义的人生既包含积极情绪也包含消极情绪，B项正确。A项“幸福是人生的终极目标”与作者批判立场相反；C项“西方文化有最好的幸福方式”文中对西方模式持批判态度；D项“人们应停止使用‘幸福’一词”过于极端，文中未提及。 Passage 8 （大兴区2026年二模·改编） 31. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。第二段：“Charles Darwin was among the first to suggest that moral instincts evolved through natural selection, because groups that cooperated outcompeted those that did not”（查尔斯·达尔文是最早提出道德本能通过自然选择演化的人之一，因为合作的群体比不合作的群体更具竞争优势）。B项“因为合作群体有生存优势”为原文同义替换。A项“善良的人活得更长”——个体层面而非群体层面，文中强调“groups”；C项“道德规则是神圣启示的”与演化论观点相反；D项“所有社会都采用相同规则”文中明确指出各文化规则不同。 32. 答案：A 详细解析： 本题为例证作用题。第三段介绍Inuit道德规范后指出：“These norms made excellent sense given the demands of survival in an unforgiving land”（考虑到在无情土地上的生存需求，这些规范完全合理）。作者用Inuit例子说明环境如何塑造具体的道德规范，这呼应了“particular moral codes”的多样性。A项正确。B项“证明道德情感在任何地方都一样”——Inuit例子恰恰说明具体规范的差异；C项“证明因纽特人没有道德准则”与例子的内容相反；D项“证明传统与道德无关”——文中说传统构成了道德规范的一部分。 33. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为细节理解题。末段定义：“we possess a biological capacity for moral learning that shapes which behaviors we find rewarding or aversive, but the specific content of what we learn is shaped by local conditions and traditions”（我们拥有道德学习的生物学能力，它塑造我们觉得哪些行为有回报或令人厌恶，但所学内容的具体内容由本地条件和传统塑造）。B项“我们的道德能力是天生的，但其内容由文化塑造”准确概括。A项“道德要么纯生物要么纯文化”——“dual”意味着两者都有；C项“文化传统比生物本能更重要”——文中未作价值比较；D项“演化心理学证明达尔文是错的”——文中支持演化观点，未反驳达尔文。 34. 答案：B 详细解析： 本题为主旨大意题。全文论证道德既有普遍根基（universal moral emotions, consistent underlying structure）又有地方适应（specific content shaped by environment and traditions），末段“Morality is neither purely innate nor purely cultural—it is the product of an evolved mind encountering a diverse world”（道德既非纯粹天生，也非纯粹文化，它是演化心智遇到多样世界的产物）直接总结了这一观点。B项“人类道德既反映了普遍人性也反映了地方适应”为最佳答案。A项“道德主要是文化传统的产物”忽略生物学维度；C项“道德的跨文化差异只是表面的”与全文强调“specific content varies dramatically”矛盾；D项“道德演化理论有根本缺陷”文中持支持演化观点。 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 学科网（北京）股份有限公司4 / 13 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $