题目内容
Section A
Directions: In this section, you will read 5 short incomplete dialogues between two speakers, each followed by 4 choices marked A, B, C, and D. Choose the answer that best suits the situation to complete the dialogue by marking the corresponding letter with a single bar across the square brackets on your machine-scoring ANSWER SHEET.
A: How about having lunch with me today, Paul？ B: ______
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
听力原文： Police in London now say that more than 50 people died in yesterday's terrorist bombings and warn that the death toll could rise. Police also said that there were no more than four explosive devices involved, three on underground trains and one on a bus, and they estimated that all the bombs were relatively small containing about 10 pounds of high explosive. Commissioner Blair also denied there was any evidence to suggest that the attacks were carried out by suicide bombers but said the possibility could not be ruled out. Police said they received no warning about the attacks and would not speculate on a claim by a group calling itself "The Secret Organization of A1-Qaida in Europe" that it was behind the bombings.
We know for sure that _______.
Suppose you go into a fruiter's shop, wanting an apple—you take up one, and on biting it you find it is sour; you look at it, and see that it is hard and green. You take up another one, and that, too, is hard, green, and sour. The shopman offers you a third; but before biting it, you examine it, and you find that it is hard and green, and you immediately say that you will not have it, as it must be sour, like those that you have already tried.
Nothing can be simpler than that, you think; but if you will take the trouble to analyze and trace out into its logical elements what has been done by the mind, you will be greatly surprised. In the first place you have performed that operation of induction. You find that, in two experiences, hardness and greenness in apples went together with sourness. It was so in the first case, and it was confirmed by the second. True, it is a very small basis, but still it is enough from which to make the induction; you generalize the facts, and you expect to find sourness in apples where you get hardness and greenness. You found upon that a general law, that all hard and green apples are sour; and that, so far as it goes, is a perfect induction. Well, having got your natural law in this way, when you are offered another apple which you find is hard and green, you say, "All hard and green apples are sour; this apple is hard and green；therefore, this apple is sour." That train of reasoning is what logicians call a syllogism, and has all its various parts and terms--its major premises, its minor premises, and its conclusion. And, by the help of further reasoning, which, if drawn out, would have to be exhibited in two or three other syllogisms, you arrive at your final determination. "I will not have that apple." So that, you see, you have, in the first place, established a law by induction, and reasoned out the special particular case.
Well now, suppose, having got your conclusion of the law, that at sometime afterwards, you are discussing the qualities of apple with a friend; you will say to him, "It is a very curious thing, but I find that all hard and green apples are sour!" Your friend says to you, "But how do you know that？" You at once reply, "Oh, because I have tried them over and over again, and have always found them to be so." Well, if we were talking science instead of common sense, we should call that an experimental verification. And, if still opposed, you go further, and say, "I have heard from people in Somersetshire and Devonshire, where a large number of apples are grown, and in London, where many apples are sold and eaten, that they have observed the same thing. It is also found to be the case in Normandy, and in North America. In short, I find the universal experience of man- kind wherever attention had been directed to the subject." Whereon your friend, unless he is a very unreasonable man, agrees with you, and is convinced that you are quite right in the conclusion you have drawn. He believes, although perhaps he does not know he believes it, that the more extensive verifications have been made, the more results of the same kind are arrived at--that the more varied the conditions under which the same re- suits are attained, the more certain is the ultimate conclusion, and he disputes the question no further. He sees that the experiment has been tried under all sorts of conditions, as to time, place, and people, with the same result; and he says to you, therefore, that the law you have laid down must be a good one, and he must believe it. (654)
The writer is probably _______.
Does money buy happiness？ It's sometimes said that scientists have found no relationship between money and happiness, but that's myth, says University of Illinois psychologist Ed Diener.
The connection is complex. In fact, very rich people rate substantially higher in satisfaction with life than very poor people do, even within wealthy nations, he says. "There is overwhelming evidence that money buys happiness," said economist Andrew Oswald of University of Warwick in England. The main debate, he said, is how strong the effect is.
Oswald recently reported a study of Britons who won between ＄ 2,000 and ＄ 250,000 in a lottery (彩票拍奖). As a group, they showed a boost in happiness averaging a bit more than one point on a 36-point scale when surveyed two years after their win, compared to their levels two years before they won.
Daniel Kahnman, a Nobel-Prize winner and Princeton economist, and colleagues, recently declared that the notion that making a lot of money will produce good overall mood is "mostly illusory". They noted that in one study, members of the high-income group were almost twice as likely to call themselves "very happy" as people from households with incomes below ＄ 20,000. But other studies, rather than asking for a summary estimate of happiness, follow people through the day and repeatedly record their feeling. These studies show less effect of income on happiness. Kahneman and colleagues said.
There is still another twist to the money-happiness story. Even though people who make＄150,000 are considerably happier than those who make ＄ 40,000, It's not clear why, says psychologist Richard E. Lucas of Michigan State University.
Researchers conclude that any effect of money on happiness is smaller than most daydreamers assume. "People exaggerate how much happiness is bought by an extra few thousand," Oswald said. "The quality of relationships has a far bigger effect than quite large rises in salary. It's much better advice, if you're looking for happiness in life, try to find the right husband or wife than to try to double your salary."
The main purpose of this passage is to discuss ______
The intellect is usually defined as a separate faculty in human beings--the ability to think about facts and ideas and to put them in order. The intellect is usually contrasted with the emotions, which are thought to distort facts and ideas, or contrasted with the imagination, which departs from facts.
As a result, it is often assumed that intellectuals are people who think, who have the facts and the ideas, and that the rest of society is composed of nonintellectual and anti-intellectuals who don't. This is of course not the case, and it is possible to be an intellectual and not be intelligent, and to be a nonintellectual and think very well. It is also assumed that there are basic differences between science and art, between scientists and artists; it is assumed that scientists are rational, objective, abstract, concerned with the intellect and with reducing everything to a formula, and that artists, on the other hand, are temperamental, subjective, irrational, and concerned with the expression of the emotions. But we all know temperamental, irrational scientists and abstract, cold-blooded artists. We know, too, that there is a body of knowledge in art. There are as many facts and ideas in art as there are in any other field, and there are as many kinds of art as there are ideas--abstract or concrete, classical, romantic, organized, unorganized, expressionist, surrealist, intuitive, intellectual, sublime, ridiculous, boring, exciting, and dozens of others. The trouble lies in thinking about art the way most people think about the intellect. It is not what they think it is.
This would not be quite so serious a matter if it were not taken so seriously, especially by educators and those who urge their views upon educators--that is, I suppose, the rest of mankind. If thinking is an activity which takes place in a separate faculty of the intellect, and if the aim of education is to teach people to think, it is therefore natural to assume that education should train the intellect through the academic disciplines. These disciplines are considered to be the subject matter for intellectual training, and they consist of facts and ideas from the major fields of human knowledge, organized in such a way that the intellect can deal with them. That is to say, they are organized in abstract, conceptual, logical terms. It is assumed that learning to think is a matter of learning to recognize and understand these concepts. Educational programs in school and college are therefore arranged with this idea in mind, and when demands for the improvement of education are made, they usually consist of demands for more academic materials to be covered and more academic discipline of this kind to be imposed. It is a call for more organization, not for more learning.
One of the most unfortunate results of this misunderstanding of the nature of the intellect is that the practice of the arts and the creative arts themselves are too often excluded from the regular curriculum of school and college or given such a minor role in the educational process that they are unable to make the intellectual contribution of which they are supremely capable. (529)
The three faculties in human beings mentioned are _______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付