单选题 Scientists had until very recently believed that there were around 100,000 human genes, available to make each and every one of us in our splendid diversity. Now, the two rival teams decoding the book of life, have each found that instead there are only somewhere between 30,000 and 40,000 genes. So that grand panjandrum, the human, may not manage to boast twice as many genes as that microscopic nowhere-worm, with its 18,000 genes, the nematode. Even the fruit fly, considered so negligible that even the most extreme of animal rights activists don"t kick up a fuss about its extensive use in genetic experimentation, has 16,000 genes. Not for the first time it has to be admitted that it"s a funny old world, and that we humans are the beings who make it such.
Without understanding in the least what the scientific implications of this discovery might be, anybody with the smallest curiosity about people—and that"s pretty much all of us—can see that it is pretty significant. The most obvious conclusion to be drawn from the limited number of genes available to programme a human is that biological determination goes so far and no further. Human complexity, on this information, can be best explained in the manner it looks to be best explained before scientific evidence becomes involved at all. In other words, in the nature versus nurture debate, the answer, thankfully, is "both".
Why is this so important? Because it should mean that we can accept one another"s differences more easily, and help each other when appropriate. Nurture does have a huge part to play in human destiny. Love can transform humans. Trust can make a difference. Second chances are worth trying. Life, to a far greater extent than science thought up until now, is what we make it. One day we may know exactly what we can alter and what we cannot. Knowing that there is a great deal that we can alter or improve, as well as a great deal that we must accept and value for its own sake, makes the human journey progressive rather than deterministic, complex and open, rather than simple and unchangeable.
For no one can suggest that 30,000 genes don"t give the human race much room for manoeuvre. Look how many tunes, after all, we"re able to squeeze out of eight notes. But it surely must give the lie to the rather sinister belief that has been gaining credence in the West that there is a hard-wired, no-prisoners-taken, gene for absolutely everything, and that whole sections of the population can be labelled as "stupid" or "lazy" or "criminal" or somehow or other sub-human. Instead, like the eight notes which can only make music (albeit in astounding diversity), the 30,000 genes can only make people. The rest is up to US.
单选题 From the first sentence of the passage we learn that scientists used to think ______
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】[解析] 第一句话的意思是:直到最近,科学家一直认为:人类大约有10万个基因,这些基因使人类千差万别,构成五彩缤纷的世界。根据下一句,两个研究组最近发现,人由约3~4万个基因组成,所以,过去的看法是不对的。
单选题 It is now found by two research groups that ______
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 第一段提到,两个同时想解码人类画卷(book这里用作比喻,比喻人的基因组谱)的研究组发现,人只由约3~4万个基因组成,所以,那个自以为了不起的生灵(panjandrum)——人类——甚至都无法吹嘘自己比线虫的基因数量多两倍,因为连毫无生活目的的微生物都有18000个基因。
单选题 One of the implications from this new discovery about human genes is that ______
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】[解析] 第二段提到了这个发现的含义:人的基因编码由有限的细胞数量组成,由这样一个发现可以得出的明显结论是:生物上的(对人的)决定因素只有这么多,如此而已。根据这一发现,对人类复杂性的最好解释似乎在发现科学证据之前就存在了,换言之,在先天与后天(nurture)之争中,可喜的是答案应该是“二者兼有”。即先天和后天因素都在决定着人的成长。这里显然是在驳斥某些先天决定论的看法,如种族优越论。参阅最后一段对先天决定论的批评。
单选题 The analogy to musical notes is used to make the point that ______
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 最后一段指出,没有人可以认为3万个基因没有给人类留下多少回旋的余地,以下提到8个音符(notes)如何构成了丰富的曲调(tune),最后一段总结说:正像8个音符构成了音乐(虽然多得令人惊异),3万个基因只能造就人类。
单选题 The most feasible conclusion we can draw from the new discovery is that ______
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 第一段最后一句点出了本文的主题:并不是第一次我们不得不承认,这还是我们那个可笑的世界,承认我们人类使它成为目前这个样子。言外之意,人类是自己生活的创造者,先天(指自然因素:nature)的决定因素没有(某些人认为的)那样重要。有关这一点重点参阅第三段。第四段最后两句总结说:正像8个音符构成了音乐(虽然多得令人惊异),3万个基因只能造就人类,其他的就靠我们自己了。这里承认了先天的作用,但不承认其决定性作用,而更强调的是后天因素的影响。