阅读理解 Humans are fascinated by the source of their failings and virtues. This preoccupation inevitably leads to an old debate: whether nature or nurture moulds us more. A revolution in genetics has poised this as a modern political question about the character of our society: if personalities are hard-wired into our genes, what can governments do to help us? It feels morally questionable, yet claims of genetic selection by intelligence are making headlines. This is down to "hereditarian" (遗传论的) science and a recent paper claimed "differences in exam performance between pupils attending selective and non-selective schools mirror the genetic differences between them". With such an assertion, the work was predictably greeted by a lot of absurd claims about "genetics determining academic success". What the research revealed was the rather less surprising result: the educational benefits of selective schools largely disappear once pupils’ inborn ability and socio-economic background were taken into account. It is a glimpse of the blindingly obvious—and there’s nothing to back strongly either a hereditary or environmental argument. Yet the paper does say children are "unintentionally genetically selected" by the school system. Central to hereditarian science is a tall claim: that identifiable variations in genetic sequences can predict an individual’s aptness to learn, reason and solve problems. This is problematic on many levels. A teacher could not seriously tell a parent their child has a low genetic tendency to study when external factors clearly exist. Unlike-minded academics say the inheritability of human traits is scientifically unsound. At best there is a weak statistical association and not a causal link between DNA and intelligence. Yet sophisticated statistics are used to create an intimidatory atmosphere of scientific certainty. While there’s an undoubted genetic basis to individual difference, it is wrong to think that socially defined groups can be genetically accounted for. The fixation on genes as destiny is surely false too. Medical predictability can rarely be based on DNA alone; the environment matters too. Something as complex as intellect is likely to be affected by many factors beyond genes. If hereditarians want to advance their cause it will require more balanced interpretation and not just acts of advocacy. Genetic selection is a way of exerting influence over others, "the ultimate collective control of human destinies," as writer H. G. Wells put it. Knowledge becomes power and power requires a sense of responsibility. In understanding cognitive ability, we must not elevate discrimination to a science; allowing people to climb the ladder of life only as far as their cells might suggest. This will need a more sceptical eye on the science. As technology progresses, we all have a duty to make sure that we shape a future that we would want to find ourselves in.

单选题 What did a recent research paper claim?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由题干中的recent research paper定位到第二段第一句。事实细节题。文章第二段第一句指出，近期的一篇论文声称来自精英学校和普通学校的学生在考试成绩上的差异反映了他们基因的不同。第二句说这种论断引发了很多荒谬的主张，认为 “基因决定了学业的成功”。由此可知近期这项研究支持“基因决定智力”的观点。故答案为D)。文章只提到精英学校和普通学校学生的考试成绩有差异，并未指出不同学校对学生的未来会产生影响，故排除A)；文章主要说明遗传决定论科学认为基因差异导致智力差异，并未提到学生基因差异大小的问题，故排除B)；第二段第三句指出，当把学生的天资以及社会经济背景因素考虑在内时，精英学校的教育优势在很大程度上就消失了，这与C)正相反，故排除C)。

单选题 What does the author think of the recent research?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的recent research及题文同序原则定位到第二段末及第三段前半部分。事实细节题。文章第二段最后一句话中，作者指出现在还没有强有力的证据可以支持遗传论或环境决定论。在第三段第二句中，作者介绍了遗传决定论的主张，之后在第三句中指出这种说法在很多层面上都存在问题。由此可知，作者对研究的结果是抱有怀疑态度的。故答案为A)。在第二段末尾以及第三段第三句，作者一直在强调遗传决定论提出的主张是有问题的，所以B)“它的影响是积极的”和D)“它的结论是有启发意义的”与作者观点相反，故排除；第一段最后一句指出，这项研究成了头条新闻，第二段第二句又提到，该工作引发了很多荒谬的主张，说明它是有一定影响力的，故排除C)。

单选题 What does the author say about the relationship between DNA and intelligence?

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】由题干中的relationship between DNA and intelligence定位到第三段倒数第二句。事实细节题。第三段倒数第二句指出，DNA和智力之间的关系充其量只是一种微弱的统计数据上的关联，绝不是因果关系。由此可知，答案为B)。第三段最后一句话指出，复杂的统计数据被用来创造一种科学确定性的氛围。这里作者客观指出目前大环境的一种情况，而并不是认为这项研究的结果是具有科学确定性的，故排除A)；第三段倒数第二句指出，两者间的关联最多也就是有统计数据上的微弱关联，而C)说两者关系取决于对统计数据的解释，与原文不符，故排除C)；一些基因科学家的观点就是DNA决定智力，D)与文章意思不符，故排除。

单选题 What do hereditarians need to do to make their claims convincing?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】由题干中的hereditarians和claims定位到第四段最后一句。推理判断题。第四段最后一句提到，如果遗传论者想推进他们的工作，就需要更多客观公正的解释，而不仅仅是宣扬他们的论点。也就是说，如果遗传论者想要更多人信服他们的观点，就应该对他们研究的结果做更加周全与综合的解释，即将更多相关因素考虑在内，故答案为A)。本文并未提及遗传论者在做研究时所用的技术精密与否，故排除B)；C)是针对第四段中socially defined groups设置的干扰，但原文的意思是社会群体的界定不能只用基因来解释，外部环境的影响同样重要，与C)提出的“收集社会各阶层人群的基因数据”的论点不一致，故排除；D)项在文章中并未提及，故排除。

单选题 What does the author warn against in the passage?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】由选项中的technology、cognition及discrimination等词定位到最后一段。推理判断题。最后一段第三句指出，在理解认知能力的过程中，我们不能将歧视抬高为科学，这将导致人类只能在他们基因暗示的范围内攀登人生的阶梯。结合该段第一句中作者引用作家威尔斯对遗传选择的看法：是对人类命运集体控制的终极形式，综合可知，作者认为不能以科学的名义宣扬歧视，故答案为D)。A)是针对最后一段最后一句话中的as technology progresses设置的干扰。原文的意思是随着技术的进步，我们有责任守住底线，不去宣扬歧视，与选项中夸大技术改变世界的力量的意思完全不一致，故排除A)；原文没有提及职业道德，故排除B)；原文中提到在理解认知能力的过程中，我们要警惕将歧视抬高为科学，这与C)“误解对人类认知研究的发现”意思不一致，故排除C)。