In the 1950s, possessing only middling intelligence was not likely to severely limit your life's trajectory. IQ wasn't a big factor in whom you married, where you lived, or what others thought of you. The qualifications for a good job, whether on an assembly line or behind a desk, mostly revolved around integrity, work ethic, and a knack for getting along—bosses didn't routinely expect college degrees, much less ask to see SAT scores.
    The 2010s, in contrast, are a terrible time to not be brainy. Those who consider themselves bright openly mock others for being less so. Even in this age of rampant concern over microaggressions and victimization, we maintain open season on the non-smart. People who'd swerve off a cliff rather than use a pejorative for race, religion, physical appearance, or disability are all too happy to drop the s-bomb: Indeed, degrading others for being "stupid" has become nearly automatic in all forms of disagreement.
    This gleeful derision seems especially cruel in view of the more serious abuse that modem life has heaped upon the less intellectually gifted. Few will be surprised to hear that, according to the 1979 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, a long-running federal study, IQ correlates with chances of landing a financially rewarding job. Other analyses suggest that each IQ point is worth hundreds of dollars in annual income—surely a painful formula for the 80 million Americans with an IQ of 90 or below.
    We must stop glorifying intelligence and treating our society as a playground for the smart minority. We should instead begin shaping our economy, our schools, even our culture with an eye to the abilities and needs of the majority, and to the full range of human capacity. It could also discourage hiring practices that arbitrarily and counterproductively weed out the less-well-IQ'ed. This might even redound to employers' benefit: Whatever advantages high intelligence confers on employees, it doesn't necessarily make for more effective, better employees. Among other things, the less brainy are, according to studies and some business experts, less likely to be oblivious of their own biases and flaws, to mistakenly assume that recent trends will continue into the future, to be anxiety-ridden, and to be arrogant.  In the 1950s, a boss would hire a worker depending on ______.
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】 事实细节题。根据定位词可以找到第一段第三句The qualifications for a good job...mostly revolved around integrity(获取一份好工作的资格……大都取决于诚信),从这句话里可以看出D选项“雇员的诚信”最符合。
   A项“工作人员的智商”和C项“教育背景”,第一段最后一句bosses didn't routinely expect college degrees, much less ask to see SAT scores(老板大多数情况下不看大学学历,更不会看SAT成绩),所以智商和教育背景都不是考虑因素。B项和A项有类似之处,可排除。