Passage 2
A recent article indicated that business schools were going to encourage the study of ethics as part of the curriculum. If graduate schools have to discover ethics, then we are truly in serious trouble. I no more believe that ethics can be taught past the age of 10 than I believe in the teaching of so-called creative writing. There are some things that you are born with, or they are taught by your parents, your priest or your grade-school teacher, but not in college or in graduate school. I believe that businesses should go back to basics in recruiting, should forget about the business schools and recruit the best young liberal arts students we can find.
The issue of ethics, both in business and in politics, takes on a sharper focus in the money culture of a service economy than in our earlier industrial days. For the businessmen and the politicians, virtually the only discipline that can be applied is ethical. Financial scandals are not new, nor is political corruption. However, the potential profit, and the ease with which they can be made from insider trading, market manipulation, conflict-of-interest transactions and many other illegal or unethical activities are too great and too pervasive to be ignored. At the same time, those institutions that historically provided the ethical basis to the society — the family, the church and the primary school — are getting weaker and weaker. Hence, our dilemma.
The application of ethics, as well as overall judgment, is made even more difficult by the increasing application of rapidly changing technology to major problems in our society. How does a layman deal with the questions raised by “Star Wars”, genetic engineering, AIDS and the myriad issues relating to the availability and affordability of lifesaving drugs and other medical technology? It is clear that one cannot abdicate to the technocrats the responsibility of making judgment on these issues.
Two important risks accompany the discarding of our value system when dealing with a money culture and high technology. The first risk is that more people will turn to radical religion and politics. People always search for frameworks that provide a certain amount of support. If they do not find it in their family, in their school, in their traditional church or in themselves, they will turn to more absolute solutions. The second risk is the polarization of society. We have created hundreds of paper millionaires and quite a few billionaires. But alongside the wealth and glamour of Manhattan and Beverly Hills, we have seen the growth of a semi-permanent or permanent underclass.
The most important function of higher education is to equip the individual with the capacity to compete and to fulfill his or her destiny. A critically important part of this capacity is the ability to critically evaluate a political process that is badly in need of greater public participation. This raises the issue of teaching ethics in graduate schools. Ethics is a moral compass. Ideally, it should coincide with enlightened self-interest, not only to avoid jail in the short run but to avoid social upheaval in the long run. It must be embedded early, at home, in grade school, in church. It is highly personal. I doubt it can be taught in college.
Yet what is desperately needed in an increasingly complex world dominated by technicians is the skepticism and the sense of history that a liberal arts education provides. History, philosophy, logic, English, and literature are more important to deal with today's problems than great technical competence. These skills must combine with an ethical sense acquired early in life to provide the framework needed to make difficult judgments. We most certainly need the creativity of great scientific minds. But all of us cannot be technical experts, nor do we need to be. In the last analysis, only judgment, tempered by a sense of history and a healthy skepticism of cant and ideology will give us the wherewithal to make difficult choices.
What are the two alternatives of the dilemma the author is referring to?
由文章第二段第三句至第五句可知，金融丑闻和政治腐败一样，已经不是新概念了。潜在的利益以及 许多不合法、不道德的活动已经太庞大、太普遍了。与此同时，为社会提供道德基础的机制，比如家庭、 宗教等的力量越来越弱。我们进入到了两难的境地。也就是说作者所指的困境是越来越多不道德的活动和 越来越弱的道德基础。因此选A。
Why are ethical rules more difficult to apply today?
文章第三段第一句提到“The application of ethics, as well as overall judgment, is made even more difficult by the increasing application of rapidly changing technology to major problems in our society.”道德标准之所以更加 难以施行，是因为社会中解决主要问题的快速发展的技术的运用。门外汉是解决不了基因工程、艾滋病等 医学问题的。也就是说在作出明智的判断方面，人们还不够渊博。因此选C。
When people fail to get guidance from traditional ethical basis, ________.
根据文章第四段第二句“The first risk is that more people will turn to radical religion and politics.”可知，当 人们丢弃了价值体系之后，很多人会转向激进的宗教或政治。也就是说，如果人们没有得到传统道德基础 指导的话，他们可能会变成宗教或政治极端分子。因此选D。
The author considers the polarization of society as ________.
文章第四段第一句提到“Two important risks accompany the discarding of our value system when dealing with a money culture and high technology.”。当人们应对拜金文化和高技术时，如果抛弃价值体系，就会导 致两种危险。第五句提到“The second risk is the polarization of society.”第二个危险就是社会两极化。也就是 说作者认为社会两极化是人们在商业中忽视道德准则的结果。因此选C。
Which of the following does the author think less important in dealing with today's problem?
由文章最后一段第二句“History, philosophy, logic, English, and literature are more important to deal with today's problems than great technical competence.”可知，在处理当今时代的问题上，历史、哲学、逻辑、英 语和文学比科技能力更重要。也就是说作者认为技术能力不太重要。因此选B。