单选题 {{B}}Text 2{{/B}}

Most human beings actually decide before they think. When any human being executive, specialized expert, or person in the street—encounters a complex issue and forms an opinion, often within a matter of seconds, how thoroughly has he or she explored the implications of the various courses of action? Answer: not very thoroughly. Very few people, no matter how intelligent or experienced, can take inventory of the many branching possibilities, possible outcomes, side effects, and undesired consequences of a policy or a course of action in a matter of seconds. Yet, those who pride themselves on being decisive often try to do just that. And once their brains lock onto an opinion, most of their thinking thereafter consists of finding support for it.
A very serious side effect of argumentative decision making can be a lack of support for the chosen course of action on the part of the "losing" faction. When one faction wins the meeting and the others see themselves as losing, the battle often doesn't end when the meeting ends. Anger, resentment, and jealousy may lead them to sabotage the decision later, or to reopen the debate at later meetings.
There is a better way. As philosopher Aldous Huxley said, "It isn't who is right, but what is right, that counts. "
The structured-inquiry method offers a better alternative to argumentative decision making by debate. With the help of the Internet and wireless computer technology, the gap between experts and executives is now being dramatically closed. By actually putting the brakes on the thinking process, slowing it down, and organizing the flow of logic, it's possible to create a level of clarity that sheer argumentation can never match.
The structured-inquiry process introduces a level of conceptual clarity by organizing the contributions of the experts, then brings the experts and the decision makers closer together. Although it isn't possible or necessary for a president or prime minister to listen in on every intelligence analysis meeting, it's possible to organize the experts' information to give the decision maker much greater insight as to its meaning. This process may somewhat resemble a marketing focus group ; it's a simple, remarkably clever way to bring decision makers closer to the source of the expert information and opinions on which they must base their decisions.

单选题 From the first paragraph we can learn that______.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】推论题。(Lines 4-9，Para．1)Very few people，no matter how intelligent or experienced，can take inventory of the many branching possibilities，possible outcomes，sideeffects，and undesired consequences of a policy or a course of action in a matter of seconds．Yet，those who pride themselves on being decisive often try to do just that．And once theirbrains lock onto an opinion，most of their thinking thereafter consists of finding support for it．文章一开始就谈到，大多数人实际上先决定，后思考(decide before they think)。但是，很少有人，不管他多聪明或多有经验，能够在做决定前那一刹那就将各种问题考虑得面面俱到。而自夸有决断能力的人经常就试图要那么做，然而却做不到这一点，他们的头脑一旦锁定一种见解，其思想就固定了。

单选题 Judging from the context, what does the word "them" (Line 4, Para. 2) refer to?

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】语义题。(Lines 2-5，Para．2)When one faction wins the meeting and the others see themselves as losing，the battle often doesn't end when the meeting ends．Anger，resentment，and jealousy may lead them to sabotage the decision later，or to reopen the debateat later meetings．根据上下文，此处的“them”指的是“losing”faction，也即“失败的派别”：愤怒、怨恨和嫉妒会导致他们破坏(sabotage)做出的决定。