单选题 For the moment, mind-reading is still science fiction. But that may not be true for much longer. Several lines of inquiry are converging on the idea that the neurological activity of the brain can be decoded directly, and people"s thoughts revealed without being spoken.
Just imagine the potential benefits. Such a development would allow both the fit and the disabled to operate machines merely by choosing what they want those machines to do. It would permit the profoundly handicapped to communicate more easily than is now possible even with the text-based speech engines used by the likes of Stephen Hawking. It might unlock the mental prisons of people apparently in comas, who nevertheless show some signs of neural activity. For the able-bodied, it could allow workers to dictate documents silently to computers simply by thinking about what they want to say. The most profound implication, however, is that it would abolish the ability to lie.
Who could object to that? You will not bear false witness. Tell the truth, and shame the Devil. Transparency, which speaks for honesty in management, is put forward as the answer to most of today"s evils. But honestly speaking, the truth of the matter is that this would lead to disaster, for lying is at the heart of civilization. People are not the only creatures who lie. Species from squids to chimpanzees have been caught doing it from time to time. But only human beings have turned lying into an art. Call it diplomacy, public relations or simple good manners: lying is one of the things that make the world go round.
The occasional untruth makes domestic life possible, is essential in the office and forms a crucial part of parenting. Politics might be more entertaining without lies—"The prime minister has my full support" would be translated as, "If that half-wit persists in this insane course we"ll all be out on our ears"—but a party system would be hard to sustain without the semblance of loyalty that dishonesty permits.
The truly scary prospect, however, is the effect mind-reading would have on relations between the state and the individual. In a world in which the authorities could peep at people"s thoughts, speaking truth to power would no longer be brave: it would be unavoidable. Information technology already means that physical privacy has become a scarce commodity. Websites track your interests and purchases. Mobile phones give away your location. Video cameras record what you are up to. Lose mental privacy as well, and there really will be nowhere.

单选题 Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 1?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】[解析] 题干已经明确指示本题是对第一段的考查。
细节理解题。根据第一段第一、二句“For the moment, mind-reading is still science fiction. But that may not be true for much longer(眼下，读心还只是科幻小说里的情节，但这样的局面也许不会持续太久)”可知，选项D“读心的梦想未来会变成现实”与文意相符，故为正确答案。
选项A“如今，读心已不再是科幻小说里的情节”与开篇第一句相悖，可排除；根据第一段第三句“Several lines of inquiry are converging on the idea that the neurological activity of the brain can be decoded directly(数种探究的方法正得出同一种观点，即脑部的神经活动可以被直接解码)”可知，直接解码脑部的神经活动目前还处于科学研究阶段，并未变成现实，故排除选项B“科学家们已经直接解码脑部的神经活动”；原文并没有明确提到读心的难易程度如何，选项C说“读心将会和读书一样简单”，属于过度推断，也可排除。

单选题 Which of the following is NOT true according to Paragraph 2?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】[解析] 题干已经明确指示本题是对第二段的考查。
细节理解题。根据文章第二段倒数第三句“It might unlock the mental Prisons of people apparently in comas, who nevertheless show some signs of neural activity(它也许会打开显然陷入昏迷，但却显示了某些神经活动迹象的人被禁锢的内心世界)”可知，读心有助于打开人们被禁锢的内心世界，选项D“读心能更加禁锢人们的内心世界”与此意相悖，故为正确答案。
第二段第三句提到“It would permit the profoundly handicapped to communicate more easily than is now possible(它可以让重度残疾者与人交流起来更加便捷)”，选项A“读心将有助于重度残疾人更好地与人交流”与此意相符，故可排除；第二段第二句“Such a development would allow both the fit and the disabled to operate machines merely by choosing what they want those machines to do(这一进步可以让健全人和残疾人仅仅通过选择想让机器做什么，就能操控它们)”，选项B“读心将有助于健全人和残疾人只靠意念来操控机器”与文意相符，也可排除；选项C“读心将有助于防止人们说谎”与第二段末句“The most profound implication, however, is mat it would abolish the ability to lie(不过，最为深远的影响还是在于它将消除人们说谎的能力)相符，故也可排除。

单选题 It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that ______.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[解析] 题干已经明确指示本题是对第三段的考查。
推理判断题。第三段第五句提到“But honestly speaking, the truth of the matter is that this would lead to disaster, for lying is at the heart of civilization(但说实话，这个问题的真相是，这将带来灾难，因为说谎是社会文明的核心所在)”，既然是核心，当然是必不可少，由此推知选项C“说谎是文明社会不可缺少的事情”与文中内容相符，故为正确答案。
第三段中间部分提到“People are not the only creatures who lie. Species from squids to chimpanzees have been caught doing it from time to time(人不是唯一会说谎的动物，从乌贼到黑猩猩，许多物种都被发现经常有说谎的现象)”，由此可以确定选项A“只有人类才会说谎”不符合原文内容，可排除该项；出于某种特殊目的，人们在外交和公关活动中可能会说谎，但不能因此将谎言等同于外交和公关，选项B“说谎就是外交和公关”表达过于绝对化，不符合文意，可排除；第三段最后一句提到“...lying is one of the things that make the world go round(……说谎是能让世界运转的因素之一)”，也就是说还有其他一些因素也能维持世界运转，选项D“没有谎言世界就无法运转”夸大了谎言的作用，不符合文意，也应排除。

单选题 From Paragraph 4 we can draw the conclusion that ______.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[解析] 题干已经明确指示本题是对第四段的考查。
推理判断题。第四段第一句提到“The occasional untruth makes domestic life possible, is essential in the office and forms a crucial part of parenting(偶尔说谎能让家庭生活得以。维持，在办公室也必不可少，而且还是养育子女过程中的一个重要部分)”，不难看出这里的“说谎”指的是善意的谎言，是不会造成实质危害的谎言，由此推断选项B“在家庭和工作中都需要善意的谎言”为正确答案。
第四段最后一句提到“...but a party system would be hard to sustain without the semblance of loyalty that dishonesty permits(但是如果没有谎言带来的表面的忠实，政党体系会很难维持)”，选项A“如果没有谎言，政党体系会更容易维持”与本句意思相悖，可排除；第四段第一句提到“The occasional untruth...forms a crucial part of parenting(偶尔说谎也是养育子女过程中的一个重要部分)”，选项C“在养育子女的过程中谎言是被禁止的”与此句意思相悖，故可排除；在第四段中，作者并未提到谎言与国家繁荣之间的关系，所以选项D“如果没有谎言，国家会变得更加繁荣”是无根据的推断，因而也可排除。

单选题 What"s the author"s attitude toward the use of mind-reading?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】[解析] 观点态度题。第二段指出了读心能给人们带来的好处，第五段指出读心的弊端，即人们将失去心灵的隐私。从全文看，作者既介绍了读心的积极作用，也指出了读心的消极影响，态度较为客观，选项A“既有积极影响，也有消极影响”正确反映了作者对读心所持的观点，故为正确答案。
在第二段中作者提到读心不仅对残疾人有帮助，健全人也可以从中受益，比如“For the able-bodied, it could allow workers to dictate documents silently to computers simply by thinking about what they want to say(对于体格健全的人来说，它可以让工作人员仅仅是想着自己要说的话，就可以无声地将文件内容传输给计算机)”，故选项B“它仅对残疾人很有帮助”与文意不符，应排除；第五段第一句提到，“The truly scary prospect, however, is the effect mind-reading would have on relations between the state and the individual(不过真正可怕的前景是，读心可能会对国家与个人之间的关系造成影响)”，由此看来，作者认为读心不仅不会改善国家与个人的关系，而且还会造成可怕的影响，故排除选项C；第五段第二句提到，“In a world in which the authorities could peep at people"s thoughts, speaking truth to power would no longer be brave: it would be unavoidable(在当权者可以窥视人们内心想法的世界里，向权力阶层据实相告不再是勇敢之举：这将是不可避免的)”，从语气上看，作者对权力阶层利用读心这一先进技术窥视人们的内心世界颇有微词，因此选项D不符合作者的观点，也应排除。