单选题There are many shops in Singapore where customers still bargain, although prices are clearly shown on the goods. There is nothing out of the ordinary in haggling; some shopkeepers expect you to and will be surprised if you accept their prices immediately. We know that the prices in some stores are a bit higher than those in Change Alley, but we also realize that to keep a store like Robinson's is by no means cheap. Besides, in such places we shop in air-conditioned (空调) com-fort. For all these, we pay a little extra. It is not always true to say that things in Change Alley cost less. I once bought a Czechoslo-vakian glass butter-dish from Robinson's for a little under two dollars. I then went on to Change Al-ley and just by chance saw an article of the same shape, design and size, in one of the shops. I then asked about its price, and was surprised when the man demanded more than four dollars for it. "How much can you offer?" he shouted at me. I offered him exactly the same price I paid for the article and his reply was shockingly rude (粗鲁). I opened my bag, showed him my receipt, stared at him and walked out of his shop. A buyer in England expects to find the price of goods clearly shown, or, to be told exactly what the price is. He knows this is the lowest price that will be accepted. If he thinks the price is be- yond what he can afford, he shrugs (耸耸) his shoulders and walks away. He does not attempt to bargain with the shopkeeper. Even if he showed annoyance or surprise, he would expect to be told that if the price was unacceptable, he should try elsewhere.

单选题For more than fifty years we have known, or could have known, that there is an unconscious to counterbalance consciousness. Medical psychology has furnished all the necessary empirical and experimental proofs of an unconscious psychic reality which demonstrably influences consciousness and behavior. All this is known, but no practical conclusions have been drawn from it. We still go on thinking and acting as if we were simplex and not duplex. Accordingly, we imagine ourselves to be innocuous, reasonable, and human. We do not think of distrusting our motives, or of asking ourselves how the inner man feels about the things we do in the outside world, but actually it is frivolous, superficial, and unreasonable of us, as well as psychically unhygienic, to overlook the reaction and viewpoint of the unconscious. One can regard one"s stomach or heart as unimportant or even worthy of contempt, but nevertheless overeating and overexertion have consequences which affect the whole man. Yet we think that psychic mistakes and their consequences can be erased by mere words, for "psychic" means less than air to most people. All the same, nobody can deny that without the psyche there would be no world at all and still less a human world. Virtually everything depends on human soul and its functions. It is worthy of all the attention we can give it, especially today when everyone admits that the weal or woe of the future will be decided not by attacks of wild animals, by natural catastrophes, or by the danger of world-wide epidemics but rather by the psychic changes in man. Only an almost imperceptible disturbance of equilibrium in a few of our rulers" heads could plunge the world into blood, fire, and radioactivity. The technical means to this destruction are available to both sides. And certain conscious deliberations, uncontrolled by an inner opponent, can be all too easily indulged, as we have already seen from the example of one "leader". The consciousness of modern man still clings so much to outward objects that he believes them exclusively responsible, as if it were on them that decisions depended. That the psychic state of certain individuals could emancipate itself for once from the behavior of objects is something that is considered far too little, although irrationalities of this sort are observed every day and can happen to everyone.

单选题Once upon a time, in the "dominion of new haven", it was illegal to kiss your children on Sunday. Or make a bed or cut your hair or eat mince pies or cross a river unless you were a clergyman riding your circuit. If you lived in Connecticut in 1650, there was no mistaking Sunday for just another shopping day; regardless of whether you"d go to hell for breaking the Sabbath, you could certainly go to jail. Centuries later, the sense that Sunday is special is still wired in us, a miniature sabbatical during which to peel off the rest of the week and savor ritual, religious or otherwise. Sunday worship, Sunday football, Sunday papers, Sunday brunch, the day you call your mother, the night the family gathers around the TV to watch, once upon a time, The Wonderful World of Disney and, now The Sim psons. The idea that rest is a right has deep roots in our history. Blue laws were a gift as much as a duty, a command to relax and reflect. That tension, explains Sunday historian Alexis McCrossen, has always been less between sacred and secular than between work and respite; America does not readily sit still, even for a day. The Civil War and a demand for news begat the Sunday paper; industrialization inspired progressives to argue that libraries and museums should open on Sundays so working people could elevate themselves. Major league baseball held its first Sunday game in 1892. Joseph Pulitzer realized the Sunday paper was less about news than about fun, comics and book reviews, and soon the theaters, amusement parks and fairs were open too. Over time, Sunday has gone from a day we could do only a very few things to the only day we can do just about anything we want. The U.S. is too diverse, our lives too busy, our economy too global and our appetites too vast to lose a whole day that could be spent working or playing or power shopping. Pulled between piety and profit, even Christian bookstores are open. Children come to Sunday school dressed in their soccer uniforms; some churches have started their own leagues just to control the schedule. Politicians recite their liturgies in TV studios. Post offices may still be closed, but once you miss that first Sunday e-mail from the boss, it becomes forever harder not to log on and check in. Even the casinos are open. If your soul has no Sunday, it becomes an orphan, Albert Schweitzer said—which raises a question for our times. What do we lose if Sunday becomes just like any other day? Lawmakers in Virginia got to spend part of their summer break debating that question, thanks to a mistake they made last winter when they inadvertently revived a "day of rest" rule; hotels and hospitals and nuclear power plants would have had to give workers a weekend day off or be fined $500. After a special legislative session was convened to fix the error, Virginia"s workers, like the rest of us, are once more potentially on call 24/7. Meanwhile, Rhode Island just became the 32nd state to let liquor stores open every Sunday; until this month, they could do so only in December, perhaps because even George Washington"s eggnog recipe called for brandy, whiskey and rum. Social conservatives may want to honor the Fourth Commandment, but businesses want the income, states need the tax revenues, and busy families want the flexibility. With progress, of course, comes backlash from those who desperately want to preserve the old ways. Morn-and-pop liquor stores in New York fought to keep the blue laws to have more time with their families. Car dealers in Kansas City pushed for a law to make them close on Sundays so they could have a day off without losing out to competition. Chick-Fil-A, a chain of more than 1,100 restaurants in 37 states, closes on Sundays because its founder, Truett Cathy, promised employees time to "worship, spend time with family and friends or just plain rest from the work week," says the chain"s website. "Made sense then, still makes sense now." Pope John Paul Ⅱ even wrote an apostolic letter in defense of Sunday.. "When Sunday loses its fundamental meaning and becomes merely part of a "weekend"," he wrote, "people stay locked within a horizon so limited that they can no longer see "the heavens"." In an age with no free time, we buy it through hard choices. Do we skip church so we can sleep in or skip soccer so we can go to church or find a family ritual—cook together, read together—that we treat as sacred? That way, at least some part of Sunday faces in a different direction, whether toward heaven or toward one another.

单选题

单选题[此试题无题干]

单选题Businesses put lots of time and money into new plans, programs and excellent employees with the hope things will change. Yet, at the end of the effort, not much changes. What happens? In most cases, those new plans, programs and employees enter a company with an existing culture(文化). And plans, programs and new employees have a way of conforming to(顺应) the existing culture. The culture of your business is the result of a particular mindset, or a particular way of thinking and the general feelings about certain things. Most often, it is the mindset of the founder or people managing the business. The founder has gotten to where he is because of his skill sets, knowledge base and personal beliefs, which unfortunately all come with inherent (固有的) limits. Why? Skills, knowledge and beliefs come from what he or she already knows or has experienced. In other words, it comes from the past. We (people) try to make the past fit the future. Just because something worked in the past, doesn't mean it is suitable for the future. As the saying goes, if you do and think what you have always done and thought, you will have what you have always had. Therefore, lasting changes have to start with the way people think. To make changes in the way you think, you will be required to set goals beyond your basic abilities and continuously think them through. It is a way to train yourself and people to get out of the comfort zone where you feel happy with your knowledge and skills.

单选题A.TradeisstillflourishinginEnglandvillages.B.Englandvillagesaboundinfrozenfoodandantiques.C.Asuperficialtravelerturnsouttobetoocritical.D.Asuperficialtravelerfavorsflourishingtrade.

单选题Questions 15-18

单选题The British author Salman Rushdie is selling his personal archive to a wealthy American university. The archive, which includes personal diaries written during the decade that he spent living in hiding from Islamic extremists, is being bought by the Emory University in Atlanta for an undisclosed sum. The move has sparked concern that Britain's literary heritage is being lost to foreign buyers. The archive also includes two unpublished novels. Rushdie, 59, said last week that his priority had been to "find a good home" for his papers, but admitted that money had also been a factor. "I don't see why I should give them away," he said. "It seemed to me quite reasonable that one should be paid." The sum involved is likely to match or exceed similar deals. In 2003 Emory bought the archive of Ted Hughes, the late poet laureate, for a reported $ 600,000. Julian Barnes, the author of Flaubert's Parrot, is said to have sold his papers to the University of Texas at Austin for $200,000. Rushdie was born in Bombay (Mumbai) but educated in Britain. His book Midnight's Children was voted the best Booker prize winner in 25 years and he is regarded as a leading British literary novelist. The sale of his papers will annoy the British Library, which is about to hold a conference to discuss how to stop famous writers' archives being sold abroad. Yesterday Clive Field, the director of scholarship and collections at the library, said: "I am pleased that Rushdie's papers will be preserved in a publicly accessible institution, but disappointed that we didn't have an opportunity to discuss the acquisition of the archive with him." Rushdie' said the British Library "never asked me about the archive". Emory University enjoys a large endowment thanks to a student who became a senior executive at Coca-Cola, and already holds the archives of the poets W B Yeats and Seamus Heaney, as well as Hughes. "Emory seems to be very serious about building a collection of contemporary literature," said Rushdie. "Not only do they have the papers of Hughes and Heaney, but also Paul Muldoon and other writers. I got the sense that they want to collect contemporary novelists as well and it just felt very good to be part of that. " Rushdie, who now lives in New York, has accepted a position as a visiting fellow and will spend a month on the campus in Decatur, a leafy suburb of Atlanta, every year until 2012. "They asked if I'd ever thought about putting my archive anywhere and, to tell you the truth, until that moment I really hadn't," Rushdie said. "My archive is so voluminous that I don't have room in my house for it and it's in an outside storage facility. I was worried about that and wanted to feel it was in a safe place. " The papers will be open for scholars to study with one key exception, the "fatwa" diaries that Rushdie wrote under threat of death from Islamic extremists for writing The Satanic Verses. He spent a decade in hiding under the protection of Scotland Yard after Ayatollah Khomeini, then leader of Iran, called the book "blasphemous against Islam" in 1989. The author may use the diaries as the basis for a book. "I wouldn't want them out in the open, I want to be the first person to have a go at the material, whether as a serious autobiography or as a memoir. " He was ambivalent about the idea of scholars studying his papers. "The whole thing is very bizarre, you know, it's like imagining someone going through your underwear. " The two unpublished novels—The Antagonist, influenced by Thomas Pynchon, the American writer, and The Book of Peer—were written by Rushdie in the 1970s. "The Antagonist was a contemporary London novel, set around Ladbroke Grove where I was living at the time. I think it was embarrassingly Pynchonesque. "Chris Smith, the former culture minister who chairs the UK Literary Heritage Working Group, said: "It is a very sad day for British literature and scholarship. Our literary heritage is arguably our greatest contribution to culture and we should be taking special care to protect that." Andrew Motion, the poet laureate, last week called for the government to remove Vat from unbound papers, which increases the cost of purchases in this country. Stephen Enniss, of Emory University, said: "There is worldwide interest in Rushdie. We are catering for the long-term care of the archive and will welcome scholars from all over the world. /

单选题

单选题 What will future historians remember about the impact of science during the last decade of the 20th century? They will not be much concerned with many of the marvels that currently preoccupy us, such as the miraculous increase in the power of home computers and the unexpected growth of the Internet. Nor will they dwell much on global warming, the loss of biodiversity and other examples of our penchant for destruction. Instead, the end of 20th century will be recognized as the time when, for better or worse, science began to bring about a fundamental shift in our perception of ourselves. It will be the third time that science has forced us to re-evaluate who we are. The first time, of course, was the revolution that began with Copernicus in 1543 and continued with Kepler, Galileo and Newton. Despite the Church's opposition, we came to realize that the Earth does not lie at the centre of the universe. Instead we gradually found we live on a small planet on the edge of a minor galaxy, circling one star in a universe that contains billion of others. Our unique position in the universe was gone for ever. A few centuries later we were moved even further from stage centre. The Darwinian revolution removed us from our position as a unique creation of God. Instead we discovered we were just another part of the animal kingdom proud to have "a miserable ape for a grandfather", as Thomas Huxley put it in 1850. We know now just how close to the apes we are—over 90% of our genes are the same of those of the chimpanzee. Increasing knowledge of our own genetics is one of the driving forces in the third great conceptual shift that will soon take place. Others are the growing knowledge of the way our minds work, our new ability to use knowledge of the nervous system to design drugs that affect specific states of mind and the creation of sophisticated scanners which enable us to see what is happening inside our brains. In the third revolution we are taking our own selves to pieces and finding the parts which make up the machine that is us. Much of the new knowledge from genetics, molecular biology and the neurosciences is esoteric. But its cultural impact is already running ahead of science. People begin to see themselves not as wholes with a moral centre but the result of the combined action of parts for which they have little responsibility. It's Nobody's Fault is the title of a popular American book on "difficult" children. Many different children, the book explains, are not actually difficult but are suffering from Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). There is nothing wrong with them or the way they have been brought up. Rather, the part of the brain which controls attention is short of a particular neurotransmitter. You might, as many people do, question the way in which the disorder has been diagnosed on such a staggering scale. But that is not the point. The cultural shift is that people are not responsible for their disorders, only for obtaining treatment for the parts of them that have gone wrong. Even when a treatment is not to hand, the notion that we are made of "clusters of functions" remains strong. Genetic analysis supports this view. A gene linked to alcoholism has been located and a Gallup poll has revealed that the great majority of Americans consider alcoholism to be a disease There are claims of genes too for obesity, homosexuality and even for laziness. Some claims about genes may be silly. Or you may think that the current conceptual shift is just a re-run of old arguments about the relative roles of nature and nurture. Instead, take one drug, Viagra, as an example of the new way of thinking about ourselves. If you suffer from impotence, it might have a variety of physiological causes. Or you might just be anxious about sexual performance. But Viagra does not make such fine distinctions: it acts at the level of the chemical reactions that control the blood flow needed to maintain an erection. The more direct means we have of changing who we are, through changing the parts that we are composed of, the harder becomes the question of who was the person who made the decision to change, before becoming someone else. This will be the real issue for the 21st century: who are we, if we are the sum of our parts and science has given us the power to change those parts?

单选题 Drivers on the Basingstoke by-pass used to have their attention diverted by a sign that reads A MOMENT'S INATTENTION CAUSES ACCIDENTS. This self-defeating warning has now been removed, but its message is still very much to the point. Almost anything can cause an accident. Apart from momentary inattention, it might be a minor miscalculation, a sudden fit of coughing, a bop on the head with a teddy-bear from a child in the back seat, an argument with the wife, fog, falling asleep at the wheel, bad eyesight, a glaring sun, ice, rain, wind, or snow-all these can make the difference between a tragic hit and a lucky miss. Although human error plays its part, it is by no means the only cause of accidents. There must be some cause other than simple human error. Road construction plays its part: researchers have found that it is not at the obvious danger spot- sharp corners, cross-roads, narrow lanes — that accidents happen. It is on those roads where there are subtle visual traps, unexpected changes in the shape or surface of the road, or even insufficient or badly-placed signs. Wherever there is a "black spot", it means that something is seriously wrong with the road. Why else did the careless driving of so many come out at that particular spot? What the law requires when you have an accident. There are, firstly the legal formalities of exchanging names and addresses with others involved in an accident and, in Certain cases, informing the police. However, you are required by law to stop after an accident only if. 1. Somebody other than yourself in or outside your car has been injured. 2. A vehicle not of your own has been damaged. 3. Any horse, cow, donkey, sheep, or dog has been injured. It has been said that if a driver continues unaware of causing injury he must be acquitted. But the courts are wary of that excuse. Furthermore, the driver himself must wait at the scene; it is not enough for him to leave his chauffeur or a friend to attend to the boring formalities while he goes off on more important business. If you have been involved in an accident and have stopped, you must give your name, address, and registration number to anyone who has a good reason for requesting it; this means anyone affected by the accident. If these formalities which are complied with it is not necessary to wait for the arrival of the police. It is, however, often wise to do so. The police are experts at drawing plans, taking measurements and photographs and gathering other evidence. In your absence the police could be given a biased story against you; and you yourself might warn to point out certain features of the accident to the police.

单选题Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passage as a symptom of major depressive disorder?

单选题At first glance, the image that flashed on the 19-inch computer screen looked like an ordinary road map. Then J. Richardson, acting manager of the Federal Aviation Administration"s Central Flow Control Facility in Washington, began tapping at his keyboard. With one stroke he zoomed in to an aerial view of the New York Metropolitan area, divided not along town or county lines but along sectors of airspace. With another keystroke he eliminated hundreds of tiny black dots showing the location of low-flying aircraft and private jets. What remained on the screen were larger, winged symbols representing commercial airliners. With a few more key taps he color-coded the jetliners according to their airport destination: red for La Guardia, green for Newark, brown for John F. Kennedy. To computer buffs at ease with the graphic virtuosity of Max Headroom, the FAA demonstration might seem primitive. But to air-traffic professionals gathered in the agency"s sixth floor "war room", it represented a technological breakthrough. Prior to last week, FAA radar data showing the location of planes flying over the U. S. could be shown only piecemeal on computer screens at one or more of the aviation agency"s 20 regional control centers. Now, all that information has been merged and displayed on a single cathod-ray screen, giving the nation"s air traffic controllers an unprecedented view of overhead traffic patterns as they unfold from coast to coast. Exclaimed the FAA"s Richardson, with pardonable pride: "It"s unbelievable!" Well, at least impressively intricate. The objective of the system is to provide centralized management of traffic problems as they may build up at any of the country"s 12,500 airports. Cost of the new computer operation so far: about $2 million. The FAA"s ultimate goal, though, is multi-billion-dollar air-traffic control system so highly automated that it can monitor flights and direct pilots with little or no human intervention. Such a system is far in the future, but a new linkup may have arrived just in time. FAA officials say that with their new control system they will be able to meet those recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board without reducing the number of flights entering or leaving the critical choke points. Using the new computers, supervisors can monitor with greater precision specific sections of airspace that are becoming dangerously over-crowded. Traffic jams can then be alleviated or prevented by shifting the altitude of some flights or rerouting others so that they bypass congested areas. By this fall, when more complex computer programs should be in place, controllers hope to be able to predict at least two hours in advance when an airspace sector is about to become saturated, and thus prevent delays. Says Jack Ryan, director of the FAA"s Air traffic Operations Service: "We will be ready to head off problems before they occur." The FAA"s glowing new capability is attracting curiosity from other federal agencies. The Defense Department, which must monitor the flow of aircraft into the U. S."s air defense identification zone, is said to be fascinated by the new system. So is the Drug Enforcement Administration, which desperately seeks to know the identity of every aircraft entering U. S. airspace, especially those from the south. They are particularly impressed with an FAA feature that allows controllers to place an electronic cursor over an individual blip, press a key and see all the available aircraft data displayed on the screen. Any blip that fails to provide information has not registered a flight plan with the FAA and may be fair game for interception.

单选题 Directions: In this section you will read several passages. Each one is followed by several questions about it. You are to choose ONE best answer, (A), (B), (C) or (D), to each question. Answer all the questions following each passage on the basis of what is stated or implied in that passage and write the letter of the answer you have chosen in the corresponding space in your ANSWER BOOKLET. Questions 1～5 Richard, King of England from 1189 to 1199, with all his characteristic virtues and faults cast in a heroic mould, is one of the most fascinating medieval figures. He has been described as the creature and embodiment of the age of chivalry, In those days the lion was much admired in heraldry, and more than one king sought to link himself with its repute. When Richard's contemporaries called him "Coeur de Lion"(The Lion Heart), they paid a lasting compliment to the king of beasts. Little did the English people owe him for his services, and heavily did they pay for his adventures. He was in England only twice for a few short months in his ten years' reign; yet his memory has always English hearts, and seems to present throughout the centuries the pattern of the fighting man. In all deeds of prowess as well as in large schemes of war Richard shone. He was tall and delicately shaped strong in nerve and sinew, and most dexterous in arms. He rejoiced in personal combat, and regarded his opponents without malice as necessary agents in his fame. He loved war, not so much for the sake of glory or political ends, but as other men love science or poetry, for the excitement of the struggle and the glow of victory. By this his whole temperament was toned, and united with the highest qualities of the military commander. Love of war called forth all the powers of his mind and body. Although a man of blood and violence, Richard was too impetuous to be either treacherous on habitually cruel. He was as ready to forgive as he was hasty to offend; he was open-handed and munificent to profusion; in war circumspect in design and skilful in execution; in political a child, lacking in subtlety and experience. His political alliances were formed upon his likes and dislikes; his political schemes had neither unity nor clearness of purpose. The advantages gained for him by military geoids were flung away through diplomatic ineptitude. When, on the journey to the East, Messina in Sicily was won by his arms he was easily persuaded to share with his polished, faithless ally, Philip Augustus, fruits of a victory which more wisely used might have foiled the French King's artful schemes. The rich and tenable acquisition of Cyprus was cast away even more easily than it was won. His life was one magnificent parade, which, when ended, left only an empty plain. In 1199, when the difficulties of raising revenue for the endless war were at their height, good news was brought to King Richard. It was said there had been dug up near the castle of Chaluz, on the lands of one of his French vassals, a treasure of wonderful quality; a group of golden images of an emperor, his wife, sons and daughters, seated round a table, also of gold, had been unearthed. The King claimed this treasure as lord paramount. The lord of Chaluz resisted the demand, and the King laid siege to his small, weak castle. On the third day, as he rode daringly, near the wall. Confident in his hard-tried luck, a bolt from a crossbow struck him in the left shoulder by the neck. The wound, already deep, was aggravated by the necessary cutting out of the arrow-head. Gangrene set in, and Coeur de Lion knew that he must pay a soldier' s debt. He prepared for death with fortitude and calm, and in accordance with the principles he had followed. He arranged his affairs; he divided his personal belongings among his friends or bequeathed them to charity. He declared John to be his heir, and made all present swear fealty to him. He ordered the archer who had shot the fatal bolt, and who was now a prisoner, to be brought before him. He pardoned him, and made him a gift of money. For seven years he had not confessed for fear of being compelled to be reconciled to Philip, but now he received the offices of the Church with sincere and exemplary piety, and died in the forty-second year of his age on April 6, 1199, worthy, by the consent of all men, to sit with King Arthur and Roland and other heroes of martial romance at some Eternal round Table, which we trust the Creator of the Universe in his comprehension will not have forgotten to provide. The archer was flayed alive.

单选题Any downtime such as the Easter weekend break takes me back to the summer of 2007 when I went on holiday and nearly died. It was the year the iPhone was born. The world was beginning to gorge on the gold rush of the Internet, social networks and mobile phones—the so called "triple revolution". I was no exception. With a new business and a new baby, I was exhausted. Whenever possible, I was going online in a world which, a decade on, posts more than 6,000 tweets a second, where 60% of Britons are on Facebook and 14m of us are on Instagram. There is a cost to all this connectedness and being "always on". In 2007, arriving in Aldeburgh, Suffolk, famous for its lack of technology as much as its shingle shore, I went for a gentle jog along the beach to get in the holiday mood. Yet I felt myself grinding to a halt. I bad ignored a cold for months. Now I had the strange sensation that I was filling up with the shingle beneath me. Dragging myself back to the cottage, I muttered: "I think I have overdone it." My husband and our children looked on with scepticism: wasn"t I just incapable of switching off? Three days later I was in Ipswich Hospital with pneumonia and sepsis. I was a few hours from all my organs shutting down. During my recovery I mulled on what had happened to me and whether I was uniquely bad at managing my life. I began to notice there was something unhealthy about this new era of "infobesity" and time poverty which has steadily worsened. I"ve been studying the effects of connectedness and its discontents and have been devising strategies to counteract the impact that the Age of Overload is having on our health. I"m now publishing my findings about what I call "social health". In it I recommend ways in which we can get the best of the fully connected era and not suffer its worst excesses. I have started by looking at the history of connectedness itself. The human has fought to become "king of the jungle" in 200,000 short years. But in just an evolutionary nanosecond—150 years—we have jumped into an entirely new era. Everything from the telephone to central heating and. of course, the computer has transformed us for ever. Yet we are seeing a society and a "system" that are not, for want of a better word, healthy. Evidence shows we are not happier, more productive, or always safer: more than 10m working days a year in the UK are lost to "stress", anxiety and depression and global productivity is stagnant and, if anything, falling. Now that we live cheek by jowl with a new species, technology, we must preserve the very essence of what makes us human and which led us to the top of the animal kingdom: our instincts, our communication skills, our organisational abilities. They can be complemented but not comprehensively outsourced to technology or we pay a price: inefficiency, inaccuracy, incompetence. And disaffection, low productivity, stress and economic weakness. Yet we all hurtle on. The Road Runner Show cartoon tells a smart bird outruns the hapless Wile E Coyote who chases him, overrunning the cliff edge, legs spinning hopelessly in perpetuity. It is useful to look at the postwar period because that is when the modern concept of health was first conceived with the creation of the World Health Organisation (WHO). Within its original definition is the goal of physical and mental health, "not merely the absence of disease or infirmity". It refers to "social well-being" but with no detail. We need an updated definition fit for purpose in this century. What exactly is social health? It means managing all forms of connectedness, online and offline. It means getting our "diet" of information from people as much as from algorithms. It means developing habits around connectedness—much as we do around keeping fit and watching what we eat. It means managing your networks as systematically as you would your finances. And it means one thing above all: managing your time and your diary like you do your body. Choose carefully what exactly goes in it. Social health is both a mindset and a behaviour; it is having trusted sources to find out what you need to know. Strong and diverse networks are crucial to social health and very different from the "work the room" association of old-style networking. Social health means having networks where you meet people who might challenge you, teach you, inspire you, not just help you get on and up. Social health means not believing everything you read or thinking that being on Facebook is better than being face to face. Today we all know the difference between a carb and a protein, how to value our sleep intake, our alcohol consumption. We can copy what we have achieved in mental and physical health and adapt it to develop social health. My own antidote? I have a weekly "techno Shabbat" when I go offline and reconnect only in real time, with real people, and real conversations. I favour small, intimate networks over large ones and I control my information intake just like my Easter eggs: in moderation.

单选题

单选题Kate is an honest girl; I say it, ______ I don't like her. [A] as if [B] as long as [C] as though [D] even if

单选题Tom ______ a photograph of me while I was not looking. [A] is taking [B] took [C] will take [D] had taken