单选题Scientists have long bickered over whether hypocrisy is driven by emotion or by reason. The role of emotion in moral judgments has upended the Enlightenment notion that our ethical sense is based on high-minded philosophy and cognition. In a new study that will not exactly restore your faith in human nature, psychologists David DeSteno and Piercarlo Valdesolo of Northeastern University instructed 94 people to assign themselves and a stranger one of two tasks, an easy one, looking for hidden images in a photo, or a hard one, solving math and logic problems. The participants could make the assignments themselves, or have a computer do it randomly. Then everyone was asked, how fairly did you act?, from "extremely unfairly" (1) to "extremely fairly" (7). Next they watched someone else make the assignments, and judged that person's ethics. Selflessness was a virtual no-show. 87 out of 94 people opted for the easy task and gave the next guy the onerous one. Hypocrisy, however, showed up with bells on. every single person who made the selfish choice judged his own behavior more leniently—on average, 4.5 vs. 3.1—than that of someone else who grabbed the easy task for himself, the scientists will report in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. The gap suggests how that kind of hypocrisy is possible. For one thing, people's emotions might have gotten the better of them. When we judge our own transgressions less harshly than we judge the same transgressions in others, DeSteno said, it may be because "we have this automatic, gut-level instinct to preserve our self-image. " Adds Dan Batson of the University of Kansas, a pioneer in hypocrisy studies, "people have learned that it pays to seem moral, since it lets you avoid censure and guilt. But even better is appearing moral without having to pay the cost of actually being moral" —such as assigning yourself the tough job. To test the role of cognition in hypocrisy, DeSteno had volunteers again assign themselves an easy task and a stranger an onerous one. But before judging the fairness of their actions, they had to memorize seven numbers. This ploy keeps the brain's thinking regions too tied up to think much about anything else, and it worked, hypocrisy vanished. People judged their own (selfish) behavior as harshly as they did others', strong evidence that moral hypocrisy requires a high-order cognitive process. When the thinking part of the brain is otherwise engaged, we're left with gut-level reactions, and we intuitively and equally condemn bad behavior by ourselves as well as others. If our gut knows when we have erred and judges our transgressions harshly, moral hypocrisy might not be as inevitable as if it were the child of emotions and instincts, which are tougher to change than thinking. "Since it's a cognitive process, we have volitional control over it," argues DeSteno.

单选题The campaign staged by both BMW and Renault are to market

单选题{{B}}Text 1{{/B}} If you see a diamond ring on the fourth finger of a woman's left hand, you probably know what it means: in America, this has long been the digit of choice for betrothal jewelry, and the lore of the trade traces the symbolism back to ancient times. But if you see a diamond ring on the fourth finger of a woman's right hand, you may or may not know that it signifies an independent spirit, or even economic empowerment and changing gender mores. "A lot of women have disposable income," Katie Couric said recently on the "Today" show after showing viewers her Change right-hander. "Why wait for a man to give her a diamond ring?" This notion may be traced back, approximately, to September. That's when the Diamond Information Center began a huge marketing campaign aimed at articulating the meaning of right-hand rings-and thus a rationale for buying them. "Your left hand says 'we' ," the campaign declares. "Your right hand says 'me' ." The positioning is brilliant: the wearer may be married or unmarried and may buy the ring herself or request it as a gift. And while it can take years for a new jewelry concept to work itself thoroughly into the mainstream, the tight-band ring already has momentum. At the higher end of the scale, the jewelry maker Kwiat, which supplies stores like Saks, offers a line of Kwiat Spirit Rings that can retail for as much as ＄5, 000, and "we're selling it faster than we're manufacturing it," says Bill Gould, the company's chief of marketing. At the other end of the stale, mass-oriented retailers that often take a wait-and-see attitude have already jumped on the bandwagon. Firms like Kwiat were given what Gould calls "direction" from the Diamond information Center about the new ring's attributes-multiple diamonds in a north-south orientation that distinguishes it from the look of an engagement ring, and so on. But all this is secondary to the newly minted meaning. "The idea," Morrison says, "is that beyond a trend, this could become a sort of cultural imperative." A tall order? Well, bear in mind that "a diamond is forever" is not a saying handed down from imperial Rome. It was handed down from an earlier generation of De Beers marketers. Joyce Jonas, a jewelry appraiser and historian, notes that De Beers, in the 40's and 50's, took advantage of a changing American class structure to turn diamond rings into an (attainable) symbol for the masses. By now, Jonans observes, the stone alone "is just a commodity" . And this, of course, is what makes its invented significance more Crucial than ever.

单选题Surprisingly enough, modern historians have rarely interested themselves in the history of the American South in the period before the South began to become self-consciously and distinctively " Southern"—the decades after 1815. Consequently, the cultural history of Britain"s North American empire in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries has been written almost as if the Southern colonies had never existed. The American culture that emerged during the Colonial and Revolutionary eras has been depicted as having been simply an extension of New England Puritan culture. However, Professor Davis has recently argued that the South stood apart from the rest of American society during this early period, following its own unique pattern of cultural development. The case for Southern distinctiveness rests_ upon two related premises: first, that the cultural similarities among the five Southern colonies were far more impressive than the differences, and second, that what made those colonies alike also made them different from the other colonies. The first, for which Davis offers an enormous amount of evidence, can be accepted without major recitations, the second is far more problematic. What makes the second premise problematic is the use of the Puritan colonies as a basis for comparison. Quite properly,Davis decries the excessive influence ascribed by historians to the Puritans in the formation of American culture. Yet Davis inadvertently adds weight to such ascriptions by using the Puritans as the standard against which to assess the achievements and contributions of Southern colonials. Throughout, Davis focuses on the important and undeniable differences between the Southern and Puritan colonies in motives for and patterns of early settlement, in attitudes toward nature and Native Americans, and in the degree of receptivity to metropolitan cultural influences. However, recent scholarship has strongly suggested that those aspects of early New England culture that seem to have been most distinctly Puritan, such as the strong religious orientation and the communal impulse, were not even typical of New England as a whole, but were largely confined to the two colonies of Massachusetts and Connecticut. Thus, what in contrast to the Puritan colonies appears to Davis to be peculiarly Southern-acquisitiveness. A strong interest in polities and the law, and a tendency to cultivate metropolitan cultural models were not only more typically English than the cultural patterns exhibited by Puritan Massachusetts and Connecticut, but also almost certainly characteristic of most other early modern British colonies from Barbados north to Rhode Island and New Hampshire. Within the larger framework of American colonial life, then, not the Southern but the Puritan colonies appear to have been distinctive, and even they seem to have been rapidly assimilating to the dominant cultural patterns by the last Colonial period.

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}{{B}}Directions:{{/B}} Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points){{B}}Text 1{{/B}} I don't know if there's something in the water, but my town has exploded with tons of single people! Just last year, practically the only eligibles I knew were my divorced friend Patti, my bud Fulgencio, hubby Rick's barfly pat Craig, and Jimmy the pizza delivery guy. But now, I find-out that my cousin Michelle is leaving her second husband, and a recent chit-chat with my building's manager Sandy revealed that she hasn't had a serious relationship in almost five years! Besides that, at least five suspected singletons have moved into my building since June. Five! For an incurable romantic like me, this is heartbreaking. People are meant to have sweeties! I feel so sorry for single people. How can they bear going through life alone? I know a lot of them put up. that "independent" front, or use that "I'm just waiting for the right person" defense, but they're kidding themselves. Why would anyone turn up her nose at the prospect of a beautiful wedding, a gorgeous bridal gown, and a stunning rock on her finger? She wouldn't. Why would anyone shake a stick at a warm dinner every night, a comfortable home, and a beautiful bride? It just isn’t rational. And I don't like to be harsh, but frankly, it's depressing to see singles out in public. When I see a girl shopping for groceries by herself, or a solitary guy reading while he waits for a bus, I can't help but sense the hollowness that single person feels inside. I'm partially psychic, so I'm aware of other people's inner feelings. Well, this Valentine's Day, I'm not going to be selfish. People like me, people in successful, lasting relationships, are duty-bound to share their romantic wisdom with the less fortunate. Granted, it's been a while since I've been on the dating Scene, so my chops are a bit rusty. In fact, hubby Rick is just about the only guy I've ever dated (Unless you count my pick for the Sadie Hawkins dance in seventh grade, Jordy DeVoe, who ditched me after about 15 minutes. Or this Oriental kid named Thant who wrapped love notes around lunchroom cookies and slipped them into my locker in ninth grade.) But Rick and I have been married nearly 20 years, so I must be doing something right. Dry those tears, Singletons! Pull your-selves together and listen to Wifey Jean. If you follow my advice, I'll bet you dollars to donuts that you'll find your Prince Charming, or Princess Enchanting, in no time!

单选题The author means to tell us that ______.

单选题The word "acquiesce" probably mean ______.

单选题In recent months, RAND researchers have teamed up with a dozen Los Angeles lunch trucks to test healthier menu items—chicken breasts and grilled fish alongside the usual tacos and hamburgers. The results have been modest but promising. The healthy meals were never best-sellers, but they did well enough that a majority of the truck owners plan to keep them on the menu. That"s important, because the trucks tend to serve working-class Latino communities, where obesity rates are high and healthy food can be scarce, leading researcher Deborah Cohen said. "It"s important that the providers are offering these meals," she said. "I think what we showed is that it"s completely feasible." Cohen has spent years arguing that restaurants, grocery stores and other food outlets should take more responsibility for the nation"s obesity epidemic, and more action to stop it. More than one-third of U. S. adults are obese, according to federal statistics, adding billions of dollars to the nation"s health care costs each year. A lunch truck may seem like an unlikely testing ground for healthy menu items, the four-wheel equivalent of a fast-food joint. But most are morn-and-pop operations where cooks make food by hand, using fresh ingredients and often for underserved communities. Cohen called them a "good lab." These aren"t the trendy food trucks that have started to sell fusion tacos and reimagined grilled cheese to hip, young urbanites. These have been part of blue-collar Los Angeles for generations, where they"re known as loncheras, after the Spanglish word lonche, for lunch. Working with a $ 275,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health, RAND researchers enlisted nearly 20 loncheras for a six-month trial they named "La Comida Perfecta," or "The Perfect Meal" About a third of the truck owners later dropped out, leaving 12 who worked with a nutritionist, created their own healthy meals, and then put them on the menu. The six-month pilot program didn"t yield big sales numbers at most trucks, but it did yield some valuable insight into the challenges, big and small, of changing food habits, the researchers said. Truck operators had trouble swapping out their corn tortillas for whole wheat, for example, and their Latino customers especially didn"t care for the brown rice that replaced their traditional Mexican rice. Nearly half of the truck customers were regulars, surveys found, and most knew what they wanted without even looking at the menu. In poorer neighborhoods and blue-collar work sites, that was usually a couple of $1 tacos, not a $7 plate with fruit and salad.

单选题Nuclear power's danger to health, safety, and even life itself can be summed up in one word: radiation. Nuclear radiation has a certain mystery about it, partly because it cannot be detected by human senses. It can't be seen or heard, or touched or tasted, even though it may be all around us. There are other things like that. For example, radio waves are all around us but we can't detect them, sense them, without a radio receiver. Similarly, we can't sense radio activity without a radiation detector. But unlike common radio waves, nuclear radiation is not harmless to human beings and other living things. At very high levels, radiation can kill an animal or human being outright by killing masses of cells in vital organs. But even the lowest levels can do serious damage. There is no level of radiation that is completely safe. If the radiation does not hit anything important, the damage may not be significant. This is the case when only a few cells are hit. And if they are killed outright, your body will replace the dead cells with healthy ones. But if the few cells are only damaged, and if they reproduce themselves, you may be in trouble. They reproduce themselves in a deformed way. They can grow into cancer. Sometimes this does not show up for many years. This is another reason for some of the mystery about nuclear radiation. Serious damage can be done without the victim being aware at the time that damage has occurred. A person can he irradiated and feel fine, then die of cancer five, ten, or twenty years later as a result. Or a child can be born weak or liable to serious illness as a result of radiation absorbed by its grandparents. Radiation can hurt us. We must know the truth.

单选题The decision of the New York Philharmonic to hire Alan Gilbert as its next music director has been the talk of the classical-music world ever since the sudden announcement of his appointment in 2009. For the most part, the response has been favorable, to say the least. "Hooray! At last!" wrote Anthony Tommasini, a sober-sided classical-music critic. One of the reasons why the appointment came as such a surprise, however, is that Gilbert is comparatively little known. Even Tommasini, who had advocated Gilbert"s appointment in the Times, calls him "an unpretentious musician with no air of the formidable conductor about him." As a description of the next music director of an orchestra that has hitherto been led by musicians like Gustav Mahler and Pierre Boulez, that seems likely to have struck at least some Times readers as faint praise. For my part, I have no idea whether Gilbert is a great conductor or even a good one. To be sure, he performs an impressive variety of interesting compositions, but it is not necessary for me to visit Avery Fisher Hall, or anywhere else, to hear interesting orchestral music. All I have to do is to go to my CD shelf, or boot up my computer and download still more recorded music from iTunes. Devoted concertgoers who reply that recordings are no substitute for live performance are missing the point. For the time, attention, and money of the art-loving public, classical instrumentalists must compete not only with opera houses, dance troupes, theater companies, and museums, but also with the recorded performances of the great classical musicians of the 20th century. These recordings are cheap, available everywhere, and very often much higher in artistic quality than today"s live performances; moreover, they can be "consumed" at a time and place of the listener"s choosing. The widespread availability of such recordings has thus brought about a crisis in the institution of the traditional classical concert. One possible response is for classical performers to program attractive new music that is not yet available on record. Gilbert"s own interest in new music has been widely noted: Alex Ross, a classical-music critic, has described him as a man who is capable of turning the Philharmonic into "a markedly different, more vibrant organization." But what will be the nature of that difference? Merely expanding the orchestra"s repertoire will not be enough. If Gilbert and the Philharmonic are to succeed, they must first change the relationship between America"s oldest orchestra and the new audience it hopes to attract.

单选题Greg Focker, played by Ben Stiller, represents a generation of American kids (1) in the 1980s on the philosophy that any achievement, however slight, (2) a ribbon. (3) replaced punishment; criticism became a dirty word. In Texas, teachers were advised to (4) using red ink, the colour of (5) . In California, a task force was set up to (6) the concept of self worth into the education system. Swathing youngsters in a (7) shield of self-esteem, went the philosophy, would protect them from the nasty things in life, such as bad school grades, underage sex, drug abuse, dead-end jobs and criminality. (8) that the ninth-place ribbons are in danger of strangling the (9) children they were supposed to help. America's (10) with self-esteem--like all developments in psychology, it gradually (11) its way to Britain--has turned children who were (12) with (13) into adults who (14) at even the mildest brickbats. Many believe that the feel-good culture has risen at the (15) of traditional education, an opinion espoused in a new book, Dumbing Down Our Kids: Why American Children Feel Good About Themselves But Can't Read, Write, or Add, by the conservative commentator Charles Sykes. Not only that, but the foundations (16) which the self-esteem industry is built are being (17) as decidedly shaky. Roy Baumeister, professor of psychology at Florida State University and once a self-esteem enthusiast, is now (18) a revision of the populist orthodoxy. "After all these years, I'm sorry to say, my recommendation is this: forget, about self-esteem and (19) more on self-control and self-dlscipline," he wrote recently. "Recent work suggests this would be good for the individual and good for society--and might even be able to (20) some of those promises that self-esteem once made but could not keep./

单选题Many foreigners who have not visited Britain call all the inhabitants English, for they are used to thinking of the British Isles as England. (1) , the British Isles contain a variety of peoples, and only the people of England call themselves English. The others (2) to themselves as Welsh, Scottish, or Irish, (3) the case may be; they are often slightly annoyed (4) being classified as "English".Even in England there are many (5) in regional character and speech. The chief (6) is between southern England and northern England. South of a (7) going from Bristol to London, people speak the type of English usually learnt by foreign students, (8) there are local variations. Further north, regional speech is usually" (9) "than that of southern Britain. Northerners are (10) to claim that they work harder than Southerners, and are more (11) They are openhearted and hospitable; foreigners often find that they make friends with them (12) . Northerners generally have hearty (13) : the visitor to Lancashire or Yorkshire, for instance, may look forward to receiving generous (14) at meal times. In accent and character the people of the Midlands (15) a gradual change from the southern to the northern type of Englishman. In Scotland the sound (16) by the letter "R" is generally a strong sound, and "R" is often pronounced in words in which it would be (17) in southern English. The Scots are said to be a serious, cautious, thrifty people, (18) inventive and somewhat mystical. All the Celtic peoples of Britain (the Welsh, the Irish, the Scots) are frequently (19) as being more "fiery" than the English. They are (20) a race that is quite distinct from the English.

单选题Any normal species would be delighted at the prospect of cloning. No more nasty surprises like sickle cell or Down syndrome--just batch after hatch of high-grade and, genetically speaking, immortal offspring! But representatives of the human species are responding as if someone had proposed adding Satanism to the grade-school Curriculum. Suddenly, perfectly secular folks are throwing around words like sanctity and retrieving medieval-era arguments against the pride of science. No one has proposed burning him at the stake, but the poor fellow who induced a human embryo to double itself has virtually recanted--proclaiming his reverence for human life in a voice, this magazine reported," choking with emotion." There is an element of hypocrisy to much of the anti-cloning furor, or if not hypocrisy, superstition. The fact is we axe already well down the path leading to genetic manipulation of the creepiest sort. Life-forms can be patented, which means they can be bought and sold and potentially traded on the commodities markets. Human embryos are life-forms, and there is nothing to stop anyone from marketing them now, on the same shelf with the Cabbage Patch dolls. In fact, any culture that encourages in vitro fertilization has no right to complain about a market in embryos. The assumption behind the in vitro industry is that some people's genetic material is worth more than others' and deserves to be reproduced at any expense. Millions of low-income babies die every year from preventable ills like dysentery, while heroic efforts go into maintaining yuppie zygotes in test tubes at the unicellular stage. This is the dread "nightmare" of eugenics in familiar, marketplace form--which involves breeding the best-paid instead of the best. Cloning technology is an almost inevitable byproduct of in vitro fertilization. Once you decide to go to the trouble of in vitro, with its potentially hazardous megadoses of hormones for the female partner and various indignities for the male, you might as well make a few backup copies of any viable embryo that's produced. And once you've got the backup organ copies, why not keep a few in the freezer, in case Junior ever needs a new kidney or cornea? The critics of cloning say we should know what we're getting into, with all its Orwellian implications. But if we decide to outlaw cloning, we should understand the implications of that. We would be saying in effect that we prefer to leave genetic destiny to the crap shooting Of nature, despite sickle-cell anemia and Tay-Sachs and all the rest, because ultimately we don't trust the market to regulate life itself. And this may be the hardest thing of all to acknowledge, that it isn't so much 21st century technology we fear, as what will happen to that technology in the hands of old-fashioned 20th century capitalism.

单选题Regardless of their political affiliation, in all countries women must overcome a host of stumbling blocks that limit their political careers. "Most obstacles to progress consist of (1) of various kinds," says the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), a Geneva-based organization (2) 139 parliaments, including the lack of time, training, information, self-confidence, money, support, motivation, women's networks and solidarity between women. In every culture, prejudice and stereotypes (3) hard. The belief still holds (4) that women belong in the kitchen and (5) the children, not at election (6) or in the Speaker's chair. The media often reinforce traditional images of women, who, upon entering politics, also bear the brunt (正面冲击) of verbal and physical (7) . In impoverished (贫穷的) countries (8) by civil conflicts and deteriorating economic and social conditions, women are (9) by the tasks of managing everyday life and looking after their families. The IPU stresses the general lack of child-care facilities—often (10) a privileged few—the (11) of political parties to change the times and running of meetings and the weak backing women receive from their families. That support, which is (12) as well as financial, is (13) vital because women have internalized (14) images of themselves since the (15) of time and often suffer from low self-confidence. Another obstacle is the lack of financial resources, especially as election campaigns become increasingly expensive. (16) , women encounter more or less open machismo (男子汉的高傲) in the (17) of closed political circles (18) entry to the "second sex. " Lastly, they (19) the lack of solidarity between women, (20) by the fact that the number of available positions is limited.

单选题{{B}}Part A{{/B}}{{B}}Directions:{{/B}}Reading the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. {{B}}Text 1{{/B}} That low moaning sound in the background just might be the Founding Fathers protesting from beyond the grave. They have been doing it when George Bush, at a breakfast of religious leaders, scorched the Democrats for failing to mention God in their platform and declaimed that a President needs to believe in the Almighty. What about the constitutional ban on "religious test(s)" for public office? the Founding Fathers would want to know. What about Tom Jefferson's conviction that it is Possible for a nonbeliever to be a moral person, "find (ing) incitements to virtue in the comfort and pleasantness you feel in its exercise"? Even George Washington must shudder in his sleep to hear the constant emphasis on "Judeo- Christian values." It was he who wrote, "We have abundant reason to rejoice that in this Land ... every person may here worship God according to the dictates of his own heart." George Bush should know better than to encourage the theocratic ambitions of the Christian right. The "wall of separation" the Founding Fathers built between church and state is one of the best defenses freedom has ever had. Or have we already forgotten why the Founding Fathers put it up? They had seen enough religious intolerance in the colonies: {{U}}Quaker women{{/U}} were burned at the stake in Puritan Massachusetts; Virginians could be jailed for denying the Bible's authority. No wonder John Adams once described the Judeo-Christian tradition as "the most bloody religion that ever existed," and that the Founding Fathers took such pains to keep the hand that holds the musket separate from the one that carries the cross. There was another reason for the separation of church and state, which no amount of pious ranting can expunge: not all the Founding Fathers believed in the same God, or in any God at all. Jefferson was a renowned doubter, urging his nephew to "question with boldness even the existence of a God." John Adams was at least a skeptic, as were of course the revolutionary firebrands Tom Paine and Ethan Allen. Naturally, they designed a republic in which they themselves would have a place. Yet another reason argues for the separation of church and state. If the Founding Fathers had one overarching aim, it was to limit the power not of the churches but of the state. They were deeply concerned, as Adams wrote, that "government shall be considered as having in it nothing more mysterious or divine than other arts or sciences." Surely the Republicans, committed as they are to "limited government," ought to honor the secular spirit that has limited our government from the moment of its birth.

单选题To know what is exactly happening on the roads, we don't need to