2012年考研英语(一)真题阅读A

2012年阅读ASect ion II Read ing Comprehe nsionPart ADirecti ons:Read the followi ng four texts. An swer the questi ons below each text by choos ing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points)Text 1Come on —Everybody' s doing it. That whispered message, half in vitatio n and half forcin g, is what most of us think of whe n we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good-dri nking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rose nberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in which orga ni zati ons and officials use the power of group dyn amics to help in dividuals improve their lives and possibly the word.Rose nberg, the recipie nt of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of example of the social cure in action: In South Caroli na, a state-sp on sored an tismok ing program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-preve ntio n in itiative known as LoveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.The idea seems promising and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they dem on strate a seriously flawed un dersta nding of psychology." D are to be different, please don t smoke!” pleads one billboard campaig n aimed at reduci ng smok ing among tee nagers-tee nagers, who desire nothing more tha n fitt ing in. Rose nberg argues convincin gly that public-health advocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at appl ying peer pressure.But on the gen eral effective ness of the social cure, Rose nberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled with too much irreleva nt detail and not eno ugh explorati on of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glari ng flaw of the social cure as it' s prese nted here is that it does nt work very well for very long. Rage Aga inst the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evide nee that the LoveLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed.There' s no doubt that our peer groups exert eno rmous in flue nee on our behavior. An emerg ing body of research shows that positive health habits-as well as n egative on es-spread through n etworks of friends via social com mun icatio n. This is a subtle form of peer pressure: we uncon sciously imitate the behavior we see every day.Far less certa in, however, is how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous direct ion s. f t s like the teacher who breaks up the troublemakers in the back row by pairi ng them with better-behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And that s the problem with a social cure engineered from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own frie nds.21. Accord ing to the first paragraph, peer pressure ofte n emerges as _____[A] a suppleme nt to the social cure[B] a stimulus to group dyn amics[C] an obstacle to school progress[D] a cause of un desirable behaviors22. Rose nberg holds that public advocates should ______[A] recruit professi onal advertisers[B] lear n from advertisers' experie nee[C] stay away from commercial advertisers[D] recognize the limitations of advertisements23. In the autho r s view, Rosenberg s book fails to _______[A] adequately probe social and biological factors[B] effectively evade the flaws of the social cure[C] illustrate the functions of state funding[D] produce a Ion g-last ing social effect24. Paragraph 5shows that our imitatio n of behaviors ____[A] is harmful to our n etworks of frie nds[B] will mislead behavioral studies[C] occurs without our realizing it[D] can produce n egative health habits25. The author suggests in the last paragraph that the effect of peer pressure is ___[A] harmful[B] desirable[C] profou nd[D] questi on ableText 2A deal is a deal-except, appare ntly ,whe n En tergy is invo Ived. The compa ny, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a Iongstanding commitment to abide by the strict nu clear regulati ons.In stead, the compa ny has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality of Vermont' s rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yan kee nu clear power pla nt runnin g.'lts a stunning move.The con flict has bee n surfaci ng since 2002, whe n the corporatio n bought Vermo n t s only nu clear power pla nt, an agi ng reactor in Vernon. As a con diti on of recei ving state approval for the sale, the compa ny agreed to seek permissi on from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plan f s license be subject to Vermont legislatur e s approval. Then, too, the compa ny went along.Either En tergy n ever really inten ded to live by those commitme nts, or it simply didn' t foresee what would happen next. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooli ng tower in 207 and the discovery of an un dergro und pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankee safety and Entergy s managemen- especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. En raged by En tergy s behavior, the Vermont Sen ate voted 26 to 4 last year aga inst allow ing an exte nsion.Now the compa ny is sudde nly clai ming that the 2002 agreeme nt is inv alid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nu clear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nu clear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precede nt-sett ing test of how far those powers exte nd. Certa in ly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point.The compa ny seems to have con cluded that its reputatio n in Vermont is already so damaged that it has noting left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be con seque nces. Permissi on to run a nu clear pla nt is a poblic trust. En tergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the company s application, it should keep it mind what promises from En tergy are worth.26. The phrase “reneging on” (Line 3.para.1) is closest in meaning to ________[A] condemning.[B] reaffirm ing.[C] disho noring.[D] securi ng.27. By en teri ng in to the 2002 agreeme nt, En tergy inten ded to ___[A] obtai n protecti on from Vermont regulators.[B] seek favor from the federal legislature.[C] acquire an exte nsion of its bus in ess lice nse .[D] get permissi on to purchase a power pla nt.28. Accord ing to Paragraph 4, En tergy seems to have problems with its _____[A] man agerial practices.[B] tech ni cal inno vative ness.[C] finan cial goals.[D] bus in ess visi on29. In the autho' s view, the Vermont case will test ______[A] Entergy ' s capacity to fulfill all its promises.[B] the mature of states patchwork regulati ons.[C] the federal authority over nu clear issues .[D] the limits of states' power over nu clear issues.30. It can be in ferred from the last paragraph that _____[A] En tergy ' s bus in ess elsewhere might be affected.[B] the authority of the NRC will be defied.[C] En tergy will withdraw its Plymouth applicati on.[D] Vermont' s reputation might be damaged.Text 3In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scie ntific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of scie nce, discovery freque ntly follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the con text of our unique life experie nce. Prior kno wledge and in terest in flue nce what we experie nce, what we think our experie nces mean, and the subseque nt acti ons we take. Opport un ities for misin terpretati on, error, and self-decepti on abo und.Con seque ntly, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscie nce. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and accepta nce to tran sform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the in dividual researcher s me, here, now becomes the com mun ity' s anyone, any where, any time. Objective kno wledge is the goal, not the start ing point.Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives in tellectual credit.But, uni ike with mining claims, the com mun ity takes con trol of what happe ns n ext.Within the complex social structure of the scie ntific com muni ty, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by con trolli ng the publicati on process; other scie ntists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and fin ally, the public (in cludi ng other scie ntists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompa nying tech no logy. As a discovery claim works it through the commu ni ty, the in teract ion and confron tati on betwee n shared and competi ng beliefs about the scie nee and the tech no logy invo Ived tran sforms an in dividua' s discovery claim into the com mun ity' s credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scie ntific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevaili ng Kno wledge that is viewed as in complete or in correct. Little reward accompa nies duplicati on and con firmatio n of what is already known and believed. The goal is n ew-search, not re-search. Not surpris in gly, n ewly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be importa nt and convincing will always be ope n to challe nge and pote ntial modificati on or refutati on by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Aze nt-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “ see ing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought. But thinking what no body else has thought and telli ng others what they have missed may not cha nge their views. Sometimes years are required for truly no vel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility “happen§ to a discovery claim - a process that corresp onds to what philosopher Ann ette Baier has described as the com mons of the mind. “ We reason together, challe nge, revise, and complete each othes reasoning and each other s conceptions of reason.31. Accord ing to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized byits ______[A] un certa inty and complexity.[B] misc on cepti on and deceptive ness.[C] logicality and objectivity.[D] systematic ness and regularity.32. It can be in ferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requires _____[A] strict in specti on.[B] shared efforts.[C] in dividual wisdom.[D] persiste nt inno vatio n.33. Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it _____[A] has attracted the attention of the general public.[B] has bee n exam ined by the scie ntific com mun ity.[C] has received recog niti on from editors and reviewers.[D] has bee n freque ntly quoted by peer scie ntists.34. Albert Sze nt-Gy?rgyi would most likely agree that _______[A] scie ntific claims will survive challe nges.[B] discoveries today in spire future research.[C] efforts to make discoveries are justified.[D] scie ntific work calls for a critical mind.35. Which of the following would be the best title of the test?[A] Novelty as an Engine of Scie ntific Developme nt.[B] Collective Scrutiny in Scientific Discovery.[C] Evoluti on of Credibility in Doi ng Scien ce.[D] Challe nge to Credibility at the Gate to Scie nee.Text 4If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant. When Hoffa' s Teamsters were in their prime in I960, only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union; now 36% do. In 2009 the number of un io ni sts in America' s public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector. In Britain, more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15% of private-sector ones are unioni zed.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions thriving. First, they can shut things dow n without sufferi ng much in the way of con seque nces. Second, they are mostly bright and well-educated. A quarter of America s public-sector workers have a university degree. Third, they now dominate left-of-centre politics. Some of their ties go back a long way. Brita in' s Labor Party, as its n ame implies, has long bee n associated with trade unionism. Its current leader, Ed Miliband, owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their in flue nee can be eve n more fearsome. Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the state s budget is patrolled by unions. The teachers unions keep an eye on schools, the CCPOA on pris ons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one. But the real gains come in ben efits and work practices. Politicia ns have repeatedly “ backloaded" public-sector pay deals, keep ing the pay in creases modest but add ing to holidays and especially pensions that are already gen erous.Reform has bee n vigorously opposed, perhaps most egregiously in educati on, where charter schools, academies and merit pay all faced draw n-out battles. Eve n though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the mostimporta nt variable, teachers unions have fought aga inst gett ing rid of bad ones and promot ing good on es.As the cost to every one else has become clearer, politicia ns have beg un to clamp down. In Wisconsin the unions have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker, the hardli ne Republica n governor. But many with in the public sector suffer un der the curre nt system, too.John Donahue at Harvard s Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Wester n civil services suit those who want to stay put but is bad for high achievers. The only America n public-sector workers who earn well above $250,000 a year are uni versity sports coaches and the preside nt of the Un ited States. Ban k6rs fat pay packets have attracted much criticism, but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may be a much bigger problem for America.36. It can be lear ned from the first paragraph that ______[A] Teamsters still have a large body of members.[B] Jimmy Hoffa used to work as a civil serva nt.[C] unions have enl arged their public-sector membership.[D] the gover nment has improved its relatio nship with union ists.37. Which of the following is true of Paragraph 2?[A] Public-sector unions are prude nt in tak ing acti ons.[B] Educati on is required for public-sector union membership.[C] Labor Party has long been fighting against public-sector unions.[D] Public-sector unions seldom get in trouble for their acti ons.38. It can be lear ned from Paragraph 4 that the in come in the state sector is _____[A] illegally secured.[B] in directly augme nted.[C] excessively in creased.[D] fairly adjusted.39. The example of the unions in Wisc onsin shows that unions _______[A] ofte n run aga inst the curre nt political system.[B] can change people s political attitudes.[C] may be a barrier to public-sector reforms.[D] are dominant in the gover nment.40. Joh n Don ahue s attitude towards the public-sector system is one of ____[A] disapproval.[B] appreciati on.[C] tolera nee.[D] i ndiffere nee.。