TEXT D The world has spent on preparation for war more than $112 billion a year, roughly $450 per head for every man, woman, and child in the world. Let us consider for a moment what could be done with this sum of money if it were spent on peace and not on war. Some of it, at any rate, in the more prosperous countries, could be spent on the reduction of taxation. The rest should be spent in ways that will, at the same time, be of benefit to mankind and a solution to the economic problem of change from war industry to the expansion of peace industries. As to this expansion, let us begin with the most elementary of all needs, namely, food. Today, the majority of mankind suffers from undernourishment, and in view of the population explosion, this situation is likely to grow worse in the coming decades. A very small part of what is now being spent upon weapons would improve our predicament. Not only could the American surplus of grain, which was for many years uselessly destroyed, be spent in relief of famine, but, by irrigation, large region now desert could be made fertile, and by improvement in transport, distribution from regions of excess to regions of scarcity could be helped. Housing, even in the richest countries, is often disastrously inadequate. This could be relieved by a tiny fraction of what is being spent on missiles. Education everywhere, but especially in the newly liberated countries of Africa and Asia, demands an expenditure many times as great as that which it receives now. But it is not only greater expenditure that is needed in education. If the terror of war were removed, science could be devoted to improving human welfare, instead of to the invention of increasingly expensive methods of mutual killing, and schools would no longer think it a part of their duty to promote hatred of possible enemies by means of ignorance hardened by lies. It can be inferred that the author’s attitude is ______.
A. ideal
B. pessimistic
C. pragmatic
D. optimistic
查看答案
TEXT A His ignorance was as remarkable as his knowledge. Of contemporary literature, philosophy and politics he appeared to know next to nothing. Upon my quoting Thomas Carlyle, he inquired in the naivest way who he might be and what he had done. My surprise reached a climax, however, when I found incidentally that he was ignorant of the Copernican Theory and of the composition of the Solar system. "You appear to be astonished," Holmes said, smiling at my expression. "Now that I do know it I shall do my best to forget it. You see, I consider that a man’s brain originally is like a little empty attic, and you have to stock it with such furniture as you choose: A fool takes in all the lumber of every sort that he comes across, so that the knowledge which might be useful to him gets crowded out, or at best jumbled up with a lot of other things, so that he has difficulty in laying his hand upon it. It is a mistake to think that the little room has elastic walls and can distend to any extent. Depend upon it, there comes a time when for every addition of knowledge you forget something that you know before. It is of the highest importance, therefore, not to have useless facts elbowing out the useful ones." "But the Solar System!" I protested. "What the deuce is it to me" he interrupted impatiently, One morning, I picked up a magazine from the table and attempted to while away the time with it, while my companion munched silently at his toast. One of the articles had a pencil mark at the heading, and I naturally began to run my eye through it. Its somewhat ambitious title was "The Book of Life," and it attempted to show how much an observant man might learn by an accurate and systematic examination of all that came in his way. It struck me as being a remarkable mixture of shrewdness and of absurdity. The reasoning was close and intense, but the deduction appeared to me to be far-fetched and exaggerated. The writer claimed by a momentary expression, a twitch of a muscle or a glance of an eye, to fathom a man’s inmost thought. Deceit, according to him, was impossibility in the case of one trained to observation and analysis. His conclusions were as infallible as so many propositions of Euclid. So startling would his results appear to the uninitiated that until they learned the processes by which he had arrived at them they might well consider him as a necromancer. "From a drop of water," said the writer, "a logician could infer the possibility of an Atlantic. So all life is a great chain, the nature of which is known whenever we are shown a single link of it. Like all other arts, the science of Deduction and Analysis is one which can be acquired by long and patient study, nor is life long enough to allow any mortal to attain the highest possible perfection in it." This smartly written piece of theory I could not accept until a succession of evidences justified it. What is the author’s attitude toward Holmes
A. Praising.
B. Critical.
C. Ironical.
Distaste.
Write a note of about 50~60 words based on the following situation: You have heard that your friend Jane has won the first prize at the speech contest. Write a note of congratulations to him. Marks will be awarded for content, organization, grammar and appropirateness.
TEXT B President Clinton’s decision on Apr. 8 to send Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji packing without an agreement on China’s entry into the World Trade Organization seemed to be a massive miscalculation. The President took a drubbing from much of the press, which had breathlessly reported that a deal was in the bag. The Cabinet and White House still appeared divided, and business leaders were characterized as furious over the lost opportunity. Zhu charged that Clinton lacked "the courage" to reach an accord. And when Clinton later telephoned the angry Zhu to pledge a renewed effort at negotiations, the gesture was widely portrayed as a flip-flop. In fact, Clinton made the right decision in holding out for a better WTO deal. A lot more horse trading is needed before a final agreement can be reached. And without the Administration’s goal of a "bullet-proof agreement" that business lobbyists can enthusiastically sell to a Republican Congress, the whole process will end up in partisan acrimony that could harm relations with China for years. THE HARD PART. Many business lobbyists, while disappointed that the deal was not closed, agree that better terms can still be had. And Treasury Secretary Robert E. Rubin, National Economic Council Director Gene B. Sperling, Commerce Secretary William M. Daley, and top trade negotiator Charlene Barshefsky all advised Clinton that while the Chinese had made a remarkable number of concessions, "we’re not there yet," according to senior officials. Negotiating with Zhu over the remaining issues may be the easy part. Although Clinton can signal U. S. approval for China’s entry into the WTO himself, he needs Congress to grant Beijing permanent most-favored-nation status as part of a broad trade accord. And the temptation for meddling on Capital Hill may prove over-whelming. Zhu had barely landed before Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss) declared himself skeptical that China deserved entry into the WTO. And Senators Jesse A. Helms (R-N. C.) and Emest F. Hollings (D-S. C.) promised to introduce a bill requiring congressional approval of any deal. The hidden message from these three textile-state Southerners: Get more protection for the U. S. clothing industry. Hoping to smooth the way, the Administration tried, but failed, to budge Zhu on textiles. Also left in the lurch: Wall Street, Hollywood, and Detroit. Zhu refused to open up much of the lucrative Chinese securities market and insisted on "cultural" restrictions on American movies and music; He also blocked efforts to allow U. S. auto makers to provide fleet financing. BIG JOB. Already, business lobbyists are blanketing Capitol Hill to presale any eventual agreement, but what they’ve heard so far isn’t encouraging. Republicans, including Lott, say that "the time just isn’t right" for the deal. Translation: We’re determined to make it look as if Clinton has capitulated to the Chinese and is ignoring human, religious, and labor rights violations; the theft of nuclear-weapons technology; and the sale of missile parts to America’s enemies. Beijing’s fierce critics within the Democratic Party, such as Senator Paul D. Wellstone of Minnesota and House Minority leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri, won’t help, either. Just how tough the lobbying job on Capitol Hill will be become clear on Apr. 20, when Rubin lectured 19chief executives on the need to discipline their Republican allies, With business and the White House still trading charges over who is responsible for the defeat of fast-track trade negotiating legislation in 1997, working together won’t he easy. And Republicans—with a wink—say that they’ll eventually embrace China’s entry into the WTO as a favor to Corporate America. Though not long before they torture Clinton. But Zhu is out on a limb, and if Congress overdoes the criticism, he may be forced by domestic critics to renege. Business must make this much dear to both its GOP allies and the White House: This historic deal is too important to risk losing to any more partisan squabbling What does the sentence "Also left in the lurch: Wall Street, Hollywood, Detroit" convey
A. Premier Zhu rejected their requirements.
B. The three places overdid criticism.
C. They wanted more protection.
D. They are in trouble.
TEXT E The relationship between the home and market economies has gone through two distinct stages. Early industrialization began the process of transferring some production processes (e.g., cloth making, sewing and canning foods) from the home to the market place. Although the home economy could still produce these goods, the processes were laborious and the market economy was usually more efficient. Soon, the more important second stage was evident—the marketplace began producing goods and services that had never been produced by the home economy, and the home economy was unable to produce them (e.g., electricity and electrical appliances, the automobile, advanced education, sophisticated medical care). In the second stage, the question of whether the home economy was less efficient in producing these new goods and services was irrelevant; if the family were to enjoy these fruits of industrialization, they would have to be obtained in the marketplace. The traditional ways of taking care of these needs in the home, such as in nursing the sick, became socially unacceptable (and, in most serious cases, probably less successful). Just as the appearance of the automobile made the use of the ’horse-drawn carriage illegal and then impractical, and the appearance of television changed the radio from a source of entertainment to a source of background music, so most of the fruits of economic growth did not increase the options available to the home economy to either produce the goods or services or purchase them in the market. Growth brought with it increased variety in consumer goods, but not increased flexibility for the home economy in obtaining these goods and services. Instead, economic growth brought with it increased consumer reliance on the marketplace. In order to consume these new goods and services, the family had to enter the marketplace as wage earners and consumers. The neoclassical model that views the family as deciding whether to produce goods and services directly or to purchase them in the marketplace is basically a model of the first stage. It cannot accurately be applied to the second stage. During the second stage, if the family wanted to consume new goods and services, they had to enter the marketplace ______.
A. as wage earners
B. both as wage manufacturers and consumers
C. both as workers and purchasers
D. as customers