题目内容
Research on animal intelligence always makes me wonder just how smart humans are. (51) the fruit-fly experiments described in Carl Zimmer’s piece in the Science Times on Tuesday. Fruit flies who were taught to be smarter than the average fruit fly (52) to live shorter lives. This suggests that (53) bulbs burn longer, that there is an advantage in not being too terrifically bright.Intelligence, it (54) , is a high-priced option. It takes more upkeep, burns more fuel and is slow off the starting line because it depends on learning—a (55) process—instead of instinct. Plenty of other species are able to learn, and one of the things they’ve apparently learned is when to (56) .Is there an adaptive value to (57) intelligence That’s the question behind this new research. I like it. Instead of casting a wistful glance (58) at all the species we’ve left in the dust I.Q.-wise, it implicitly asks what the real (59) of our own intelligence might be. This is on the mind of every animal I’ve ever met.Research on animal intelligence also makes me wonder what experiments animals would (60) on humans if they had the chance. 51().
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
职工具有良好的职业道德，有利于增强企业的凝聚力，促进企业发展，提高市场竞争力。( )
Jan Hendrik Schon’s success seemed too good to be true, and it was. In only four years as a physicist at Bell Laboratories, Schon, 32, had co-authored 90 scientific papers—one every 16 days—detailing new discoveries in superconductivity, lasers, nanotechnology and quantum physics. This output astonished his colleagues, and made them suspicious. When one co-worker noticed that the same table of data appeared in two separate papers—which also happened to appear in the two most prestigious scientific journals in the world, Science and Nature—the jig was up. In October 2002, a Bell Labs investigation found that Schon had falsified and fabricated data. His career as a scientist was finished. Scientific scandals, which are as old as science itself, tend to follow similar patterns of presumption and due reward.In recent years, of course, the pressure on scientists to publish in the top journals has increased, making the journals much more crucial to career success. The questions are whether Nature and Science have become too powerful as arbiters of what science reaches to the public, and whether the journals are up to their task as gatekeepers.Each scientific specialty has its own set of journals. Physicists have Physical Review Letters, neuroscientists have Neuron, and so forth. Science and Nature, though, are the only two major journals that cover the gamut of scientific disciplines, from meteorology and zoology to quantum physics and chemistry. As a result, journalists look to them each week for the cream of the crop of new science papers. And scientists look to the journals in part to reach journalists. Why do they care Competition for grants has gotten so fierce that scientists have sought popular renown to gain an edge over their rivals. Publication in specialized journals will win the acclaims from academics and satisfy the publish-or-perish imperative, but Science and Nature come with the added bonus of potentially getting your paper written up in The New York Times and other publications.Scientists tend to pay more attention to the big two than to other journals. When more scientists know about a particular paper, they’re more apt to cite it in their own papers. Being oft-cited will increase a scientist’s "Impact Factor", a measure of how often papers are cited by peers. Funding agencies use the "Impact Factor" as a rough measure of the influence of scientists they’re considering supporting. To find why scientific scandals like Schon’s occur, people have begun to raise doubt about the two top journals for ().
The appeal of advertising to buying motives can have both negative and positive effects.Consumers may be convinced to buy a product of poor quality or high price because of an advertisement. For example, some advertisers have appealed to people’s desire for better fuel economy for their cars by advertising automotive products that improve gasoline mileage. Some of the products work. Others are worthless and a waste of consumers’ money.Sometimes advertising is intentionally misleading. A few years ago a brand of bread was offered to turned out that the bread was not dietetic (适合节食的), but just regular bread. There were fewer calories because it was sliced very thin, but there were the same number of calories in every loaf.On the positive side, emotional appeals may respond to a consumer’s real concerns. Consider fire insurance. Fire insurance maybe sold by appealing to fear of loss. But fear of loss is the real reason for fire insurance. The security of knowing that property is protected by insurance makes the purchase of fire insurance a worthwhile investment for most people. If consumers consider the quality of the insurance plans as well as the message in the ads, they will benefit from the advertising.Each consumer must evaluate her or his own situation. Are the benefits of the product important enough to justify buying it Advertising is intended to appeal to consumers, but it does not force them to buy the product. Consumers still control the final buying decision. Advertising can persuade the consumer to buy worthless products by ().
再审查明原告与汇泰公司关于运费的纠纷已经在本案一审之前由汇泰公司起诉在其他法院审理裁决过了，法院应如何处理
微信支付 
支付宝支付