题目内容
Our ability to think has long been considered central to what makes us human. Now research suggests that our bodies and their relationship with the environment (1) even our most abstract thoughts. This includes thinking up random numbers or deciding (2) to review positive or negative experiences."Advocates of traditional (3) of cognition would be surprised," says Tobias Loetscher at the University of Melbourne in Parkville, Australia. "They (4) consider human reasoning to involve abstract cognitive processes without any connection to body or space."Until recently, the (5) has been that our bodies (6) only to our most basic interactions with the environment, (7) sensory and motor processes. The new results suggest that our bodies are also (8) to produce abstract thought, and that even seemingly (9) activities have the power to influence our thinking. (10) that our bodies may play a role in thought can be found in the metaphors we use to describe situations, (11) "I was given the cold shoulder" or "she has an excellent grasp of relativity".Thirty years ago, such (12) led the linguist and philosopher George Lakoff at the University of Califor- nia, Berkeley, together with philosopher Mark Johnson at the University of Oregon in Eugene, to (13) "conceptual metaphor theory", the notion that we think of abstract concepts (14) how our bodies function. Now (15) for the theory has started to (16) in. In 2008, (17) , researchers found that people made to feel socially (18) reported feeling physically colder. Now, Loetscher and his colleagues have (19) our ability to think of random numbers--an example of abstract thought--to bodily (20) 15（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
关于各类法规与政策，下列说法错误的是( )。
第4篇 Trying to Find a Partner One of the most striking findings of a recent poll in the UK is that of the people interviewed, one in two believes that it is becoming more difficult to meet someone to start a family with. Why are many finding it increasingly difficult to start and sustain intimate relationships Does modern life really make it harder to fall in love Or are we making it harder for ourselves It is certainly the case today that contemporary couples benefit in different ways from relationships. Women no longer rely upon partners for economic security or status. A man doesn’t expect his spouse to be in sole charge of running his household and raising his children. But perhaps the knowledge that we can live perfectly well without a partnership means that it takes much more to persuade people to abandon their independence. In theory, finding a partner should be much simpler these days. Only a few generations ago, your choice of soulmate (心上人) was constrained by geography, social convention and family tradition. Although it was never explicit, many marriages were essentially arranged. Now those barriers have been broken down. You can approach a builder or a brain surgeon in any bar in any city on any given evening. When the world is your oyster (牡蛎), you surely have a better chance of finding a pearl. But it seems that the old conventions have been replaced by an even tighter constraint: the tyranny of choice. The expectations of partners are inflated to an unmanageable degree: good looks, impressive salary, kind to grandmother, and right socks. There is no room for error in the first impression. We think that a relationship can be perfect. If it isn’t, it is disposable. We work to protect ourselves against future heartache and don’t put in the hard emotional labor needed to build a strong relationship. Of course, this is complicated by realities. The cost of housing and child-rearing creates pressure to have a stable income and career before a life partnership. Which of the following is NOT expected of a partner according to this passage
Our ability to think has long been considered central to what makes us human. Now research suggests that our bodies and their relationship with the environment (1) even our most abstract thoughts. This includes thinking up random numbers or deciding (2) to review positive or negative experiences."Advocates of traditional (3) of cognition would be surprised," says Tobias Loetscher at the University of Melbourne in Parkville, Australia. "They (4) consider human reasoning to involve abstract cognitive processes without any connection to body or space."Until recently, the (5) has been that our bodies (6) only to our most basic interactions with the environment, (7) sensory and motor processes. The new results suggest that our bodies are also (8) to produce abstract thought, and that even seemingly (9) activities have the power to influence our thinking. (10) that our bodies may play a role in thought can be found in the metaphors we use to describe situations, (11) "I was given the cold shoulder" or "she has an excellent grasp of relativity".Thirty years ago, such (12) led the linguist and philosopher George Lakoff at the University of Califor- nia, Berkeley, together with philosopher Mark Johnson at the University of Oregon in Eugene, to (13) "conceptual metaphor theory", the notion that we think of abstract concepts (14) how our bodies function. Now (15) for the theory has started to (16) in. In 2008, (17) , researchers found that people made to feel socially (18) reported feeling physically colder. Now, Loetscher and his colleagues have (19) our ability to think of random numbers--an example of abstract thought--to bodily (20) 18（）
How could anybody dislike the notion of fairness Everything is better when it is fair: a share, a fight, a maiden, or a game. Even defeat sounds more attractive when it is fair and square. For the British fair play is especially important: without it, life isn’t cricket. Their country becomes quite pleasant when the weather is fair, though unfortunately it rarely is. And these days fair-trade goods crowd their supermarket shelves. Fairness is not only good, but also moderate, which is another characteristic that the British approve of. It does not claim too much for itself. Those who, on inquiry, admit that their health and fortunes are fair-to-middling navigate carefully between the twin dangers of boastfulness and ill-temperedness, while gesturing in a chinup sort of way towards the possibility of future improvement. Fairness appeals to the British political class, for it has a common sense down-to-earthiness which avoids the grandiosity of American and continental European political discourse while aspiring to do its best for all men--and of course for maidens too, fair and otherwise, for one of its virtues is that it does not discriminate on grounds of either gender or skin colour. Not surprising, then, that Britain’s government should grab hold of the word and cling to it in the buffeting the coalition has had since the budget on June 22nd proposed higher taxes and even sharper spending cuts. "Tough but fair" is what George Osborne, the Conservative chancellor of the exchequer, called the cuts he announced. "It is going to be tough, but it is also very fair," said Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat business secretary. At last, something they could agree on. "Fairness" suits Britain’s coalition government so well not just because its meanings are all positive, but also because they are wide-ranging. To one lot of people, fairness means establishing the same rules for everybody, playing by them, and letting the best man win and the winner take all. To another, it means making sure that everybody gets equal shares. Those two meanings are not just different: they are opposite. They represent a choice that has to be made between freedom and equality. Yet so slippery--and thus convenient to politicians-- is the English language that a single word encompasses both, and in doing so loses any claim to meaning. The author holds in the last paragraph that "fairness"
微信支付 
支付宝支付