题目内容
Passage ThreeIt is hard to predict how science is going to turn out, and if it is really good science it is impossible to predict. If the things to be found are actually new, they are by definition unknown in advance. You cannot make choices in this matter. You either have science or you don’t, and if you have it you are obliged to accept the surprising and disturbing pieces of information, along with the neat and promptly useful bits.The only solid piece of scientific truth about which I feel totally confident is that we are profoundly ignorant about nature. I regard this as the major discovery of the past hundred years of biology. It is, in its way, an illuminating piece of news. It would have amazed the brightest minds of the 18th century Enlightenment to be told by any of us how little we know and how bewildering seems the way ahead. It is this sudden confrontation with the depth and scope of ignorance that represents the most significant contribution of the 20th century science to the human intellect. In earlier times, we either pretended to understand how things worked or ignored the problem, or simply made up stories to fill the gaps. Now that we have begun exploring in earnest, we are getting glimpses of how huge the questions are, and how far they are from being answered. Because of this, we are depressed. It is not so bad being ignorant if you are totally ignorant; the hard thing is knowing in some detail the reality of ignorance, the worst spots and here and there the not-so-bad spots, but no true light at the end of the tunnel nor even any tunnels that can yet be trusted.But we are making a beginning, and there ought to be some satisfaction. There are probably no questions we can think up that can’t be answered, sooner or later, including even the matter of consciousness; to be sure, there may well be questions we can’t think up, ever, and therefore limits to the reach of human intellect, but that is another matter. Within our limits, we should be able to work our way through to all our answers, if we keep at it long enough, and pay attention. Which of the following is NOT mentioned about scientists in earlier times ？（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Passage OneAnyone who doubts that global financial markets control national economies need only look at the crisis facing the "tigers" of the Far East. Last year, the value of their currencies dropped rapidly, after investors decided that their economic policies were not strong enough; now the region is suffering slower growth, lower living standards and rising unemployment.The situation in Asia shows how power has shifted from individual governments to the markets. In theory, governments are free to set their own economic policies; in practice, they must conform to a global economic model or risk being penalized by the markets.Adjusting to this new "economic order" is proving difficult. In the developed world, and in particular the European Union, globalization is facing widespread public resistance. Critics complain that, without the protection of trade barriers, jobs are being lost to workers in poorer countries, and wages for employees in rich countries are falling. Opponents in the European Union point to the effects that globalization has had in the U.S. and Britain. In those countries, wages are stagnant—except for a few privileged--and taxes and welfare benefits have been reduced to help companies compete with industries in the developing world.Those in favor of globalization accuse their critics of being shortsighted protectionists. They claim that a more integrated global economy will ultimately benefit everyone because it will enable countries to specialize in those areas where they perform best. Developing countries, with their higher populations and lower wages, will concentrate on labor-intensive industries. The richer countries, on the other hand, will diversify into high-tech industries, where high productivity and specialist knowledge are paramount. The effect of this will be to improve productivity in all countries, leading to higher living standards. The free movement of capital will also help poorer countries develop so that they can play a full and active role in the world economy.But how close are we to a truly global economy For those in favor of globalization, probably too close. But in terms of real economic integration, there are still many problems to be solved. A global economy would mean complete freedom of movement of goods and services, capital, and labor. Yet, even ignoring the tariffs and other restrictions still in place, cross-border trade remains tiny as compared with the volume of goods and services traded within countries; foreign investment is also extremely small, amounting to little more than five percent of the developed world’s domestic investments.But what is really holding globalization back is the lack of labor mobility. Labor markets remain overwhelmingly national~ even in areas like the European Union, where citizens can live and work in any EU country. The main reasons for this are language and cultural barriers; the lack of internationally recognized qualifications; and, in some cases, strict immigration controls. The word "paramount" (Paragraph 4) may be replaced by （）.
我方某公司出口某商品1000箱，对外报价为每箱20美元，FOB C3%广州，外商要求将价格改报为每箱CIF C5%汉堡。已知运费为每箱1美元，保险费为FOB价的0.8%，请问： (1)要维持出口销售外汇净收入不变，CIF C5%应改报为多少 (2)已知进货成本为160元人民币/箱，每箱的商品流通费为进货成本的3%，出口退税率为17%，该商品的出口销售盈亏率及换汇成本是多少(USD 100=CNY80923)
Passage OneAnyone who doubts that global financial markets control national economies need only look at the crisis facing the "tigers" of the Far East. Last year, the value of their currencies dropped rapidly, after investors decided that their economic policies were not strong enough; now the region is suffering slower growth, lower living standards and rising unemployment.The situation in Asia shows how power has shifted from individual governments to the markets. In theory, governments are free to set their own economic policies; in practice, they must conform to a global economic model or risk being penalized by the markets.Adjusting to this new "economic order" is proving difficult. In the developed world, and in particular the European Union, globalization is facing widespread public resistance. Critics complain that, without the protection of trade barriers, jobs are being lost to workers in poorer countries, and wages for employees in rich countries are falling. Opponents in the European Union point to the effects that globalization has had in the U.S. and Britain. In those countries, wages are stagnant—except for a few privileged--and taxes and welfare benefits have been reduced to help companies compete with industries in the developing world.Those in favor of globalization accuse their critics of being shortsighted protectionists. They claim that a more integrated global economy will ultimately benefit everyone because it will enable countries to specialize in those areas where they perform best. Developing countries, with their higher populations and lower wages, will concentrate on labor-intensive industries. The richer countries, on the other hand, will diversify into high-tech industries, where high productivity and specialist knowledge are paramount. The effect of this will be to improve productivity in all countries, leading to higher living standards. The free movement of capital will also help poorer countries develop so that they can play a full and active role in the world economy.But how close are we to a truly global economy For those in favor of globalization, probably too close. But in terms of real economic integration, there are still many problems to be solved. A global economy would mean complete freedom of movement of goods and services, capital, and labor. Yet, even ignoring the tariffs and other restrictions still in place, cross-border trade remains tiny as compared with the volume of goods and services traded within countries; foreign investment is also extremely small, amounting to little more than five percent of the developed world’s domestic investments.But what is really holding globalization back is the lack of labor mobility. Labor markets remain overwhelmingly national~ even in areas like the European Union, where citizens can live and work in any EU country. The main reasons for this are language and cultural barriers; the lack of internationally recognized qualifications; and, in some cases, strict immigration controls. The main opposition to globalization is that （）.
Passage TwoMale chauvinism—the attitude that women are the passive and inferior servants of society and of men—sets women apart from the rest of the working class. Even when they do the same work as men, women are not considered workers in the same sense, with the need and right to work to provide for their families or to support themselves independently. They are expected to accept work at lower wages and without job security. Thus they can be used as a marginal or reserve labor force when profits depend on extra low costs or when men are needed for war.Women are not supposed to be independent, so they are not supposed to have any "right to work". This means, in effect, that although they do work, they are denied the right to organize and fight for better wages and conditions. Thus the role of women in the labor force undermines the struggles of male workers as well. The boss can break a union drive by threatening to hire lower paid women or blacks. In many cases, where women are organized, the union contract reinforces their inferior position, making women the least loyal and militant union members. (Standard Oil workers in San Francisco recently paid the price of male supremacy. Women at Standard Oil have the least chance for advancement and decent pay, and the union has done little to fight this. Not surprisingly, women formed the core of the back to work move that eventually broke the strike.)In general, because women are defined as docile, helpless, and inferior, they are forced into the most demeaning and mind rotting jobs—from scrubbing floors to filing cards—under the most oppressive conditions where they are treated like children or slaves. Their very position reinforces the idea, even among the women themselves, that they are fit for and should be satisfied with this kind of work.Apart from the direct, material exploitation of women, male supremacy acts in more subtle ways to undermine class consciousness. The tendency of male workers to think of themselves primarily as men (i.e., powerful) rather than as workers (i.e., members of an oppressed group) promotes a false sense of privilege and power, and an identification with the world of men, including the boss. The petty dictatorship which most men exercise over their wives and families enables them to vent their anger and frustration in a way which poses no challenge to the system. The role of the man in the family reinforces aggressive individualism, authoritarianism, and a hierarchical view of social relations—values which are fundamental to the perpetuation (不朽) of capitalism. In this system we are taught to relieve our fears and frustrations by brutalizing those weaker than we are: a man in uniform turns into a pig; the foreman intimidates the man on the line; the husband beats his wife, child, and dog. Unfair working status of women also produces negative effects on men in that （）.
微信支付 
支付宝支付