题目内容

【题目】People have wondered for a long time how their personalities and behaviors are formed. It’s not easy to explain why one person is intelligent and another is not, or why one is cooperative and another is competitive.

Social scientists are, of course, extremely interested in these types of question. They want to explain why we possess certain characteristics and exhibit certain behaviors. There are no clear answers yet, but two distinct schools of thought on the matter have developed. As one might expect, the two approaches are very different from each other, and there is a great deal of debate between proponents of each theory. The argument is often conveniently referred to as nature vs. nurture.

Those who support the “nature” side of the conflict believe that our personalities and behavior patterns are largely determined by biological and genetic factors. That our environment has little, if anything, to do with our abilities, characteristics and behavior is central to this theory. Taken to an extreme, this theory maintains that our behavior is predetermined(注定)to such a great degree that we are almost completely governed by our instincts(本能).

Proponents of the “nurture” theory, or, as they are often called, behaviorists, claim that our environment is more important than our biologically based instincts in determining how we will act. Behaviorists see humans as beings whose behavior is almost completely shaped by their surroundings. Their view of the human being is quite mechanistic; they maintain that, like machines, humans respond to environmental stimuli (something that helps sb./ sth. to develop better and more quickly)as the basis of their behavior.

The social and political connections of these two theories are significant. In the United States, for example, blacks often score below whites on standardized intelligent test. This leads some “nature” proponents to conclude that blacks are genetically worse than whites. Behaviorists, in contrast, say that the differences in scores are due to the fact that blacks are often robbed of many of the educational and other environmental advantages that whites enjoy, and that, as a result ,they do not develop the same responses that whites do.

Neither of these theories can yet fully explain human behavior. In fact, it is quite likely that the key to our behavior lies somewhere between these two extremes. That the argument will continue for a long time is certain.

【1】The author is mainly concerned about solving the problem .

A. why our personalities and behaviors differ

B. what makes different stages of intelligence

C. how social scientists form different theories

D. what causes the “nature/ nurture” argument

【2】The underlined word “proponents” can best be replaced by .

A. approaches B. advocates

C. principles D. characters

【3】Which of the following statements may be supported by the “nature” school?

A. We are born with certain personalities and behaviors.

B. Environment has nothing to do with our personalities.

C. Abilities and characteristics are showed by behaviors.

D. Only extreme behaviors are determined by instincts.

【4】 What can we learn about the behaviorists?

A. They believe human beings are mechanical.

B. They/span> compare our behaviors to the machines.

C. They suggest that we react to the environment as the machines do.

D. They agree that the mechanistic theory can be applied on us as well.

【答案】

【1】B

【2】C

【3】D

【4】B

【解析】

试题分析:本文是一篇议论文,本文议论了人们对人的个性和行为形成原因的不同看法,一方认为一个人的个性和行为是人的生物和遗传因素决定的,另一方则认为环境对人的影响最大。

【1】A主旨大意题。首段首句指出作者要讨论的问题,第二段开始从两个方面解释该问题,末段是总结段,由此看来,首段首句和末段首句提到的人类行为是本文的中心内容,故选A。

【2】B词义猜测题。根据文章内容,我们可以判断proponent应指人,指这两种理论的支持者,只有advocates“拥护者”符合这种推测,故选B。

【3】A细节理解题。第三段首句的largely determined by biological and genetic factors和末句的governed by our instincts都表明“天性论”派会认同A项的看法,故选A。

【4】C 细节理解题。本题实际上考查对第四段末句的正确理解。原文该句中的like machines,humans respond...表明作者并非单纯把人类比作机器,而是把人类对环境的反应与机械对环境的反应做对比,故选C。

练习册系列答案
相关题目

【题目】Hank Viscardi was born without legs. He had not legs but stumps(残肢)that could he fitted with a kind of special boots. People stared at him with cruel interest. Children laughed at him and called him ‘Ape Man’ (猿人) because his arms practically dragged on the ground.

Hank went to school like other boys. His grades were good and he needed only eight years to finish his schooling instead of the usual twelve. After graduating from school, he worked his way through college. He swept floors, waited on table, or worked in one of the college offices. During all this busy life, he had been moving around on his stumps. But one day the doctor told him even the stumps were not going to last much longer. He would soon have to use a wheel chair.

Hank felt himself getting cold all over. However, the doctor said there was a chance that he could be fitted with artificial legs (假腿). Finally a leg maker was found and the day came when Hank stood up before the mirror, for the first time he saw himself as he has always wanted to be-a full five feet eight inches tall. By this time he was already 26 years old.

Hank had to learn to use his new legs. Again and again he marched the length of the room, and marched back again. There were times when he fell down on the floor, but he pulled himself up and went back to the endless marching. He went out on the street. He climbed stairs and learned to dance. He built a boat and learned to sail it.

When World War II came, he talked the Red Cross into giving him a job. He took the regular training. He marched and drilled along with the other soldiers. Few knew that he was legless. This was the true story of Hank Viscardi, a man without legs.

【1】Children laughed at Hank and called him ‘Ape Man’ because .

A. he didn’t talk to them

B. he kept away from them

C. he couldn’t use his arms

D. his arms touched the ground while moving

【2】It can be inferred from the story that five feet eight inches tall is __.

A. an average height for a fully grown person

B. too tall for an average person

C. too short for an average person

D. good enough for a disabled man

【3】The sentence “he talked the Red Cross into giving him a job” implies that the Red Cross .

A. was only glad to give him a job

B. give him a job because he was a good soldier

C. was not willing to give him a job at first

D. gave him a job after he talked to someone whom he knew in the organization

【4】When Hank marched and drilled along with the other soldiers, he .

A. took some special training

B. did everything the other soldiers did

C. did some of the things the other soldiers did

D. did most of the things the other soldiers did

【题目】【原创】Children whose mothers were exposed to higher levels of phthalates(酞酸盐), common chemicals in consumer products, in late pregnancy tend to score lower than other kids on intelligence tests at age seven, according to a new study.

Some soaps, nail polish, hairspray, shower curtains, raincoats, car interiors and dryer sheets contain phthalates, which are used as so-called plasticizers, or softening agents.

At present, the Food and Drug Administration does not have evidence that phthalates as used in cosmetics pose a safety risk, but six types of phthalates are currently banned from children’s toys.

Researchers followed 328 New York women in low-income communities from pregnancy until the child was seven years old. When the children were seven, they completed an intelligence test measuring four areas of mental functioning. The mothers’ levels of two of the phthalates - DnBP and DiBP - during pregnancy were associated with childhood intelligence: As phthalate levels went up, child IQ tended to go down.

“With observational studies, there is always the chance that the results may be in part explained by an unmeasured factor that we haven’t yet considered,” said Stephanie Engel, associate professor of epidemiology(流行病)from the University of North Carolina.

“I would characterize this study as thorough and high quality, and the results concerning,” said Engel, who was not involved in the work. “But there needs to be more research in this area before firm conclusions can be drawn.”

“Nevertheless, It is clear that there needs to be a serious discussion in the scientific and policy communities about whether the evidence is strong enough yet to warrant widespread policy changes, not just on the basis of this study, but also including a range of childhood health outcomes that have already been reported in the literature,” Engel said.

“Although there are no regulations on phthalate exposure during pregnancy, it would be wise for expectant mothers to avoid microwaving food in plastic, avoid scented products, and as much as possible store foods in glass instead of plastic,” she said.

1According to the passage, the new study is about ___________________________.

A. the interaction between a pregnant woman and her unborn baby

B. how phthalates taken in by a pregnant woman affect her baby

C. why childrens IQ is different at the age of seven

D. the usage of common chemical in consumer products

【2】Which of the following statements is TRUE?

A. Researchers chose 328 pregnant women at random to do the research

B. The FDA doesnt think phthalates have any risks

C. There are two types of phthalates that may affect childhood intelligence

D. The researchers are very confident about their conclusions

【3】What can you learn from the last but one paragraph?

A. The evidence is not strong enough to change the policy

B. The policy should be stricter

C. A serious discussion is needed based on this study

D. All studies about childhood health should be involved

【4】This passage has probably been taken from _________.

A. a childrens book

B. a science report

C. a nutrition guidebook

D. a health notice board

违法和不良信息举报电话:027-86699610 举报邮箱:58377363@163.com

精英家教网