阅读理解

　　I’m sure many of you have seen Star Wars, Jurassic Park, Multiplicity, or many of the other movies that describe cloning．Most of what you see in these movies is false．What you don’t know is that cloning could be dangerous, to the clone and to our society as a whole．It’s immoral to have a human clone．

　　What about identity?Humans are promised the right to their own personality．What would happen if we ignore those rights by giving them someone else’s genetic identity?True, personality is not fixed in someone’s genes, but the clone would share any physical appearance or genetic fault of the cloned．

　　Also, there is a large power struggle here．Cloning means a degree of power and control over another person’s physical identity and that ignores their rights and their only personality．The person doing the cloning would have more power than any parent would have．

　　Cloning would also deal with killing embryos(胚胎)．You might not have known, but Dolly, the sheep that was cloned in 1996, was one of over 200 sheep embryos and hers was the only embryo that survived．The rest died or were thrown away．Imagine if the failure rate was that high when we started to clone humans．More than 200 embryos, the start of 200 human beings, would die for the sake of just one embryo that would have the same DNA as someone else．

　　Cloning someone, at this present time, would be extremely dangerous to the birth mother and the clone．In studies done on cows, 4 out of 12 birth mothers died．There is a very high failure rate, which is showed in the cloning of Dolly．Even if you had a few good embryos, failures have been noticeable in animal tests．

　　So, should we work ahead in the world of cloning?I say no．The risks are greater than the benefits．It’s dangerous to the clone and to the birth mother．We would be killing human lives in the process．It would also be a violation(侵害) of the clone’s right to its own genetic identity and personality．

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

阅读理解

　　I’m sure many of you have seen Star Wars, Jurassic Park, Multiplicity, or many of the other movies that describe cloning．Most of what you see in these movies is false．What you don’t know is that cloning could be dangerous, to the clone and to our society as a whole．It’s immoral to have a human clone．

　　What about identity?Humans are promised the right to their own personality．What would happen if we ignore those rights by giving them someone else’s genetic identity?True, personality is not fixed in someone’s genes, but the clone would share any physical appearance or genetic fault of the cloned．

　　Also, there is a large power struggle here．Cloning means a degree of power and control over another person’s physical identity and that ignores their rights and their only personality．The person doing the cloning would have more power than any parent would have．

　　Cloning would also deal with killing embryos(胚胎)．You might not have known, but Dolly, the sheep that was cloned in 1996, was one of over 200 sheep embryos and hers was the only embryo that survived．The rest died or were thrown away．Imagine if the failure rate was that high when we started to clone humans．More than 200 embryos, the start of 200 human beings, would die for the sake of just one embryo that would have the same DNA as someone else．

　　Cloning someone, at this present time, would be extremely dangerous to the birth mother and the clone．In studies done on cows, 4 out of 12 birth mothers died．There is a very high failure rate, which is showed in the cloning of Dolly．Even if you had a few good embryos, failures have been noticeable in animal tests．

　　So, should we work ahead in the world of cloning?I say no．The risks are greater than the benefits．It’s dangerous to the clone and to the birth mother．We would be killing human lives in the process．It would also be a violation(侵害)of the clone’s right to its own genetic identity and personality．

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

阅读理解

　　Is the woman pictured on the right more attractive than the woman on the left?

　　The photograph on the right was changed using a new“beauty making”computer program, which uses a mathematical formula(公式)involving 234 measurements of distances between facial features to get a theoretically more attractive version, while keeping the basic appearance of the face unchanged．Unlike changes done in fashion magazine photos, wrinkles were not smoothed and hair color was not changed．

　　The program is the latest attempt to combine beauty and science, a subject that has drawn increasing academic interest in the last decade．

　　Studies have shown there is surprising agreement among people of different cultures about what makes a face attractive．Most important is symmetry(匀称), along with youthfulness, skin smoothness and vivid eyes and hair color．Yet, like the many other scientific or mathematical attempts to define beauty, this software program raises difficult questions about the understanding of beauty．

　　“How can they prove something is more or less beautiful?”said Lois Banner, a history professor at Chicago University, who studies changing beauty standards．“There can never be a single standard of beauty because so much of it is culturally influenced．”

　　After viewing“before”and“after”photographs of different people, Banner said the original faces were more attractive．“Attempts to measure beauty are driven by the media's efforts to define beauty and who is beautiful”, said Banner

　　Martina Eckstut, the woman whose photo was beautified for this article, said she was struck by how different she looked．“I think the”after“picture looks great, but it doesn't really look like me at all．”She added,“I would like to keep my original face．”

　　For centuries people have tried to define a universal ideal of beauty．“The first reaction we have to faces will be based on face symmetry．”said Alexander Nehamas, a professor who has written about beauty．“But in real life we don't just see a face．We see faces as people express their emotions and ideas, and all those aspects of the face are essential to our deciding whether a face or a person is beautiful．”

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)