1 . Is forgiveness against our human nature? To answer our question, we need to ask a further question: What is the essence of our humanity? For the sake of simplicity, people consider two distinctly different views of humanity.
The first view involves dominance and power. In an early paper on the psychology of forgiveness, Droll (1984) made the interesting claim that humans’ essential nature is more aggressive than forgiving allows. Those who forgive are against their basic nature, much to their harm. In his opinion, forgivers are compromising their well-being as they offer mercy to others, who might then take advantage of them.
The second view involves the theme of cooperation, mutual respect, and even love as the basis of who we are as humans. Researchers find that to fully grow as human beings, we need both to receive love from and offer love to others. Without love, our connections with a wide range of individuals in our lives can fall apart. Even common sense strongly suggests that the will to power over others does not make for harmonious interactions. For example, how well has slavery worked as a mode of social harmony?
From this second viewpoint of who we are as humans, forgiveness plays a key role in the biological and psychological integrity of both individuals and communities because one of the outcomes of forgiveness, shown through scientific studies, is the decreasing of hate and the restoration of harmony. Forgiveness can break the cycle of anger. At least to the extent the people from whom you are estranged (不和的) accept your love and forgiveness and are prepared to make the required adjustments. Forgiveness can heal relationships and reconnect people.
As an important note, when we take a classical philosophical perspective, we see the distinction between potentiality and actuality. We are not necessarily born with the capacity to forgive, but instead with the potential to learn about it and to grow in our ability to forgive. The actuality of forgiving, in real situations, develops with practice.
1. What is Droll’s idea about forgiveness?| A．People should offer mercy to others. |
| B．Aggressive people should learn to forgive. |
| C．Forgiveness depends on the nature of humanity. |
| D．People who forgive can have their own welfare affected. |
| A．To fight is to grow. | B．To give is to receive. |
| C．To forgive is to abuse. | D．To dominate is to harm. |
| A．Favorable. | B．Reserved. | C．Objective. | D．Skeptical. |
| A．Forgiveness is in our nature. | B．Forgiveness grows with time. |
| C．It takes practice to forgive. | D．Actuality is based on potentiality. |
2 . Recently, after I gave a virtual presentation on my book Indistractable, a listener wrote something in the Zoom chat that drove me crazy, “This is great but wouldn’t work for me. I’m a Gemini (双子星座的人).”
Ironically, the Zoom listener is right. If she thinks she’s incapable, she’ll prove it correct — whether it has anything to do with the stars and moon or not. Her inflexible self-identification denies her the chance to improve her life. It’s incredibly self-limiting.
That’s why we should stop defining ourselves as fixed identities and nouns, and instead start describing ourselves using verbs.
Words are powerful. Linguistic research shows that language shapes people and culture; it can also give us insight into ourselves and our behavior. In a well-known study, researchers Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobsen had all students in the same elementary school take a standard IQ test. Then they randomly selected a group of students, regardless of their test results, and told teachers the group would show “dramatic intellectual growth”. Eight months later, those students scored significantly higher on an IQ test. The study concluded that teachers’ positive perception of students correlated to those students’ high performance on intellectual and academic tests. The labels the children received became a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy (预言).
That’s because language shapes expectations, which shape our reality. If we have experiences that lead us to label ourselves with specific nouns during our life, then we are likely to stick with those labels and the behaviors that go with them.
Using verbs to identify ourselves is an effective method for releasing “trapped priors”—a term in psychology for a perception of reality that’s affected or trapped by past experiences. Verbs are action words well suited to describing short-lived behaviors that can and do change. They don’t lay claim to our entire identity, but they acknowledge that we are people first and foremost, not whatever a singular noun may say we are. So, instead of saying, “I am a procrastinator (拖拉者)”, you should say, “I am a person who often procrastinates.”
By focusing on our behaviors, not fixed characteristics, we can release harmful perceptions of ourselves that hold us back from trying methods that might improve our lives — like those that can help us achieve the critical skill of being indistractable.
1. What does the author want to show through the example of the Zoom listener?| A．The concept of flexible self-identification. |
| B．His confusion about the way to self-identify. |
| C．His understanding of proper self-identification. |
| D．The negative effects of using nouns to define oneself. |
| A．Self-fulfilling prophecies change over time. |
| B．Encouragement promotes students’ improvement. |
| C．Language usage will have an impact on teaching. |
| D．IQ has little to do with students’ academic performance. |
| A．By highlighting their behaviors. |
| B．By focusing on their advantages. |
| C．By analyzing their typical characteristics. |
| D．By assessing their academic performance. |
| A．Nouns are more powerful than verbs |
| B．Your words can determine your future |
| C．How we define ourselves really counts |
| D．Our option of words reflects our identity |
3 . On December 16, 2023, the first section of Maya Train officially opened, which runs between Campeche and Cancún, carrying up to 231 passengers across 290 miles and stopping at 14 train stations.
Built as an ambitious effort to promote tourism and boost Mexico’s economy, the rail system connects the major cities and tourist regions of the Yucatán Peninsula —from Cancún’s beaches to Tulum’s archaeological wonders. Once the project is completed, the entire rail system will link tourist destinations across five states. However, environmentalists and archaeologists argue that the train route will cause great damage to the environment-and ancient Mayan sites.
The Maya Train passes through six UNESCO World Heritage sites and thousands of archaeological sites. One particular area of concern is the Calakmul biosphere reserve, which is home to many endangered species, such as jaguars and over 500 other animal species. The train lines, more than 60 meters wide, could act as artificial barriers that may limit the movement of these animals within the reserve making it difficult for them to move around and access food and water sources.
Opponents also express safety concerns. Certain sections of the rail system will be built right on top of the aquifer’s(含水层的) most fragile points of contact with the surface. “It’s like wanting to build over eggshells,” says Guillermo Christy, a water treatment consultant. “Putting trains weighing thousands of tons on top could cause the underground caves to crash down.” To construct the train infrastructure also requires driving long piles deep into the ground, which poses a big threat to this fragile ecosystem and leads to water shortages.
In the ongoing debate of Maya Train, it is crucial to consider the delicate balance between economic development and environmental preservation. While Maya Train may provide economic benefits, we must not overlook the potential environmental and cultural losses, as well as the safety risks it may bring. Achieving harmony between progress and conservation may be a significant challenge for the project, but we must take into account the long-term consequences of our actions.
1. What do we know about the Maya Train project?| A．It consumes lots of labor in Mexico. |
| B．It has concerned some professionals. |
| C．It was completed on December 16,2023. |
| D．It blocks the development of local tourism. |
| A．Restricting their activities. |
| B．Polluting their water sources. |
| C．Disturbing their sleeping patterns. |
| D．Attracting their enemies to the area. |
| A．To show the difficulty of constructing the rail lines. |
| B．To prove the urgency of protectıng the fragile ecosystem. |
| C．To explain the reasons for water shortages along the railway. |
| D．To stress Maya Train’s potential harm to the aquifer system. |
| A．Preserving cultural sites requires strong financial support. |
| B．It is time to speed up the con truction process of Maya Train. |
| C．We should value the economic benefits of the project in the long run. |
| D．Economic development should not come at the cost of the environment. |
4 . We are in the midst of a battle for our attention. Our devices have affected our brains and destroyed our collective ability to concentrate. Journalist Johann Hair’s new book, Stolen Focus, has just joined the voices complaining about the great influence of the digital age. His and other recent books reflect a public perception that our focus is under attack.
Indeed, in our new research, we found some clear concerns. We surveyed a nationally representative sample of 2,093 UK adults in 2021. Half of those surveyed felt their attention spans were shorter than they used to be, compared with a quarter who didn't. And three quarters of participants agreed we're living through a time when there's non-stop competition for our attention between a variety of media channels and information outlets (渠道).
There has long been a worry about the threat to attention brought by new cultural forms, whether that’s social media or the cheap paperback sensation novels of the 19th century. Even as far back as ancient Greece, the philosopher Socrates complained that the written words created “forgetfulness in our souls”. There has always been a tendency to fear the effects that new media and technologies will have on our minds.
The reality is that we simply don’t have long-term studies that tell us whether our attention spans have actually shrunk. What we do know from our study is that people overestimate some of the problems. There’s no such thing as an average attention span. Our ability to focus varies hugely depending on the individual and the task at hand.
It’s also important not to ignore the many benefits that technology brings to our life. Much of the public surveyed recognized these, so while half thought big tech and social media were ruining young people’s attention spans, roughly another half felt that being easily distracted was more to do with people’s personalities than any negative influence that technology may or may not have. Also, half of the public believed multitasking at work and switching frequently between emails, phone calls, and other tasks can create a more efficient and satisfactory work experience.
1. What might be the theme of the books mentioned in Paragraph 1?| A．The main focus of social media. | B．The great influence of public opinion. |
| C．The attention crisis in the digital age. | D．The fierce competition in the digital age. |
| A．They were frequently disturbed by digital devices. |
| B．They felt it hard to acquire useful information online. |
| C．They had shorter attention spans than average people. |
| D．They felt challenged by fierce competition from others. |
| A．To stress new cultural forms have limitations. |
| B．To show worry about attention is an age-old problem. |
| C．To prove the important role be played in literary history. |
| D．To explain cultural differences between the past and the present. |
| A．People tend to overestimate their abilities. |
| B．Digital distractions might have potential benefits. |
| C．Technology’s benefits have been largely ignored. |
| D．Switching between different tasks frequently is difficult. |
| A．Digital devices can benefit our work. | B．We should say “No” to digital devices. |
| C．We should think highly of new cultural forms. | D．Digital distractions really affect us so much. |
5 . Science is increasingly central to our lives — from its role in creating day-to-day objects such as the smartphones in our pockets, to the big challenges of tackling disease, addressing climate change and focusing on biodiversity loss.
Many of the changes that the discipline brings are hugely beneficial, but they often come with potential downsides that demand public debate. Will artificial intelligence take people’s jobs or destroy elections with false news? How fast can we practically achieve a net zero economy?
For the crucial public debate that is needed on all this to take place, we must have a scientifically literate population. But there is a divide between the scientifically minded and those who choose not to engage with science.
It saddens me that our culture now views science as difficult, which discourages many from taking an interest in it. A British Science Association (BSA) survey recently suggested that only around a third of 14- to 18-year-olds find scientists inspirational or consider the subject to be relevant to their lives.
In fact, science is interlinked with every aspect of our existence and people from all walks of life and of all ages should be able to access it easily. The invention of the printing press was crucial to the Enlightenment because it democratised (普及) knowledge. So, in this increasingly science-centred world, the same attention should be given to popular science writing as is given to other forms of literature.
The Royal Society Science Book Prize is the only one in the world to promote popular science writing. Stephen Hawking’s A Brief History of Time, which was shortlisted (把……列入入围名单) for the prize in 1989, was written for readers who had no prior knowledge of physics and has since become a universally recognised text on the universe.
Democratising science has never been more important. There are so many scientific stories to be told that can help us better understand ourselves. A society equipped with a solid understanding of the issues of the day is a society more able to respond to them in a better way.
1. What does the underlined part “all this” in paragraph 3 refer to?| A．Beneficial scientific advancements. |
| B．Challenges facing human beings. |
| C．Potential downsides of science. |
| D．Disagreements between scientists and the public. |
| A．They have great respect for scientists. |
| B．They feel disconnected from science. |
| C．They know little about the Enlightenment. |
| D．They wish to land a career in the scientific field. |
| A．It won an international book prize. |
| B．It focused on important life issues. |
| C．It was written by a highly-honoured author. |
| D．It democratised knowledge about the universe. |
| A．The crisis of science in our modern life |
| B．We must rely on science to tackle our problems |
| C．Popular science books have never been more important |
| D．Public debate about science could never be more necessary |
6 . ChatGPT is a new artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot that can write essays, solve complex problems, compose song lyrics, and more. It has caused a new moral panic as many teachers, parents, and even some teens are convinced that students will use this tool to cheat. In response, a number of school districts have moved to ban ChatGPT.
Moral panics generally reveal underlying beliefs in technological determinism, so before jumping on the trend of banning ChatGPT, remember that technology will continue to be a big part of our kids’ lives. There is no putting that horse back in the barn, so it’s a good idea to figure out how to prepare kids to navigate a world with AI.
Preparing kids for AI means teaching them the skills and knowledge they need to work with AI technologies. Foremost among these are critical thinking and ethical (合乎道德的) decision-making. This includes learning how to check information sources to develop data literacy and understanding key ethical concepts such as copyright and privacy. It also means age-appropriate exposure to the benefits, challenges, and dangers of AI tools as they emerge.
As parents, you’d better not dismiss a tool like ChatGPT until you explore it for yourself. Think about how you would use ChatGPT. I asked it to write a recipe for Sole Meuniere (香煎鳎目鱼). It was very fast and accurate and included serving suggestions.
Ask your kids to brainstorm how they might use ChatGPT. Ask ChatGPT some questions together with your kids. All questions can lead you to a discussion about when it’s a helpful tool and what uses would be unethical or inappropriate.
AI is driving a lot of our interactions with technology. But it will never replace human cognition and will not go away. The only way to make use of its potential is to learn how to use it well.
1. What is the main purpose of paragraph 1?| A．To raise a question to be discussed. |
| B．To list some interesting phenomena. |
| C．To express the main idea of the text. |
| D．To introduce a new trend in technology. |
| A．Tolerant. | B．Opposed. | C．Neutral. | D．Unclear. |
| A．To show that ChatGPT is easy to use. |
| B．To encourage readers to use ChatGPT in their daily life. |
| C．To prove that ChatGPT is commonly used in many aspects of life. |
| D．To inspire readers to consider whether ChatGPT would be useful for them. |
| A．Kids should be allowed to explore AI freely. |
| B．Parents should instruct kids to use AI properly. |
| C．AI will replace human cognition in some fields. |
| D．AI needs to be improved to answer all questions. |
7 . We cannot argue with reality. We cannot argue with science. Therefore, we simply cannot argue with the fact that there are no straight lines in the universe.
Let’s start with science. The science of a straight line falls under the subject of physics. It might seem like a complicated topic, but the theory behind it is pretty simple. If you start rowing in a boat from one place and keep sailing, the concept of the curved (弯曲的) Earth will take you in a circle and you will end up where you started. The brain forms the concept of a straight line to simplify what you see in nature. Consider it a tool for the mind to recognize reality.
The concept of straight lines was controversial and heavily influenced the politics and society of Europe from the 15th century to the 17th century. Greek thinkers and scholars like Aristotle in the 5th century already proved that the Earth was a globe, but many Europeans at that time did not believe in this idea! However, some Europeans during the Age of Exploration denied this belief. Just as the famous Italian scientist Galileo Galilei was persecuted (迫害) for advocating a heliocentric (日心的) model of the solar system, many thinkers like Giordano Bruno were shamed for believing that the Earth was round.
Well, my friends, let’s move on to life. The concept of nothing going in a straight line can be associated with life as much as it relates to science and architecture. Whenever you do something, it never turns out to play out exactly as planned. I especially know that as a thirteen-year-old! Life is a rough road—every time you go forward, it is followed by two steps back or to the side. Just like how science explains it, life is a curvy path full of unexpected twists, turns, and adventures that nobody can ever predict.
1. What does paragraph 1 function as?| A．An introduction to the topic. | B．A means to attract readers. |
| C．An explanation of a common sense. | D．A proof of the author’s opinion. |
| A．The mind could not recognize realities. | B．Things in nature might look complicated. |
| C．What you see in nature could seem simple. | D．People in the 16th century might find the Earth flat. |
| A．Plain and smooth. | B．Easy but fruitless. | C．Long and tough. | D．Bothersome but safe. |
| A．A Straight Line: Everything Simple | B．A Straight Line: People’s Good Wish |
| C．A Straight Line: Difficult To Prove | D．A Straight Line: Simply Nonexistent |
8 . In the 19th century, an Arab physician known as Ibn Zuhr conducted some animal research to assess the surgical procedures that could be applicable to humans. Since then, animal testing has been considered to be the most efficient way to develop new drugs. New medical treatments and drugs are tested on animals first to determine their effectiveness or safety levels before they are finally tested on humans. However, it remains controversial whether it is morally right or wrong to use animals for medical or commercial experiments.
The use of animals for medical purposes is seen to be necessary by many scientists. Researchers usually begin their trials using rats. If the tests are successful, further tests are done on monkeys before using human beings. For testing, such tiered (分层的) rounds are important because it reduces the level of error and any negative side effects. Some argue that animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments and that there is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system. Moreover, there are regulations for animal testing that limit the misuse of animals during research, which serves as evidence that animals are well taken care of and treated well instead of being intentionally harmed.
However, some other experts and animal welfare groups have opposed such practice, terming it inhumane and claiming it should be banned. According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force-feeding, radiation exposure, operations to deliberately cause damage and frightening situations to create depression and anxiety. They also hold the view that animals are very different from human beings and therefore make poor test subjects. Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe. Animal tests on the arthritis (关节炎) drug Vioxx showed that it would have a protective effect on the hearts of mice, yet the drug went on to cause more than 27,000 heart attacks before being pulled from the market.
It’s safe to say that using animals for tests will continue to be debated in many years to come. Despite the benefits of animal testing, some of the animal welfare organizations’ concerns need to be addressed with adequate regulations to ensure that animals are treated humanely.
1. Why is animal testing considered necessary?| A．Because other testing alternatives may not replace the need for animals. |
| B．Because animal testing has been in practice since the 19th century. |
| C．Because animal testing can spare humans any side effect. |
| D．Because rats are more like humans than monkeys. |
| A．Having unnecessary operations. |
| B．Eating poisonous food. |
| C．Being killed deliberately. |
| D．Breathing in polluted air. |
| A．Arthritis is hard to cure. |
| B．Some drugs need to be pulled from the shelves. |
| C．A drug should be tested many more times before its release. |
| D．Animal tests cannot necessarily produce accurate results. |
| A．Experts try hard to determine whether animal tests are harmful. |
| B．Scientists reduce the number of animals used in research. |
| C．The authorities issue a new law to guarantee animal rights during research. |
| D．Relevant organizations show more concern about the animals’ welfare. |
9 . If there was an app claiming to improve your memory, would you be willing to try it? It’s hard to resist the idea of having a better memory.
In response to this perceived need, the brain training industry has grown rapidly, offering a wide range of accessible and affordable mental exercises through smartphone and tablet apps. Many researchers have found evidence suggesting that well-designed exercises can improve mental abilities and lead to better scores on IQ tests. They compare the brain to muscles, suggesting that targeted repetition of memory exercises can strengthen and condition our memory processes, similar to how athletes engage in strength and conditioning by repeatedly exercising specific muscle groups.
In contrast to everyday activities like solving a complex puzzle, memory training apps are specifically designed to provide a more challenging workout for the brain. These apps typically involve tasks that require tracking a large number of objects while being distracted (使分心) by a secondary task, such as mental calculations or exploring a game’s landscape. If this brain training proves effective, it could be beneficial for individuals with brain-related disabilities or those recovering from conditions like cancer.
Critics, though, argue that while the concept is appealing, the overall evidence fails to demonstrate significant improvement in core brain processes. Additionally, despite the claims made by many apps and brain training companies, scientists have yet to identify the key factors that make an intervention truly effective or determine the best approaches to address the diverse needs of individuals seeking help.
While the question is still open to debate, there is evidence suggesting that short-term working memory training can benefit high-functioning individuals. However, it’s important to note that brain training, like diet and exercise, is unlikely to have identical effects on every individual.
1. In what way is the brain similar to muscles according to many researchers?| A．In testing results. | B．In work processes. |
| C．In bodily functions. | D．In training methods. |
| A．Simple. | B．Effective. |
| C．Demanding. | D．Interesting. |
| A．Legal claims. | B．Proven effects. |
| C．Tailored services. | D．Appealing concepts |
| A．Can Our Memory be Improved? |
| B．Does Brain Training Actually Work? |
| C．What have Scientists Found about Memory? |
| D．What does the Brain Training Industry Bring? |
10 . Some people worry that there’s too much technology in our lives. And they may have a point, given how countless people now carry the Internet around in their pocket and use it as a primary form of communication. It’s practically difficult to shun technology in our world. There are computer microchips in our watches, our cars, light switches, even our pets! Where will it end?
Well, if certain people have their way, it’ll go even further. We’ll have microchips implanted into our brains that can interact with the computers by thought alone. It may sound like something from the science fiction, but in many ways, things look quite promising. Thanks to the ability to send and receive information remotely via computers, microchips and other related devices have long been put into brains.
For example, electrodes have been implanted in the brains of epilepsy patients to better record and even predict the abnormal neurological activity. Similarly, deep-brain stimulation, through implanted devices that cause activity in key brain regions, is an established treatment for things like Parkinson’s disease, and is even being looked into for illnesses like depression.
However, it’s another thing to place such devices in healthy individuals. There are the practical concerns, not least of which is what these chips will be made of. The inside of the brain is a mass of highly reactive chemicals and electrical activity. Implants would need to be dull enough to not upset the delicate processes by their presence, but also sensitive enough to read and process the activity around them. Current technology has made impressive progress with this, but if it were to be rolled out to millions of people, we’d need to be 100 per cent certain that it’s safe.
How many people will actually want to have technology literally put into their brain? A surprising 60 percent of Americans say they’d be okay with it, but that’s when it’s purely theoretical. In reality, the possibility of having strangers stick chips in your brain is likely to prove unattractive, especially for a population where millions get mad at fictional microchips in vaccines (疫苗), and even more are frightened of dentists.
Ultimately, the technology of computer-brain interface (接口) implants is still far away from us.
1. What does the underlined word “shun” in paragraph 1 probably mean?| A．develop | B．avoid | C．change | D．trust |
| A．The possible treatment for particular diseases. |
| B．The process of human-computer interaction. |
| C．The existing application of microchip implants. |
| D．The future of microchips and devices alike. |
| A．The right materials used for the chips. |
| B．The exact position in the brain for the chips. |
| C．The chips’ precise sensitivity to function in the brain. |
| D．The extensive use of the chips on all humans. |
| A．Computer-brain Interface: The Light of the Future |
| B．Innovation is Necessary to Make Progress |
| C．Where are We in the Medical Technology? |
| D．Mind-controlled Tech: Is It Possible? |
