In 1818 Mary Shelley published Frankenstein, the story of a scientist who tries to create a superior, being and instead creates a monster. In the last two centuries, this story     1     (tell) over and over again in countless variations. At first sight, the Frankenstein story appears to warn us that if we try to play God and engineer life we will be punished severely. Yet the story has a     2     (deep) meaning.

The Frankenstein myth confronts. Homo sapiens (智人) with the fact that the last days are fast approaching.     3     some nuclear or ecological disaster strikes, the pace of technological development will soon lead to the replacement of Homo sapiens by completely different beings who possess not only different physiques, but also very different cognitive and emotional worlds. This is something most Sapiens find extremely worrying. We like to believe that in the future people just     4     us will travel from planet to planet in fast spaceships. We don’t like to think about the     5     (possible) that in the future, beings with emotions and identities like ours will no longer exist, and our place will be taken by alien life forms     6     abilities beat our own.

We seek comfort in the fantasy that Dr. Frankenstein can create only terrible monsters, whom we would have to destroy in order to save the world. We like to tell the story that way because it implies that we are     7     best of all beings, that there never was and never will be anything better than us. Any attempt     8     (improve) us will inevitably fail, because even if our bodies might be improved, you cannot touch the human spirit.

We would have a hard time     9     (accept) the fact that scientists could engineer spirits as well as bodies, and that future Dr. Frankenstein could therefore create something     10     (true) superior to us, something that will look at us as condescendingly (居高临下地) as we look at the Neanderthals (穴居人).

Traditionally,     1     the year winds down, it’s a time for reflections—to give thanks, reconnect with loved ones, and cherish the more meaningful parts of life, removed from our usual day-to-day distractions.

Of course, the events of 2020 haven’t shown a lot of respect for our traditions. In a year of so much tragedy, it can be tough to give thanks when you’re doing your best to get by. And far too many of us will have to gather around a table with an empty chair, if we were able to gather together at all.

One thing, though, we can say about 2020 is that it forced us all to cherish what is most important, what’s most meaningful in our lives. To stop taking things for granted,     2     truly matters. To be grateful for what we have, and to be alive to the pain of those     3     (fortunate).

Throughout this challenging year, I’ve been moved, again and again, by the sacrifices so many were willing to make on behalf of others. The healthcare professionals who risked their lives to save ours. The workers who have kept our lights on and our shelves stocked, always essential to our economy, but finally     4     (recognize) for it. The protesters of every race and age who saw injustice in their streets and their institutions and demanded change. And the less heralded leaders, the quiet change-makers who saw need in their own communities and leapt to address it. They checked in on their neighbors, delivered food and PPE to seniors and those experiencing hardship, offered mental health support to those     5    (recover) from trauma.     6     holes this pandemic tore wide in our social fabric, these emerging leaders stepped forward to patch it up.

These are exactly the leaders Michelle and I started our Foundation to support. We always thought they     7     (lead) us into a bright future, if only we     8     empower them, connect them with each other, and give them a dose of inspiration when they needed it.

What we learned in 2020 is that these emerging leaders aren’t just building a brighter future, they’re safeguarding our present. In hard times, they are the ones who’ve given me solace. It’s     9     sacrifice in which I found hope. And as we begin to close the chapter on a difficult year with encouraging news on the horizon, it’s their leadership     10     will guide us today and tomorrow.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays, everybody.

—Quoted from Barack Obama’s Christmas speech in 2020

The home of the future won't be     1    (complete) different and we will be living in houses and flats just as we do today.     2    (build) in different shapes, no two homes will look the same. People will be able to buy “house kits” containing a basic house structure, with adjustable walls, doors and windows. They will put together the different parts     3     (create) the home they want.

Space holidays will develop in the future, but these holidays won't be for everyone because they are     4     (expensive) than holidays on the earth. Short space trips will develop first, then the space hotels will go around the earth     5    it will be possible to have a longer vacation. By     6    end of the next century, there will be holiday centres on the moon with leisure facilities for families.

According to the laws of physics, the earth is going to    7    ( appear) some time in the future. This isn't going to happen tomorrow but scientists predict that it will happen in five billion years when our sun    8    (explode).     9     a result,we will have to explore the universe and find another home. At some point in the distant future, either we stay on the earth and die with it,or we leave and move to another planet. There won't be any other    10    (choose).

Are all changes good?

It is a commonly held belief that as people get older, they become resistant to change. Their complaints that things used to be better in the past or     1     some new development is no good can be dismissed as the unavoidable thoughts of people who    2     (simple) don't like change and are therefore     3     (able) to see the benefits of progress.

But is this automatically true? Are the views of an older person on a new development always to be disregarded? This would suggest that every new development must be a good     4     and surely that cannot logically be    5     case.

Take    6     (architect) for example. In the 1950s and 1960s, many older British people were highly critical of the new concrete housing blocks that suddenly sprang up in cities,     7     (say) that they were ugly and depressing places to live in. They were     8     (tell) that they were simply being old-fashioned and that they were incapable of appreciating the advantages of these new buildings, which had replaced the streets of small houses that they were familiar with.     9     decades later, these very same blocks were being pulled    10    , as new generations decided they were both ugly and bad for society.