1 . Culture is one of the most important concepts within sociology because sociologists recognize that it plays a crucial role in our social lives.
Sociologists define the non-material aspects of culture as the values and beliefs, language, communication and practices that are shared in common by a group of people. Expanding on these categories, culture is made up of our knowledge, common sense, assumptions and expectations.
Sociologists see the two sides of culture-the material and non-material-as closely connected. Material culture emerges from and is shaped by the non-material aspects of culture.
A.It is composed of both non-material and material things. |
B.Without culture, we would not have relationships or society. |
C.Culture is also what we do and how we behave and perform. |
D.Material culture is composed of the things that humans make and use. |
E.Culture is different from social structure and economic aspects of society. |
F.In other words, what we value, believe and know influences the things that we make. |
G.For example, a great documentary film might change people’s attitudes and beliefs. |
2 . Here’s something that’s surprisingly common: people who strongly advocate moral or noble ideals, but regularly use them to justify attacking and mistreating others — something which is surely neither moral nor noble.
Isn’t this inconsistent? How can someone loudly insist they’re a good person while behaving in ways that totally contradict this, without mentally short-circuiting in some way?
The answer is that there are many psychological and neurological (神经的) processes that allow people to engage in this behaviour that, for want of a better label, we’ll call ‘virtue bullying’.
A lot of virtue bullying could be seen as virtual bullying, which is to say it’s a lot easier online. We’ve all seen Facebook posts that make some simple, morally solid claim, such as “I support victims of [the latest disaster]”, which are then followed by something like “Share if you agree. I bet 97 per cent of you won’t.” Such posts are basically saying, “I’m a good, moral person ... and I’ll criticise you until you agree.” This isn’t the behaviour of a good person.
But it’s not internet-specific. Wanting to protect children is a good, moral aim, but consider all the books and shows banned or attacked in the US under the cover of protecting children. Indeed, throughout history, there have been many instances where individuals who considered themselves good and moral have committed terrible acts.
But why do good people treat others badly? Our brains work hard to enhance our self-esteem (自尊). A 2011 study found that an effective way to strengthen our self-esteem is to attack others, so our status (地位) becomes relatively higher. So, thinking you’re good while attacking others can be a very instinctive (本能的) process, sadly.
For humans, our morals are a key aspect of our identity and an important factor in our decision-making. We’re naturally protective of our identities and decision-making. If these things are rooted in morals and beliefs, we’ll be defensive towards anyone who poses a threat to them. This can lead to what seems to be inconsistent behaviours.
Ultimately, for all the explanations offered here, it should be acknowledged that some people are just not nice. How you deal with such people is up to you.
1. Why does the author raise questions in paragraph 2?A.To express his doubts. | B.To present an assumption. |
C.To display a phenomenon. | D.To introduce points for discussion. |
A.Advocating for noble causes online. |
B.Using moral ideals to justify mistreating others. |
C.Forcing others to agree with one’s moral claims. |
D.Attacking people who disagree with one’s moral beliefs. |
A.Attacking others boosts self-esteem. |
B.Self-esteem is linked with social status. |
C.People with higher social status attack others more often. |
D.Boosting self-esteem reduces the desire to attack others. |
A.Morals vary with them. | B.Morals threaten them. |
C.Morals shape them. | D.Morals assess them. |
3 . Reading doesn’t come naturally to people, but most of us have learned how. Eighty-six percent of the world’s population is literate (有读写能力的), and this rate has been increasing for centuries. Literacy makes it possible to navigate a world filled with books, websites, text messages, road signs and more.
Could a growing number of people participate in today’s world without reading or writing at all? Technology makes it possible. Most of our devices now talk to us and take spoken commands. Smart cars ask for a destination and then give directions. Smart virtual assistants listen for requests to report the weather, play a song, set a timer, order groceries, and much more. Software can also read text aloud or turn speech into text. These interactions aren’t perfect — the software still makes silly mistakes. But it’s getting better and better. It’s possible to imagine a future world where all of our communication with our devices and each other is spoken.
But reading and writing are powerful tools. For one, most people read faster than they speak. A podcaster or audio book narrator speaks at around 150 to 160 words per minute, while a strong reader can cruise through a text at 300 to 400 words per minute. That’s twice as fast! Research has also found that people remember more information and stay more interested when they read as opposed to listen. Learning to read also creates new connections in the brain. In her book Proust and the Squid: The Story and Science of the Reading Brain, Maryanne Wolf writes that with the invention of reading, human beings “rearranged the very organization of our brain, which in turn expanded the ways we were able to think, which changed the intellectual evolution of our species.” Would we really choose to give up that progress? What do you think? Do you hope people keep on reading and writing, or will technology make literacy obsolete (淘汰的)?
1. What does the 2nd paragraph focus on?A.Technology makes up for illiteracy. |
B.Many people have problems with literacy. |
C.Technology is a double-edged sword. |
D.Technology is changing fast. |
A.Gather more information. | B.Remember less clearly. |
C.Show less interest. | D.Learn more words. |
A.To give an example of a book on reading. |
B.To show the evolution of human beings. |
C.To prove that reading is related with brain. |
D.To illustrate the need for reading and writing. |
A.A textbook. | B.A blog post. | C.A book review. | D.An academic article. |
4 . Many have probably heard of Thoreau, even though his message of simplicity may sound old-fashioned. Nowadays, smartphones flood us with text messages. Many consumers are buying the latest digital devices, from tablets and fitness trackers to commercial drones. Simple living seems to be a thing of the past.
As a writer who declared the value of simplicity almost two centuries ago, Thoreau was a contrarian (叛逆者) for his time. He lived during the height of the Industrial Age, distinguished by the rise of large factories, expanding urban developments, and powerful machines such as steam engines.
Turned off by the constant hustle and bustle of his time, Thoreau withdrew from city life to live alone in the woods. He brought with him only the necessities of life and wrote about this adventure in his book Walden. In Walden, Thoreau is basically making a philosophical statement. We are not living deliberate or meaningful lives, thanks (or no thanks) to modern technology. We created powerful machines to make life more convenient. Unfortunately, these machines have done the opposite. In his words, “men have become the tools of their tools”.
That is to say, we are not the ones controlling technology. Technology is controlling us. Let me try updating Thoreau’s message with a couple 21st-century examples. Every few minutes, smartphones may distract us with messages. At least half of Americans check their phones several times an hour. Meanwhile, information overload from social media can weaken our concentration and heighten confusion.
When technology causes that much distraction and confusion, it may be healthy to simplify life by reducing technology overuse. Personally, I’ve done so in two ways. First, I use very little data on my phone and keep the apps on it to a minimum. The vast majority of the time, I only use my phone to call or text. Second, I quit most social media. Sure, those two things aren’t as extreme as Thoreau withdrawing into the woods. Nevertheless, they’re realistic moves I can make toward living a more meaningful life.
1. Which statement would Thoreau probably agree with?A.Technology holds back our ambition. |
B.Technology is key to a meaningful life. |
C.Simplicity is possible in a tech-driven world. |
D.Simplicity is outdated in modern times. |
A.To escape the harsh economic conditions of his time. |
B.To throw himself into the completion of his masterpiece. |
C.To experience a new and exciting lifestyle away from technology. |
D.To find a quieter existence that allows for deeper reflection and purpose. |
A.Theoretical models. | B.Popular beliefs. |
C.Practical measures. | D.Realistic analyses. |
A.To criticize the overuse of 21st-century modern technology. |
B.To illustrate Thoreau’s ideas on simple living in the modern context. |
C.To explore the role of technology in shaping contemporary lifestyles. |
D.To examine the effects of reduced social media use on personal well-being. |
5 . It may feel unforgivably rude to reject an invitation — even one to an event you would much prefer not to attend—but people often overestimate the social consequences of saying “no”.
In one experiment, the researchers asked participants to read a scenario (脚本) where they either invited or were invited by one of their friends to dinner on a Saturday night at a local restaurant with a celebrity chef. The participants who were given the invitation were told to imagine they declined because they already had plans during the day and wanted to spend a night at home relaxing. The participants who imagined giving the invitation were told their friends declined for the same reason. “Across our experiments, we consistently found that invitees often overestimate the negative consequences that may arise in the eyes of inviters after declining an invitation,” Julian Givi, a professor said.
In another experiment, the researchers recruited (招募) 160 people to participate in what was called a “couples survey” with their significant other. Of the couples who participated, 4% had been together for less than six months, 1% six to 12 months, 21% one to five years and 74% had been together for more than five years. Regardless of the length of the couples’ relationship, the researchers found that the person who rejected their partner’s invitation to a fun activity tended to believe that their partner would be angrier or more likely to feel as if the rejection meant they did not care about their partner than they actually did.
The researchers believe their findings show people consistently overestimate how upset someone will be when they decline an invitation, even if they have a long-standing, close relationship.
Givi says that people could benefit from turning down invitations on occasion when it could help them avoid burnout, as doing so will not necessarily have the major consequences they expect it will. “Burnout is the real thing, especially around the holidays when we are often invited to too many events,” he said. “Don’t be afraid to turn down invitations once in a while. But, keep in mind that spending time with others is how relationships develop, so don’t decline every invitation.”
1. How did the researchers conduct the first experiment?A.By asking participants to invite their friends. |
B.By analyzing the data of declining consequences. |
C.By recording the invitation refusals of participants. |
D.By offering participants an imaginary life situation. |
A.How partners decline an invitation. |
B.What couples care about during an invitation. |
C.If relationships affect the refusal of an invitation. |
D.Why partners feel angry about the refusal of an invitation. |
A.To keep away from tiredness. | B.To develop their own inner mind. |
C.To experience their Individual time. | D.To avoid the negative impact on relationships. |
A.Send a Proper Invitation | B.How to Refuse an Invitation |
C.Decline in a Polite Way | D.Say “No” to That Invitation |
1. What was mentioned in the open letter?
A.The concern about AI affecting human creativity in writing. |
B.The role of science fiction in influencing AI development. |
C.The potential benefits of AI in the field of writing. |
A.A fact-checking program with the power to change facts. |
B.A poet who agrees to work with an AI poetry company. |
C.A wife and mother who is out of work due to AI. |
A.A government worker. | B.A doctor. | C.A director. |
A.Sike. | B.Death of an Author. | C.In Our Likeness. |
People are being lured (引诱) onto Facebook with the promise of a fun, free service,
Most Facebook users don’t realize this is happening. Even if they know what the company is up to, they still have no idea
The biggest problem, however, is that the company keeps changing the rules. Early on, you could keep everything private. That was the great thing about Facebook — you could create your own little private network. Last year, the company changed its privacy rules
According to Facebook’s vice president Elliot Schrage, the company is simply making changes to improve its service, and if people don’t share information, they have a “
Some critics think this is more about Facebook looking to make more money. Its original business model,
So far the privacy issue
I suspect that whatever Facebook has done
8 . Julia Keller decided to quit journalism in order to write fiction. Her subversive (颠覆性的) message is that if at first you don’t succeed — or even if you do then may be just
Last year’s TikTok trend for “Quit Toks” saw users live-streaming
Yet for many of us, quitting remains shrouded (隐瞒) in guilt and shame, associated with failure rather than with pursuing a different kind of
Keller fears the belief that success is a matter of never giving up may cover up the role of structural economic
She insists she’s not
A.giving out | B.giving up | C.giving in | D.giving away |
A.survive | B.stand | C.persevere | D.go |
A.informing | B.registration | C.apology | D.resignation |
A.kicking | B.arising | C.raising | D.coming |
A.goal | B.success | C.achievement | D.contribution |
A.edge | B.cliff | C.side | D.limits |
A.mindset | B.state | C.attitude | D.perspective |
A.prosperity | B.inequalities | C.strength | D.fault |
A.boring | B.long | C.miserable | D.unlucky |
A.abusive | B.negative | C.unpleasant | D.forced |
A.spent | B.got | C.thrown | D.put |
A.arguing | B.appealing | C.advocating | D.enhancing |
A.small | B.tiny | C.baby | D.exploring |
A.channel | B.bridges | C.roads | D.ways |
A.help | B.restore | C.save | D.revolve |
9 . Last summer, two nineteenth-century cottages were rescued from remote farm fields in Montana, to be moved to an Art Deco building in San Francisco. The houses were made of wood. These cottages once housed early settlers as they worked the dry Montana soil; now they hold Twitter engineers.
The cottages could be an example of the industry’s odd love for “low technology”, a concept associated with the natural world, and with old-school craftsmanship that exists long before the Internet era. Low technology is not virtual — so, to take advantage of it, Internet companies have had to get creative. The rescued wood cottages, fitted by hand in the late eighteen-hundreds, are an obvious example, but Twitter’s designs lie on the extreme end. Other companies are using a broader interpretation of low technology that focuses on nature.
Amazon is building three glass spheres filled with trees, so that employees can “work and socialize in a more natural, park-like setting.” At Google’s office, an entire floor is carpeted in grass. Facebook’s second Menlo Park campus will have a rooftop park with a walking path.
Olle Lundberg, the founder of Lundberg Design, has worked with many tech companies over the years. “We have lost the connections to the maker in our lives, and our tech engineers are the ones who feel impoverished (贫乏的), because they’re surrounded by the digital world,” he says. “They’re looking for a way to regain their individual identity, and we’ve found that introducing real crafts is one way to do that.”
This craft-based theory is rooted in history. William Morris, the English artist and writer, turned back to pre-industrial arts in the eighteen-sixties, just after Industrial Revolution. The Arts and Crafts movement defined itself against machines. “Without creative human occupation, people became disconnected from life,” Morris said.
Research has shown that natural environments can restore our mental abilities. In Japan, patients are encouraged to “forest-bathe”, taking walks through woods to lower their blood pressure.
These health benefits apply to the workplace as well. Rachel Kaplvin, a professor of environmental psychology, has spent years researching the restorative effects of natural environments. Her research found that workers with access to nature at the office — even simple views of trees and flowers — felt their jobs were less stressful and more satisfying. If low-tech offices can potentially nourish the brains and improve the mental health of employees then, fine, bring on the cottages.
1. Why did the writer mention the two nineteenth-century cottages?A.To show that Twitter is having a hard time. |
B.To show that old cottages are in need of protection. |
C.To show that early settlers once suffered from a dry climate in Montana. |
D.To show that Internet companies have rediscovered the benefits of low technology. |
A.is related to nature | B.is out of date today |
C.consumes too much energy | D.exists in the virtual world |
A.Human beings have destroyed many pre-industrial arts. |
B.Human beings have a tradition of valuing arts and crafts. |
C.Human beings can become intelligent by learning history. |
D.Human beings can regain their individual identity by using machines. |
A.Past Glories, Future Dreams |
B.The Virtual World, the Real Challenge |
C.High-tech Companies, Low-tech Offices |
D.The More Craftsmanship, the Less Creativity |
10 . How to pick the best place for a much-needed refreshment? If you’re like most people, a simple clue is likely to vary your choice. You will look for the busiest restaurant with the most diners because its popularity is bound to reflect on the quality of food and service.
Early diners with no meaningful clues as to which restaurant to choose may have picked their evening eatery at random, for example selecting the place with the nicest name or the smiliest waiter. The following passers-by may have misinterpreted their restaurant choice as a well-informed decision and blindly followed their example.
Voluntarily copying other people’s thoughts or choices or simply going with the crowd is often referred to as “herd behaviour.” It is a frequent occurrence amongst humans as well as many other animals, a common example being sheep.
In an earlier article, I discussed the so-called “wisdom of crowds”, which suggests that average judgements of large groups of people often outperform individual choices. Furthermore, following the crowd appears to offer protection and comfort.
A.But is this true? |
B.It is therefore an easy option. |
C.After all, there’s “safety in numbers”. |
D.Herding can appear to make a lot of sense. |
E.This could have resulted in a snow-balling effect. |
F.Herd behaviours, while easy to explain, hold significant dangers. |
G.The number of diners is unlikely to indicate the quality of the meal. |