1 . Who is a genius? This question has greatly interested humankind for centuries.
Let’s state clearly: Einstein was a genius. His face is almost the international symbol for genius. But we want to go beyond one man and explore the nature of genius itself. Why is it that some people are so much more intelligent or creative than the rest of us? And who are they?
In the sciences and arts, those praised as geniuses were most often white men, of European origin. Perhaps this is not a surprise. It’s said that history is written by the victors, and those victors set the standards for admission to the genius club. When contributions were made by geniuses outside the club—women, or people of a different color or belief—they were unacknowledged and rejected by others.
A study recently published by Science found that as young as age six, girls are less likely than boys to say that members of their gender(性别)are “really, really smart.” Even worse, the study found that girls act on that belief: Around age six they start to avoid activities said to be for children who are “really, really smart.” Can our planet afford to have any great thinkers become discouraged and give up? It doesn’t take a genius to know the answer: absolutely not.
Here’s the good news. In a wired world with constant global communication, we’re all positioned to see flashes of genius wherever they appear. And the more we look, the more we will see that social factors(因素)like gender, race, and class do not determine the appearance of genius. As a writer says, future geniuses come from those with “intelligence, creativity, perseverance(毅力), and simple good fortune, who are able to change the world.”
1. What does the author think of victors’ standards for joining the genius club?| A．They’re unfair. | B．They’re conservative. |
| C．They’re objective. | D．They’re strict. |
| A．They think themselves smart. |
| B．They look up to great thinkers. |
| C．They see gender differences earlier than boys. |
| D．They are likely to be influenced by social beliefs |
| A．Improved global communication. |
| B．Less discrimination against women. |
| C．Acceptance of victors’ concepts. |
| D．Changes in people’s social positions. |
| A．Geniuses Think Alike | B．Genius Takes Many Forms |
| C．Genius and Intelligence | D．Genius and Luck |
2 . It’s no secret that reading good news feels a lot better than reading bad news. Like, would you rather bite into a lemon, or sip on a fresh glass of lemonade?
In fact, good news, known as solutions journalism, is becoming more popular, as publishers and news stations discover the benefits of sharing positive stories. Good Good Good is one of them.
“If it bleeds, it leads.” has long been a saying used in the media to describe how news stories about violence, death and destruction draw readers’ attention.
| A．Share good news with people around you. |
| B．It’s just that we don’t hear as much about them. |
| C．But the “bad news” has its place in the world. |
| D．It provides a more balanced view of the world. |
| E．And so, negative news stories are everywhere on news media. |
| F．Heartwarming stories make you cry and feel good. |
| G．The news media company is devoted to providing good news intentionally. |
3 . Two and a half millennia ago, Socrates complained that writing would harm students. With a way to store ideas permanently and externally, they would no longer need to memorize. However, studies today have found that writing on paper can improve everything from recalling a random series of words to better understanding complex concepts.
For learning material by repetition, the benefits of using a pen or pencil lie in how the motor and sensory memory of putting words on paper reinforces that material. The scribbling (涂鸦) on a page feeds into visual memory: people might remember a word they wrote down in French class as being at the bottom-left on a page.
One of the best-demonstrated advantages of writing by hand seems to be in note-taking. Students typing on computers wrote down almost twice as many words directly from lectures, suggesting they were not understanding so much as rapidly copying the material. However, handwriting forces note-takers to process and organize ideas into their own words. This aids conceptual understanding at the moment of writing, resulting in better performance on tests.
Many studies have confirmed handwriting’s benefits, and policymakers have taken note. Though America’s curriculum from 2010 does not require handwriting instruction past first grade (roughly age six), about half the states since then have required more teaching of it. In Sweden there is a push for more handwriting and printed books and fewer devices. England’s national curriculum already includes the teaching of basic cursive writing (连写体) skills by age seven.
However, several school systems in America have gone so far as to ban most laptops. This is too extreme. Some students have disabilities that make handwriting especially hard. Nearly all will eventually need typing skills. Virginia Berninger, professor of psychology at the University of Washington, is a longtime advocate of handwriting. But she is not a purist; she says there are research tested benefits for “manuscript” print-style writing but also for typing.
Socrates may or may not have had a point about the downsides of writing. But no one would remember, much less care, if his student Plato had not noted it down for the benefit of future generations.
1. According to the text, why does writing on paper have benefits for learning?| A．It provides visual enjoyment in class. |
| B．It improves the effect of memorization. |
| C．It promotes the motor and sensory ability. |
| D．It helps to remember the information forever. |
| A．By giving examples. | B．By providing statistics. |
| C．By making comparisons. | D．By making classification. |
| A．Difficulties faced by the disabled. |
| B．Unreasonableness of forbidding typing. |
| C．The research-tested benefits of typing. |
| D．The longtime advocacy for handwriting. |
| A．To thank Plato for his efforts. |
| B．To defend Socrates’ point of view. |
| C．To show people’s indifference to typing. |
| D．To confirm the importance of handwriting. |
4 . Imagine that as you are boarding an airplane, half the engineers who built the plane tell you there is a 10 percent chance the plane will crash, killing you and everyone else on board. Would you still board?
In 2022, over 700 top academics and researchers behind the leading artificial intelligence companies were asked in a survey about future AI risk. Half of those surveyed stated that there was a 10 percent or greater chance of human extinction from future AI systems.
The fear of AI has haunted humanity since the mid-20th century, yet until recently it has remained a distant prospect, something that belongs in sci-fi more than in serious scientific and political debates.
In the beginning was the word.
| A．Humans often don’t have direct access to reality. |
| B．Language is the operating system of human culture. |
| C．In games like chess, no human can hope to beat a computer. |
| D．By gaining mastery of language, AI is seizing the master key to civilization. |
| E．Technology companies are caught in a race to put all of humanity on that plane. |
| F．For thousands of years we humans have lived inside the dreams of other humans. |
| G．It’s difficult for human minds to grasp the capabilities of GPT-4 and similar tools. |
5 . If you live on this planet, there’s a decent chance you’ve seen the classic Star TrekEpisode, in which captain Kirk and several members find themselves in what appears to be another universe.
These days, it seems the idea of the multiverse—many worlds—is having its Hollywood moment. Its appeal as a storytelling device is obvious—characters explore a multi-world with varying degrees of similarity to our own, as well as different versions of themselves. Hence, it has been fully established in mainstream pop culture.
While Hollywood can’t seem to get enough of the multiverse, it remains deeply controversial (有争议的) among scientists. Advocates on the two sides show no mercy toward each other in their books, on their blogs. But physicists didn’t pull the idea out of thin air—rather, several distinct lines of reasoning seem to point to the multiverse’s existence. However, critics warn that making the multiverse legal could make it harder for the public to distinguish speculative (推测性的) theories from established fact, making it more difficult to keep pseudo-science (伪科学) at bay. Giving credit to such speculation risks “turning fundamental physics into pseudo-science”.
The multiverse controversy is rooted in the idea of test ability. If we can’t interact with these other universes, or detect them in any way, some experts insist that reduces them to mere philosophical speculation. But Carroll, an advocate for “many worlds”, argues that mathematics is the language describing our physical theories. Since Schrdinger’s equation (方程), on which Quanturr (量子) mechanic rests, predicts the existence of many worlds, so be it.
Could a more expansive view of the universe itself be the next breakthrough? As Siegfried puts it: “Every time in the past that we’ve thought, ‘We’ve got it; this is what the whole universe is’—the people who’ve said, ‘Maybe there’s more than one of those’ have always turned out to be right.”
1. Why is Hollywood so occupied with the multiverse?| A．It makes for engaging plots. |
| B．It is a much-talked-about topic. |
| C．It is helpful to popularize science. |
| D．It dominates the mainstream pop culture. |
| A．Out of date. | B．Out of place. | C．Out of nowhere. | D．Out of question. |
| A．it can be detected somehow |
| B．it can be reasoned logically |
| C．it can be interpreted philosophically |
| D．it can be predicted by mathematics equation |
| A．Doubtful. | B．Dismissive. | C．Unclear. | D．Approving. |
6 . Albert Einstein’s 1915 masterpiece “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity” is the first and still the best introduction to the subject, and I recommend it as such to students. But it probably wouldn’t be publishable in a scientific journal today.
Why not? After all, it would pass with flying colours the tests of correctness and significance. And while popular belief holds that the paper was incomprehensible to its first readers, in fact many papers in theoretical physics are much more difficult.
As the physicist Richard Feynman wrote, “There was a time when the newspapers said that only 12 men understood the theory of relativity. I do believe there might have been a time when only one man did, because he was the only guy who caught on, before he wrote his paper. But after people read the paper a lot understood the theory of relativity in some way or other, certainly more than 12.”
No, the problem is its style. It starts with a leisurely philosophical discussion of space and time and then continues with an exposition of known mathematics. Those two sections, which would be considered extraneous today, take up half the paper. Worse, there are zero citations of previous scientists’ work, nor are there any graphics. Those features might make a paper not even get past the first editors.
A similar process of professionalization has transformed other parts of the scientific landscape. Requests for research time at major observatories or national laboratories are more rigidly structured. And anything involving work with human subjects, or putting instruments in space, involves piles of paperwork.
We see it also in the Regeneron Science Talent Search, the Nobel Prize of high school science competitions. In the early decades of its 78-year history, the winning projects were usually the sort of clever but naive, amateurish efforts one might expect of talented beginners working on their own. Today, polished work coming out of internships(实习) at established laboratories is the norm.
These professionalizing tendencies are a natural consequence of the explosive growth of modern science. Standardization and system make it easier to manage the rapid flow of papers, applications and people. But there are serious downsides. A lot of unproductive effort goes into jumping through bureaucratic hoops(繁文缛节), and outsiders face entry barriers at every turn.
Of course, Einstein would have found his way to meeting modern standards and publishing his results. Its scientific core wouldn’t have changed, but the paper might not be the same taste to read.
1. According to Richard Feynman, Einstein’s 1915 paper ________.| A．was a classic in theoretical physics |
| B．turned out to be comprehensible |
| C．needed further improvement |
| D．attracted few professionals |
| A．Unrealistic. | B．Irrelevant. |
| C．Unattractive. | D．Imprecise. |
| A．The application of research findings. |
| B．The principle of scientific research. |
| C．The selection of young talents. |
| D．The evaluation of laboratories. |
| A．What makes Einstein great? |
| B．Will science be professionalized? |
| C．Could Einstein get published today? |
| D．How will modern science make advances? |
7 . Nowadays, people are increasingly interacting with others in social media environments where algorithms control the flow of social information they see. People’s interactions with online algorithms may affect how they learn from others, with negative consequences including social misperceptions, conflict and the spread of misinformation.
On social media platforms, algorithms are mainly designed to amplify (放大) information that sustains engagement, meaning they keep people clicking on content and coming back to the platforms. There is evidence suggesting that a side effect of this design is that algorithms amplify information people are strongly biased (偏向的) to learn from. We call this information “PRIME”, for prestigious, in-group, moral and emotional information.
In our evolutionary past, biases to learn from PRIME information were very advantageous: Learning from prestigious individuals is efficient because these people are successful and their behavior can be copied. Paying attention to people who violate moral norms is important because punishing them helps the community maintain cooperation. But what happens when PRIME information becomes amplified by algorithms and some people exploit (利用) algorithm amplification to promote themselves? Prestige becomes a poor signal of success because people can fake prestige on social media. News become filled with negative and moral information so that there is conflict rather than cooperation.
The interaction of human psychology and algorithm amplification leads to disfunction because social learning supports cooperation and problem-solving, but social media algorithms are designed to increase engagement. We call it functional mismatch. One of the key outcomes of functional mismatch is that people start to form incorrect perceptions of their social world, which often occurs in the field of politics. Recent research suggests that when algorithms selectively amplify more extreme political views, people begin to think that their political in-group and out-group are more sharply divided than they really are. Such “false polarization” might be an important source of greater political conflict.
So what’s next? A key question is what can be done to make algorithms facilitate accurate human social learning rather than exploit social learning biases. Some research team is working on new algorithm designs that increase engagement while also punishing PRIME information. This may maintain user activity that social media platforms seek, but also make people’s social perceptions more accurate.
1. What are social media algorithms targeted at?| A．Improving social environment. | B．Generating PRIME information. |
| C．Avoiding side effects of social media. | D．Raising the media platform click rate. |
| A．To make an assumption. | B．To illustrate a conclusion. |
| C．To explain a political issue. | D．To present an extreme case. |
| A．boost engagement and regulate amplification |
| B．strengthen social learning and delete biases |
| C．identify biases and punish PRIME information |
| D．monitor media platforms and guarantee users’ privacy |
| A．PRIME information meets with misperceptions |
| B．Algorithms control the flow of social information |
| C．Social media algorithms twist human social learning |
| D．Online algorithm designs face unexpected challenges |
8 . Hardly a day goes by without a company telling us in its beautifully crafted advertising how much it contributes to the environment on our behalf. Flowers grow out of power-station chimneys; SUVs are presented in natural habitats; oil companies use sunny, friendly logos and promise cleaner technologies- although, in fact, they fail to make enough investment in renewable or alternative energy sources. Statistics are made up, and the tiniest ecological improvements are overstated in multi-million-dollar advertising campaigns, while in the meantime the greedy side of the business continues.
This is known as greenwashing, which means “making things that are not green look green”. The phenomenon has long existed since the first Earth Day in 1970, when companies spent $300 million advertising themselves as green companies—many times more than the money they actually spent on research into pollution reduction itself. And the trend continued over the following decades when some of the planet’s worst polluters tried to pass themselves off as eco-friendly. As the public’s environmental awareness grew, so too did the experience of corporate public relations strategies, and advertisers found ever- more-creative ways to use a green curtain to hide dark motives.
Of course, some businesses are genuinely committed to making the world a better, greener place. But when a company spends more time and money claiming to be “green” than actually adopting business practices that minimize environmental impact, it is clear that, for them, environmentalism is little more than a convenient slogan(口号). Their message is “buy our products and you will end global warming, improve air quality and save the oceans”. At best, such greenwashing pushes the fact to its limits; at worst, it helps conceal deception.
And what about today s consumers? Few of them are truly well-equipped to make informed decisions about what is true. Greenwashing is only possible because consumers often believe what they are being told-why else would companies do it? More information and greater awareness are essential. Analysing the tricks used by advertisers should be part of every school curriculum. Non- governmental organisations can spread the word. Consumer groups can punish the greenwashing companies. But it is not enough. Legally enforceable systems must be put in place.
So what is already being done about planned attempts to pull the wool over consumers’ eyes? In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission is taking action against misleading advertising claims. France has published Green Claims Guidance, stressing that “an advertisement must avoid conveying a message contrary to the accepted principles of sustainable development”. All of these surely are the heart of the matter: the true impact of advertising is the promotion of unsustainable lifestyles. And therein lies the real danger to our planet, a danger which cannot be ignored any longer.
1. What can we learn about greenwashing?| A．It is an ecological concept. |
| B．It is a marketing technique. |
| C．It is an awareness campaign. |
| D．It is an advertising innovation. |
| A．Hide the truth. | B．Raise the risk. |
| C．Expose the weakness. | D．Break the limit. |
| A．They are lacking in legal knowledge. |
| B．They have encouraged greenwashing. |
| C．They may question consumer groups. |
| D．They tend to make sensible decisions. |
| A．Actions to fight false advertising. |
| B．Ways to protect customers’ interest. |
| C．Attempts to solve environmental problems. |
| D．Proposals to ensure sustainable development. |
9 . “A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for,” said John A. Shedd, an early 20th century author. Throughout the Covid-19, we’ve all become used to assessing risk in new ways. We’ve come to understand, though we can never get rid of risk altogether, we have great power to make choices both large and small to protect ourselves.
Developmental psychologists talk about “positive risks” — socially acceptable risks that our lives can benefit from.
One guide to positive risk management lists ways that people can make sure their risks are on the “safe" side of risk range. For example, to ensure a successful bike ride, you should in advance equip yourself with a fully-charged cell phone and a full water bottle.
Nobody wants to be needlessly risky. But using our newly-acquired risk assessment tools, we can once again learn and grow in our lives.
| A．Take risks in a positive way. |
| B．But the self-protective mind state carries its own risk. |
| C．Overall happiness is one benefit of positive risk-taking. |
| D．Remember to tell one of your friends or family your destination. |
| E．Besides taking preventive steps, flexible thinking is also encouraged. |
| F．Like a ship sailing away from its harbor, that is what we were built to do. |
| G．For teenagers, this means risks like running for monitor or trying out for a team. |
Up to 82 percent of children with healthy mothers are not easy to be obese（肥胖的）, according to research. A mother,
And research suggests it could be more to do with nurture(养育)
The study examined the medical history and lifestyles of more than 24,000 children aged nine
The mother's health was judged on her height-to-weight ratio(比例), her diet, amount of physical
