英語高考閱讀關於人與科學

Ⅰ 2020年高考英語北京卷 - 閱讀理解D

Certain forms of AI are indeed becoming ubiquitous. For example, algorithms carry out huge volumes of trading on our financial markets, self-driving cars are appearing on city streets, and our smartphones are translating from one language into another. These systems are sometimes faster and more perceptive than we humans are. But so far that is only true for the specific tasks for which the systems have been designed. That is something that some AI developers are now eager to change.
某些形式的AI （人工智慧）確實正變得無處不在。例如，金融市場上進行大量交易的演算法，出現在城市街道上的自動駕駛汽車，智能手機將一種語言翻譯成另一種語言。這些系統有時比我們人類更快、更敏銳。但到目前為止，這些只適用於系統所設計的特定任務，一些AI開發者正在期待改變。

Some of today's AI pioneers want to move on from today's world of 「weak」 or 「narrow」 AI, to create 「strong」 or 「full」 AI, or what is often called artificial general intelligence (A GI). In some respects, today's powerful computing machines already make our brains look weak. A GI could, its advocates say, work for us around the clock, and drawing on all available data, could suggest solutions to many problems. DM, a company focused on the development of A GI, has an ambition to 「solve intelligence」. 「If we're successful,」 their mission statement reads, 「we believe this will be one of the most important and widely beneficial scientific advances ever made.」
當代一些AI先驅希望從今天的「弱」或「窄」的AI世界中走出來，創造「強」或「全」的AI，也就是通常所說的A GI（人工通用智能）。在某些方面，今天強大的計算機已經讓我們的大腦看起來很弱。A GI的支持者認為A GI可以24小時為我們工作，利用所有可用的數據，可以為許多問題提供解決方案。DM是一家專注於A GI開發的公司，有著「解決智能問題」的雄心。「如果我們成功了，」他們的任務聲明寫道，「我們相信這將是有史以來最重要、最廣泛有益的科學進步之一。」

Since the early days of AI, imagination has outpaced what is possible or even probable. In 1965, an imaginative mathematician called Irving Good predicted the eventual creation of an "ultra-intelligent machine…that can far surpass all the intellectual activities of any man, however clever." Good went on to suggest that 「the first ultra-intelligent machine" could be 「the last invention that man need ever make."
自AI誕生之初，想像力的發展速度已經超過了你的想像。1965年，一位富有想像力的數學家歐文·古德預言，最終將創造出一台「超智能機器……它將遠遠超過人類的所有智能活動，無論多麼聰明。」古德接著表示，「第一台超智能機器」可能是「人類需要創造的最後一項發明」。

Fears about the appearance of bad, powerful, man-made intelligent machines have been reinforced by many works of fiction—Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and the Terminator film series, for example. But if AI does eventually prove to be our downfall, it is unlikely to be at the hands of human-shaped forms like these, with recognisably human motivations such as aggression. Instead, I agree with Oxford University philosopher Nick Bostrom, who believes that the heaviest risks from A GI do not come from a decision to turn against mankind but rather from a dogged pursuit of set objectives at the expense of everything else.
人們對於出現強大而又邪惡的人造智能機器的擔憂已經加劇，例如，瑪麗·雪萊的《弗蘭肯斯坦》科幻小說和《終結者》系列電影。但如果最終證明AI 是我們的垮台，它就不太可能掌握在這樣的人形形態手中，而這些形態具有明顯的人類動機，比如敵對行為。相反，我同意牛津大學哲學家尼克·博斯特羅姆的觀點，他認為，A GI帶來的最大風險不是來自於反對人類的決定，而是來自於不惜犧牲一切代價執著地追求既定目標。

The promise and danger of true A GI are great. But all of today's excited discussion about these possibilities presupposes the fact that we will be able to build these systems. And, having spoken to many of the world's foremost AI researchers, I believe there is good reason to doubt that we will see A GI any time soon, if ever.
真正的A GI的前景和危險都是巨大的，但是今天所有關於這些可能性的激動人心的討論都是以我們能夠建立這些系統為前提。而且，在與許多世界上最重要的AI研究人員交談後，我相信有充分的理由懷疑我們是否會很快看到A GI，如果有的話。

Ⅱ 2020年高考英語全國卷2 - 閱讀理解C

When you were trying to figure out what to buy for the environmentalist on your holiday list, fur probably didn』t cross your mind. But some ecologists and fashion enthusiast are trying to bring back the market for fur made from nutria.
當你想給環保人士的假日購物清單增加些什麼時，你可能不會想到皮毛。但是一些生態學家和時尚發燒友們正試圖恢復海狸鼠皮毛的市場。

Unusual fashion shows in New Orleans and Brooklyn have showcased nutria fur made into clothes in different styles. 「It sounds crazy to talk about guilt-free fur – unless you understand that the nutria are destroying vast wetlands every year,」 says Cree McCree, project director of Righteous Fur.
新奧爾良和布魯克林的不同尋常時裝秀展示了海狸鼠皮毛製成的不同風格的服裝。「談論沒有罪惡感的皮毛聽起來很瘋狂——除非你知道海狸鼠每年都在破壞大片濕地，」Righteous Fur（正義皮毛）項目總監克里·麥克里說。

Scientists in Louisiana were so concerned that they decided to pay hunters $5 a tail. Some of the fur ends up in the fashion shows like the one in Brooklyn last month.
路易斯安那州的科學家非常擔心，他們決定付給獵人每尾5美元。一些皮毛最終出現在時裝秀上，比如上個月布魯克林的時裝秀。

Nutria were brought there from Argentina by fur farmers and let go into the wild. 「The ecosystem down there can』t handle this non-native species. It』s destroying the environment. It』s them or us,」 says Michael Massimi, an expert in this field.
海狸鼠是皮毛農場主從阿根廷帶到這里並放生的。「那裡的生態系統無法應對這種非本土物種，它正在破壞環境」，這一領域的專家邁克爾·馬西米說。

The fur trade kept nutria in check for decades, but when the market for nutria collapsed in the late 1980s, the cat-sized animals multiplied like crazy.
幾十年來，皮毛貿易一直控制著海狸鼠數量，但是20世紀80年代末海狸鼠市場崩潰後，這些貓一樣大小的動物瘋狂繁殖。

Biologist Edmond Mouton runs the nutria control program for Louisiana. He says it』s not easy to convince people that people that nutria fur is green, but he has no doubt about it. Hunters bring in more than 300,000 nutria tails a year, so part of Mouton』s job these days is trying to promote fur.
生物學家埃德蒙·莫頓負責路易斯安那州的海狸鼠控制。他說要讓人們相信海狸鼠皮是綠色的並不容易，但他對此毫無疑問。獵人們每年帶來超過30萬條海狸鼠尾巴，所以莫頓現在的部分工作就是推廣皮毛。

Then there』s Righteous Fur and its unusual fashions. Model Paige Morgan says,「To give people a guilt-free option that they can wear without someone throwing paint on them – I think that』s going to be a massive thing, at least here in New York.」 Designer Jennifer Anderson admits it took her a while to come around to the opinion that using nutria fur for her creations is morally acceptable. She』s trying to come up with a label to attach to nutria fashions to show it is eco-friendly.
還有Righteous Fur和它不同尋常的時尚。模特佩奇·摩根說，「給人們一個沒有罪惡感的選擇，讓他們可以穿著，而不用被人往身上潑油漆——我認為這將是一件大事，至少在紐約是這樣。」設計師詹妮弗·安德森承認，她花了一段時間才意識到，用海狸鼠皮製作作品在道德上是可以接受的。她正嘗試給海狸鼠時尚貼上環保標簽。

Ⅲ 2021高考英語全國乙卷閱讀理解D篇優劣辨析

2021年普通高等學校招生全國統一考試D篇

原文鏈接：

https://hbr.org/2017/10/why-you-can-focus-in-a-coffee-shop-but-not-in-your-open-office

2021全國乙卷D篇文本

During an interview for one of my books, my interviewer said something I still think about often. Annoyed by the level of distraction(干擾) in his open office, he said, 「That』s why I have a membership at the coworking space across the street —so I can focus. "His comment struck me as strange. After all, coworking spaces also typically use an open office layout (布局). But I recently came across a study that shows why his approach works.

The researchers examined various levels of noise on participants as they completed tests of creative thinking. They were randomly divided into four groups and exposed to various noise levels in the background, from total silence to 50 decibels(分貝),70 decibels, and 85decibels. The differences between most of the groups were statistically insignificant; however,the participants in the 70 decibels group—those exposed to a level of noise similar to background chatter in a coffee shop-significantly outperformed the other groups. Since the effects were small, this may suggest that our creative thinking does not differ that much in response to total silence and 85 decibels of background noise.

But since the results at 70 decibels were significant, the study also suggests that the right level of background noise—not too loud and not total silence—may actually improve one』s creative thinking ability. The right level of background noise may interrupt our normal patterns of thinking just enough to allow our imaginations to wander, without making it impossible to focus. This kind of"distracted focus"appears to be the best state for working on creative tasks.

So why do so many of us hate our open offices? The problem may be that, in our offices, we can't stop ourselves from getting drawn into others』 conversations while we』re trying to focus. Indeed, the researchers found that face-to-face interactions and conversations affect the creative process, and yet a coworking space or a coffee shop provides a certain level of noise while also providing freedom from interruptions.

32. Why does the interviewer prefer a coworking space?

A. It helps him concentrate.

B. It blocks out background noise.

C. It has a pleasant atmosphere.

D. It encourages face-to-face interactions.

33. Which level of background noise may promote creative thinking ability?

A. Total silence.

B. 50 decibels.

C. 70 decibels.

D. 85 decibels.

34. What makes an open office unwelcome to many people?

A. Personal privacy unprotected.

B. Limited working space.

C. Restrictions on group discussion.

D. Constant interruptions.

35.What can we infer about the author from the text?

A. He's a news reporter. B. He』s on office manager.

C. He's a professional designer. D. He's a published writer.

答案：ACDD

解讀：

文章大意：辦公環境「噪音」對環境當中的「人的大腦」的影響。「帶入式」噪音和「非帶入式噪音」是有差別的。文本詞數：394。

本文本因為對原文進行了大量的刪減。所以可以看出刪除部分包含以文章main idea為核心的相關research, 也就是缺少了連貫的科學研究過程的闡述，且以作者第一人稱來敘述，研究並非作者親自參與，所以文章style屬於敘事體，高考當中的文本體裁趨近界定為nonfiction范疇的類科普說明文（事實上是缺少科普文所應該具備的要素的）。

文章當中有一個關鍵信息詞彙coworking space。

拓展信息：

聯合辦公（共享辦公）是一種為降低辦公室租賃成本的辦公模式，來自不同公司的個人在聯合辦公空間中共同工作，在特別設計和安排的辦公空間中共享辦公環境，彼此獨立完成各自項目。同樣的，其應該具有以下四個要素：輕服務——免費提供公共辦公空間、網路、茶水、列印、安保服務等夠靈活——即租即用，租期靈活，領包入住分割式——一個辦公場地被劃分為許多小塊，按照自身需求尋找相應共享式——來自不同公司的個人共享一個辦公環境，更加強調空間與人之間的連接。國內的聯合辦公行業，各品牌已經開始有自己較為明晰對的定位和細分客群， 優客工場和氪空間擁有現如今國內最大的空間數量以及經營面積，主張便捷高效的辦公理念，在引入多元化投資機構的同時，已逐步完成了自身生態圈體系的搭建。

2.1第一段當中During an interview for one of my books, my interviewer said something I still think about often. Annoyed by the level of distraction(干擾) in his open office, he said, 「That』s why I have a membership at the coworking space across the street —so I can focus. "His comment struck me as strange. After all, coworking spaces also typically use an open office layout (布局). But I recently came across a study that shows why his approach works.

本段命題人對原文有一定的改編，首句起到一個引入主題的作用，但對文章整體核心信息並沒有密切的關聯性，所以篇章首句並非都是文本信息具有main idea 有提示作用的關鍵句（如很多文本解讀所述）。整體看，第一段內容屬於中式思維改編，具有一定的跳躍性，但整體信息可以理解。第一段最後兩句的轉折從信息攝入角度看，因信息不足顯得牽強。此處，命題人命制了第一題：

32. Why does the interviewer prefer a coworking space?

A. It helps him concentrate.

B. It blocks out background noise.

C. It has a pleasant atmosphere.

D. It encourages face-to-face interactions.

其實本題的信息提示點遍布全文。只要讀懂全文，回答這個問題就比較容易。但是僅僅從第一段信息來看，試題的答案的文本信息支持是不足的。而本文當中如本題題干提示題境的the interviewer的選擇僅僅在第一段中提到，因此判斷其相關性很牽強。作為考試題答案選擇A。第一段最後一句是一個過渡句，引起下文提到的研究。但是命題人改編刪減後，下文提到的研究所表述的內容和原文的核心信息發生了偏離，同時「開放辦公環境」和「聯合/共享區域辦公」的差異性沒有體現出來。使得文章主體信息發生了偏離。但是不影響做題。

2.2文本第二段：The researchers examined various levels of noise on participants as they completed tests of creative thinking. They were randomly divided into four groups and exposed to various noise levels in the background, from total silence to 50 decibels(分貝),70 decibels, and 85decibels. The differences between most of the groups were statistically insignificant; however,the participants in the 70 decibels group—those exposed to a level of noise similar to background chatter in a coffee shop-significantly outperformed the other groups. Since the effects were small, this may suggest that our creative thinking does not differ that much in response to total silence and 85 decibels of background noise.

但在70分貝噪音環境中（和咖啡廳里的噪音水平非常接近）的那一組在創造性思維測試中的表現是遠超過其它組的表現的。此外，我們的創造性思維水平在完全安靜的環境中和在85分貝的背景噪音環境中其實並沒有多大差別。此處闡述研究發現人們工作環境的噪音分貝對人們創造性思維的影響。信息直觀陳述。下一題：33. Which level of background noise may promote creative thinking ability?

Total silence. B. 50 decibels. C. 70 decibels. D. 85 decibels. 因為題干信息提示非常具體—— promote creative thinking ability，回讀文章however,the participants in the 70 decibels group—those exposed to a level of noise similar to background chatter in a coffee shop-significantly outperformed the other groups.既可以選擇答案為C。此處，從做題角度需要考生讀懂幾個關鍵數字（分貝）相關聯的信息。上句是一個復雜巨，把破折號部分去掉，理解outperform基本就可以理解此處信息點，選擇正確答案。

2.3 文本第三段和第四段

But since the results at 70 decibels were significant, the study also suggests that the right level of background noise—not too loud and not total silence—may actually improve one』s creative thinking ability. The right level of background noise may interrupt our normal patterns of thinking just enough to allow our imaginations to wander, without making it impossible to focus. This kind of"distracted focus"appears to be the best state for working on creative tasks.

So why do so many of us hate our open offices? The problem may be that, in our offices, we can't stop ourselves from getting drawn into others』 conversations while we』re trying to focus. Indeed, the researchers found that face-to-face interactions and conversations affect the creative process, and yet a coworking space or a coffee shop provides a certain level of noise while also providing freedom from interruptions.

這兩段信息也是經過命題人以自己的思維模式刪減改編的。整體上已經偏離了原文所要傳遞的科學規范的邏輯思路和信息。變成了命題人自己的thoughts。所以從文章精準信息傳遞上比較欠缺嚴謹性。第三段所表達的內容基本屬於相關研究結果。屬於對「開放式辦公環境」噪音影響思維的一個研究作證，但並非是「開放式」辦公環境思維能力受干擾的直接相關因素。直接因素是：熟悉環境下人們交談等內容對聽者所引發的代入感才是真正的「干擾」。此處命題：

34. What makes an open office unwelcome to many people?

A. Personal privacy unprotected.

B. Limited working space.

C. Restrictions on group discussion.

D. Constant interruptions.

題干提示下的四個備選答案ABC三個選項在文中基本沒有出現相關信息。只有D可以被選為正確答案。此題的問題在於背離真實科學信息而設立的情境。那麼這種閱讀理解以及閱讀理解考查就是虛假的理解測評。

35.What can we infer about the author from the text?

A. He's a news reporter. B. He』s on office manager.

C. He's a professional designer. D. He's a published writer.

最後一個題目設置的比較頭重腳輕，需要回到文章首句。基本就可以選擇答案了。這個題目從測試目標看效果不太理想。

總結：本文內容特色提及了關於「人腦對於噪音」的影響反應。屬於科普知識。但是文章語境涉及的是辦公環境，是學生所不熟悉的信息。與學生生活學習相關性不大。同時，此類研究並非學術界主流話題研究，非熱點話題。文章經過刪減改變後信息傳遞發生了本質變化，違背了傳遞真實信息的原則，也就是，讀者攝取的可能是不真實的信息。這是本文文本所變現的問題。本篇高考閱讀理解難度從考場答題角度來說屬於中等或中等偏下。題目設置以及干擾項並非很完整。

A few years ago, ring a media interview for one of my books, my interviewer said something I still ponder often. Ranting about the level of distraction in his open office, he said, 「That』s why I have a membership at the coworking space across the street — so I can focus.」

While I fully support the backlash against open offices, the comment struck me as odd. After all, coworking spaces also typically use an open office layout.

But I recently came across a series of studies examining the effect of sound on the brain that reveals why his strategy works.

From previous research, we know that workers』 primary problem with open or cubicle-filled offices is the unwanted noise.

But new research shows that it may not be the sound itself that distracts us…it may be who is making it. In fact, some level of office banter in the background might actually benefit our ability to do creative tasks, provided we don』t get drawn into the conversation. Instead of total silence, the ideal work environment for creative work has a little bit of background noise. That』s why you might focus really well in a noisy coffee shop, but barely be able to concentrate in a noisy office.

One study, published in the Journal of Consumer Research, found that the right level of ambient noise triggers our minds to think more creatively. The researchers, led by Ravi Mehta of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, examined various levels of noise on participants as they completed tests of creative thinking.

Participants were randomized into four groups and everyone was asked to complete a Remote Associates Test (a commonly used measurement that judges creative thinking by asking test-takers to find the relationship between a series of words that, as first glance, appear unrelated). Depending on the group, participants were exposed to various noise levels in the background, from total silence to 50 decibels, 70 decibels, and 85 decibels. The differences between most of the groups were statistically insignificant; however, the participants in the 70 decibels group (those exposed to a level of noise similar to background chatter in a coffee shop) significantly outperformed the other groups. Since the effects were small, this may suggest that our creative thinking doesn』t differ that much in response to total silence and 85 decibels of background noise — the equivalent of a loud garbage disposal or a quiet motorcycle. Since none of us presumably want to work next to a garbage disposal or motorcycle, I found this surprising.

But since the results at 70 decibels were significant, the study also suggests that the right level of background noise — not too loud and not total silence — may actually boost one』s creative thinking ability. The right level of background noise may disrupt our normal patterns of thinking just enough to allow our imaginations to wander, without making it impossible to focus. This type of 「distracted focus」 appears to be the optimal state for working on creative tasks. As the authors write, 「Getting into a relatively noisy environment may trigger the brain to think abstractly, and thus generate creative ideas.」

In another study, researchers used frontal lobe electroencephalographic (EEG) machines to study the brain waves of participants as they completed tests of creativity while exposed to various sound environments. The researchers found statistically significant changes in creativity scores and a connection between those scores and certain brain waves. As in the previous study, a certain level of white noise proved the ideal background sound for creative tasks.

So why do so many of us hate our open offices? The quiet chatter of colleagues and the gentle thrum of the HVAC should help us focus. The problem may be that, in our offices, we can』t stop ourselves from getting drawn into others』 conversations or from being interrupted while we』re trying to focus. Indeed, the EEG researchers found that face-to-face interactions, conversations, and other disruptions negatively affect the creative process. By contrast, a coworking space or a coffee shop provides a certain level of ambient noise while also providing freedom from interruptions.

Taken together, the lesson here is that the ideal space for focused work is not about freedom from noise, but about freedom from interruption. Finding a space you can hide away in, regardless of how noisy it is, may be the best strategy for making sure you get the important work done.

原文翻譯：

相信很多人都有這樣的感受：在很吵的咖啡廳能夠非常專注地工作，但在開放式的辦公室卻很難做到專注。究竟為什麼會出現這種現象呢？研究表明，適當水平的環境噪音能激發我們的思維進行更有創造性地思考。讓我們在工作中分心的可能並不是噪音本身，而是是誰製造的這些聲音。在開放式的辦公室，我們通常無法阻止自己被其他人的談話內容所吸引和帶入，或是當我們想集中注意力時卻經常被其他人打斷和打擾。適合專注工作的理想工作環境並不是沒有一點噪音的安靜環境，而是一種不會受到他人打斷和干擾的環境。

幾年前，有一位媒體記者朋友針對我剛出版的一本新書對我做了一次專訪，專訪期間，這位媒體記者說的一段讓我至今都經常思考的話。他說，他所在的開放式辦公環境的噪音讓他非常容易分心，對此他已經忍無可忍，於是他在公司辦公樓街對面的一個聯合辦公空間辦了一個會員，他在那裡能更加專注地工作。

開放式的辦公環境的各種噪音容易讓人分心，對於這一點我非常認同，也深有體會。但是這位記者朋友說到的聯合辦公空間能夠讓他更加專注地工作，這一點卻讓我很難理解。畢竟聯合辦公空間通常採用的也是開放式的辦公布局。

但是最近當我看了一系列研究聲音對大腦的影響方面的文章後，我才開始理解為什麼我的那位媒體朋友為了能專注地工作而選擇在聯合辦公空間工作而不願在自己的開放式辦公室工作。

根據之前的研究，我們知道，開放式辦公環境讓大家最頭疼的一個問題就是有各種大家不想聽到的噪音。

但是最新的研究發現，讓我們在工作中分心的可能並不是聲音本身，而是是誰製造的這些聲音。實際上，適度的辦公室幽默和閑言笑語對我們完成一些創造性的工作是有幫助的，只要我們自己不被這種閑言笑語帶進去就行。適合創造性工作的理想工作環境其實並不是那種一點噪音都沒有的絕對安靜的環境，而是有那種有適度水平的背景噪音的環境。這也是為什麼你能夠在一個有點吵的咖啡廳里專注工作，而在一個嘈雜的辦公室里卻很難集中精力工作。

《消費者研究周刊》發布的一份研究報告顯示，適當水平的環境噪音能激發我們的思維進行更有創造性地思考。伊利諾伊大學香檳分校的Ravi Mehta教授帶領一些研究人員做了這樣一項研究：研究了不同水平的噪音是如何影響那些正在進行創造性思維測試的研究對象的。

研究對象被隨機分為四組，每個人都被要求完成一項遠距離聯想測試（註：研究創造力問題的一種測驗方法。通常，提供幾個相隔較遠的片語，猜測它們共同的關聯詞。如，「鹽 、 深 、 沫」，它的關聯詞是「海」。創造性思考是將聯想得來的元素重新整合的過程。新結合的元素相互之間聯想的距離越遠，這個思維的過程或問題的解決就更有創造力。有創造力的人的聯想不同於一般人。有創造力的人他們有廣泛的聯想，一個元素可以與許多其他元素連接；而一般人的元素連接則比較少）。以組為單位，我們會為研究對象在測試過程中設置不同水平的噪音，從完全的靜音到50分貝、70分貝和85分貝的噪音。大部分分組之間的差異其實並不是太大，但在70分貝噪音環境中（和咖啡廳里的噪音水平非常接近）的那一組在創造性思維測試中的表現是遠超過其它組的表現的。此外，我們的創造性思維水平在完全安靜的環境中和在85分貝的背景噪音環境中其實並沒有多大差別。

因為在70分貝的噪音環境中的那一組的研究對象在創造性思維測試中的表現明顯好於其它組，因此研究認為，恰當水平的背景噪音（噪音不是太大，也不太過安靜）實際上是有助於提高一個人的創造性思維能力的。恰當水平的背景噪音可能會打亂我們正常的思維模式，使我們的想像力得以漫遊，但又不至於會讓我們無法集中注意力。這種「分心式的專注」能夠讓我們以最佳狀態完成創造性任務。正如作者所寫的的那樣：「在一個相對嘈雜的環境中可能會刺激我們的大腦進行更加抽象性地思考，從而產生創造性的想法。」

在另一項研究中，當研究對象在不同水平的噪音環境下完成創造性思維測試的時候，研究人員使用額葉腦電圖（EEG）機器來研究研究對象的腦電波。研究人員發現，研究對象的創造性思維的表現分數在不同噪音環境下的變化是非常大的，同時還發現這個分數與特定的腦電波是有緊密聯系的。和此前的研究結果一樣，一定水平的白噪音環境是完成創造性任務的理想環境。

所以問題來了：為什麼我們中的大部分人都討厭在開放式的辦公室里辦公呢？同事們之間小聲安靜的交談和空調系統製造的柔和聲音應該是能幫助我們集中注意力的。但問題是，在我們所處的開放式辦公室里，我們通常無法阻止自己被其他人的談話內容所吸引和帶入，或是當我們想集中注意力時卻經常被其他人打斷和打擾。事實上，腦電圖研究人員發現，面對面的交流、交談和其他干擾會對人們的創造性工作過程產生負面影響。相比之下，聯合辦公空間或咖啡館提供了一定程度的陌生環境噪音，同時也能讓自己免受他人的打擾，不會有人在你努力集中注意力工作的時候走過來打斷你、干擾你。

總的來說，我們通過上述這些研究成果學到的是：適合專注工作的理想工作環境並不是沒有一點噪音都沒有的決定安靜的環境，而是一種不會受到他人打斷和干擾的環境。因此，找到一個你可以沉浸進去專注工作的環境，不管這個環境有多嘈雜，這才是確保你能完成重要工作的最佳策略。

日記本

相關推薦

Tranquil

閱讀 58

You exist only in what you do

閱讀 48

茶餘飯後

閱讀 57

創新類暢銷書《如何殺死一頭獨角獸 How To Kill a Unicorn》（英文節選）I

閱讀 45

環境教育質性研究的不同類型、操作案例、使用情境

閱讀 316

Ⅳ 求：2009重慶高考卷英語閱讀理解E的翻譯

最近的一項研究表明，盡管人們對科學持普遍樂觀態度，但同時也表明人們普遍擔心它可能「失控」。這個想法很危險。
科學可以是為善的力量，也可以是邪惡的力量。科學可以應用於這兩者中的任何方面，這要靠我們的抉擇而定。我們作出的決定，無論是個人的還是集體的，都將決定科學的歸宿。但此處確有危險。科學發展如此之快，且受到商業的影響如此之強烈，我們很可能相信，無論我們做出什麼決定，都幾乎無濟於事。與其力爭採取可能的最好策略，我們有可能退後而無所作為。
有些人走得甚至更遠。他們說，盡管道德和法律所不容，任何科學上可能做到事，在某個地方，在某個時候，終究都會被做出來。他們相信科學最終會失去控制。這種信念也是危險的，因為它加劇了無望的情緒，打消了他們努力來建設一個更安全世界的念頭。
在我們的這個相互聯系的世界裡，科學界內部以及關於科學界缺乏共識，可能導致對科學的應用失去控制。如果不能達成共識，本世紀對科學加以「控制」的挑戰將是非常嚴峻的。以克隆人為例。盡管科學家們就其對傳統道德價值觀可能產生的巨大影響達成了普遍的共識，但有一些國家仍然繼續進行研究並發展相關的技術。最終的後果難以預料。
因此，關於如何應用科學的討論應該擴展至遠超科學團體以外之處。只有通過滿懷希望的人們的共同努力，我們才能完全安全地抵制科學的濫用，將來科學才能更好地為人類服務。

Ⅳ 高考英語閱讀理解答案

高考英語閱讀理解答案

新的高中英語教學大綱明確規定："側重提高閱讀能力"。縱觀近幾年的高考英語試題，我們不難看出，閱讀理解能力是高考考查的重點，自始至終占著主導地位，並且有逐年增加的趨勢。可以毫不誇張地說，做好閱讀理解題，是獲得高考英語高分的關鍵!

第一篇：

Since the 1970s, scientists have been searching for ways to link the brain with computers. Brain-computer interface (BCI) technology could help people with disabilities send commands to machines.

Recently, two researchers, Jose Millan and Michele Tavella from the Federal Polytechnic School in Lausanne, Switzerland, demonstrated (展示) a small robotic wheelchair directed by a person's thoughts.

In the laboratory, Tavella operated the wheelchair just by thinking about moving his left or right hand. He could even talk as he watched the vehicle and guided it with his thoughts.

“Our brain has billions of nerve cells. These send signals through the spinal cord (脊髓) to the muscles to give us the ability to move. But spinal cord injuries or other conditions can prevent these weak electrical signals from reaching the muscles.” Tavella says. “Our system allows disabled people to communicate with external world and also to control devices.”

The researchers designed a special cap for the user. This head cover picks up the signals from the scalp (頭皮) and sends them to a computer. The computer interprets the signals and commands the motorized wheelchair. The wheelchair also has two cameras that identify objects in its path. They help the computer react to commands from the brain.

Prof. Millan, the team leader, says scientists keep improving the computer software that interprets brain signals and turns them into simple commands. “The practical possibilities that BCI technology offers to disabled people can be grouped in two categories: communication, and controlling devices. One example is this wheelchair.”

He says his team has set two goals. One is testing with real patients, so as to prove that this is a technology they can benefit from. And the other is to guarantee that they can use the technology over long periods of time.

1.BCI is a technology that can ________.

A. help to update computer systems

B. link the human brain with computers

C. help the disabled to recover

D. control a person's thoughts

2.How did Tavella operate the wheelchair in the laboratory?

A. By controlling his muscles.

B. By talking to the machine.

C. By moving his hand.

D. By using his mind.

3.Which of the following shows the path of the signals described in Paragraph 5?

A. scalp→computer→cap→wheelchair

B. computer→cap→scalp→wheelchair

C. scalp→cap→computer→wheelchair

D. cap→computer→scalp→wheelchair

4.The team will test with real patients to ________.

A. make profits from them

B. prove the technology useful to them

C. make them live longer

D. learn about their physical condition

5.Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

A. Switzerland, the BCI Research Center

B. New Findings About How the Human Brain Works

C. BCI Could Mean More Freedom for the Disabled

D. Robotic Vehicles Could Help to Cure Brain Injuries

第二篇：

Homestay provides English language students with the opportunity to speak English outside the classroom and the experience of being part of a British home.

What to Expect

The host will provide accommodation and meals.Rooms will be cleaned and bedcovers changed at least once a week.You will be given the house key and the host is there to offer help and advice as well as to take an interest in your physical and mental health.

Accommodation Zones

Homestays are located in London mainly in Zones 2, 3 and 4 of the transport system.Most hosts do not live in the town centre as much of central London is commercial and not residential(居住的) .Zones 3 and 4 often offer larger accommodation in a less crowded area.It is very convenient to travel in London by Underground.

Meal Plans Available

◇Continental Breakfast

◇Breakfast and Dinner

◇Breakfast, Packed Lunch and Dinner

It's important to note that few English families still provide a traditional cooked breakfast.Your accommodation includes Continental Breakfast which normally consists of fruit juice，cereal (穀物類食品), bread and tea or coffee.Cheese, fruit and cold meat are not normally part of a Continental Breakfast in England.Dinners usually consist of meat or fish with vegetables followed by dessert, fruit and coffee.

Friends

If you wish to invite a friend over to visit, you must first ask your host's permission.You have no right to entertain friends in a family home as some families feel it is an invasion of their privacy.

SelfCatering Accommodation in Private Homes

Accommodation on a room-only basis includes shared kitchen and bathroom facilities and often a main living room.This kind of accommodation offers an independent lifestyle and is more suitable for the long-stay student.However, it does not provide the same family atmosphere as an ordinary homestay and may not benefit those who need to practise English at home quite as much.

1.The passage is probably written for ________.

A.hosts willing to receive foreign students

B.foreigners hoping to build British culture

C.travellers planning to visit families in London

D.English learners applying to live in English homes

2.Which of the following will the host provide?

A.Room cleaning.

B.Medical care.

C.Free transport.

D.Physical training.

3.What can be inferred from Paragraph 3?

A.Zone 4 is more crowded than Zone 2.

B.The business centre of London is in Zone 1.

C.Hosts dislike travelling to the city centre.

D.Accommodation in the city centre is not provided.

4.According to the passage, what does Continental Breakfast include?

A.Dessert and coffee.

B.Fruit and vegetables.

C.Bread and fruit juice.

D.Cereal and cold meat.

5.Why do some people choose self-catering accommodation?

A.To experience a warmer family atmosphere.

B.To enrich their knowledge of English.

C.To entertain friends as they like.

D.To enjoy much more freedom.

>>>>>>答案與解析<<<<<<

第一篇：

1.B細節理解題。根據第一段可知，自20世紀70年代以來，科學家一直尋找途徑能將人腦與電腦相連。BCI技術能幫助殘疾人向機器發送指令。故此處B項正確。而C項只是部分正確，雖然能幫助殘疾人，但卻不能幫他們康復。

2.D細節理解題。根據第三段可知Tavella只是思考動他的左右手就能操作這個輪椅。甚至當他觀察這台機器時就能進行交流，也能用他的思想指導機器人工作。因此機器人是在人腦的思想支配下進行工作的。故D項正確。

3.C細節理解題。根據第五段可知，首先研究人員為用戶設計一種特殊的帽子，它會捕捉頭皮發出的信號並將其傳給電腦。電腦將這些信號進行分析翻譯，給監控下的機器人輪椅發出指令。機器人輪椅裝有兩部攝像頭能識別信號路徑中的物體，從而幫助電腦對人腦的指令作出反應。故此處C項正確。

4.B推理判斷題。根據最後一段第二句“One is testing with real patients, so as to prove that this is a technology they can benefit from”可知，在患者身上進行實驗是他們團隊工作的一個目標，旨在證明這項技術對他們有益。故正確答案選B項。

5.C主旨大意題。本文為科技說明文，開篇點題。介紹科學家研究的這項新技術BCI，對殘疾人大有裨益。故正確答案為C項。

第二篇：

1.D主旨大意題。由第一段第一句可知，Homestay為學習英語的學生提供在課堂外說英語的機會和成為英國家庭成員的體驗。再結合文章的內容可推知這篇文章不是為願意接受英國學生的主人寫的，也不是為那些希望建設英國文化的外國人以及計劃參觀倫敦家庭的參觀者寫的。大概是為那些申請在英國人家中居住的英語學習者寫的。

2.A細節理解題。由第二段第二句可知A項的敘述符合題意。主人能夠提供的東西主要在第二段進行論述，該段並沒有告訴讀者主人將為入住者提供醫療護理、免費交通和身體訓練。

3.B推理判斷題。由第三段倒數第二句可知Zone 3和Zone 4不像Zone 2那麼擁擠，由此排除A項;第二句只說明人們不喜歡居住在市中心，並沒有說人們不去市中心，由此排除C項;本段只是提到市中心擁擠，並沒有說到居住在市中心的'家庭不為學生提供食宿，由此排除D項。

4.C細節理解題。由第四段中的Continental Breakfast which normally consists of fruit juice，cereal，bread and tea or coffee可知，A項、B項和D項的敘述是錯誤，只有C項中的Bread and fruit juice是裡面的內容。故選C項。

5.D細節理解題。由最後一段第二句中的This kind of accommodation offers an independent lifestyle可知Self-Catering Accommodation 能夠為住宿者提供更多的自由，這與D項的敘述一致。A項、B項和C項的內容均沒有在最後一段提及，故排除。

;

Ⅵ 2019年高考英語全國卷2 - 閱讀理解D

Bacteria are an annoying problem for astronauts. The microorganisms from our bodies grow uncontrollably on surfaces of the International Space Station, so astronauts spend hours cleaning them up each week. How is NASA overcoming this very tiny big problem? It』s turning to a bunch of high school kids. But not just any kids. It is depending on NASA HUNCH high school classrooms, like the one science teachers Gene Gordon and Donna Himmelberg lead at Fairport High School in Fairport, New York.
對宇航員來說，細菌是個煩人的問題。來自我們身體的微生物在國際空間站的表面不受控制地生長，所以宇航員每周要花數小時來清理它們。NASA是如何克服這個非常細微的大問題的？現在輪到一群高中生了，但不是所有高中生，這取決於NASA HUNCH高中課程，比如紐約州費爾波特市費爾波特高中的科學教師吉恩·戈登和唐娜·哈姆伯格。

HUNCH is designed to connect high school classrooms with NASA engineers. For the past two years, Gordon』s students have been studying ways to kill bacteria in zero gravity, and they think they』re close to a solution. 「We don』t give the students any breaks. They have to do it just like NASA engineers,」 says Florence Gold, a project manager.
HUNCH目的是將高中課程與NASA工程師連接。在過去的兩年裡，戈登的學生們一直在研究如何在零重力下殺死細菌，他們認為已經接近解決方案。項目經理弗洛倫斯·戈爾德說：「我們不給學生任何休息時間，他們必須像NASA的工程師一樣去做」。

「There are no tests,」 Gordon says. 「There is no graded homework. There almost are no grades, other than 『Are you working towards your goal?』 Basically, it』s 『I』ve got to proce this proct and then, at the end of year, present it to NASA.』 Engineers come and really do an in-person review, and...it』s not a very nice thing at times. It』s a hard business review of your proct.」
戈登說：「沒有考試，沒有評分作業。除了『你正在朝著你的目標努力嗎？』之外，幾乎沒有評分。基本上，它是『我必須生產這個產品，然後在年底前提交給NASA』。工程師們親自來做審查，然後……有時這並不好，對你的產品進行商業審查很難。」

Gordon says the HUNCH program has an impact on college admissions and practical life skills. 「These kids are so absorbed in their studies that I just sit back. I don』t teach.」 And that annoying bacteria? Gordon says his students are emailing daily with NASA engineers about the problem, readying a workable solution to test in space.
戈登說HUNCH 項目對大學入學和實際生活技能有影響。「這些孩子全神貫注於學習，我只是在那坐著，我不教他們。」那討厭的細菌呢？戈登說，他的學生每天都在給NASA的工程師發郵件，討論這個問題，准備一個可行的解決方案，在太空進行測試。

Ⅶ 英語作文科學與人文區別

科學與人文區別
科學是探究客觀事實的，內容不以人的意志轉移。而人文所研究的東西如經濟哲學等，很大層面上是取決於人的。因而兩者內涵有很大區別，但內在聯系也是有的。科學是探索事物的規律，可以比喻為「造車」；人文是給人應用科學一個方向，是「開車」。科學不能解決方向問題，原子能研究出來，可以發電，也可以用於戰爭破壞。這便是價值觀問題；同理，人文不能直接解決科技問題。科學與人文的結合便能產生最佳效應，推動社會和事物前進。

科學與人文的關系，在中國古代里早有精闢論述：格物、致知、誠意、正心、修身、齊家、治國、平天下。前面兩要素是講科學，「格物」即研究客觀世界，「致知」即認識客觀世界；中間三要素「誠意、正心、修身」，講的是做人，人文精神；後面三要素：「齊家、治國、平天下」，講的是通過科學與人文的結合，達到的目的。

The difference between science and Humanities
Science is to explore objective facts, and its content is not transferred by human will. What humanity studies, such as economic philosophy, largely depends on people. Therefore, there are great differences between the two connotations, but there are also internal connections. Science is to explore the laws of things, which can be compared to "making cars"; humanities is to give people a direction of Applied Science, which is "driving". Science can't solve the problem of direction. When atomic energy is developed, it can generate electricity or be used for war destruction. This is the problem of values. Similarly, humanity can not directly solve the problem of science and technology. The combination of science and humanities can proce the best effect and promote the progress of society and things.

In ancient China, the relationship between science and humanity has long been incisively discussed: To study things, to know, to be sincere, to correct one's mind, to cultivate one's morality, to regulate one's family, to govern the country, and to pacify the world. The first two elements are about science, the second one is about studying the objective world, and the third one is about sincerity, integrity and self-cultivation. The last three elements are about regulating the family, governing the country and pacifying the world. They are about the purpose achieved through the combination of science and humanity.