Text 3

Up until a few decades ago, our visions of the future were largely—though by no means uniformly—glowingly positive. Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity, leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.

Now utopia has grown unfashionable, as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us, from asteroid strike to epidemic flu to climate change. You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.

But such gloominess is misplaced. The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years—so why shouldn’t we? Take a broader look at our species’ place in the universe, and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatened species of the international Union for the Concentration of Nature (IUCN), and you will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline.”

So what does our deep future hold? A growing number of researchers and organizations are now thinking seriously about that question. For example, the Long Now Foundation has as its flagship project a mechanical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.

Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of today’s technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and it’s perhaps best left to science-fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. That’s one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.

But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.

This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.

31. Our vision of the future used to be inspired by _______.

[A] our desire for lives of fulfillment.                              [B] our faith in science and technology.

[C] our awareness of potential risks.                                 [D] our belief in equal opportunity.

32. The IUCN’s “Red List” suggests that human beings are _______.

[A] a misplaced race.                                                      [B] a sustained species.

[C] the world’s dominant power.                                     [D] a threat to the environment.

33. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?

[A] The interest in science fiction is on the rise.                 [B] Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies.

[C] Technology offers solutions to social problems.           [D] Our immediate future is hard to conceive.

34. To ensure the future of mankind, it is crucial to _______.

[A] draw on our experience from the past.    [B] adopt an optimistic view of the world.

[C] explore our planet’s abundant resources.     [D] curb our ambition to reshape history.

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

[A] Uncertainty about Our Future      [B] Evolution of the Human Species

[C] The Ever-bright Prospects of Mankind.      [D] Science, Technology and Humanity.

31.【答案】A

【解析】

这篇文章选自The Scientist,文章题目是The Evolution of Credibility。文章第一段第二句话提到"But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route."，即在每天的科学实践中，发现所遵循的规律是模棱两可和复杂的。A项uncertainty and complexity 是对文中ambiguous and complicated的同义替换，所以为正确答案。

B项是利用文中最后一句话的干扰"Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound"，这句话是说"有误解和自我欺骗的可能"，从而导致了科学发现的模棱两可和复杂性;C项和D项是受文章第一句话的干扰，但是第一句同时提出只有"在理想中(in the idealized version of ...)，科学发现才能够很客观。

32.【答案】B

【解析】

第二段第二句中提到"But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to...",其中it指的是将科学发现获得公众可信度的过程。接下来的第四句话具体讲到了这个过程："through which the individual researcher's me, here, now becomes the community's anyone, anywhere, anytime."，即要经历从个人到集体的过程，需要每个人共同的努力，故答案为B。

33.【答案】B

【解析】

本段第三句话中提到"Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries"，即"研究者需要在科学团体复杂的社会结构中实现科学发现"，在这句话的后面有一个分号，分号后面的三个短句分别解释了在科学团体中不同身份的人所做的不同工作，如新闻编辑者和评论家需要控制科学发现公开的过程,而另外一些科学家需要同过新的发现来证明已有的发现等。除此之外，最后一句话"transform an individual's discovery claim into the community's credible discovery"即将个人的发现转换为集体可信的科学发现，故答案为B，即科学发现获得公众的可信度需要集体的努力和验证。

答案A是利用本段首句设置的干扰，属于主观臆断;答案C为干扰项目，以偏概全;答案D文中没有提及。

34.【答案】D

【解析】

第四段主要讲到了科学发现获得大众可信度的过程中面临的两个矛盾。Albert Szent-Gyorygi的观点主要针对第二个矛盾，即创新本身经常会引起怀疑。同时他认为科学发现需要"seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought"，即看到每个人都已经看到的，并想到别人没有想到的。这句话暗示了科学发现的过程需要有评判性思维，即我们应该去探求事物。故答案为D。

答案A与本段中讲到的第一个矛盾有关;答案B的过渡推断来自本段最后一句话，这句话的意思是，真正有创新的发现需要时间的验证来得到公众的认可。答案C文中没有提到，属于主观臆断。

35.【答案】C

【解析】

此题考察对全文主旨大意的准确归纳。从整个文章脉络来看，文章第一段指出任何发现最终的目标是使之客观化，然而此过程或多或少会受到不同的生活环境的影响;第二段指出这个过程需要公众共同的努力;第三段具体论述了不同的人在这个过程中需要完成的工作;第四段则提出了使科学发现获得可信度的过程中所遇到的两个矛盾;最后一段用Annette Baier的一句话总结了这个过程。由此可知，C项统领全文，为正确答案。答案A项与原文不符;答案B 是第二段中提到的一部分;而答案D只是对第四段的概括。