室内装饰设计员综合练习
室内装饰设计员综合练习
The newspaper must provide for the reader the facts, unalloyed, unslanted (不歪曲的), objectively selected facts. But in the days of complex news it must provide more; it must supply interpretation, the meaning of the facts. This is the most important assignment confronting American journalism—to make clear to the reader the problems of the day, to make international news as understandable as community news, to recognize that the there is no longer any such thing as "local" news, bemuse any event in the international area has a local reaction in manpower draft, in economic strain, in terms, indeed, of our very Way of life.
There is in journalism a widespread view that when you embark on interpretation, you are entering dangerous waters, the swirling tides of opinion. This is nonsense.
The opponents of interpretation insist that the writer and the editor shall confine himself to the "facts". This insistence raises two questions: What are the facts And: Are the bare facts enough
As to the first query. Consider how a so-called "factual" story comes about. The reporter collects, say, fifty facts; out of these fifty, his space allotment being necessarily restricted, he selects the ten which he considers most important. This is Judgment Number One. Then he or his editor decides which of these ten facts shall constitute the lead of the piece. (This is an important decision bemuse many readers do not proceed beyond the first paragraph.) This is Judgments Number Two. Then the night editor determines whether the article shall be presented on page one, where it has larger impact, or on page twenty-four, where it has little, Judgment Number Three.
Thus, in the presentation of a so-called "factual" or "objective" story, at least three judgments are involved. And they are judgments not at all unlike those involved in interpretation, in which reporter and editor, calling upon their research resources, their general background, and their "news neutralism" arrive at a conclusion as to the significance of the news.
The two areas of judgment, presentation of the news and its interpretation, are both objective rather than subjective processes—as objective, that is, as any human being can be. (Note in passing: even though complete objectivity can never be achieved, nevertheless the ideal must always be the beacon on the murky news channels.) if an editor is intent on slanting the news. he can do it in other ways and more effectively than by interpretation. He can do it by the selection of those facts that prop up(支持)his particular plea. Or he can do it by the play when he gives a story promoting it to page one or demoting it to page thirty.
What is the LEAST effective way of "slanting" news
A:Interpretation. B:Selection. C:Placement. D:Concentration.
According the theory of kin selection, humans tend to act altruistically ______.
A:for the sake of desired reproduction. B:out of self-interest. C:on the request of natural selection. D:because of kind nature.
Part A
Directions:
Read the following four texts. Answer
the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on
ANSWER SHEET 1.
Text 1
| The newspaper must provide for the
reader the facts, unalloyed, unslanted (不歪曲的), objectively selected facts.
But in the days of complex news it must provide more; it must supply
interpretation, the meaning of the facts. This is the most important assignment
confronting American journalism—to make clear to the reader the problems of the
day, to make international news as understandable as community news, to
recognize that the there is no longer any such thing as "local" news, bemuse any
event in the international area has a local reaction in manpower draft, in
economic strain, in terms, indeed, of our very Way of life. There is in journalism a widespread view that when you embark on interpretation, you are entering dangerous waters, the swirling tides of opinion. This is nonsense. The opponents of interpretation insist that the writer and the editor shall confine himself to the "facts". This insistence raises two questions: What are the facts And: Are the bare facts enough As to the first query. Consider how a so-called "factual" story comes about. The reporter collects, say, fifty facts; out of these fifty, his space allotment being necessarily restricted, he selects the ten which he considers most important. This is Judgment Number One. Then he or his editor decides which of these ten facts shall constitute the lead of the piece. (This is an important decision bemuse many readers do not proceed beyond the first paragraph.) This is Judgments Number Two. Then the night editor determines whether the article shall be presented on page one, where it has larger impact, or on page twenty-four, where it has little, Judgment Number Three. Thus, in the presentation of a so-called "factual" or "objective" story, at least three judgments are involved. And they are judgments not at all unlike those involved in interpretation, in which reporter and editor, calling upon their research resources, their general background, and their "news neutralism" arrive at a conclusion as to the significance of the news. The two areas of judgment, presentation of the news and its interpretation, are both objective rather than subjective processes—as objective, that is, as any human being can be. (Note in passing: even though complete objectivity can never be achieved, nevertheless the ideal must always be the beacon on the murky news channels.) if an editor is intent on slanting the news. he can do it in other ways and more effectively than by interpretation. He can do it by the selection of those facts that prop up(支持)his particular plea. Or he can do it by the play when he gives a story promoting it to page one or demoting it to page thirty. |
A:Interpretation. B:Selection. C:Placement. D:Concentration.
At some point during their education, biology students are told about a conversation in a pub that took place over 50 years ago. J. B. S. Haldane, a British geneticist, was asked whether he would lay down his life for his country. After doing a quick calculation on the back of a napkin, he said he would do so for two brothers or eight cousins. In other words, he would die to protect the equivalent of his genetic contribution to the next generation.
The theory of kin selection--the idea that animals can pass on their genes by helping their close relatives--is biology’s explanation for seemingly altruistic acts. An individual carrying genes that promote altruism might be expected to die younger than one with "selfish" genes, and thus to have a reduced contribution to the next generation’s genetic pool. But if the same individual acts altruistically to protect its relatives, genes for altruistic behavior might nevertheless propagate.
Acts of apparent altruism to non-relatives can also be explained away, in what has become a cottage industry within biology. An animal might care for the offspring of another that it is unrelated to because it hopes to obtain the same benefits for itself later on (a phenomenon known as reciprocal altruism). The hunter who generously shares his spoils with others may be doing so in order to signal his superior status to females, and ultimately boost his breeding success. These apparently selfless acts are therefore disguised acts of self interest.All of these examples fit economists’ arguments that Homo sapiens is also Homo economicus--maximizing something that economists call utility, and biologists fitness. But there is a residuum of human activity that defies such explanations: people contribute to charities for the homeless, return lost wallets, do voluntary work and tip waiters in restaurants to which they do not plan to return. Both economic rationalism and natural selection offer few explanations for such random acts of kindness. Nor can they easily explain the opposite: spiteful behavior, when someone harms his own interest in order to damage that of another. But people are now trying to find answers.
When a new phenomenon is recognized by science, a name always helps. In a paper in Human Nature, Dr Fehr and his colleagues argue for a behavioral propensity they call "strong reciprocity". This name is intended to distinguish it from reciprocal altruism. According to Dr Fehr, a person is a strong reciprocator if he is willing to sacrifice resources to be kind to those who are being kind, and to punish those who are being unkind. Significantly, strong reciprocators will behave this way even if doing so provides no prospect of material rewards in the future.
A:for the sake of desired reproduction B:out of self-interest C:on the request of natural selection D:because of kind nature
Humans are peculiar as a species, so what makes them so must be hidden in their genome. To an almost disconcerting extent, though, the human genome looks similar to the genomes of other primates, especially when it comes to the particular proteins it allows cells to make. The powerful new ways of looking at the genome being pioneered by the ENCODE consortium, though, provide ways to seek out the subtle species—specific signals. Lucas Ward and Manolis Kellis of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology report on the results of such sleuthing in a paper just published in Science.
The two researchers used data from ENCODE to identify the bits of the genome that actually do things and data from the 1,000 Genomes Project, which has studied human-genome variation across hundreds of people, to discover how much these functional elements vary from person to person. In particular, they looked for telltales that an element is being maintained by natural selection. If something is evolutionarily important then random variations in its DNA sequence will be slowly eliminated from the population, keeping it on the functional straight and narrow in a process known as purifying selection.
Dr Ward and Dr Kellis found that, in addition to the 5 % of human DNA that is conserved between mammals, an additional 4 % of human DNA appears to be uniquely human in the sense that it is prone to purifying selection in humans but not in other mammals. Much of this proprietary DNA is involved in regulating gene activity—for example, controlling how much of a protein is produced, rather than changing the nature of the protein itself. This finding is in line with modern thinking that a lot of evolutionary change is connected with regulatory elements rather than actual protein structure. The researchers also found that long non-coding segments that are not conserved in other mammals are in fact highly constrained in humans, suggesting they have human-specific functions.
Some areas identified as particularly human are the regulation of the cone cells of the retina (which are involved in colour vision) and the regulation of nerve-cell growth. These processes evolved rapidly in man’s primate ancestors but are now under strong purifying selection to maintain their beneficial functions. The implications of that, given humanity’s main distinguishing feature—its huge brain—are obvious. Dr Ward and Dr Kellis have thus created a powerful tool for investigating in detail just what it is that makes a human being human.
Which of the following is the basis that Dr. Ward and Dr. Kellis concludes
A:Comprehensive genetic studies. B:The delicate species-specific signals. C:Data from ENCODE consortium and Genomes Project. D:Purifying selection of humans.
A good title for the selection is ______.
A:Archimedes B:Archimedes’Principle C:A gold and silver crown D:The king of Syracuse
A good title for the selection is ______.
A:Archimedes B:Archimedes' Principle C:A gold and silver crown D:The king of Syracuse
Natural selection describes the biological process in which the differences of individuals within a population influences their abilities to survive and reproduce in an environment. The differences in individuals is a result of their genetic inheritance from their parents. In a population, any characteristic which blocks reproduction success tends to decrease generation by generation. In time, the ill-adapted die out. On the other hand,the individuals who do survive and reproduce will tend to produce offspring which are better adapted to the environment. Natural selection tends to promote adaptations that will increase the organism’s ability to survive in an environment.
Natural selection can serve to stabilize a population if the new traits, called mutations, are eliminated when they appear because they are not as well-adapted to the environment. The opposite effect is obtained when a new trait is introduced which allows individuals to adapt better over time, the species will change as this mutation becomes more widespread in the population. In human beings, increased brain size helped individuals to adapt better, and so brain size increased gradually in the species. Changes in the overall genetic makeup of a population are normal when there are environmental changes, especially sever environmental disruptions. Specialized adaptations to specific environments can lead, over time, to the development of subpopulation of individuals, ones who are better adapted to particular soil conditions food sources and so on. Given
enough time, these subpopulations may develop into separate species, such as zebras and horses, living in distinct environments and not interbreeding.
A:Natural selection favors adoptions that help a species to survive. B:Natural selection works against extreme changes in a species. C:Natural selection allows helpful new traits to spread through a population. D:Natural selection occurs in periods of severe environmental disturbances.
Natural selection describes the biological process in which the differences of individuals within a population influences their abilities to survive and reproduce in an environment. The differences in individuals is a result of their genetic inheritance from their parents. In a population, any characteristic which blocks reproduction success tends to decrease generation by generation. In time, the ill-adapted die out. On the other hand,the individuals who do survive and reproduce will tend to produce offspring which are better adapted to the environment. Natural selection tends to promote adaptations that will increase the organism’s ability to survive in an environment.
Natural selection can serve to stabilize a population if the new traits, called mutations, are eliminated when they appear because they are not as well-adapted to the environment. The opposite effect is obtained when a new trait is introduced which allows individuals to adapt better over time, the species will change as this mutation becomes more widespread in the population. In human beings, increased brain size helped individuals to adapt better, and so brain size increased gradually in the species. Changes in the overall genetic makeup of a population are normal when there are environmental changes, especially sever environmental disruptions. Specialized adaptations to specific environments can lead, over time, to the development of subpopulation of individuals, ones who are better adapted to particular soil conditions food sources and so on. Given
enough time, these subpopulations may develop into separate species, such as zebras and horses, living in distinct environments and not interbreeding.
A:why natural selection leads to population increase over generations B:how natural selection maintains and changes the makeup of a population C:why natural selection created the large brain size in human beings D:how natural selection promotes individuals who care for their offspring
