Text 4
The meanings of "science" and "technology" have changed significantly from one generation to another. More similarities than differences, however, can be found between the terms. Both science and technology imply a thinking process, both are concerned with causal relationships in the material world, and both employ an experimental methodology that results in empirical demonstrations that can be verified by repetition. Science, at least in theory, is less concerned with the practicality of its results and more concerned with the development of general laws, but in practice science and technology are inextricably involved with each other. The varying interplay of the two can be observed in the historical development of such practitioners as chemists, engineers, physicists9 astronomers, carpenters, potters, and many other specialists. Differing educational requirements, social status, vocabulary, methodology, and types of rewards, as well as institutional objectives and professional goals, contribute to such distinctions as can be made between the activities of scientists and technologists; but throughout history the practitioners of "pure" science have made many practical as well as theoretical contributions.
Indeed, the concept that science provides the ideas for technological innovations and that pure research is therefore essential for any significant advancement in industrial civilization is essentially a myth. Most of the greatest changes in industrial civilization cannot be traced to the laboratory. Fundamental tools and processes in the fields of mechanics, chemistry,. astronomy, metallurgy, and hydraulics were developed before the laws governing their functions were discovered. The steam engine, for example, was commonplace before the science of thermodynamics elucidated the physical principle underlying its operations.
In recent years a sharp value distinction has grown up between science and technology. Advances in science have frequently had their bitter opponents, but today many people have come to fear technology much more than science. For these people, science may be perceived as a serene, objective source for understanding the eternal laws of nature, whereas the practical manifestations of technology in the modern world now seem to them to be out of control.
Many historians of science argue not only that technology is an essential condition of advanced, industrial civilization, but also that the rate of technological change has developed its own momentum in recent centuries. Innovations now seem to appear at a rate that increase geometrically, without respect to geographical limits or political systems. These innovations tend to transform traditional cultural systems, frequently with unexpected social consequences. Thus technology can be conceived as both a creative and a destructive process.

Science is, as the author argues, similar to technology in that（）

A:it involves a long process of change B:it focuses on the casual aspects of the material world C:it resorts to experiments as an exclusive method of research D:it is concerned about the theoretical development

The meanings of "science" and "technology" have changed significantly from one generation to another. More similarities than differences, however, can be found between the terms. Both science and technology imply a thinking process, both are concerned with causal relationships in the material world, and both employ an experimental methodology that results in empirical demonstrations that can be verified by repetition. Science, at least in theory, is less concerned with the practicality of its results and more concerned with the development of general laws, but in practice science and technology are inextricably involved with each other. The varying interplay of the two can be observed in the historical development of such practitioners as chemists, engineers, physicists, astronomers, carpenters, potters, and many other specialists. Differing educational requirements, social status, vocabulary, methodology, and types of rewards, as well as institutional objectives and professional goals, contribute to such distinctions as can be made between the activities of scientists and technologists; but throughout history the practitioners of "pure" science have made many practical as well as theoretical contributions.
Indeed, the concept that science provides the ideas for technological innovations and that pure research is therefore essential for any significant advancement in industrial civilization is essentially a myth. Most of the greatest changes in industrial civilization cannot be traced to the laboratory. Fundamental tools and processes in the fields of mechanics, chemistry, astronomy, metallurgy, and hydraulics Were developed before the laws governing their functions were discovered. The steam engine, for example, was commonplace before the science of thermodynamics elucidated the physical principle underlying its operations.
In recent years a sharp value distinction has grown up between science and technology. Advances in science have frequently had their bitter opponents, but today many people have come to fear technology much more than science. For these people, science may be perceived as a serene, objective source for understanding the eternal laws of nature, whereas the practical manifestations of technology in the modern world now seem to them to be out of control.
Many historians of science argue not only that technology is an essential condition of advanced, industrial civilization, but also that the rate of technological change has developed its own momentum in recent centuries. Innovations now seem to appear at a rate that increase geometrically, without respect to geographical limits or political systems. These innovations tend to transform traditional cultural systems, frequently with unexpected social consequences. Thus technology can be conceived as both a creative and a destructive process.
Science is, as the author argues, similar to technology in that ______.

A:it involves a long process of change B:it focuses on the casual aspects of the material world C:it resorts to experiments as an exclusive method of research D:it is concerned about the theoretical development

Humans are unique in the extent to which they can reflect on themselves and others. Humans are able to (1) , to think in abstract terms, to reflect on the future. A meaningless, (2) world is an insecure world. We do not like extensive insecurity. When it (3) to human behavior we infer meaning and (4) to make the behavior understandable. What all this means is that people develop "quasi theories" of human behavior, that is, theories that are not developed in an objective, scientific (5) . When doing so, people believe they know (6) humans do the things they do.
Let’s consider an example. In the United States people have been (7) with the increasing amount of crime for several years. The extent of crime bothers us; we ourselves could be (8) But what also bothers us is that people behave in such ways. Why can such things happen We develop quasi theories. We (9) concerned about the high crime rate, but we now believe we (10) it: our criminal justice system is (11) ; people have grown selfish and inconsiderate as our moral values (12) from the influence of liberal ideas; too many people are (13) drugs. These explanations suggest possible solutions. (14) the courts; put more people in jail as (15) to other lawbreakers. There is hope that the problem of crime can be solved if only we (16) these solutions. Again, the world is no longer meaningless nor (17) so threatening.
These quasi theories (18) serve a very important function for us. But how accurate are they How (19) will the suggested solutions be These questions must be answered (20) how people normally go about developing or attaining their quasi theories of human behavior.

7（）

A:concerned B:worried C:disturbed D:involved

Text 4 The meanings of "science" and "technology" have changed significantly from one generation to another. More similarities than differences, however, can be found between the terms. Both science and technology imply a thinking process, both are concerned with causal relationships in the material world, and both employ an experimental methodology that results in empirical demonstrations that can be verified by repetition. Science, at least in theory, is less concerned with the practicality of its results and more concerned with the development of general laws, but in practice science and technology are inextricably involved with each other. The varying interplay of the two can be observed in the historical development of such practitioners as chemists, engineers, physicists9 astronomers, carpenters, potters, and many other specialists. Differing educational requirements, social status, vocabulary, methodology, and types of rewards, as well as institutional objectives and professional goals, contribute to such distinctions as can be made between the activities of scientists and technologists; but throughout history the practitioners of "pure" science have made many practical as well as theoretical contributions. Indeed, the concept that science provides the ideas for technological innovations and that pure research is therefore essential for any significant advancement in industrial civilization is essentially a myth. Most of the greatest changes in industrial civilization cannot be traced to the laboratory. Fundamental tools and processes in the fields of mechanics, chemistry,. astronomy, metallurgy, and hydraulics were developed before the laws governing their functions were discovered. The steam engine, for example, was commonplace before the science of thermodynamics elucidated the physical principle underlying its operations. In recent years a sharp value distinction has grown up between science and technology. Advances in science have frequently had their bitter opponents, but today many people have come to fear technology much more than science. For these people, science may be perceived as a serene, objective source for understanding the eternal laws of nature, whereas the practical manifestations of technology in the modern world now seem to them to be out of control. Many historians of science argue not only that technology is an essential condition of advanced, industrial civilization, but also that the rate of technological change has developed its own momentum in recent centuries. Innovations now seem to appear at a rate that increase geometrically, without respect to geographical limits or political systems. These innovations tend to transform traditional cultural systems, frequently with unexpected social consequences. Thus technology can be conceived as both a creative and a destructive process.

Science is, as the author argues, similar to technology in that（）

A:it involves a long process of change B:it focuses on the casual aspects of the material world C:it resorts to experiments as an exclusive method of research D:it is concerned about the theoretical development

The author is primarily concerned with

A:comparing several current interpretations of early American history. B:providing the theoretical framework that is used by most historians in understanding early American history. C:refuting an argument about early American history that has been proposed by social historians. D:discussing a reinterpretation of early American history that is based on new social research on migration.

The meanings of "science" and "technology" have changed significantly from one generation to another. More similarities than differences, however, can be found between the terms. Both science and technology imply a thinking process, both are concerned with causal relationships in the material world, and both employ an experimental methodology that results in empirical demonstrations that can be verified by repetition. Science, at least in theory, is less concerned with the practicality of its results and more concerned with the development of general laws, but in practice science and technology are inextricably involved with each other. The varying interplay of the two can be observed in the historical development of such practitioners as chemists, engineers, physicists, astronomers, carpenters, potters, and many other specialists. Differing educational requirements, social status, vocabulary, methodology, and types of rewards, as well as institutional objectives and professional goals, contribute to such distinctions as can be made between the activities of scientists and technologists; but throughout history the practitioners of "pure" science have made many practical as well as theoretical contributions.
Indeed, the concept that science provides the ideas for technological innovations and that pure research is therefore essential for any significant advancement in industrial civilization is essentially a myth. Most of the greatest changes in industrial civilization cannot be traced to the laboratory. Fundamental tools and processes in the fields of mechanics, chemistry, astronomy, metallurgy, and hydraulics Were developed before the laws governing their functions were discovered. The steam engine, for example, was commonplace before the science of thermodynamics elucidated the physical principle underlying its operations.
In recent years a sharp value distinction has grown up between science and technology. Advances in science have frequently had their bitter opponents, but today many people have come to fear technology much more than science. For these people, science may be perceived as a serene, objective source for understanding the eternal laws of nature, whereas the practical manifestations of technology in the modern world now seem to them to be out of control.
Many historians of science argue not only that technology is an essential condition of advanced, industrial civilization, but also that the rate of technological change has developed its own momentum in recent centuries. Innovations now seem to appear at a rate that increase geometrically, without respect to geographical limits or political systems. These innovations tend to transform traditional cultural systems, frequently with unexpected social consequences. Thus technology can be conceived as both a creative and a destructive process.

Science is, as the author argues, similar to technology in that（）

A:it involves a long process of change B:it focuses on the casual aspects of the material world C:it resorts to experiments as an exclusive method of research D:it is concerned about the theoretical development

In the text, the author is primarily concerned with

A:predicting the consequences of a practice. B:criticizing a point of view. C:calling attention to recent discoveries. D:summarizing conflicting opinions.

In most cultures, when you meet acquaintances for the first time during a day, it is normal to greet them. The main purpose of this greeting is to (61) a good relationship between the people (62) , and each language usually has (63) set phrases that can be used for this purpose. Sometimes, though, there can be considerable (64) in the type of phrases that can be used, and (65) misunderstandings can easily arise. The following is a true story.
A young British woman went to Hong Kong to work, and at the (66) of her arrival she knew (67) about the Chinese culture or language. (68) her way to school one day, she went to the bank to get some money. To her surprise, the bank clerk asked her whether she had had her lunch before she went to the bank. She was extremely surprised at (69) a question because in the British culture it would be regarded as an indirect (70) to lunch. Between unmarried young people it can also show the young man’s interest in (71) the girl. Since this bank clerk was a complete stranger (72) the British girl, she was very much surprised. After a moment she answered that she had already eaten quickly. Then she went on her way to her school and was even more surprised when one of the teachers asked her the (73) question. By now she realized that it could not be an invitation, (74) was confused why they all asked this question. In the following days she was asked the same question again and again, and she spent hours trying to explain (75) why so many people kept asking her this. (76) ,she came to a conclusion: the people who (77) inquiring her about the same thing must be concerned about her (78) . She was somewhat underweight at the time, and so she concluded they must be worrying that she was not (79) very well! Only much later (80) that the question had no real sense at all it was only a greeting.

80（）

A:concern B:concerning C:concerned D:to concern

In most cultures, when you meet acquaintances for the first time during a day, it is normal to greet them. The main purpose of this greeting is to (61) a good relationship between the people (62) , and each language usually has (63) set phrases that can be used for this purpose. Sometimes, though, there can be considerable (64) in the type of phrases that can be used, and (65) misunderstandings can easily arise. The following is a true story.
A young British woman went to Hong Kong to work, and at the (66) of her arrival she knew (67) about the Chinese culture or language. (68) her way to school one day, she went to the bank to get some money. To her surprise, the bank clerk asked her whether she had had her lunch before she went to the bank. She was extremely surprised at (69) a question because in the British culture it would be regarded as an indirect (70) to lunch. Between unmarried young people it can also show the young man’s interest in (71) the girl. Since this bank clerk was a complete stranger (72) the British girl, she was very much surprised. After a moment she answered that she had already eaten quickly. Then she went on her way to her school and was even more surprised when one of the teachers asked her the (73) question. By now she realized that it could not be an invitation, (74) was confused why they all asked this question. In the following days she was asked the same question again and again, and she spent hours trying to explain (75) why so many people kept asking her this. (76) ,she came to a conclusion: the people who (77) inquiring her about the same thing must be concerned about her (78) . She was somewhat underweight at the time, and so she concluded they must be worrying that she was not (79) very well! Only much later (80) that the question had no real sense at all it was only a greeting.

71（）

A:concern B:concerning C:concerned D:to concern