A.paradox
B.contradict
C.perspective
D.manipulation
It is a () that in some odd way world peace appears to depend on our spending millions of pounds on weapons that can kill us all.
A.paradox
B.contradict
C.perspective
D.manipulation
A.oxymoron
B.paradox
C.irony
D.pun
A.refers to the finding that U.S. exports were more labor intensive than its imports.
B.refers to the finding that US. Exports were more capital intensive than its exports.
C.refers to the finding that the U.S. produces outside its Edgeworth Box
D.still accurately applies totoday’s pattern of U.S. international trad
E.refersto the fact that Leontieff - an American economist – had a Russian nam
E.
Wallace, whose parents were poor and who had left school at 14, had followed courses at Working Men's Institutes in London and Leicester as a surveyor's apprentice and pupil teacher.
The fact is that there are two traditions of explanation that march side by side in the ascent of man. One is the analysis of the physical structure of the world. The other is the study of the processes of life: their delicacy, their diversity, the wavering cycles from life to death in the individual and in the species. And these traditions do not come together until the theory of evolution; because until then there is a paradox which cannot be resolved, which cannot be begun, about life.
The paradox of the life sciences, which makes them different in kind from physical science, is in the detail of nature everywhere. We see it about us in the birds, the trees, the grass, the snails, in every living thing. It is this, the manifestations of life, its expressions, its forms, are so diverse that they must contain a large element of the accidental. And yet the nature of life is so uniform. that it must be constrained by many necessities.
So it is not surprising that biology as we understand it begins with naturalists in the 18th and 19th centuries: observers of the countryside, bird-watchers, clergymen, doctors, gentlemen of leisure in country houses. I am tempted to call them, simply, "gentlemen in Victorian England", because it cannot be an accident that the theory of evolution is conceived twice by two men living at the same time in the same culture — the culture of Queen Victoria in England.
SECTION 2 Optional Translation (30 points)
The theory of evolution by natural selection was put forward in the 1850s independently by two men. One was Charles Darwin; the other was Alfred Russel Wallace. Both men had some scientific background, of course, but at heart both men were naturalists. Darwin had been a medical student at Edinburgh University for two years, before his father who was a wealthy doctor proposed that he might become a clergyman and sent him to Cambridge. Wallace, whose parents were poor and who had left school at 14, had followed courses at Working Men's Institutes in London and Leicester as a surveyor's apprentice and pupil teacher.
The fact is that there are two traditions of explanation that march side by side in the ascent of man. One is the analysis of the physical structure of the world. The other is the study of the processes of life: their delicacy, their diversity, the wavering cycles from life to death in the individual and in the species. And these traditions do not come together until the theory of evolution; because until then there is a paradox which cannot be resolved, which cannot be begun, about life.
The paradox of the life sciences, which makes them different in kind from physical science, is in the detail of nature everywhere. We see it about us in the birds, the trees, the grass, the snails, in every living thing. It is this, the manifestations of life, its expressions, its forms, are so diverse that they must contain a large element of the accidental. And yet the nature of life is so uniform. that it must be constrained by many necessities.
So it is not surprising that biology as we understand it begins with naturalists in the 18th and 19th centuries: observers of the countryside, bird-watchers, clergymen, doctors, gentlemen of leisure in country houses. I am tempted to call them, simply, "gentlemen in Victorian England ", because it cannot be an accident that the theory of evolution is conceived twice by two men living at the same time in the same culture—the culture of Queen Victoria in England.
It is a curious paradox that we think of the physical sciences as "hard", the social sciences as "soft", and the biological sciences as somewhere in between. This is interpreted to mean that our knowledge of physical systems is more certain than our knowledge of biological systems, and these in turn are more certain than our knowledge of social systems. In terms of bur capacity to sample the relevant universes, however, and the probability that our images of these universes are at least approximately correct, one suspects that a reverse order is more reasonable. We are able to sample earth's social systems with some degree of confidence that we have a reasonable sample of the total universe being investigated. Our knowledge of social systems, therefore, while it is in many ways extremely inaccurate, is not likely to be seriously overturned by new discoveries. Even the folk knowledge in social systems on which ordinary life is based in earning, spending, organizing, marrying, taking part in political activities, fighting and so on, is not very 'dissimilar from the more sophisticated images of the social system derived from the social sciences, even though it is built upon the very imperfect samples of personal experience.
In contrast, our image of the astronomical universe, of even of earth's geological history, can easily be subject to revolutionary changes as new data comes in and new theories are worked out. If we define the "security" of our image of various parts of the total system as the probability of their suffering significant changes, then we would reverse the order of hardness and see the social sciences as the most secure, the physical sciences as the least secure, and again the biological sciences as somewhere in between. Our image of the astronomical universe is the least secure of all simply because we observe such a fantastically small sample of it and its record-keeping is trivial as compared with the rich records of the social systems, or even the limited records of biological systems. Records of the astronomical universe, despite the fact that we see distant things as they were long ago, are limited in the extreme.
Even in regard to such a close neighbor as the moon, which we have actually visited, theories about its origin and history are extremely different, contradictory, and hard to choose among. Our knowledge of physical evolution is incomplete and highly insecure.
The word "paradox"(Para. 1) means "()".
A.implication
B.contradiction
C.interpretation
D.confusion
In contrast, our image of the astronomical universe, of even of earth’s geological history, can easily be subject to revolutionary changes as new data comes in and new theories are worked out. If we define the "security" of our image of various parts of the total system as the probability of their suffering significant changes, then we would reverse the order of hardness and see the social sciences as the most secure, the physical sciences as the least secure, and again the biological sciences as somewhere in between. Our image of the astronomical universe is least secure of all simply because we observe such a fantastically small sample of it and its record-keeping is trivial as compared with the rich records of the social systems, or even the limited records of biological systems. Records of the astronomical universe, despite the fact that we see distant things as they were long ago, are limited in the extreme.
Even in regard to such a close neighbor as the moon, which we have actually visited, theories about its origin and history are extremely different, contradictory, and hard to choose among. Our knowledge of physical evolution is incomplete and highly insecure.
The word "paradox" (Para. 1, Line 1 ) means" ______ ".
A.implication
B.contradiction
C.interpretation
D.confusion
With this paradox in mind, I recently visited 25 companies; it became clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed. Manufacturing regularly observes a "40, 40, 20" rule. Roughly 40 percent of any manufacturing-based competitive advantage derives from long-term changes in manufacturing structure (decisions about the number, size, location, and capacity of facilities) and in approaches to materials. Another 40 percent comes from major changes in equipment and process technology. The final 20 percent rests on implementing conventional east-cutting. This rule does not be tried. The well-known tools of this approach -- including simplifying jobs and retraining employees to work smarter, not harder -- do produce results. But the tools quickly reach the limits of what they can contribute.
Another problem is that the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people. As Abernathy's study of automobile manufacturers has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investment in cast-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products. And managers under pressure to maximize cost-cutting will resist innovation because they know that more fundamental changes in processes or systems will wreak havoc with the results on which they are measured. Production managers have always seen their job as one of minimizing costs and maximizing output. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching, mechanistic culture in most factories that has kept away creative managers.
Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so, in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy. Such a strategy facturing and implementing a manufacturing strategy. Such a strategy focuses on the manufacturing structure and on equipment and process technology. In one company a mamufacturing strategy that allowed different areas of the factory to specialize in different markets replaced the conventional cast-cutting approach; within three years the company regained its competitive advantage. Together with such strategies, successful companies are. also encouraging managers to focus on a wider set of objectives besides cutting costs. There is hope for manufacturing, but it clearly rests on a different way of managing.
The author of t. he passage is primarily concerned with ______.
A.summarizing a thesis
B.recommending a different approach
C.comparing points of view
D.making a series of predictions
为了保护您的账号安全,请在“简答题”公众号进行验证,点击“官网服务”-“账号验证”后输入验证码“”完成验证,验证成功后方可继续查看答案!