birthplacesummary-writing(原文及范文)

summary writing(

原文及范文）

Writing

Directions: For this part, you are to write a summary of either of two

articles that

are

presented

to

you in

the

following.

Your summary

should

be 150-200 words. Remember to write neatly.

Science and Humanity

The twentieth century saw more momentous change than any previous

century:

change

for

better,

change

for

worse;

change

that

brought

enormous

benefits

to

human

beings,

change

that

threatens

the

very

existence

of

the

human

species.

Many

factors

contributed

to

this

change

but

—

in

my

opinion

—

the most important factor was the progress in science.

Academic

research

in

the

physical

and

biological

sciences

has

vastly

broadened

our

horizons;

it

has

given

us

a

deep

insight

into

the

structure

of

matter

and

of

the

universe;

it

has

brought

better

understanding

of

the

nature

of

life

and

of

its

continuous

evolution.

Technology

—

the

application of science

—

has made fantastic advances that have affected

us

beneficially

in

nearly

every

aspect

of

life:

better

health,

more

wealth,

less drudgery (

单调沉闷的工作

), greater access to information.

Sadly,

however,

there

is

another

side

to

the

picture.

The

creativity

of science has been employed to the detriment(

损害

) of mankind. The

application

of

science

and

technology

to

the

development

and

manufacture

of

weapons

of

mass

destruction

has

created

a

real

threat

to

the

continued

existence of the human race on this planet. We have seen this happen in

the case of nuclear weapons. Although their actual use in combat has so

far occurred only in 1945

—

when two Japanese cities were destroyed

—

during the four decades of the Cold War, obscenely huge arsenals(

武器

库

) of nuclear weapons were accumulated and made ready for use. The

arsenals were so large that if the weapons had actually been detonated

(

爆炸

) the result could have been the complete extinction of the human

species, as well as of many animal species.

William Shakespeare said

:

混

合的

) yarn, good and ill together.

application of only one strand of human activities

—

science

—

seems to

bear out this adage (

格言

). But does it have to be so Must ill always

accompany good deeds Are we biologically programmed for aggression and

war

I

am

not

an

authority

in

genetics,

but

from

my

readings

and

life-long

observation I do not see any evidence that we are genetically condemned

to

commit

evil.

On

the

contrary,

on

very

general

grounds

I

would

say

that

genetically

we

are

destined

to

do

things

that

are

of

benefit

to

the

human

species,

and

that

the

negative

aspects

are

mistakes,

transient

errors

in

the process of evolution. In other words, I believe in the inherent

goodness of Man.

We

are

thus

faced

with

a

daunting

(

威吓，使胆怯

)

dilemma.

As

a

process

of

natural

evolution,

science

should

be

allowed

to

develop

freely,

without

restrictions.

But

can

we

afford

the

luxury

of

uninhibited

research

in

the

natural

sciences,

with

its

awesome

(

可

怕

的

)

potential

of

total

destruction,

in

a

world

in

which

war

is

still

a

recognized

social

institution

The

preservation

of

the

human

species

and

its

continuing

enhancement

demand that we learn to live with one another in peace and harmony. But

this learning process has been slow and arduous (

费力的

), and is not yet

complete. Due to the harsh conditions under which primitive man lived,

he often had to fight with other human beings for survival. Individual

killing and, later, collective killing

—

wa r

—

thus began to be seen as a

natural phenomenon.

&

We

are

still

not

organized

for

a

war-free

world.

But

in

the

meantime,

the human species may be brought to an end by the use of the tools of

destruction, themselves the product of science and technology.

In

my

opinion,

the

problem

has

to

a

large

extent

arisen

from

the

uneven

rate

of

advance

in

the

different

areas

of

human

activities,

in

particular,

between

the

progress

in

the

natural

sciences

—

which

include

the

physical

and biological

disciplines, and

the

various social

sciences

economics,

sociology,

politics

(with

psychology

perhaps

at

the

interface

between

the

two major groups). Undoubtedly, there has been much faster progress in

the natural sciences than in the social ones.

Why have the natural sciences, especially the physical sciences,

advanced

so

much

faster

than

the

social

sciences

It

is

not

because

physicists are wiser or cleverer than, say, economists. The explanation

is simply that physics is easier to master than economics. Although the

material world

is

a

highly complex

system, for practical

purposes it

can

be

described

by

a

few

general

laws.

The

laws

of

physics

are

immutable

(

不

). They apply everywhere, on this planet as well as everywhere

else

in

the

universe,

and

are

not

affected

by

human

reactions

and

emotions,

as the social sciences are.

How can we tackle this unevenness in the rate of progress of of

science Two ways come to mind

:

one, by accelerating the rate of progress

in the social sciences; two, by slowing down the rate of advancement of

the natural sciences in some areas, for example, by the imposition of

ethical codes of conduct.

Clearly, the former is by far the preferable way. What we would like

to

see

is

faster

progress

in

the

social

sciences,

leading

to

the

establishment

of

a

social

system

which

would

make

war

not

only

unnecessary

but

unthinkable;

a

system

in

which

the

existence

of

old,

or

the

invention

of new, weapons of mass destruction, would not matter, because nobody

would dream of using them; a system in which people will be able to say:

“

nuclear weapons: who cares

”

Responsibility for one's actions is, of course, a basic requirement

of every citizen, not just of scientists. Each of us must be accountable

for our deeds. But the need for such responsibility is particularly

imperative for scientists, if only because scientists understand the

technical problems better than the average citizen or politician. And

knowledge brings responsibility.

In

any

case,

scientists

do

not

have

a

completely

free

hand.

The

general

public, through elected governments, have the means to control science,

either

by

withholding

(

抑

制

)

the

purse,

or

by

imposing

restrictive

regulations

harmful

to

science.

Clearly

it

is

far

better

that

any

control

should

be

exercised

by

the

scientists

themselves,

through

a

self- imposed

code of conduct. The establishment of an ethical code of conduct for

scientists is an idea whose time has come.

Summary

：

Science and Humanity

The twentieth

century has

made

greater change to the

world, which

was brought by the progress in science, than any previous century.

Unfortunately,

not

all

these

changes

did

good

to

the

human

society.

Some

of

them

have

done

serious

damage

to

mankind

and

have

been

even

predicted

to destroy the whole world someday if out of control. In fact, mankind

is not biologically programmed for violent behaviors like war. People

are faced with a dilemma in which we would like to see science develop

freely, but cannot afford the result of that. It is a basic instinct

that

man

tends

to

protect

oneself

by

fighting

with

others.

The

progress

in the nautral sciences is much faster than that in social sciences

because

laws

in

natural

sciences

are

immutable

and

apply

everywhere

and

are not

affected by

human reactions and

emotions. For even developmemt

and for a better future of mankind, imposition of ethical codes is

necessary.

Everyone

should

be

responsible

for

his

behavior,

especially

the scientists. (166 words)

】

China Sees Opportunities in Climate Change

UNLIKE

America’s

leaders,

China’s

bosses

are

not

much

troubled

by

recalcitrant

（顽强的）

legislatures.

The

government

has

therefore

had

no

difficulty

in

executing

a

smart

volte

face

（完全改变）

on

climate

change.

Around three years ago its fierce resistance to the notion of any limit

on its greenhouse-gas emissions started to soften. It now seems to be

making serious efforts to control them.

One reason for this change is the country’s growing awareness

of its vulnerability to a warming world. The monsoon

（季风）

seems to be

weakening, travelling less far inland and dumping its rainfall on the

coasts.

As

a

result

China

is

seeing

floods

in

the

south-east

and

droughts

in the north-

west. At the same time the country’s leaders are deeply

concerned

about

the

melting

of

the

glaciers

on

the

Tibetan

plateau,

which