六级真题阅读原文汇总

2010 12

一

In the early 20th century, few things were more appealing than the promise of

scientific knowledge. In a world struggling with rapid industrialization, science

and technology seemed to offer solutions to almost every problem. Newly created

state colleges and universities devoted themselves almost entirely to scientific,

technological, and engineering fields. Many Americans came to believe that

scientific certainty could not only solve scientific problems, but also reform

politics, government, and business. Two world wars and a Great Depression

rocked the confidence of many people that scientific expertise alone could create a

prosperous and ordered world. After World War

Ⅱ

, the academic world turned

with new enthusiasm to humanistic studies, which seemed to many scholars the

best way to ensure the survival of democracy. American scholars fanned out

across much of the world

—

with support from the Ford Foundation, the Fulbright

program, etc.

—

to promote the teaching of literature and the arts in an effort to

make the case for democratic freedoms.

In the America of our own time, the great educational challenge has become

an effort to strengthen the teaching of what is now known as the STEM disciplines

(science, technology, engineering, and math). There is considerable and justified

concern that the United States is falling behind much of the rest of the developed

world in these essential disciplines. India, China, Japan, and other regions seem

to be seizing technological leadership.

At the same time, perhaps inevitably, the humanities

—

while still popular in

elite colleges and universities

—

have experienced a significant decline.

Humanistic disciplines are seriously underfunded, not just by the government

and the foundations but by academic institutions themselves. Humanists are

usually among the lowest-paid faculty members at most institutions and are often

lightly regarded because they do not generate grant income and because they

provide no obvious credentials (

资质

) for most nonacademic careers.

Undoubtedly American education should train more scientists and engineers.

Much of the concern among politicians about the state of American universities

today is focused on the absenc

e of “real world” education—

which means

preparation for professional and scientific careers. But the idea that institutions

or their students must decide between humanities and science is false. Our

society could not survive without scientific and technological knowledge. But we

would be equally impoverished (

贫困的

) without humanistic knowledge as well.

Science and technology teach us what we can do. Humanistic thinking helps us

understand what we should do.

It is almost impossible to imagine our society without thinking of the

extraordinary achievements of scientists and engineers in building our

complicated world. But try to imagine our world as well without the remarkable

works that have defined our culture and values. We have always needed, and we

still need, both.

二

Will there ever be another Einstein? This is the undercurrent of conversation

at Einstein memorial meetings throughout the year. A new Einstein will emerge,

scientists say. But it may take a long time. After all, more than 200 years

separated Einstein from his nearest rival, Isaac Newton.

Many physicists say the next

Einstein hasn’t been born yet, or is a baby now.

That’s because the quest for a unified theory that would account for all the

forces of nature has pushed current mathematics to its limits. New math must be

created before the problem can be solved.

But researchers say there are many other factors working against another

Einstein emerging anytime soon.

For one thing, physics is a much different field today. In Einstein’s day,

there were only a few thousand physicists worldwide, and the theoreticians who

could intellectually rival Einstein probably would fit into a streetcar with seats to

spare.

Education is different, too. One crucial aspect of Einstein’s training that is

overlooked is the years of philosophy he read as a teenager

—

Kant, Schopenhauer

and Spinoza, among others. It taught him how to think independently and

abstractly about space and time, and it wasn’t long before he became a

philosopher himself.

“The independen

ce created by philosophical insight is

—

in my opinion

—

the

mark of distinction between a mere artisan (

工匠

) or specialist and a real seeker

after truth,” Einstein wrote in 1944.

And he was an accomplished musician. The interplay between music and

math is well known. Einstein would furiously play his violin as a way to think

through a knotty physics problem.

Today, universities have produced millions of physicists. There aren’t many

jobs in science for them, so they go to Wall Street and Silicon Valley to apply their

analytical skills to more practical

—

and rewarding

—

efforts.

“Maybe

there is an Einstein out there today,” said Columbia University

physicist Brian Greene, “but it would be a lot harder for him to be heard.”

Especially considering what Einstein was proposing.

“The actual fabric of space and time curving? My God, what an idea!”

Greene said at a recent gathering at the Aspen Institute. “It takes a certain type

of person who will bang his head against the wall because you believe you’ll find

the

solution.”

Perhaps the best examples are the five scientific papers Einstein wrote in his

“miracle year” of 1905. These “thought experiments” were pages of

calculations signed and submitted to the prestigious journal Annalen der Physik

by a virtual unknown. There were no footnotes or citations.

What might happen to such a submission today?

“We all get papers like those in the mail,” Greene said. “We put them

in the junk file.”

2010

一

Only two countries in the advanced world provide on guarantee for paid leave

from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave

up that dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I

wasn’t surprised when this didn’t make the news here in the United

States

—we’re

now the only wealthy country without such a policy.

The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical

Leave Act, passed in 1933. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks’ unpaid

leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the

modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups

fought it bitterly, describing it as “government

-

run personnel management”

and a “dangerous precedent.” In fact, every step of the way, as (usually)

Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the

law, business groups have been strongly opposed.

As Yale law professor Anne A1stott argues, justifying parental support

depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must

pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society

Owes Parents, she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives:

there is “no exit” when it comes to children. “Society expects—

and

needs

—

parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the

intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual,

emotional, and moral capabilities. And society expects

—

and needs

—

parents to

persist in their role for 18 years, or longer if needed.”

While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not

providing care, What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state,

for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but

essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of

family laws that govern children’s welfare, yet parents receive little help in

meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parents receive

little help in meeting the life- changing obligations society imposes. To classify

parenting as a personal choice for which there is on collective responsibility is not

merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those

benefits because they accrue(

不断积累)to the whole of society as today’s chi

ldren

become tomorrow’s productive citizenry(公民

). In fact, by some estimates, the

value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money

(including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these

investments generate huge social benefits

—

as they clearly do

—

the benefits of

providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.

二

There

are

few

more

sobering

online

activities

than

entering

data

into

college-tuition calculators and gasping as the Web spits back a six-figure sum.

But economists say families about to go into debt to fund four years of partying,

as well as studying, can console themselves with the knowledge that college is an

investment that, unlike many bank stocks, should yield huge dividends.

A

2008

study

by

two

Harvard

economists

notes

that

the

“labor

-market

premium to skill”—or the amount college graduates earned that’s greater than

what high-school graduate earned

—

decreased for much of the 20th century, but

has come back with a vengeance (

报复性地

) since the 1980s. In 2005, The typical

full-time year-round U.S. worker with a four-year college degree earned $$50,900,

62% more than the $$31,500 earned by a worker with only a high-school diploma.

There’s no question that going to college is a

smart economic choice. But a

look

at

the

strange

variations

in

tuition

reveals

that

the

choice

about

which

college to attend doesn’t come down merely to dollars and cents. Does going to

Columbia University (tuition, room and board $$49,260 in 2007-08) yield a 40%

greater

return

than

attending

the

University

of

Colorado

at

Boulder

as

an

out-of-state student ($$35,542)? Probably not. Does being an out-of-state student

at the University of Colorado at Boulder yield twice the amount of income as being

an in-state student ($$17,380) there? Not likely.

No,

in

this

consumerist

age,

most

buyers

aren’t

evaluating

college

as

an

investment, but rather as a consumer product

—

like a car or clothes or a house.

And with such purchases, price is only one of many crucial factors to consider.

As with automobiles, consumers in today’s college marketplace have vast

choices,

and

people

search

for

the

one

that

gives

them

the

most

comfort

and