Question

    Contemporary worries about the impact of technology are part of a historical pattern. The new technologies that dominated the past decade seem to be making things worse. Parents worry that smartphones have turned their children into screen-addicted zombies. The technologies expected to dominate the new decade also seem to cast a dark shadow. Artificial intelligence (AI) may well deepen bias and prejudice, threaten your job and shore up authoritarian rulers.

Today’s gloomy mood is centred on smartphones and social media, which took off a decade ago. Yet concerns that humanity has taken a technological wrong turn, or that particular technologies might be doing more harm than good, have arisen before. Stand back, and in these historical cases disappointment arose from a mix of unrealised hopes and unforeseen consequences. Technology frees the forces of creative destruction, so it is only natural that it leads to anxiety: for any given technology its drawbacks sometimes seem to outweigh its benefits. When this happens with several technologies at once, as today, the result is a wider sense of techno-pessimism.

However, that pessimism can be overdone. Too often people focus on the drawbacks of a new technology while taking its benefits for granted. Worries about screen time should be weighed against the much more substantial benefits of instant communication and access to information and entertainment that smartphones make possible. A further danger is that efforts to avoid the short-term costs associated with a new technology will end up denying access to its long-term benefits—something called a “technology trap”. Fears that robots will steal people’s jobs may prompt politicians to tax them, for example, to discourage their use. Yet in the long run countries that wish to maintain their standard of living as their workforce ages and shrinks will need more robots, not fewer.

That points to another lesson, which is that the remedy to technology-related problems very often involves more technology. And the most important lesson is about technology itself. Any powerful technology can be used for good or ill. Biotechnology can raise crop yields and cure diseases, but it could equally lead to deadly weapons. Technology itself has no agency: it is the choices people make about it that shape the world. Thus the techlash (技术鞭策) is a necessary step in the adoption of important new technologies. At its best, it helps frame how society comes to terms with innovations and imposes rules and policies that limit their destructive potential, accommodate change or strike a trade-off. Healthy skepticism means that these questions are settled by a broad debate, not by a group of technologists.

Perhaps the real source of anxiety is not technology itself, but growing doubts about the ability of societies to hold this debate and come up with good answers. In that sense, techno-pessimism is a symptom of political pessimism. Yet there is something comforting about this: a gloomy debate is much better than no debate at all. And history still argues, on the whole, for optimism.

1.What is Paragraph 2 mainly about?

A.Reasons for techno-pessimism. B.History of technology development.

C.Consequences of technological turns. D.Attitude towards particular technologies.

2.What can we learn from the passage?

A.Worries about technology started a decade ago.

B.The drawbacks of technology are always neglected.

C.Skepticism is helpful for technology development if properly applied.

D.There isn’t much we can do to limit the destructive potential of technology.

3.Which of the following would be the best title for the passage?

A.History vs. Today. B.Technology vs. Debate.

C.Technology vs. Society. D.Pessimism vs. progress.

4.Which of the following shows the development of ideas in this passage?

I: Introduction   P: Point   Sp: Sub-point (次要点)   C: Conclusion

A. B.

C. D.

Answer

1.A

2.C

3.D

4.A

【解析】

这是一篇议论文。文章主要就技术的进步导致悲观情绪的产生这一社会现象展开分析，说明了产生技术悲观的原因，和这种情绪的产生说明解决与技术相关的问题往往需要更多的技术。焦虑的真正根源并不是技术本身，而是人们对社会是否有能力举行这场辩论并提出好的答案的日益怀疑。

1.主旨大意题。根据第二段中Stand back, and in these historical cases disappointment arose from a mix of unrealised hopes and unforeseen consequences. Technology frees the forces of creative destruction, so it is only natural that it leads to anxiety: for any given technology its drawbacks sometimes seem to outweigh its benefits. When this happens with several technologies at once, as today, the result is a wider sense of techno-pessimism.可知退一步说，在这些历史案例中，失望来自于未实现的希望和未曾预料到的后果。技术解放了创造性破坏的力量，因此，它导致焦虑是很自然的：对于任何一种技术来说，它的缺点有时似乎超过了它的好处。当这种情况同时发生在几种技术上时，就像今天这样，其结果是一种更广泛的技术悲观感。由此可知，第二段主要讲了技术悲观主义产生的原因。故选A。

2.推理判断题。根据第四段中Healthy skepticism means that these questions are settled by a broad debate, not by a group of technologists.可知健康的怀疑主义意味着这些问题是通过广泛的辩论来解决的，而不是由一群技术人员来解决的。由此可推知，如果应用得当，怀疑主义有助于技术的发展。故选C。

3.主旨大意题。根据第二段中Technology frees the forces of creative destruction, so it is only natural that it leads to anxiety: for any given technology its drawbacks sometimes seem to outweigh its benefits. When this happens with several technologies at once, as today, the result is a wider sense of techno-pessimism.可知技术解放了创造性破坏的力量，因此，它导致焦虑是很自然的：对于任何一种技术来说，它的缺点有时似乎超过了它的好处。当这种情况同时发生在几种技术上时，就像今天这样，其结果是一种更广泛的技术悲观感。结合文章主要就技术的进步导致悲观情绪的产生这一社会现象展开分析，说明了产生技术悲观的原因，和这种情绪的产生说明解决与技术相关的问题往往需要更多的技术。焦虑的真正根源并不是技术本身，而是人们对社会是否有能力举行这场辩论并提出好的答案的日益怀疑。故D选项“悲观主义与进步”符合文章标题。故选D。

4.推理判断题。分析文章结构可知，文章先是提出技术进步产生了技术悲观主义的论点，然后在此基础上提出两个论点，第一是这种悲观情绪可能是过度；第二是解决与技术相关的问题往往需要更多的技术。并且在第二个论点上再分出两个次要点，一是任何强大的技术都可以用来造福人类，也可以用来造福人类；二是技术冲突是采用重要新技术的必要步骤。最后文章得出结论：焦虑的真正根源并不是技术本身，而是人们对社会是否有能力举行这场辩论并提出好的答案的日益怀疑。由此可推知，A最符合文章中思想的发展。故选A。