|
|
阅读模拟题（4）
When you think of the tremendous technological progress we have made, it’s
amazing how little we have developed in other respects. We may speak
contemptuously of the poor old Romans because they relished the orgies of
slaughter that went on in their arenas. We may despise them because they mistook
these goings on for entertainment. We may forgive them condescendingly because
they lived 2000 years ago and obviously knew no better. But are our feelings of
superiority really justified? Are we any less blood-thirsty? Why do boxing
matches, for instance, attract such universal interest? Don’t the spectators who
attend them hope they will see some violence? Human beings remains as
bloodthirsty as ever they were. The only difference between ourselves and the
Romans is that while they were honest enough to admit that they enjoyed watching
hungey lions tearing people apart and eating them alive, we find all sorts of
sophisticated arguments to defend sports which should have been banned long age;
sports which are quite as barbarous as, say, public hangings or bearbaiting.
It really is incredible that in this day and age we should still allow
hunting or bull-fighting, that we should be prepared to sit back and watch two
men batter each other to pulp in a boxing ring, that we should be relatively
unmoved by the sight of one or a number of racing cars crashing and bursting
into flames. Let us not deceive ourselves. Any talk of ‘the sporting spirit’ is
sheer hypocrisy. People take part in violent sports because of the high rewards
they bring. Spectators are willing to pay vast sums of money to see violence. A
world heavyweight championship match, for instance, is front page news. Millions
of people are disappointed if a big fight is over in two rounds instead of
fifteen. They feel disappointment because they have been deprived of the
exquisite pleasure of witnessing prolonged torture and violence.
Why should we ban violent sports if people enjoy them so much? You may well
ask. The answer is simple: they are uncivilized. For centuries man has been
trying to improve himself spiritually and emotionally - admittedly with little
success. But at least we no longer tolerate the sight madmen cooped up in cages,
or public floggings of any of the countless other barbaric practices which were
common in the past. Prisons are no longer the grim forbidding places they used
to be. Social welfare systems are in operation in many parts of the world. Big
efforts are being made to distribute wealth fairly. These changes have come
about not because human beings have suddenly and unaccountably improved, but
because positive steps were taken to change the law. The law is the biggest
instrument of social change that we have and it may exert great civilizing
influence. If we banned dangerous and violent sports, we would be moving one
step further to improving mankind. We would recognize that violence is degrading
and unworthy of human beings.
1. It can be inferred from the passage that the author’s opinion of
nowadays’ human beings is
A. not very high. B. high.
C. contemptuous. D. critical.
2. The main idea of this passage is
A. vicious and dangerous sports should be banned by law.
B. people are willing to pay vast sums money to see violence.
C. to compare two different attitudes towards dangerous sports.
D. people are bloodthirsty in sports.
3. That the author mentions the old Romans is
A. To compare the old Romans with today’s people.
B. to give an example.
C. to show human beings in the past know nothing better.
D. to indicate human beings are used to bloodthirsty.
4. How many dangerous sports does the author mention in this passage?
A. Three. B. Five.
C. Six. D. Seven.
5. The purpose of the author in writing this passage is
A. that, by banning the violent sports, we human beings can improve our
selves.
B. that, by banning the dangerous sports, we can improve the law.
C. that we must take positive steps to improve social welfare system.
D. to show law is the main instrument of social change.
参考答案：A A D B A |
|
发表于 2018-8-18 14:25:38