2012年考研英语真题注释答案解析

1、2012年考研英语真题注释+答案解析（中英文对照版）1、 完型填空 文章大意：纽约时报道德、政治与法律法律相对于政治的独立性，法官所需具备的道德及行为准则。【内容提要】 本文围绕法官的所作所为，讲述了该如何让法院看起来更具合法性：法官要约束自己的行为，使自己的所作所为符合行为道德规范。The ethical judgments of the Supreme Court justices have become an important issue recently. The court cannot _1_ maintain its legitimacy as guardian of the

2、rule of law _2_ when justices behave like politicians. Yet, in several instances, justices acted in ways that _3_weakened the courts reputation for being independent and impartial.介绍背景，引出话题：最高法院法官的道德判断。Justice Antonin Scalia, for example, appeared at political events. That kind of activity makes it

3、less likely that the courts decisions will be _4_accepted as impartial judgments. Part of the problem is that the justices are not _5_bound by an ethics code. At the very least, the court should make itself _6_subject to the code of conduct that _7_applies to the rest of the federal judiciary.举例，分析原

4、因：法院缺少道德规范的约束。This and other similar cases _8_raise the question of whether there is still a _9_line between the court and politics.The framers of the Constitution envisioned law _10_as having authority apart from politics. They gave justices permanent positions _11_so they would be free to _12_upse

5、t those in power and have no need to _13_cultivate political support. Our legal system was designed to set law apart from politics precisely because they are so closely _14_tied.Constitutional law is political because it results from choices rooted in fundamental social _15_concepts like liberty and

6、 property. When the court deals with social policy decisions, the law it _16_shapes is inescapably political-which is why decisions split along ideological lines are so easily _17_dismissed as unjust.深入分析法律与政治之间的关系。阐明法律必须独立于政治之外的原因。The justices must _18_ address doubts about the courts legitimacy by

7、 making themselves _19_accountable to the code of conduct. That would make rulings more likely to be seen as separate from politics and, _20_as a result, convincing as law.总结全文，提出解决办法：法官应该遵守行为准则。 最近，最高法院法官的道德判断成为了至关重要的事情。法官所作所为犹如政客一般，法院就不能维持自己作为法律、法条维护者的合法性。然而在几宗案例中，法官的所作所为却削弱了法院独立、公平的声望。 例如，法官Anton

8、in Scalia出席政治活动。此类活动使人们很有可能认为法院的决定是不公平的判断。此问题的部分原因在于法官并不受道德规范的约束。至少，法院应该使自己遵守适用于联邦司法部其他部门的行为准则。 这个以及其他相似的案例引发了这样一个问题：法院和政治之间是否有界线。宪法的建构者设想法律远离政治，拥有权威。他们给了法官享用一生的地位，这样他们就可以推翻位高权重之人而不受限制，他们就没有必要培养政治扶持。我们的法制体系如此设置是为了把法律和政治分开，就是因为这两者关系紧密。宪法具有政治特点，选择根植于像自由、财产等最基本的社会概念中，而宪法就来源于此。法院处理社会政策决策问题时，法律本身就认为自己与政治

9、逃不开关系，因此决策就偏离了思想路线，而这些路线很容易被认为是不公正的而不予考虑。法官应该为自己的行为负责，通过这一方式处理对法院合法性的质疑。这样将使得统治更有可能看起来与政治分离，结果会让人信服这就是法律。2、 阅读理解Text 1关键词：peer pressure来自同辈的压力；social cure社会治疗Come on Everybodys doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, is what most of us think of when we hear the words peer

10、 pressure. It usually leads to no good-drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club, Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in which organizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help indiv

11、iduals improve their lives and possibly the word.Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of example of the social cure in action: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prev

12、ention initiative known as LoveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers.The idea seems promising，and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they de

13、monstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology.” Dare to be different, please dont smoke!” pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers-teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health advocates ought to take a

14、page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure.But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful.

15、The most glaring flaw of the social cure as its presented here is that it doesnt work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evidence that the LoveLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed.Theres no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous

16、 influence on our behavior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health habits-as well as negative ones-spread through networks of friends via social communication. This is a subtle form of peer pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day.Far less certain, however, i

17、s how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous directions. Its like the teacher who breaks up the troublemakers in the back row by pairing them with better-behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And thats the problem with a so

18、cial cure engineered from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own friends. 赶快，每个人都在做!当我们听到“来自同辈的压力”这个短语时，大部分人都会想到这个广为流传的，半是邀请、半是强迫的信息。一般来讲指的都不是好事酗酒，吸毒，随意的性行为。但是Tina Rosenberg在新书Join the Club中辩护到，通过社会治疗这一方式，来自同辈的压力也可以成为正面积极的力量。在这个社会治疗中，各个机构和行政人员利用团队力量帮助个人改善他们的生活，这样

19、还有可能改善整个世界。普利策奖获得者Rosenberg提供了大量正在进行中的社会治疗的例子：在南卡罗来纳，州资助的反对吸烟活动名叫Rage Against the Haze，它打算让吸烟不再流行。在南非，名为LoveLife的预防HIV感染的活动招募年轻人在他们的同龄人中提倡安全性行为。这一想法似乎充满希望，Rosenberg是个有洞察力的观察着。她准确地批评了很多公共卫生活动的不完善：这些活动没有动员同龄人形成健康的习惯，对青少年心理的理解有严重误区。其中一个广告牌活动致力于在青少年中减少抽烟量，上面写着：“勇于特立独行，请不要抽烟!”而青少年，渴望的就是和他人保持一致。Rosenberg争

20、论到，公共卫生提倡者应该向广告商学习，他们能如此熟练地运用来自同辈的压力。这一论点很具说服力。但是在社会治疗的整体效力上，Rosenberg并不太具说服力。Join the Club里面有太多毫不相关的细节，促使来自同辈的压力如此强大的社会、生物因素却剖析地不够。正如现在所呈现的，社会治疗最引人注目的缺陷是：如果持续时间很久，它的效果并不好。一旦州砍掉资金，Rage Against the Haze就失败了。证据显示，LoveLife项目所产生的长远变化是有限的，而且混杂其他因素。同龄人给我们的行为带来了巨大的影响，这是毫无疑问的。大量刚刚出炉的研究表明，正面积极的健康习惯 还有负面消极的 通

21、过社会交流在朋友网中流传。这是来自同辈的压力更为微妙的形式：我们无意识地模仿每天看到的行为。专家和政府人员该如何成功地选择同龄人团队并引导他们的行为朝着有德行的方向发展，这远远不能确定。这就像老师把后排制造麻烦的学生和表现良好的学生放在一起，以此来解散麻烦制造者团队，这样的技巧从不真正起作用。从外部因素出发策划的社会治疗也有这一问题：在真实世界中，就像在学校，我们坚持选择自己的朋友。Text 2关键词：deal,commitment,promise承诺；nuclear power核能源A deal is a deal-except, apparently ,when Entergy is in

22、volved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict nuclear regulations.Instead, the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challe

23、nge the constitutionality of Vermonts rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. Its a stunning move.The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermonts only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in V

24、ernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plants license be subject to Vermont legislatures approval. Then, too, the com

25、pany went along.Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didnt foresee what would happen next. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 207 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions abou

26、t both Vermont Yankees safety and Entergys management especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergys behavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid

27、 because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power over nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will o

28、ffer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point.The company seems to have concluded that its rep

29、utation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has noting left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a public trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging

30、 to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the companys application, it should keep it mind what promises from Entergy are worth. 承诺就是承诺 很明显，当Entergy公司牵涉在内的话就除外。这个公司是新英格兰主要的能源供应商，

31、它曾承诺要一直遵守严格的核能源规范条例，但上周它宣布要违背这个承诺，理所当然地，它激起了佛蒙特州的义愤。这个公司确实已做了它曾承诺的永远不会做的事情：在联邦法庭上挑战佛蒙特州条例的合宪性，拼命努力来保证佛蒙特州美国核能源工厂的正常运行。这一举动令人震惊。2002年公司购买了佛蒙特州唯一的核能源工厂，即位于弗农古老的核反应堆。自此，冲突开始浮出水面。公司同意2012年之后都会寻求本州调整者的许可，作为接受本州同意销售的条件。2006年，佛蒙特更进一步，要求延长这一核工厂的许可证必须得到佛蒙特州立法机关的许可。公司也同意了。Entergy可能不想真正地遵守这些承诺，或者简单来说它并没有预见将要发生

32、的事情。一系列事故，如207冷却塔部分坍塌，发现地下管道系统漏泄，这些都引发了关于佛蒙特州美国人的安全及Entergy公司经营等方面的严重问题 尤其在公司关于管道问题做了令人误解的声明之后。因Entergy的所作所为而震怒，去年佛蒙特州参议院以26:4的选票结果，反对允许延长它的许可证。现在公司突然宣布，因2006法规2002协议无效，只有联邦政府才有权调控核事件。这一案例中的法律问题模糊不清：最高法院曾宣布各州确实对核能源有调控权力，但法律学者认为佛蒙特案件将验证这些权力到底有多大。当然，如果每一个州都设定自己的法律条例，由此而导致的混乱确实能引起合理的关注。但是如果Entergy信守诺言，

33、那这场争论就偏离主题了。公司似乎下了这样的论断：它在佛蒙特的声望已被损害，即使与佛蒙特州作战也没什么好失去的。但是这有一定的后果。允许经营核工厂体现了公众的信任。在美国Entergy还经营了其他11个反应堆，包括普利茅斯的Pilgrim核电站。公司承诺安全经营Pilgrim，已向联邦提出申请，要求再经营20年。但是当核管理委员会审查了公司的申请时，应该记住Entergy的承诺能有什么样的价值。Text 3关键词：discovery claim发现声明In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world ar

34、e waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life

35、 experience. Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly

36、staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researchers me, here, now becomes the communitys anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objectiv

37、e knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make disc

38、overies; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works

39、it through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individuals discovery claim into the communitys credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific w

40、ork tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible di

41、scoveries that appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “seeing what ev

42、erybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility “happens” to a d

43、iscovery claim a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. “We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each others reasoning and each others conceptions of reason.” 如何做科研的理想版本是，世界上的事实等着客观的研究人员来观察和收集，这些研究人员使用科学方法展开自己的工作。但是在每天的实践中，发现的

44、道路常常是模糊复杂的。我们的目标是客观，但我们不能脱离自己独特生活经历的环境。先前的知识和兴趣影响着我们的经历，影响着我们对自己经历的看法，影响着我们随后采取的行动。误释、错误、自我欺骗的可能性到处存在。因此，发现声明应该被认为是原生科学。和用木桩来界定探矿区域相似，这些声明有很多潜在的可能性。但是从发现声明转化为成熟的发现需要集体仔细的核查和认可。这就是可靠性过程，通过这一过程，单个研究人员此时此地变成了团体中在任何地方、任何时间内的任何一个人。客观知识是目标，而并不是出发点。一旦发现声明公开，发现者要接受学术认可。但是，和探矿界限不同，团体掌控接下来发生的事情。在科研团体复杂的社会结构中，

45、研究人员去发现;通过控制出版，编辑和审核人员充当门卫的功能;其他科学家利用新的发现来实现自己的目标;最后，公众(包括其他科学家)接受新发现，随之而来的有可能是新科技。当发现声明通过团体审核时，关于科学与相关技术的观点，不管是共有的，还是彼此抵触的，会相互沟通交流，这样个人的发现声明就转化为团体可靠的声明。在这个可靠性过程中，存在着两个矛盾。第一，科研工作倾向于集中在普及知识的某些方面，而这些方面被看做是不完整或是不正确的。复制和确认已经知道和认可的知识，得到的回报很少。目标是新科研，并非再研究。新近发表的发现声明和可靠的发现看起来很重要，而且具有说服力，它们要公开接受未来研究人员的挑战、可能的

46、修改、或反驳，这一点并不奇怪。第二，新奇本身经常驱使人们不去相信。诺贝尔获得者生理学家AzentGyorgyi曾经把发现描述为“看到每个人都看到的东西，想到没有人想到的东西”。但是，想到其他人没有想到的东西，并告诉其他人他们错过的东西，可能改变不了他们的看法。有时候，需要很多年才能让让人接受并欣赏真正新奇的发现。最后，可靠性“出现在”发现声明中 这个过程和哲学家Annette Baier描述的大脑的共性相一致。“我们共同推理，挑战、修改、完善彼此的推理和彼此对于推理的认知”。Text 4关键词：public-sector unionsmembership,thriving reasons,in

47、fluence,wage，reform，problem公共部门工会的会员，盛行原因，影响，工资，改革,问题If the trade unionist Jimmy Hoffa were alive today, he would probably represent civil servant. When Hoffas Teamsters were in their prime in 1960, only one in ten American government workers belonged to a union; now 36% do. In 2009 the number of un

48、ionists in Americas public sector passed that of their fellow members in the private sector. In Britain, more than half of public-sector workers but only about 15% of private-sector ones are unionized.There are three reasons for the public-sector unions thriving. First, they can shut things down wit

49、hout suffering much in the way of consequences. Second, they are mostly bright and well-educated. A quarter of Americas public-sector workers have a university degree. Third, they now dominate left-of-centre politics. Some of their ties go back a long way. Britains Labor Party, as its name implies,

50、has long been associated with trade unionism. Its current leader, Ed Miliband, owes his position to votes from public-sector unions.At the state level their influence can be even more fearsome. Mark Baldassare of the Public Policy Institute of California points out that much of the states budget is

51、patrolled by unions. The teachers unions keep an eye on schools, the CCPOA on prisons and a variety of labor groups on health care.In many rich countries average wages in the state sector are higher than in the private one. But the real gains come in benefits and work practices. Politicians have rep

52、eatedly “backloaded” public-sector pay deals, keeping the pay increases modest but adding to holidays and especially pensions that are already generous.Reform has been vigorously opposed, perhaps most egregiously in education, where charter schools, academies and merit pay all faced drawn-out battle

53、s. Even though there is plenty of evidence that the quality of the teachers is the most important variable, teachers unions have fought against getting rid of bad ones and promoting good ones.As the cost to everyone else has become clearer, politicians have begun to clamp down. In Wisconsin the unio

54、ns have rallied thousands of supporters against Scott Walker, the hardline Republican governor. But many within the public sector suffer under the current system, too.John Donahue at Harvards Kennedy School points out that the norms of culture in Western civil services suit those who want to stay pu

55、t but is bad for high achievers. The only American public-sector workers who earn well above $250,000 a year are university sports coaches and the president of the United States. Bankers fat pay packets have attracted much criticism, but a public-sector system that does not reward high achievers may

56、 be a much bigger problem for America. 如果工会会员Jimmy Hoffa今天还活着，他也许会是公务员的代表。1960年Hoffa的组织Teamsters处于全盛时期，美国政府工作人员中只有十分之一的人属于某一个公会;现在这个比率是36%。2009年任职于美国公共部门的工会会员人数超过了任职于私营部门的工会会员人数。在英国，在公共部门的工作人员中半数以上参加了工会;而私营部门的工作人员只有大约15%的人参加了工会组织。公共部门工会如此盛行的原因有三个。第一，他们能够脱身，而不用承担太多后果。第二，他们中间大部分人聪明，受过良好教育。美国公共部门的工作人员中

57、四分之一的人有大学学位。第三，他们现在在政治中的左翼力量中占主导地位。其中有些关系有很长的历史。正如其名，英国工党和工会组织的关系由来已久。其现任领导Miliband把自己得到的位置归功于来自公共部门工会组织的投票。从州范围来看，他们的影响更为吓人。加利福尼亚州公共政策研究院的Mark Baldassare指出，本州大部分预算都由工会来检查。教师工会关注学校，加利福尼亚感化治安官协会关心监狱，各型各色的劳工团体关注卫生保健。在很多富裕国家，公共部门的平均工资要高于私营部门的平均工资。但是真正的收入来源于利润和工作表现。政客已不停地加强公共部门的工资待遇，工资涨幅不大，但却加长本来就不少的假期，

58、特别是增加本来就很多的养老保险金。对于变革的反对一直都很强烈，在教育方面最为惊人。在教育方面，契约学校、专科学校、绩效奖都面临着持久战。尽管有大量证据表明教师的质量是最重要的变量，但教师工会反对解雇不好的教师，提升好教师。对其他每个人的支出变得更为清晰，政客开始强制执行。在威斯康辛州，工会集结了成千上万的支持者，反对走强硬路线的州长，即共和党人Scott Walker。但很多任职于公共部门的工作人员也在目前的体制下受罪。哈佛肯尼迪学院的John Donahue指出，西方公务员系统的文化准则适合这些想留在原地过安逸生活的人们，但并不适合那些表现好的人们。任职于美国公共部门的工作人员中，只有大学体育教练和美国总统每年的收入远远高于250,000美元。银行的高收入招致了很多批评，但对于美国来讲，在公共部门体制中，没有给表现好的工作人员足够的回报可能会成为更为严重的问题。3、 新题型（选择排序）文章大意：新科学家2011.7.5电脑如何治愈文化糖尿病人们一直以来将电脑看做一个下载机器，很少进行创造；希望人们多通过网络上传有价值的文件。 Think of those fleeting moments when you look out of an aerop