2025年大學(xué)《大學(xué)英語》專業(yè)題庫——英語專業(yè)學(xué)生的思辨能力培養(yǎng)考試時間：______分鐘總分：______分姓名：______考試時間：120分鐘注意事項(xiàng)：1.請將所有答案寫在答題紙上，寫在試卷上無效。2.答題時請仔細(xì)閱讀題目要求，確保回答符合題目意圖。第一部分閱讀理解與批判性分析閱讀下面的文章，完成第1至4題。ThePerilsofUncheckedTechnologicalOptimismIntherelentlessmarchoftechnologicalprogress,thereoftenarisesachorusofoptimismthattendstoovershadowpotentialdownsides.Fromartificialintelligencetobiotechnology,newadvancementsarefrequentlyheraldedaspanaceasforhumanity'swoes,promisingefficiency,convenience,andevenutopia.Whiletechnologicalinnovationhasundoubtedlybroughtnumerousbenefits,anuncheckedoptimismcanbedangerous.Itrisksfosteringablindfaithintechnologythatignoresethicalconsiderations,socialconsequences,andtheinherentlimitationsofhumancontrol.Onemajorriskofuncheckedtechnologicaloptimismistheerosionofhumanagency.Asmachinesbecomemoresophisticatedandcapable,thereisatendencytocededecision-makingpowertothem,oftenundertheguiseofimprovingaccuracyorefficiency.Forinstance,algorithmicdecision-makingsystemsareincreasinglyusedinareasrangingfromhiringtocriminaljustice,yetthesesystemsarenotinfallible.Theycanperpetuatebiasespresentintheirtrainingdata,leadingtounfairanddiscriminatoryoutcomes.Furthermore,theincreasingautomationoftasksmayleadtoadeskillingoftheworkforce,reducinghumancontrolovercriticalprocessesandmakingindividualsmorevulnerabletosystemfailuresormaliciousattacks.Anotherconcernisthepotentialfortechnologytoexacerbatesocialinequalities.Whiletechnologistsoftenspeakofthedemocratizingpotentialoftheirinventions,therealityisthatnewtechnologiestendtobeaccessedandutilizedbythosewhoarealreadyprivileged.Thedigitaldivide,forexample,hasonlywidenedinrecentyears,leavinglargesegmentsofthepopulationbehind.Moreover,thehighcostofnewtechnologiescanmaketheminaccessibletomany,furtherentrenchingexistingsocialhierarchies.Inthisway,technology,farfrombeingaforceforequality,canbecomeatoolforreinforcingandevenamplifyingsocialstratification.Finally,uncheckedtechnologicaloptimismcanleadtoacomplacencyaboutthelong-termenvironmentalimpactofouractions.Whilesometechnologiesoffersolutionstoenvironmentalproblems,manyothersexacerbatethem.Therelentlesspursuitofeconomicgrowththroughtechnologicalmeansofteninvolvesunsustainableresourceconsumptionandpollution.Moreover,thefocusonshort-termgainscanobscurethelong-termconsequencesofouractions,leadingtoasituationwherewepayfortoday'sconveniencewithtomorrow'secologicaldisaster.Inconclusion,whiletechnologicalprogressoffersmanypotentialbenefits,itiscrucialtomaintainahealthyskepticismandcriticallyevaluatetheimplicationsofnewadvancements.Wemustresistthetemptationtoviewtechnologyasapanaceaandinsteadfocusondevelopingtechnologiesthatareethicallyresponsible,sociallyequitable,andenvironmentallysustainable.Onlythencanweensurethatourtechnologicalfutureisapositiveone.1.Theauthorarguesthattechnologicaloptimism,ifleftunchecked,canleadtoseveralnegativeconsequences.Identifyandbrieflydiscussthreeoftheseconsequences,drawingevidencefromthetext.2.Thetextsuggeststhattheincreasingautomationoftasksmayhaveunintendedconsequences.Explainhowautomationcouldpotentiallyerodehumanagency,usingexamplesfromthetextoryourownknowledge.3.Theauthorcriticizesthenotionthattechnologyinherentlydemocratizessociety.Discusstheevidenceprovidedinthetextthatsupportsthiscriticism,andexplainhowtheconceptofthe"digitaldivide"illustratesthispoint.4.Thefinalparagraphcallsforamorebalancedapproachtotechnologicaldevelopment.Whatspecificqualitiesshouldfuturetechnologiespossessaccordingtotheauthor,andwhyarethesequalitiesimportantforensuringapositivetechnologicalfuture?第二部分文本分析與論證評價閱讀下面的論述片段，完成第5至8題。Topic:TheRoleofSocialMediainShapingPublicOpinionSocialmediaplatformshavebecomeindispensibletoolsfordisseminatinginformationandfacilitatingcommunicationinthemodernworld.Theirabilitytoconnectindividualsacrossvastdistancesandenablerapidsharingofcontenthasfundamentallyalteredthelandscapeofpublicdiscourse.Whileproponentsarguethatsocialmediaempowerscitizensandpromotestransparency,criticscontendthatitoftenleadstothespreadofmisinformationandthepolarizationofpublicopinion.Thisessaywillarguethat,despiteitspotentialbenefits,socialmedia'snegativeimpactonpublicopinion,particularlythroughthecreationofechochambersandtheamplificationofextremeviewpoints,ultimatelyoutweighsitspositivecontributions.Oneofthemostsignificantwaysthatsocialmedianegativelyimpactspublicopinionisbycreatingechochambers.Algorithmiccurationontheseplatformstendstoshowuserscontentthatalignswiththeirpre-existingbeliefsandpreferences.Thisfilteringprocess,whileintendedtoenhanceuserexperience,resultsinindividualsbeingexposedprimarilytoinformationthatconfirmstheirbiases.Consequently,usersarelesslikelytoencounteropposingviewpoints,lesslikelytochallengetheirownassumptions,andmorelikelytoengageinhostileinteractionswiththosewhoholddifferentopinions.Thisreinforcementofexistingbeliefspreventsthedevelopmentofawell-roundedunderstandingofcomplexissuesandcontributestotheentrenchmentofideologicaldivisions.Furthermore,socialmediaplatformsfacilitatetherapidspreadofmisinformation,whichcansignificantlyinfluencepublicopinion.Theeasewithwhichfalseormisleadinginformationcanbesharedontheseplatforms,oftenaccompaniedbyemotionalappealsandcompellingnarratives,makesitdifficultforuserstodiscernfactfromfiction.Thisisparticularlyproblematicinanerawheretrustintraditionalmediaoutletshasdeclined.Asaresult,individualsmaybeswayedbyinaccurateinformation,makingpoorlyinformeddecisionsonissuesrangingfromhealthandpoliticstoeconomics.Theconsequencesofsuchmisinformationcanbefar-reaching,contributingtosocialunrest,politicalinstability,andtheerosionofdemocraticinstitutions.Whilesocialmediadoesofferopportunitiesforincreasedtransparencyandcitizenengagement,thesebenefitsareoftenoutweighedbythenegativeconsequencesoutlinedabove.Theabilitytoshareinformationandorganizeprotestscertainlyhasademocratizingpotential.However,theeasewithwhichfalseinformationcanspreadandthetendencyofplatformstocreateechochambersultimatelyunderminethesepositiveaspects.Inawell-functioningdemocracy,informedpublicdiscourseisessentialformakingsounddecisionsandholdingthoseinpoweraccountable.Socialmedia,initscurrentform,doeslittletopromotesuchdiscourseandinsteadcontributestoitsdegradation.5.Summarizethemainargumentoftheprovidedessay.6.Theessayclaimsthatsocialmediacreatesechochambers.Explainhowtheauthorusestheconceptofalgorithmiccurationtosupportthisclaim.Whatdoesthissuggestaboutthepotentiallong-termeffectsonusers'understandingoftheworld?7.Identifythecentralargumentinthethirdparagraph.Whatevidenceorexamplesdoestheauthorusetosupporttheclaimthatmisinformationspreadseasilyonsocialmediaandimpactspublicopinion?Howdoesthisrelatetothedeclineoftrustintraditionalmedia?8.Theessayconcludesthatwhilesocialmediahassomepositiveaspects,itsnegativeimpactsonpublicopinionoutweighthebenefits.Discusstheauthor'sfinalpointabouttherelationshipbetweensocialmedia,informeddiscourse,anddemocracy.Doyouagreewiththeauthor'sassessmentofsocialmedia'sroleinpublicopinionformation?Explainyourreasoning,drawingontheinformationpresentedintheessayandyourownknowledge.第三部分論證構(gòu)建與回應(yīng)假定你是一位評論員，針對以下觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行評論：“人工智能技術(shù)的飛速發(fā)展將最終取代人類藝術(shù)家，因?yàn)闄C(jī)器能夠以更高效、更標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的方式創(chuàng)作出看似優(yōu)秀的藝術(shù)作品?！闭堊珜懸黄s400字的評論，構(gòu)建你的論證，并回應(yīng)上述觀點(diǎn)。第四部分自我觀點(diǎn)闡述近年來，關(guān)于“人工智能是否會取代教師”的討論日益激烈。請結(jié)合你對該話題的理解，闡述你的個人觀點(diǎn)：你認(rèn)為人工智能將在多大程度上影響未來的教育？它更可能成為教師的輔助工具，還是替代者？請說明理由，并舉例說明你如何想象未來人工智能在教育領(lǐng)域的具體應(yīng)用。---結(jié)束試卷答案第一部分閱讀理解與批判性分析1.答案：*侵蝕人類agency（能動性）：不受約束的技術(shù)樂觀主義導(dǎo)致決策權(quán)向機(jī)器轉(zhuǎn)移（如算法在招聘和司法中的應(yīng)用），這可能導(dǎo)致不公平和歧視性結(jié)果（偏見），并減少勞動力技能，使個人更容易受到系統(tǒng)故障或網(wǎng)絡(luò)攻擊的影響。（解析：回答需涵蓋文章第一段提到的“侵蝕人類agency”，并結(jié)合文中“cedingdecision-makingpowertothem”、“perpetuatebiases”、“deskillingoftheworkforce”、“vulnerabletosystemfailuresormaliciousattacks”等關(guān)鍵信息。）*加劇社會不平等：新技術(shù)往往被已有特權(quán)者使用，導(dǎo)致數(shù)字鴻溝擴(kuò)大，高昂的成本使許多人無法接觸，從而強(qiáng)化甚至放大了社會階層分化。（解析：回答需對應(yīng)文章第二段的觀點(diǎn)，并結(jié)合“privileged”、“digitaldividehasonlywidened”、“highcost...inaccessible”、“reinforcingandevenamplifyingsocialstratification”等信息。）*忽視長期環(huán)境后果導(dǎo)致complacency（自滿）：對技術(shù)進(jìn)步的樂觀情緒可能導(dǎo)致對資源消耗和污染的忽視，專注于短期利益而忽視長期生態(tài)災(zāi)難的風(fēng)險。（解析：回答需基于文章第三段，并結(jié)合“complacencyaboutthelong-termenvironmentalimpact”、“unsustainableresourceconsumptionandpollution”、“short-termgainsobscurelong-termconsequences”等關(guān)鍵句。）2.答案：自動化通過將任務(wù)從人類手中接管，可能削弱人類掌握關(guān)鍵過程的能力，減少對系統(tǒng)的理解和控制，從而使個人在面對技術(shù)故障、系統(tǒng)錯誤或惡意攻擊時更加脆弱和被動。例如，完全依賴自動駕駛汽車可能使駕駛者在緊急情況下失去必要的技能和反應(yīng)能力。（解析：回答需抓住文章第一段關(guān)于“deskillingoftheworkforce,reducinghumancontrol”的核心觀點(diǎn)，并解釋其后果——脆弱性。例子可以是任何與自動化相關(guān)的領(lǐng)域，只要能說明失去控制或技能的后果即可。）3.答案：文章通過指出新技術(shù)往往被特權(quán)階層使用且成本高昂來批判其民主化潛力。例如，“technologistsoftenspeakofthedemocratizingpotentialoftheirinventions”與后面描述的現(xiàn)實(shí)形成對比，“thedigitaldividehasonlywidened...leavinglargesegmentsofthepopulationbehind”以及“thehighcostofnewtechnologiescanmaketheminaccessibletomany,furtherentrenchingexistingsocialhierarchies”。數(shù)字鴻溝的擴(kuò)大precisely（精確地）說明了技術(shù)未能惠及所有人，反而可能加劇了社會不平等，而非實(shí)現(xiàn)民主化。（解析：回答需先點(diǎn)明文章批判的具體方面（成本、可及性、加劇不平等），然后引用支持這些觀點(diǎn)的文本證據(jù)（如引號內(nèi)的內(nèi)容）。最后，要明確解釋“digitaldivide”如何具體體現(xiàn)“非民主化”的論點(diǎn)。）4.答案：根據(jù)作者，未來的技術(shù)應(yīng)具備倫理責(zé)任（ethicallyresponsible）、社會公平（sociallyequitable）和環(huán)境可持續(xù)性（environmentallysustainable）。這些品質(zhì)重要，因?yàn)樗鼈兡艽_保技術(shù)發(fā)展不會以犧牲人類福祉、社會公平或地球健康為代價，從而真正服務(wù)于人類的長期利益，避免過去因無節(jié)制發(fā)展而帶來的負(fù)面后果。（解析：直接從文章最后一段提取“ethicallyresponsible,sociallyequitable,andenvironmentallysustainable”作為答案。解析部分則解釋了為何這些品質(zhì)是重要的——確保利益，避免負(fù)面后果，與開頭形成呼應(yīng)。）第二部分文本分析與論證評價5.答案：本文的主要論點(diǎn)是，盡管社交媒體具有一些積極影響，但它在塑造公共輿論方面產(chǎn)生的負(fù)面影響（特別是通過創(chuàng)造回聲室和放大極端觀點(diǎn)）最終大于其正面貢獻(xiàn)。（解析：概括文章首段或末段的中心論點(diǎn)，抓住“negativeimpactsoutweighpositivecontributions”這一核心權(quán)衡關(guān)系。）6.答案：作者認(rèn)為，社交媒體的算法根據(jù)用戶的偏好篩選內(nèi)容，展示與其既有信念一致的信息，從而創(chuàng)造了回聲室。這導(dǎo)致用戶較少接觸不同觀點(diǎn)，難以挑戰(zhàn)自身假設(shè)，并可能加劇與持有不同意見者的敵意互動。這表明算法強(qiáng)化了現(xiàn)有信念，可能阻礙用戶對復(fù)雜問題的全面理解，并加深意識形態(tài)分歧。（解析：解釋算法如何工作（基于偏好篩選），以及由此產(chǎn)生的結(jié)果（回聲室、缺乏多樣性、觀點(diǎn)極化）。解析需涵蓋文中“algorithmiccuration”、“pre-existingbeliefs”、“filteringprocess”、“hostileinteractions”、“ideologicaldivisions”等概念，并闡述其對用戶理解的潛在長期影響。）7.答案：第三段的中心論點(diǎn)是，虛假信息在社交媒體上傳播迅速，并影響公共輿論。作者指出，由于社交媒體易于分享情感化且具說服力的錯誤信息，用戶難以辨別真?zhèn)?，尤其是在信任傳統(tǒng)媒體下降的背景下。這導(dǎo)致人們可能基于不準(zhǔn)確信息做出決定，引發(fā)社會動蕩、政治不穩(wěn)定和民主制度的侵蝕。（解析：明確指出第三段的核心主張（信息傳播快，影響大