increa是什么意思英语真题阅读理解试题及名师解析（22）
Americans today don’t place a very high value on intellect. Our
heroes are athletes, entertainers, and entrepreneurs, not scholars.
Even our schools are where we nd our children to get a practical
老罗英语education-not to pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge.
Symptoms of pervasive anti-intellectualism in our schools aren’t
difficult to find.
“Schools have always been in a society where practical is more
important than intellectual,” says education writer Diane Ravitch.
“Schools could be a counterbalance.” Ravitch’s latest bock, Left
Back: A Century of Failed School Reforms, traces the roots of
anti-intellectualism in our schools, concluding they are anything
but a counterbalance to the American distaste for intellectual
pursuits.
But they could and should be. Encouraging kids to reject the
life of the mind leaves them vulnerable to exploitation andtravelogue
control. Without the ability to think critically, to defend their
ideas and understand the ideas of others, they cannot fully
participate in our democracy. Continuing along this path, says
writer Earl Shorris,“We will become a cond-rate country. We will
have a less civil society.”
“Intellect is rented as a form of power or privilege,”writes
葫芦丝培训
historian and professor Richard Hofstadter in Anti-Intellectualism
in American Life, a Pulitzer Prize winning book on the roots of
anti-intellectualism in US politics, religion, and education. From
the beginning of our history, says Hofstadter, our democratic and
happy new year to youpopulist urges have driven us to reject anything that smells of
elitism. Practicality, common n, and native intelligence have
been considered more noble qualities than anything you could learn
from a book.
Ralph Waldo Emerson and other Transcendentalist philosophers
broilthought schooling and rigorous book learning put unnatural
restraints on children: “We are shut up in schools and college
recitation rooms for 10 or 15 years and come out at last with a
bellyful of words and do not know a thing.”Mark Twain’s Huckleberry
Finn exemplified American anti-intellectualism. Its hero avoids
being civilized-going to school and learning to read-so he can
prerve his innate goodness.
Intellect, according to Hofstadter, is different from native
intelligence, a quality we reluctantly admire. Intellect is the
critical, creative, and contemplative side of the mind.
Intelligence eks to grasp, manipulate, re-order, and adjust,
while intellect examines, ponders, wonders, theorizes, criticizes
and imagines.
School remains a place where intellect is mistrusted.
Hofstadter says our country’s educational system is in the grips of
people who “joyfully and militantly proclaim their hostility to
intellect and their eagerness to identify with children who show
the least intellectual promi.”
36. What do American parents expect their children to acq
uire
in school?
[A] The habit of thinking independently.
[B] Profound knowledge of the world.
[C] Practical abilities for future career.
[D] The confidence in intellectual pursuits.
37. We can learn from the text that Americans have a history
of
[A] undervaluing intellect.
[B] favoring intellectualism.
[C] supporting school reform.
[D] suppressing native intelligence.
38. The views of Ravish and Emerson on schooling are
[A] identical.[B] similar. [C] complementary.[D] opposite.
39. Emerson, according to the text, is probably
[A] a pioneer of education reform.[B] an opponent of
intellectualism.
[C] a scholar in favor of intellect. [D] an advocate of
regular schooling.
40. What does the author think of intellect?
[A] It is cond to intelligence.[B] It evolves from common
n.
[C] It is to be pursued. [D] It underlies power.
名师解析
36. What do American parents expect their children to acquire
in school?
美国的父母期望他们的孩子在学校里面学到什么?
[A] The habit of thinking
independently. 独立思考的习惯。.
[B] Profound knowledge of the world.
深厚的世界知识。.
[C] Practical abilities for future
career. 从事未来职业的实用技能。
[D] The confidence in intellectual
pursuits. 追求学识的信心。
【答案】C
【考点】事实细节题。
【分析】父母对孩子的期望这一点可以从第一段中找到“即使是学校也只是我们送孩子去接受实用教
育的地方，而不是让他们为了知识而去追求知识的地方。”至此，答案选项[C]一目了然。而选项[B]显然错误。选项[A]这个干扰项是出题人故意拿出一个本身没有问题，但是不适合本处的说法来干扰考生。考生一定要警惕先入为主的思维模式，在做阅读理解的时候，不能按照自己的直觉和知识瞎猜，一定要以原文为根据。选项[D]显然也是不符合家长的期望的。
37. We can learn from the text that Americans have a history
of
从原文中我们可以得知美国的历史历来是
[A] undervaluing intellect. 贬低学识。
[B] favoring intellectualism.
赞成学识至上论。.
[C] supporting school reform.
支持学校改革。
[D] suppressing native intelligence. pilot是什么意思
压制天分。
【答案】A
【考点】事实细节题。
【分析】第四段“霍夫斯塔特说：自我们的历史之初，我们对民主化和大众化的渴望就驱使我们排斥任何带有精英优越论味道的东西。实用性、常识以及天分这些素质一直被视作比可以从书本里学得的任何东西都高贵。”在这里，我们可以把精英优越论味道的东西以及书本里面学到的东西等同于学识，而实用性、常识以及天分这
些素质要比学识来得“高贵”，也就是说，正确答案是选项[A]。选项[B]是与原文意思相反，选项[C]“支持学校改革”在文中找不到出处，选项[D]与霍夫斯塔特的描述也截然相反。
38. The views of Ravish and Emerson on schooling are
Ravitch and Emerson 对学校的看法是insurance是什么意思
[A] identical.
相同的。
[B] similar. 类似的。
[C] complementary.
互补的。
[D] opposite. 相反的。
【答案】D
【考点】事实细节题。
【分析】我们需要在寻找到“Ravitch and
Emerson”二人对学校的看法后再将二人的意见进行一番比较，然后得出二人意见的异同。“Ravitch”的意见我们从第二段中可以找到，“Diane
Ravitch说：‘学校始终处于实用重于学识的社会之中。’”“学校本来可以是一种抵消的力量。”“Ravitch”最新著作《落后：失败的学校改革的一个世纪》探索学校里反学识至上论的根源，书中
的结论是：“美国学校绝对没有抵制美国人对学识追求的厌恶。”从本段可以看出，“Ravitch”批评学校没有起到抵制美国人对学识追求的厌恶的作用，即认为学校应该追求学识。而“Emerson”的意见可以在第五段中找到，他和其他一些先验主义哲学家认为学校教育和严格的书本学习限制了孩子们的天性。“我们被关在中小学和大学的朗诵室里十年或十五年，最后出来满肚子墨水，却啥都不懂。”本段说明爱默生认为学校压制人的天性，追求学识的学校是不正确的。因此可以判定：二人意见刚好相反。
39. Emerson, according to the text, is probably
根据本文, Emerson可能是一位
[A] a pioneer of education reform.
教育改革的先驱。
[B] an opponent of intellectualism. 学识主义的反对者。
[C] a scholar in favor of intellect.
赞成学识的学者。
[D] an advocate of regular schooling.
正规学校教育的倡导者。
【答案】B
【考点】推断题。
【分析】从某人的观点推断出某个人的立场是最常见的考题，上题中已经提到过爱默生的观点，即“学校教育和严格的书本学习限制了孩子们的天性”，也就是说，他是反对学识主义的，选择[B]也就否定了[C]。一个反对学识教育的人，不可能是正规学校教育的倡导者，所以选项[D]也是不正确的。而选项[A]教育改革的先驱这一点在文中都找不到依据。
40. What does the author think of intellect?
rand 本文作者怎么看待才智?
[A] It is cond to
intelligence.
它没有智力重要。
[B] It evolves from common n.
它从常识发展而来。
[C] It is to be
pursued.
它是必须被人们追求的东西。
[D] It underlies
power.
它是权利的基础。
【答案】C
【考点】作者观点题。
【分析】作者观点题通常只有在通篇读完才能够得出。第一段作者说今天的美国人不很看重“intellect”，第二段引用教育学作家“Diane
Ravitch”的观点来说明这一点，第三段作者表明自己的态度：“鼓励孩子们排斥精神生活使得他们极易被利用和控制。如果不能批判地思考、不能捍卫自己的思想、不能理解他人的思想，他们就不能充分地参与我们的民主”。而且引用作家“Earl
Shorris”的话来说明如果不这么做，国家将“沦为二流国家”。至此，我们可以看出，作者是支持“intellect”的。作者本人并没有比较“intellect”和“intelligence”谁优谁劣，所以[A]可以被排除。至于常识和权利，文章中虽然提到了，但是并没有对它们进行探讨。
难句解析：
1. Even our schools are where we nd our children to get a
practical education-not to pursue knowledge for the sake of
knowledge.
【结构分析】本句是主系表结构。主语为“our schools”，表语从句为“where we nd our
children to get a practical education-not to pursue knowledge for
the sake of knowledge”，在表语从句中，破折号后面的内容是补充说明前面从句中的目的状语的。
2. Encouraging kids to reject the life of the mind leaves them
vulnerable to exploitation and control.
【结构分析】本句是简单句。主语由动名词短语“encouraging kids to reject the life of
the mind”充当，“vulnerable to exploitation and
control”是宾语“them”的补语。
3. Hofstadter says our country’s educational system is in the
grips of people who“joyfully and militantly proclaim their
hostility to intellect and their eagerness to identify with
children who show the least intellectual promi.”
【结构分析】本句主句为“Hofstadter says”。宾语从句是主系表结构，其主语是“our country’s
educational system”，在表语中存在一个定语从句修饰“people”。
全文翻译：
latitude 今天的美国人不很看重才智。我们的英雄不是学者，而是运动员、演艺名星和企业家。即使是学校也只是我们送孩子去接受实用教育的地方，而不是让他们为了知识而去追求知识的地方。学校里也不难发现盛行的反才智主义的表现。
“学校始终处于实用性重于才智性的社会之中，”教育学作家戴恩·瑞维兹说，“学校可以是一种抵消的力量。”瑞维兹最新著作《落后：学校改革失败的一世纪》探索学校里反才智主义倾向的根源，书中的结论是：美国学校绝对没有抵制美国人对才智追求的厌恶。
但学校是能够并应该做到这一点的。鼓励孩子们排斥精神生活使得他们极易被剥削和控制。不能批判地
思考、捍卫自己的思想、理解他人的观点，他们就不能充分地参与我们的民主。沿着这条路线发展下去，作家厄尔·少瑞斯说，“我们将沦为二流国家。我们的社会将不再那么文明。”
历史学家兼教授理查德·霍夫斯塔特在《美国生活中的反学识主义》中写道：“才智被人们看作一种权利或特权而遭厌恶。”该书探讨美国政治、宗教和教育中的反才智主义的根源，曾获普利策奖。霍夫斯塔特说，自我们的历史之初，我们对民主化和大众化的渴望就驱使我们排斥任何带有精英优越论味道的东西。实用性、常识以及天分这些素质一直被视作比可以从书本里学得的任何东西都高贵。
拉尔夫·瓦尔多·爱默生和其他一些先验主义哲学家认为学校教育和严格的书本学习限制了孩子们的天性。“我们被关在中小学和大学的朗诵室里十年或十五年，最后出来满肚子墨水，却啥都不懂。”马克·吐温的小说《哈克弗恩历险记》即是美国反才智主义的例证。该书的主人公逃避教化--不上学认字--因此他才得以保住善良的天性。
按照霍夫斯塔特的观点，才智不同于天分，天分是一种我们不太情愿去赞赏的品质。才智是精神世界中的批评性、创造性和沉思性的一面。天分寻求的是掌握、控制、重组和调节，而才智是审视、思考、质疑、归纳、批判和想象。
如今学校仍然是才智备受怀疑的地方。霍夫斯塔特说，掌握我们国家教育体系的人“沾沾自喜地、霸气十足地公然宣称敌视才智，迫不及待地认同那些才智发展最差的孩子。”
