单项选择题

One of the questions that is coming into focus as we face growing scarcity of resources of many kinds in the world is how to divide limited resources among countries. In the international development community, the conventional wisdom has been that the 2 billion people living in poor countries could never expect to reach the standard of living that most of us in North America enjoy, simply because the world does not contain enough iron ore, protein, petroleum, and so on. At the same time, we in the United States have continued to pursue superaffluence as though there were no limits on how much we could consume. We make up 6 percent of the world’’s people; yet we consume one-third of the world’’s resources.   As long as the resources we consumed each year came primarily from within our own boundaries, this was largely an internal matter. But as our resources come more and more from the outside world, "outsiders’’’ are going to have some say over the rate at which and terms under which we consume. We will no longer be able to think in terms of "our" resources and "their" resources, but only of common resources.   As Americans consuming such a disproportionate share of the world’’s resources, we have to question whether or not we can continue our pursuit of superaffluence in a world of scarcity. We are now reaching the point where we must carefully examine the presumed link between our level of well-being and the level of material goods consumed. If you have only one crust of bread and get another crust of bread, your well-being is greatly enhanced. But if you have a loaf of bread, then an additional crust of bread doesn’’t make that much difference. In the eyes of most of the world today, Americans have their loaf of bread and are asking for still more. People elsewhere are beginning to ask why. This is the question we’’re going to have to answer, whether we’’re trying to persuade countries to step up their exports of oil to us or trying to convince them that we ought to be permitted to maintain our share of the world fish catch.   The prospect of a scarcity of, and competition for, the world’’s resources requires that we reexamine the way in which we relate to the rest of the world. It means we find ways of cutting back on resource consumption that is dependent on the resources and cooperation of other countries. We cannot expect people in these countries to concern themselves with our worsening energy and food shortages unless we demonstrate some concern for the hunger, illiteracy and disease that are diminishing life for them. The writer warns Americans that

A. their excessive consumption has caused world resource exhaustion.
B. they are confronted with the problem of how to obtain more goods.
C. their unfair share of resources should give way to proper division.
D. they have to discard their cars for the growing scarcity of oil fuels.
热门 试题

问答题
A large proportion of the studies of behavior used animals as subjects, especially pigeons, rats, and rabbits. There are a number of reasons why researchers in this field frequently choose to conduct their experiments with nonhuman subjects. First of all, the possibility of a placebo effect is minimized with animal subjects. 46)Whereas a human subject’’s behavior may be drastically altered by the knowledge that he or she is being observed, this is unlikely with animal subjects because most studies with animal subjects are conducted in such a way that the animal does not know its behavior is being monitored and recorded. Furthermore, it is unlikely that an animal subject will be motivated either to please or displease the experimenter, a motive that can ruin a study with human subjects. A second reason for using animal subjects is convenience. The species most commonly used as subjects are easy and inexpensive to care for, and animals of a specific age and sex can be obtained in any quantities the experimenter needs. 47)Once animal subjects are obtained, their participation is as regular as the experimenter’’s--animal subjects never fail to show up for their appointments, which is unfortunately not the case with human subjects.48) Probably the biggest advantage of domesticated animal subjects is that their environment can be controlled to a much greater extent than is possible with either wild animals or human subjects. This is especially important in experiments on learning, where previous experience can have a large effect on a subject’’s performance in a new learning situation. Likewise, if a human subject tries to solve some mystery as part of a learning experiment, the experimenter cannot be sure how many similar problems the subject has encountered in his lifetime. 49) When animals are bred and raised in the laboratory, however, their environments can be constructed to make sure that they have no contact with objects or events similar to those they will encounter in the experiment.A final reason for using animal subjects is that of comparative simplicity. 50)Just as a child trying to learn electricity is better off starting with a flashlight than a radio, researchers may have a better chance of discovering the basic principles of learning by examining creatures that are less intelligent and less complex than human beings The assumption here is that although human beings differ from other animals in some respects, they are also similar in some respects, and it is these commonalities that can be investigated with animal subjects.