问题 问答题 简答题

为什么人和许多动物的雌雄性之比总接近1:1?

答案

参考答案:

这是由于男性的性染色体为异型的XY,它们能产生含X和Y性染色体的两种精子;而女性的性染色体为同型的XX,只能产生一种X性染色体的卵细胞,故作用概率相同,受精后生育的男性、女性比例为1:1。

阅读理解与欣赏

阅读下面的文字,完成后面题目。(9分)

21世纪以来,各种搞笑文化风生水起。从《疯狂的石头》(2006)到《泰囧》(2012),种种搞笑影视的“成功”一度挑起了学界对于喜剧的热情。人们一方面吃惊于这种新型喜剧的“逆袭”,一方面又依照喜剧的原则重新审视这些作品的价值。尽管有论者以“新美学”或者“独特性”命名《泰囧》等作品,但是,仍旧无法摆脱“喜剧”的分析框架。有趣的是,无论怎样调用已有的喜剧理论来命名和分析,21世纪以来的“搞笑”文化连同它所“指向”的时代,却毫不客气地“违背”着“喜剧”的文化逻辑和原则,以一种极其吊诡的方式“表征”当下我们这个时代的“吊诡”。

之所以说“喜剧”这个概念无法涵盖这些产品,乃是因为这个概念的哲学内涵已经失效。马克思曾经在《路易•波拿巴的雾月十八日》中引用并评述恩格斯的观点时说:“黑格尔在某个地方说过,一切伟大的世界历史事变和人物,可以说都出现两次。他忘记补充一点:第一次是作为悲剧出现,第二次是作为笑剧出现。”在这里,“笑剧”乃是历史性地告别旧事物的讽刺性的喜剧,而对于马克思主义的社会学理论来说,人类的历史乃是从悲剧开始,以笑剧(讽刺喜剧)的形式自我否定并进而发展,世界历史的最终形态则是喜剧——人类告别阶级、国家和压迫,实现自由人的联合体的理想。

所以,在马克思那里,喜剧并不仅仅是笑剧和滑稽,而是一种新的社会制度告别旧的制度、合理性的新事物胜利驱逐非合理性的旧事物的特定形式。他在评论“一个德国式的现代问题”的时候这样说:“现代的旧制不过是真正的主角已经死去的那种世界制度的丑角。历史不断前进,经过许多阶段才把陈旧的生活形式送进坟墓,世界历史形式的最后一个阶段就是喜剧。在埃斯库罗斯的《被锁链锁住的普罗米修斯》里已经悲剧式地受到一次致命伤的希腊之神,还要在琉善的《对话》中喜剧式地重死一次。历史为什么是这样的呢?这是为了人类能愉快地和自己的过去诀别,我们现在为德国当局争取的也正是这样一个愉快的历史结局。”所以,只有当旧事物不再具有阻遏历史发展的力量的时候,喜剧才会痛快淋漓地发生。

显然,作为一个历史性的美学范畴,喜剧乃是一个充满了信心的时代里面社会情绪自信满满的表达。所谓“告别的年代”,并不仅仅是罗大佑所唱出来的悲伤,也是他对各种缤纷色彩的未来向往和冲动。而喜剧恰好是这种充满向往和期待的未来冲动的时刻。只有在一个“正在发生的未来”的时刻,喜剧才有力量识别什么是“丑”,什么是“美”,才有可能呈现那些无价值的东西被撕碎时刻的快乐与轻松。

就此而言,喜剧所对应的主角“丑”,并不只是现实和历史的否定性力量,更是面向未来生活的肯定性力量;只有在“未来”显露了它的璀璨的曙光的时候,“丑”才不是那样令人恐惧、厌恶和尴尬,才会在它们执着于不肯认输的作为中为我们提供胜利者才会有的快乐。

简言之,喜剧不是指一部可以搞笑的作品那么简单,而是对正在发生的未来的历史的充分肯定和把玩。正是在这样的意义上说,“喜剧”必然是一个时代的喜剧,每一出喜剧就是一个喜剧时代。

小题1:下列关于“喜剧”的理解,不正确的一项是                     ( )

A.喜剧不但是笑剧和滑稽,而且是一种新的社会制度告别旧的制度、合理性的新事物胜利驱逐非合理性的旧事物的特定形式。

B.在一个充满了信心的时代,社会情绪能够自信满满的表达,喜剧也就诞生了。

C.《泰囧》等搞笑影视作品的“成功”一度挑起了学界对于喜剧的热情,它们为市场打造了无穷的笑声,堪称新时代的喜剧。

D.喜剧不仅滑稽,而且是把人生无价值的东西撕破给人看,更是人类告别阶级、国家和压迫,实现自由人的联合体的理想的形式。小题2:下列对文章的理解,符合文意的一项是                                ( )

A.黑格尔认为,人类的历史乃是从悲剧开始,以笑剧的形式自我否定并进而发展的。

B.评论以“新美学”或者“独特性”命名《泰囧》等,其实这些作品 “违背”了“喜剧”的文化逻辑和原则。

C.所谓“告别的年代”,并不是罗大佑所唱出来的悲伤,而是他对各种缤纷色彩的未来向往和冲动。

D.只要在充满希望的“未来”显露了它的璀璨的曙光的时候,“丑”即使令人恐惧、厌恶和尴尬,就会在它们执着于不肯认输的作为中为我们提供胜利者才会有的快乐。小题3:“喜剧”必然是一个时代的喜剧,每一出喜剧就是一个喜剧时代。原因何在?请根据文本概括两点理由(3分)

单项选择题

Addiction is such a harmful behavior, in fact, that evolution should have long ago weeded it out of the population: if it’s hard to drive safely under the influence, imagine trying to run from a saber-toothed tiger or catch a squirrel for lunch. And yet, says Dr. Nora Volkow, director of NIDA and a pioneer in the use of imaging to understand addiction, "the use of drugs has been recorded since the beginning of civilization. Humans in my view will always want to experiment with things to make them feel good."

That’s because drugs of abuse co-opt the very brain functions that allowed our distant ancestors to survive in a hostile world. Our minds are programmed to pay extra attention to what neurologists call salience—that is, special relevance. Threats, for example, are highly salient, which is why we instinctively try to get away from them. But so are food and sex because they help the individual and the species survive. Drugs of abuse capitalize on this ready-made programming. When exposed to drugs, our memory systems, reward circuits, decision making skills and conditioning kick in—salience in overdrive—to create an all consuming pattern of uncontrollable craving. "Some people have a genetic predisposition to addiction," says Volkow. "But because it involves these basic brain functions, everyone will become an addict if sufficiently exposed to drugs or alcohol."

That can go for nonchemical addictions as well. Behaviors, from gambling to shopping to sex, may start out as habits but slide into addictions. Sometimes there might be a behavior-specific root of the problem. Volkow’s research group, for example, has shown that pathologically obese people who are compulsive eaters exhibit hyperactivity in the areas of the brain that process food stimuli—including the mouth, lips and tongue. For them, activating these regions is like opening the floodgates to the pleasure center. Almost anything deeply enjoyable can turn into an addiction, though.

Of course, not everyone becomes an addict. That’s because we have other, more analytical regions that can evaluate consequences and override mere pleasure seeking. Brain imaging is showing exactly how that happens. Paulus, for example, looked at drug addicts enrolled in a VA hospital’s intensive four-week rehabilitation program. Those who were more likely to relapse in the first year after completing the program were also less able to complete tasks involving cognitive skills and less able to adjust to new rules quickly. This suggested that those patients might also be less adept at using analytical areas of the brain while performing decision-making tasks. Sure enough, brain scans showed that there were reduced levels of activation in the prefrontal cortex, where rational thought can override impulsive behavior. It’s impossible to say if the drugs might have damaged these abilities in the relapsers an effect rather than a cause of the chemical abuse—but the fact that the cognitive deficit existed in only some of the drug users suggests that there was something innate that was unique to them. To his surprise, Paulus found that 80% to 90% of the time, he could accurately predict: who would relapse within a year simply by examining the scans.

Another area of focus for researchers involves the brain’s reward system, powered largely by the neurotransmitter dopamine. Investigators are looking specifically at the family of dopamine receptors that populate nerve cells and bind to the compound. The hope is that if you can reduce the effect of the brain chemical that carries the pleasurable signal, you can loosen the drug’s hold.

Paulus could accurately predict the relapsers because()

A. the part of their brain controlling cognitive skills is less active

B. a four-week intensive rehabilitation program is not effective enough

C. he has the devices sophisticated enough to scan any brain damage

D. something innate to their brains prompt them to use drugs