哪位有雅思剑5test1passage2的原文和答案？谢谢（剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析85）

今天雅思无忧小编整理了哪位有雅思剑5test1passage2的原文和答案？谢谢（剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析85）相关内容，希望能帮助到大家，一起来看下吧。

本文目录一览：

• 1、哪位有雅思剑5test1passage2的原文和答案？谢谢
• 2、剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析85
• 3、剑桥雅思5阅读难度

哪位有雅思剑5test1passage2的原文和答案？谢谢

Nature or Nurture?

A) A few years ago. in one of the most fascinating and disturbing experiments in behavioral psychology. Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life for their willingness to obey instructions given by a 'leader' in a situation in which the subjects might feel a personal distaste for the actions they were called upon to perform. Specifically, Milgram told each volunteer 'teacher-subject' that the experiment was in the noble cause of education, and was designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils' ability to learn.

B) Milgram's experimental set-up involved placing the teacher-subject before a panel of thirty switches with labels ranging from '15 volts of electricity (slight shock)' to '450 volts (danger - severe shock)' in steps of 15 volts each. The teacher-subject was told that whenever the pupil gave the wrong answer to a question, a shock was to be administered, beginning at the lowest level and increasing in severity with each successive wrong answer. The supposed 'pupil' was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks by emitting a spectrum of groans, screams and writhing together with an assortment of statements and expletives denouncing both the experiment and the experimenter. Milgram told the teacher-subject to ignore the reactions of the pupil, and to administer whatever level of shock was called for. as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment.

C) As the experiment unfolded, the pupil would deliberately give the wrong answers to questions posed by the teacher, thereby bringing on various electrical punishments, even up to the danger level of 300 volts and beyond. Many of the teacher-subjects balked at administering The higher levels of punishment, and turned to Milgram with questioning looks and/or complaints about continuing the experiment. In these situations, Milgram calmly explained that the teacher-subject was to ignore the pupil's cries for mercy and carry on with the experiment. If the subject was still reluctant to proceed, Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end His final argument was, 'You have no other choice. You must go on." What Milgram was trying to discover was the number of teacher-subjects who would be willing to administer the highest levels of shock, even in the face of strong personal and moral revulsion against the rules and conditions of the experiment.

D) Prior to carrying out the experiment, Milgram explained his idea to a group of 39 psychiatrists and asked them to predict the average percentage of people in an ordinary population who would be willing to administer the highest shock level of 450 volts. The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists felt that 'most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts' and they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts. Furthermore, they thought that only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1.000 would give the highest shock of 450 volts.

E) What were the actual results? Well, over 60 per cent of the teacher-subjects continued to obey Milgram up to the 450-volt limit! In repetitions of the experiment in other countries, the percentage of obedient teacher-subjects was even higher, reaching 85 per cent in one country. How can we possibly account for this vast discrepancy between what calm, rational, knowledgeable people predict in the comfort of their study and what pressured, flustered, but cooperative teachers' actually do in the laboratory of real life?

F) One's first inclination might be to argue that there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment, and that Milgram's teacher-subjects were just following a genetic need to discharge this pent-up primal urge onto the pupil by administering the electrical shock. A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors in their struggle against the hardships of life on the plains and in the caves, ultimately finding its way into our genetic make-up as a remnant of our ancient animal ways.

G) An alternative to this notion of genetic programming is to see the teacher-subjects' actions as a result of the social environment under which the experiment was carried out. As Milgram himself pointed out. Most subjects in the experiment see their behaviour in a larger context that is benevolent and useful to society - the pursuit of scientific truth. The psychological laboratory has a strong claim to legitimacy and evokes trust and confidence in those who perform there. An action such as shocking a victim, which in isolation appears evil, acquires a completely different meaning when placed in this setting."

H) Thus, in this explanation the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties like loyalty, self-sacrifice and discipline to the service of malevolent systems of authority.

I) Here we have two radically different explanations for why so many teacher-subjects were willing to forgo their sense of personal responsibility for the sake of an institutional authority figure. The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible. This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology - to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates, or at least strongly biases, the interaction of animals and humans with their environment, that is, their behaviour. Put another way, sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour.

答案：
14. F
15. A
16. B
17. D
18. I
19. C
20. B
21. D
22. C
23. Not Given
24. True
25. False
26. False

剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析85

您好，我是专注留学考试规划和留学咨询的小钟老师。在追寻留学梦想的路上，选择合适的学校和专业，准备相关考试，都可能让人感到迷茫和困扰。作为一名有经验的留学顾问，我在此为您提供全方位的专业咨询和指导。欢迎随时提问！

● 题目：
Yet, even if America’s trash output continues to rise as it has done in the past, and even if the American population doubles by 2100, all the rubbish America produces through the entire 21st century will still take up only one-12,000th of the area of the entire United States.(剑5, Test 1 passage 3)
● 分析：
本句的主句为“all the rubbish America produces through the entire 21st century will still take up only one-12,000th of the area of the entire United States.”;其中“America produces”为定语从句，作all the rubbish的定语，关系词在定语从句中作宾语，被省掉;“even if America’s trash output continues to rise as it has done in the past,”和“even if the American population doubles by 2100”两个从句并列，皆为even if引导的让步状语从句。
● 编辑推荐：
突破雅思“长难句”解析结构剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析专题以上就是为大家整理的部分雅思阅读题，非常实用，各位烤鸭们都记住了吗？

· 小编推荐 ·

本文章系我们留学整理，转载请注明我们留学！如有不妥之处，欢迎指正！
希望以上的答复能对您的留学申请有所帮助。留学的道路充满了无限可能，但选择和准备的过程可能也充满挑战。如果您有任何更详细的问题或需要进一步的协助，我强烈推荐您访问我们的留学官方网站 。在那里您可以找到更多专业的留学考试规划和留学资料以及*的咨询服务。我们的专业团队会全程陪伴您，助您圆梦海外学府。祝您留学申请顺利！

剑桥雅思5阅读难度

较低。剑桥雅思5阅读材料的难度系数是相对较低的，适合于入门或者初级学习者练习阅读。一般而言，剑桥雅思5阅读材料的难度与英语水平A2-B1水平相当，主要特点是：
1、词汇量相对较低，词汇难度不高。
2、句子结构相对简单，没有太多复杂的语法结构和从句，语言表达相对直白。
3、篇章组织结构比较简单，主题清晰明了。
4、阅读材料的篇幅较短，大多数文章仅有1-2页。

以上就是哪位有雅思剑5test1passage2的原文和答案？谢谢（剑桥雅思阅读长难句分析85）全部内容，更多相关信息，敬请关注雅思无忧。

雅思培训
免责声明：文章内容来自网络，如有侵权请及时联系删除。