no man or woman is worth your tears, and the one who is, won’t make you cry.以下是小編爲大家搜索整理的2018年英語專業八級在線測試試題，希望能給大家帶來幫助!更多精彩內容請及時關注我們應屆畢業生考試網!
These days we hear a lot of nonsense about the ‘great classless society’. The idea that the twentieth century is the age of the common man has become one of the great clichés of our time. The same old arguments are put forward in evidence. Here are some of them: monarchy as a system of government has been completely discredited. The monarchies that survive have been deprived ofall political power. Inherited wealth has been savagely reduced by taxation and, in time, the great fortunes will disappear altogether. In a number of countries the victory has been complete. The people rule; the great millennium has become a political reality. But has it? Close examination doesn’t bear out the claim.
It is a fallacy to suppose that all men are equal and that society will be leveled out if you provide everybody with the same educational opportunities. (It is debatable whether you can ever provide everyone with the same educational opportunities, but that is another question.) The fact is that nature dispenses brains and ability with a total disregard for the principle of equality. The old rules of the jungle, ‘survival of the fittest’, and ‘might is right’ are still with us. The spread of education has destroyed the old class system and created a new one. Rewards are based on merit. For ‘aristocracy’ read ‘meritocracy’; in other respects, society remains unaltered: the class system is rigidly maintained.
Genuine ability, animal cunning, skill, the knack of seizing opportunities, all bring material rewards. And what is the first thing people do when they become rich? They use their wealth to secure the best possible opportunities for their children, to give them ‘a good start in life’. For all the lip service we pay to the idea of equality, we do not consider this wrong in the western world. Private schools which offer unfair advantages over state schools are not banned because one of the principles in a democracy is that people should be free to choose how they will educate their children. In this way, the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent: an able child from a wealthy home can succeed far more rapidly than his poorer counterpart. Wealth is also used indiscriminately to further political ends. It would be almost impossible to become the leader of a democracy without massive financial backing. Money is as powerful a weapon as ever it was.
In societies wholly dedicated to the principle of social equality, privileged private education is forbidden. But even here people are rewarded according to their abilities. In fact, so great is the need for skilled workers that the least able may be neglected. Bright children are carefully and expensively trained to become future rulers. In the end, all political ideologies boil down to the same thing: class divisions persist whether you are ruled by a feudal king or an educated peasant.
1. What is the main idea of this passage?
[A] Equality of opportunity in the twentieth century has not destroyed the class system.
[B] Equality means money.
[C] There is no such society as classless society.
[D] Nature can’t give you a classless society.
2. According to the author, the same educational opportunities can’t get rid of inequality because
[A] the principle ‘survival of the fittest’ exists.
[B] Nature ignores equality in dispensing brains and ability.
[C] Material rewards are for genuine ability.
[D] People have the freedom how to educate their children.
3. Who can obtain more rapid success
[A] those with wealth.
[B] Those with the best brains.
[C] Those with the best opportunities.
[D] Those who have the ability to catch at opportunities.
4. Why does the author say the new meritocracy can perpetuate itself to a certain extent? Because
[A] money decides everything.
[B] Private schools offer advantages over state schools.
[C] People are free to choose the way of educating their children.
[D] Wealth is used for political ends.
5. According to the author, ‘class divisions’ refers to
[A] the rich and the poor.
[B] Different opportunities for people.
[C] Oppressor and the oppressed.
[D] Genius and stupidity.
答案詳解：
1. A 二十世紀平等的機遇並沒有摧毀階級。文章一開始就對無階級社會的論點進行了反駁：有人認爲君主整體已完全摧毀，倖存下來的王公貴族已經被剝奪了一切政治權力，繼承的財產爲稅收大幅度的削減，到時候，巨大的財富將消失殆盡，在許多國家中，已全面勝利，人民進行統治，偉大的太平盛世已成爲政治顯示。作者認爲：深入檢查證實這一斷言不實。第二段提出了即使人人都獲同樣的受教育的機會，可人的天然智慧和能力與平等原則無關，適者生存，強權即公理依然存在。教育的普及摧毀了老的階級體制，卻創造新的，報酬是機遇才幹成就。貴族統治就是英才統治，可在其他方面，社會依然，階級確實存在。後面兩段集中論述了金錢的作用。
B.金錢意味着平等是錯誤的。C.不存在無階級社會。內容是對的，但不是本文的主題思想。D.自然界不會賦予你一個無階級社會。
2. B 自然界在分賦人智慧和能力是不會顧及平等。
A.適者生存的原則存在。根據這一原則無智慧和能力者難以生存於社會。C.物質報償是根據人的真正能力。D.人們有自由選擇如何教育自己的孩子。這三項都基於一點――人的智慧和能力。有智慧能力才能生存，才能獲報償，這已經是不平等，即使獲同樣的受教育的機會，也不可能剷除不平等。
3. A 有錢的人。第三段一開始就點明：真正的能力、動物般機敏狡猾、技能、善抓機會的訣竅，這一切都帶來物質報償。有了錢的人首要作的事情就是給孩子最佳教育機會，而私人學校教育優於公立學校，人們又有自由選擇如何教育自己的孩子。在這個意義上，英才教育在某種程度上是永存的。一個來自富有家庭的有能力的孩子要比其對立面獲得成功要快得多多。
B.具有很高智慧的`人，若沒有錢是難以成功的。第三段的最後一句話也點明這一點，金錢同從前一樣是強有力的武器。文章最後一段即使在完全遵循社會平等原則的社會裏，禁止特權的私人教育，人們也是按能力獲報酬。小心翼翼而又耗費巨大地把聰明的孩子培養成未來的統治者。C.具有最佳機遇的人。D.是B和C的結合。
4. A金錢決定一切。新的英才教育在一定程度上永存。沒有錢，上不起私立學校，談不上機會，更不用說英才教育。有了錢才能爲孩子創造機會。
B.私立學校提供的優越性高於公立學校。C.人們有自由選擇教育孩子的方式方法。D.財富用於政治目的。第三段最後三句話：“財富也可以不加區別地用於更遠的政治目的。沒有強大的財政作後盾，成爲民主國家的元首幾乎是不可能。金錢和過去一樣是強有力的武器，這也說明了金錢的力量，決定一切。”
5. A 富人和窮人。縱然作者提及，同樣的教育機會也不可能剷除不平等，因爲上天賦予人之智慧是不可能考慮平等原則，可是作者也提到適者生存、強權即公理。貴族政治可讀成英才教育。這已說明英才指的是貴族的英才。第四段進一步指出有錢的人首先要做的就是給子女一個良好的教育機會。而私立學校的教育質量優於公立學校。有錢人家的有能力的孩子成功機遇就高。財產還可用於政治目的，要成爲民主國家的領袖就得有雄厚的財力支持。錢財和過去一樣強有力。即使在以社會平等爲原則的社會中，私立學校被禁，酬勞還是以人的能力爲準，大量需要有技能的工作人員，而差勁的人沒有人關注。天才的孩子予以仔細而又及其昂貴的培養以成爲未來的統治者。
總之，政治意識歸結爲同一個東西――階級劃分存在，不論你是爲封建帝王統治，還是爲受過教育的農民統治，從這裏看，作者的class division指的是A項。
B.人們不同的機遇。C.壓迫者和被壓迫者。D.天才和笨蛋。
