Question

We like to think our intelligence is self-made; it happens inside our heads, the product of our inner thoughts alone. But the rise of Google, Wikipedia and other online tools has made many people question the impact of these technologies on our brains. Is typing in “Who has played James Bond in the movies?” the same as our knowledge about the names like Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan and Daniel Craig? Can we say we know the answer as long as we know how to rapidly get the information on Google?
Here the question is about how we define intelligence itself. The answer appears to be interesting, because the evidence from psychological studies suggests that much of our intelligence comes from how we coordinate ourselves with other people and our environment.
An influential theory among psychologists is that we're cognitive misers(認知吝嗇者). This is the idea that we are unwilling to do mental work unless we have to. We try to avoid thinking things fully when a short cut is available. If you've ever voted for the presidential candidate(總統(tǒng)候選人) with the most honest smile, or chosen a restaurant based on how many people are already sitting in there, then you are a cognitive miser. The theory explains why we'd much rather type a zip code into Google Maps than memorize and recall the location of a place – it's so much easier to do so.
Research shows that people don't tend to rely on their memories for things they can easily access. Buildings can somehow disappear from pictures we're looking at, or the people we're talking to can be changed with someone else, and often we won't notice – a phenomenon called “change blindness”. This isn't an example of human stupidity – far from it, in fact – this is an example of mental efficiency. The mind relies on the world as a better record than memory.
Philosophers have suggested that thinking is really happening in the environment as much as it is happening in our brains. The philosopher Andy Clark called humans "natural born cyborgs(電子人)", those naturally capable of absorbing and combining new tools, ideas and abilities. In Clark's view, the route to a solution is not the issue – having the right tools really does mean you know the answers, just as much as already knowing the answer.
Rather than being forced to rely on our own resources for everything, we can share our knowledge. Technology keeps track of things for us so we don't have to, while large systems of knowledge serve the needs of society as a whole. I don't know how a computer works, or how to grow vegetables, but that knowledge is out there and I can get to benefit. The internet provides even more potential to share this knowledge. Wikipedia is one of the best examples – an increasingly large database of knowledge from which everyone can benefit.
So as well as having a physical environment – like the rooms or buildings we live or work in – we also have a mental environment, which means that when I ask you where your mind is, you shouldn’t point toward the centre of your forehead. As research shows, our minds are made up just as much by the people and tools around us as they are by the brain cells inside our skull.
【小題1】Why did the writer raise the questions in Paragraph 1?

A．To find out who has played James Bond in the movies.

B．To introduce the topic to be discussed in the passage.

C．To show that he knows the answer to the questions.

D．To attract readers’ attention by mentioning James Bond.

【小題2】What is the writer’s attitude towards the rise of technologies like Google and Wikipedia?

A．Supportive

B．Objective

C．Indifferent

D．Neutral

【小題3】 Which of the following might the philosopher Andy Clark agree with?

A．Intelligence is something that is made by one’s brain itself.

B．Intelligence is something that only happens inside one’s head.

C．Intelligence is the product of one’s inner thoughts alone.

D．Intelligence is a mixture of the environment, people and one’s brain cells.

【小題4】It is true about the phenomenon called “change blindness” that human beings____.

A．a(chǎn)re stupid not to notice the changes

B．a(chǎn)re efficient in mental work

C．a(chǎn)re blind to changes around them

D．rely on memory when dealing with things

【小題5】According to the text, how do technologies like Google, Wikipedia affect us?

A．They make us much more intelligent.

B．They make us lazier and more stupid.

C．They have little to do with our intelligence.

D．They have a negative effect on our intelligence.

Answer 1

【小題1】B
【小題2】A
【小題3】D
【小題4】B
【小題5】A

解析試題分析：本文敘述了對智力的理解，我們更傾向于認為我們的智力源于自我成就，它形成于大腦內(nèi)，是內(nèi)在獨立思考的產(chǎn)物。心理學界中一個頗具影響的理論認為人是“認知守財奴”。 有時我們在談話過程中不經(jīng)意地切換談話對象，常常未引起我們在意，這種現(xiàn)象叫“變化盲視”，這并非人類的愚昧，與此相反，這是心理效應的一個表現(xiàn)。研究表明我們的思想大部分都由身邊的人及工具組成的，他們就像是我們頭蓋骨里的腦細胞。
【小題1】推理判斷題。根據(jù)Here the question is about how we define intelligence itself. 可知作者要引出他要講的話題，故選B。
【小題2】推理判斷題。根據(jù)The internet provides even more potential to share this knowledge. Wikipedia is one of the best examples 可知作者對它們是支持的，故選A。
【小題3】細節(jié)理解題。根據(jù)The philosopher Andy Clark called humans "natural born cyborgs(電子人)", those naturally capable of absorbing and combining new tools, ideas and abilities. 故選D。
【小題4】細節(jié)理解題。根據(jù)This isn't an example of human stupidity – far from it, in fact – this is an example of mental efficiency. 故選B。
【小題5】推理判斷題。根據(jù)that knowledge is out there and I can get to benefit 和an increasingly large database of knowledge from which everyone can benefit.可知它們可以使我們變得更聰明，故選A。
考點：科普類短文閱讀。
點評：做推理題干擾選項的特點夸大事實：一是對于原文中的細節(jié)或論斷的某方面程度進行了夸大處理。二是無中生有：捏造原文并不存在的信息，并以此作為依據(jù)進行推理。三是摻入常識：根據(jù)考生已有的常識是正確的，但卻不是基于文章。四是推理過頭：引申過度，使結論過于絕對化。知道了這些特點在容易排除干擾項進而做出正確的判斷。