Question

Wilderness
“In wilderness(荒野) is the preservation of the world.” This is a famous saying from a writer regarded as one of the fathers of environmentalism. The frequency with which it is borrowed mirrors a heated debate on environmental protection: whether to place wilderness at the heart of what is to be preserved.  
As John Sauven of Greenpeace UK points out, there is a strong appeal in images of the wild, the untouched; more than anything else, they speak of the nature that many people value most dearly. The urge to leave the subject of such images untouched is strong, and the danger exploitation(開發(fā)) brings to such landscapes(景觀) is real. Some of these wildernesses also perform functions that humans need—the rainforests, for example, store carbon in vast quantities. To Mr.Sauven, these ”ecosystem services” far outweigh the gains from exploitation.
Lee Lane, a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute, takes the opposing view. He acknowledges that wildernesses do provide useful services, such as water conservation. But that is not, he argues, a reason to avoid all human presence, or indeed commercial and industrial exploitation. There are ever more people on the Earth, and they reasonably and rightfully want to have better lives, rather than merely struggle for survival. While the ways of using resources have improved, there is still a growing need for raw materials, and some wildernesses contain them in abundance. If they can be tapped without reducing the services those wildernesses provide, the argument goes, there is no further reason not to do so. Being untouched is not, in itself, a characteristic worth valuing above all others.
I look forwards to seeing these views taken further, and to their being challenged by the other participants. One challenge that suggests itself to me is that both cases need to take on the question of spiritual value a little more directly. And there is a practical question as to whether wildernesses can be exploited without harm.
This is a topic that calls for not only free expression of feelings, but also the guidance of reason. What position wilderness should enjoy in the preservation of the world obviously deserves much more serious thinking.
小題1:John Sauven holds that_____.

A．many people value nature too much

B．exploitation of wildernesses is harmful

C．wildernesses provide humans with necessities

D．the urge to develop the ecosystem services is strong

小題2:What is the main idea of Para. 3?

A．The exploitation is necessary for the poor people.

B．Wildernesses cannot guarantee better use of raw materials.

C．Useful services of wildernesses are not the reason for no exploitation.

D．All the characteristics concerning the exploitation should be treated equally.

小題3:What is the author’s attitude towards this debate?

A．Objective.	B．Disapproving.
C．Sceptical.	D．Optimistic.

小題4:Which of the following shows the structure of the passage?

A．	B．
C．	D．

CP: Central Point           P: Point            Sp: Sub-point(次要點)       C: Conclusion

Answer 1

小題1:B
小題2:C
小題3:A
小題4:D

說明文，作者就荒野保護的問題客觀中立地闡述了對立雙方的觀點，并沒有任何的個人傾向性。
小題1:考查細節(jié)題，讀完文章不難判斷出第二自然段的JS是反對開發(fā)荒野的，這一自然段的第一句就表明了這一點，符合這一基調的只有B選項。
小題2:考查推理題，本自然的第一句話表明 ，第三自然段的LL和第二自然持相對的觀點，即認為荒野應該被開發(fā)，本自然段的第二句話提到了"useful services"是C選項的直接對應。
小題3:主旨題，對應回文章最后一自然段的第一句話，“我們不僅需要情感的自由表達，還需要理性的指導”，即可得出A選項“客觀的”（objective）。本題的陷阱在于很多同學會把objective誤當做“反對的”，可見夯實詞匯基礎的做好閱讀理解的第一步。
小題4:本題為結構題，找各段首句是解決這一類題目的關鍵。第三自然段首句說的是LL和上一自然段的JS持相反的觀點，可以判斷二三兩個自然段必然是平行的兩段，而第四五兩個自然的敘述主體都是“我”，可以得出答案為D選項。