下面是新SAT OG2阅读解析，每一道题目都进行了翻译和讲解，给大家的备考提供一定的帮助。
Questions 11-21 are based on the following passage and supplementary material.
This passage is adapted from lain King. 'Can Economics Be Ethical?” 02013 by Prospect Publishing,
Recent debates about the cconomy have rediscovered the question, “is that right?", where “right" means more than just profits or efficiency. ioe Some argue that because the free markets allow 5 for personal choice, they are already ethical. Others have accepted the ethical critique and embraced corporate social responsibility. But before we can label any market outcome as “immoral,” or sneer at economists who try to put a price on being ethical,
10we need to be clear on what we are talking about.There are different views on where ethics should apply when someone makes an economic decision. Consider Adam Smith, widely regarded as the founder of modem economics. He was a moral
15 philosopher who believed sympathy for others was the basis for ethics (we would call it empathy nowadays). But one of his key insights in The Wealth of Nations was that acting on this empathy could be countcr-productive—he observed people becoming
20 better off when they put their own empathy aside, and interacted in a self-interested way. Smith justifies selfish behavior by the outcome. Whenever planners use cost-bencfit analysis to justify a new railway line, or someone retrains to boost his or her earning
25 power, or a shopper buys one to get one free, they are using the same approach: empathizing with someone, and seeking an outcome that makes that person as well off as possible—although the person they are empathizing with may be themselves in the
30 future.Instead of judging consequences, Aristotle said ethics was about having the right character—displaying virtues like courage and honesty. It is a view put into practice whenever 35 business leaders are chosen for their good character. But it is a hard philosophy to teach—just how much loyalty should you show to a manufacturer that keeps losing money? Show too little and you’re a “greed is good” corporate raider; too much and you’re wasting
40.money on unproductive capital. Aristotle thought there was a golden mean between the two extremes, and finding it was a matter of fine judgment. But if ethics is about character, it’s not dear what those characteristics should be.
45 There is yet another approach: instead of rooting ethics in character or the consequences of actions, we can focus on our actions themselves. From this perspective some things arc right, some wrong—we should buy fair trade goods, wc shouldn't tell lies in
50advertisements. Ethics becomes a list of
commandments, a catalog of “dos” and “don’ts.” When a finance official refuses to devalue a currcncy bccausc they have promised not to, they arc defining ethics this way. According to this approach
55 devaluation can still be bad, even if it would make everybody better off.
Many moral dilemmas arise when these three versions pull in different directions but clashes are not inevitable. Take fair trade coffee (coffee that is
60 sold with a certification that indicates the farmers and workers who produced it were paid a fair wage), for example: buying it might have good consequences, be virtuous, and also be the right way to act in a flawed market. Common ground like this
65 suggests that, even without agreement on where cthics applies, ethical economics is still possible.
Whenever we feel queasy about “perfect" competitive markets, the problem is often rooted in a phony conception of people. The model of man on
70 which classical economics is based—an entirely rational and selfish being—is a parody, as John Stuart Mill, the philosopher who pioneered the model, accepted. Most people—even economists— now accept that this ‘'economic man” is a fiction.
75 We behave like a herd; wc fear losses more than we hope for gains; rarely can our brains process all the relevant facts.
These human quirks mean we can never make purely "rational1* decisions. A new wave of behavioral 80economists, aided by neuroscientists, is trying to understand our psycholog)-, both alone and in groups, so they can anticipate our decisions in the marketplace more accuratcly. But psycholog}' can also help us understand why wc react in disgust at
85 economic injustice, or accept a moral law as universal. Which means that the relatively new scicncc of human behavior might also define ethics for us. Ethical economics would then emerge from one of the least likely places: economists themselves.
11. 这篇文章的主旨是
A. 考虑由于成本利润分析造成的道德两难
B. 描述一个道德经济行为的心理学研究
C. 争论自由市场阻碍了道德经济学
D. 论述了几种评估经济道德的方法
答案：D
考点：主旨题
解析：在11-12行中，作者介绍了这篇文章的主要目的是“关于经济决策时在哪个方面应用道德观，有不同的观点”。文章论述了亚当•斯密、亚里士多德、和约翰•斯图亚特•米尔关于道德和经济关系的观点。选项A、B、C 错误为这几个选项均是文章细节(成本-利润分析、道德经济行为、自由市场的角色)，不是文章主旨。
12. 文章中，作者运用下列哪个观点来反驳对自由市场道德的批判?
A. 斯密关于自由市场和道德行为的关联时至今日依然适用
B. 自由市场是生成高利润的最好方式，所以道德是第二位的
C. 自由市场是合乎道德的，货币贬值使自由市场变为可能
D. 自由市场是合乎道德的，因为他们允许个人去做选择
答案：D
考点：求异题
解析：在4-5行，作者说道一些人反对对自由市场道德的批判，因为他们认为自由市场本身就是道德的，因此没有必要研究自由市场中道德的角色。这个观点认为自由市场是道德的，因为它允许个人自己做出决定，决定买什么、卖什么。选项A、B错误因为这两项并不是对自由市场道德批判的回击。C错误因为作者没有表明自由市场要依靠货值贬值。
13. 下面哪个选项为上题提供了最好的证据?
A. 4-5行(“some…ethical”)
B. 7-10行(“But…about”)
C. 21-22行(“Smith…outcome”)
D. 52-54行(“When…way”)
答案：A
考点：因果联系题
解析：在4-5行中作者陈述了一些人认为自由市场“已经是合乎道德的”应为他们“允许个人做出选择”。这个陈述提供了证据证明有些人认为对自由市场道德的批判是不必要的，因为自由市场允许个人做出自己的选择。选项B、C、D错误因为他们不是对自由市场批判回击的证据。
14. 第6行中“embrace”最接近的意思是
A. 亲切地拿着
B. 容易地采用
C. 急切的拥抱
D. 不情愿的使用
答案：B
考点：词汇题
解析：在6-7行中，作者说人们“接受了道德批评，接受了企业社会责任”在上下文中，人们通过特定的行为，“接受”或者“容易地采用”公司社会责任。选项A、C、D错误因为在上下文中“embrace”没有亲切地拿着、急切地
拥抱、不情愿的使用的意思。
15. 第五段(45-56行)的主旨是
A. 反驳“贪婪至上的观点”
B. 支持道德是关于品性的这个观点
C. 描述第三种定义道德经济的方法
D. 例证一个人的行为是一个人的性格的结果
答案：C
考点：主旨题
解析：第三段和第四段陈述了亚当•斯密和亚里士多德定义经济道德的不同方法、第五段提供了第三种方法来定义经济道德，“与其以品性和行为结果来判定道德，我们可以把注意力集中在行动本身。从这个观点来说有些行为是正确的，有些是错误的”选项A错误因为第五段并没有反驳。选项B、D错误因为尽管“品性”一词在第五段中提到过，它和道德的关系是在第四段论述的。
16. 58行中的“clash”最接近的意思是
A. 冲突
B. 不匹配
C. 撞击
D. 争吵
答案：A
考点：词汇题
解析：在57-59行中，作者陈述“这三种观点指向不同的方向时，会产生很多道德两难问题，但是这种冲突并不是无可避免的。”在上下文中，这三种对于道德经济不同的观点可能会彼此 “碰撞”或“冲突。选项B、C、D错误因为在上下文中“clashes”不是不匹配、撞击、或争吵的意思。
17. 下面那个选项最好的支持了作者的观点：文章中描述的不同道德途径有一致之处?
A.11-12行(“There…decision”)
B.47-50行(“From…advertisement”)
C.59-64行(“Take…market”)
D.75-77行(“We…facts”)
答案：C
考点：关联题
解析：在59-64行，作者陈述道“以公平贸易咖啡为例……购买此种咖啡能带来好的结果、是一种美德行为、是在有缺陷的市场中的正确行事方式。”作者在此表示在公平贸易咖啡这个例子中，关于道德经济的三个观点-亚当•斯密的结果论，亚里士多德对品性的强调、还有第三种强调良好行为本身的观点-都得到了体现。这三个观点是有”一致之处“的(64行)，因为这三种观点都可以应用到公平贸易咖啡的例子中，并没有互相冲突。选项A、B、D不正确因为没有表示出来这三种观点是如何有一致之处的。选项A只是简单的陈述了在经济学中有“关于道德的不同观点“，选项B解释了第三种道德经济途径，选项D说人们有”从众心理“。
18. 最后一段的主要观点是
A. 人类的怪癖使准确预测人的道德决定变得困难
B. 面对经济上的不公正时，人们普遍表现的很厌恶
C. 了解人类心理学可以帮助定义经济道德
D. 经济学家要对改革自由市场负责
答案：C
考点：主旨题
解析： 83-85行中，作者论述到心理学能帮助我们“定义道德“，从而可以帮助解释为什么人们”会厌恶经济的不公正，或是普遍接受一种道德律令”。选项A、B错误因为这两项只是提及了最后一段的细节(人类的怪癖和人们对于经济不公正的反应)，并不是主要观点。选项D错误因为最后一段并没有提及经济学家要负责改革自由市场。
19. 图标中关于坦桑尼亚每磅咖啡利润的数据最强有力的支持了下面哪个选项?
A. 公平贸易咖啡一直比常规咖啡赚取更多的利润
B. 常规咖啡赚取的利润不曾波动
C. 2004年至2006年期间，公平贸易咖啡的利润在增加
D. 到2008年公平贸易咖啡和常规咖啡赚取的利润是一样的
答案：A
考点：图表题
解析：图表中的数据表明2000至2008年期间在坦桑尼亚，公平贸易咖啡的利润在1.3美元每磅左右，期间常规咖啡的利润约为20-60美分每磅。选项B、C、D错误因为图表信息并不支持这些选项。
20. 图表中的数据表明公平贸易咖啡和常规咖啡每磅利润差最大的是在哪段时间?
A. 2000-2002
B. 2002-2004
C. 2004-2005
D. 2006-2008
答案：B
考点：图表题
解析：表中数据表明2002-2004年间，公平贸易咖啡和常规咖啡每磅利润差约为1美元。在这段时间，公平贸易咖啡利润约为每磅1.3美元，常规咖啡利润约为每磅20美分。图表也表明常规咖啡在2002-2004年利润最低，而公平贸易咖啡在2000-2008八年间利润基本稳定。A、C、D选项错误因为他们没有表明公平贸易咖啡和常规咖啡的最大每磅利润差。
21. 表中数据最直接支持了文中哪个观点?
A. 根据同理心行事可能会产生反生产力
B. 道德经济可以根据品性定义
C. 道德经济仍然可能
D. 相比希望得到，人们更害怕失去
答案：C
考点：关联题
解析：在59-61行，作者这样定义公平贸易咖啡：公平贸易咖啡是有证书可以证明支付了生产此咖啡的农民和工人合理的工资的一种咖啡。这个定义表明购买公平贸易咖啡是一种为道德负责的选择。公平贸易咖啡得以生产并可盈利说明道德经济仍然是人们考虑的一个因素。图表中的数据显示公平贸易咖啡的利润是常规咖啡的两倍多，支持了这一观点。选项A 错误因为图表表明人们根据同理心行事(购买公平贸易咖啡)对公平贸易咖啡农民和工人来说是促进生产力的。选项B、D错误因为图表并没有关于品性或人们害怕失去这一特征的信息。
以上就是新SAT OG2阅读解析，希望大家有问题的地方可以多进行思考，更多内容请关注百利天下教育，为大家提供更多备考帮助。
您还可能关注：
