TEXT B
The Internet, E-commerce and globalization are making a new economic era possible. In the future, capitalist markets will largely be replaced by a new kind of economic system based on networked relationships, contractual arrangements and access rights.
Has the quality of our lives at work, at home and in our communities increased in direct proportion to all the new Internet and business-to-business Internet services being introduced into our lives? I have asked this question of hundreds of CEOS and corporate executives in Europe and the United States. Surprisingly, virtually everyone has said,"No, quite contrary." The very people responsible for ushering in what some have called a "technological renaissance" say they are working longer hours, feel more stressed, are more impatient, and are even less civil in their dealings with colleagues and friends--not to mention strangers. And what’s more revealing, they place much of the blame on the very same technologies they are so aggressively championing.
The techno gurus (领袖) promised us that access would make life more convenient and give us more time. Instead, the very technological wonders that were supposed to liberate us have begun to enslave us in a web of connections from which there seems to be no easy escape.
If an earlier generation was preoccupied with the quest to enclose a vast geographic frontier, the .com generation, it seems, is more caught up in the colonization of time. Every spare moment of our time is being filled with some form of commercial connection, making time itself the most scarce of all resources. Our e-mail, voice mail and cell phones, our 24-hour Interact news and entertainment all seize for our attention.
And while we have created every kind of labor-and time-saving device to service our needs, we are beginning to feel like we have less time available to us than any other humans in history. That is because the great proliferation of labor-and-time-saving services only increases the diversity, pace and flow of commodified activity around us. For example, e-mail is a great convenience. However, we now find ourselves spending much of our day frantically responding to each other’s electronic messages. The cell phone is a great time-saver,
Except now we are always potentially in reach of someone else who wants our attention.
Social conservatives talk about the decline in civility and blame it on the loss of a moral compass and religious values. Has anyone bothered to ask whether the hyper speed culture is making all of us less patient and less willing to listen and defer, consider and reflect?
Maybe we need to ask what kinds of connections really count and what types of access really matter in the e-economy era. ff this new technology revolution is only about hyper efficiency, then we risk losing something even precious than time--our sense of what it means to be a caring human being.
86. According to the passage, corporate executives think that
A. technology renaissance should be pushed forward.
B. technology has a profound impact on their lives.
C. technology actually results in a decline in their life quality.
D. technology should be aggressively championed.
87. Which of the following is NOT true?
A. Technology was supposed to free people.
B. The .corn generation became slaves of technology.
C. New technologies occupy much of our time.
D. It is difficult to avoid the influence of technology wonders.
88. What is the most valuable resource for the .com generation?
A. Technological wonders. 
B. Access to information.中 华 考 试 网
C. Time. 
D. Time saving devices.
89. In the sixth paragraph, the author implied that
A. social conservatives blamed the loss of morality on technology.
B. the .com generation was less civil than the earlier generations.
C. the hyper speed culture led to the decline in civility.
D. technology might make people less impatient.
90. An appropriate title for the passage might be
A. The New Internet Life. 
B. The Drawbacks of too Much Access.
C. The Failure of Technological Renaissance. 
D. The Declining Quality of Life.

【文章概要】
本文探讨了玩游戏的利与弊。首段介绍游戏提倡者Jane McGonigal的新观点：游戏其实对大家有益；第2段分析玩游戏有益的原因及持相反意见的人对Jane McGonigal观点的质疑；第3段指出玩游戏是否有益还有待研究讨论．同时肯定了某些游戏的正面作用；最后两段阐释作者对玩游戏的观点：让玩的人感到开心才是最重要的。
【答案解析】
86．[A]因果细节题。定位到第1段，根据第l段第2句可知，传统观念中对游戏的争议点在于玩游戏“有害身心”还是“纯粹无伤大雅的娱乐”，而McGonigal却提倡玩游戏，认为玩游戏有益。这与传统观念背道而驰，因此备受争议。故选项A正确。B项的内容文中有提及，但这是McGonigal认为人们应该玩多点游戏的原因；C项是对第2段首句的误解；D项文中没有提到。
87．[C]细节判断题。定位到第2段和第3段。根据第2段末句可知，A与原文内容相符。B、D两项在第3段也有提及．属游戏的正面作用。选项C，与第3段首句不符，本句提到，游戏是否有助提高技能，还有待研究讨论，本题为逆向选择题，故选C。 
88．[D]细节判断题。定位到第4段，作者认为为了提高认知能力而去阅读是让人沮丧的，阅读是件很快乐的事情，提倡阅读不是因为它使读者变得聪明而是能让读者感到愉悦，给读者新的体验；因此选项D(阅读在于能让人快乐)符合题意。而A(阅读能拓宽人的视野)、B(使人变得智慧)、C(提升人的视觉)都不是作者提倡阅读的原因，故排除。
89．[A]观点态度题。从全文来看，文章由McGonigal提出的玩游戏有益的观点引出对玩游戏的利与弊的探讨。文章最后一段指出作者对玩游戏是否能拯救整个世界或提升自己无可奉告，但是我们可以为了开心而玩，从而得知作者对玩电脑游戏是持一种支持的态度。因此选项A符合题意，同时排除其他三项。