考研英语英汉翻译历年真题汇编
2019-10-16 21:18:00   来源：环球教育在线   评论：0 点击：

　　People have wondered for a long time how their personalities，and behaviors are formed.It is not easy to explain why oneperson is intelligent and another is not，or why one is cooperative and another is competitive.

　　Social scientists are，of course，extremely interested in these types of questions.（61）They want to explain why we possess certain characteristics and exhibit certain behaviors.There are no clear answers yet，but two distinct schools of thought on the matter have developed.As one might expect，the two approaches are very different from each other.The controversy is often conveniently referred to asnature vs.nurture.

　　（62）Those who support thenatureside of the conflict believe that our personalities and behavior patterns are largely determined by biological factors.（63）That our environment has little，if anything，to do with our abilities，characteristics and behavior is central to this theory.Taken to an extreme，this theory maintains that our behavior is predetermined to such a great degree that we are almost completely governed by our instincts.

　　Those who support thenurturetheory，that is，they advocate education，are often called behaviorists.They claim that our environment is more important than our biologically based instincts in determining how we will act.A behaviorist，B.F.Skinner，sees humans as beings whose behavior is almost completely shaped by their surroundings.（64）The behaviorists maintain that，like machines，humans respond to environmental stimuli as the basis of their behavior.

　　Let us examine the different explanations about one human characteristic，intelligence，offered by the two theories.（65）Supporters of thenaturetheory insist that we are born with a certain capacity for learning that is biologically determined.Needless to say，they don’t believe that factors in the environment have much influence on what is basically a predetermined characteristic.On the other hand，behaviorists argue that our intelligence levels are the product of our experiences.（66）Behaviorists suggest that the child who is raised in an environment where there are many stimuli whichdevelop his or her capacity for appropriate responses will experience greater intellectual development.

　　The social and political implications of these two theories are profound.（67）In the United States，blacks often score below whites on standardized intelligence tests.This leads somenatureproponents to conclude that blacks are biologically inferior to whites.（68）Behaviorists，in contrast，say that differences in scores are due to the fact that blacks are often deprived of many of the educational and other environmental advantages that whites enjoy.

　　Most people think neither of these theories can yet fully explain human behavior.

　　1990年英译汉试题参考译文

　　长期以来人们完全不知道他们的性格特征和行为模式是怎样形成的。人们很难解释一个聪明而另一个人愚蠢的原因，或者也很难解释一个人有协作精神，而另一个人有竞争意识的原因。

　　当然，社会科学家对这类问题极为关注。（61）他们想要说明，为什么我们具有某些性格特征并表现出某些行为。然而，这些问题尚无明确的答案。但是在这方面已经形成了两个截然不相同的学派。人们可以预料，这两家的看法大不相同。为方便起见，这种争论通常被称为天性论与环境因素论之争。

　　（62）在这场争论中，赞成天性一方的那些人认为，我们的性格特征和行为模式大多是由生物因素所决定的。（63）这种理论的核心是，我们的环境同我们的才能、性格特征和行为即使有什么关系的话，也是微不足道的。这种理论甚至极端地坚持认为，我们的行为模式在很大程度上是先天决定的;因此，我们几乎完全受我们的本能所支配。

　　赞成环境因素论的那些人，即提倡培养教育的人，通常被称为行为主义者。他们声称，在决定我们的行为方式时，环境比以生理为基础的本能更为重要。一位名叫B.F.史基纳的行为主义者认为，人的行为模式完全是由周围环境塑造的。（64）行为主义者坚信，人像机器一样，对环境的刺激作出反应，这是他们行为的基础。

　　咱们来考察一下这两种理论对人的一种性格特征———智力———的不同解释。（65）支持天性论的人坚持说，我们生来就具有一定的学习才能，这是由生物因素决定的。勿庸说，他们认为，周围环境的各种因素并不严重影响基本上是先天的性格特征。而行为主义者却争辩说，我们的智力水平是我们各种经历相结合的产物。（66）行为主义者的看法是，如果一个儿童在有许多刺激物的环境里成长，而这些刺激物能够发展其作出适当反应的能力，那么，这个儿童将会有更高的智力发展。

　　这两种理论所包含的社会和政治内涵是意味深长的。（67）在美国，黑人在标准化智力测试中的成绩常常低于白人。这就使一些天性论的拥护者得出结论，黑人在生理上比白人略低一筹。（68）相反，行为主义者认为，成绩的差异是由于黑人往往被剥夺了白人在教育及其它环境方面所享有的许多有利条件。

　　2.1991年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　The fact is that the energy crisis，which has suddenly been officially announced，has been with us for a long time now，and will be with us for an even longer time.Whether Arab oil flows freely or not，it is clear to everyone that world industry cannot be allowed to depend on so fragile a base.（71）The supply of oil can be shut off unexpectedly at any time，and in any case，the oil wells will all run dry in thirty years or so at the present rate of use.

　　（72）New sources of energy must be found，and this will take time，but it is not likely to result in any situation that will ever restore that sense of cheap and plentiful energy we have had in the times past.For an indefinite period from here on，mankind is going to advance cautiously，and consider itself lucky that it can advance at all.

　　To make the situation worse，there is as yet no sign that any slowing of the world’s population is in sight.Although the birthrate has dropped in some nations，including the United States，the population of the world seems sure to pass six billion and perhaps even seven billion as the twentyfirst century opens.

　　（73）The food supply will not increase nearly enough to match this，which means that we are heading into a crisis in the matter of producing and marketing food.

　　Taking all this into account，what might we reasonably estimate supermarkets to be like in the year2001?

To begin with，the world food supply is going to become steadily tighter over the next thirty years—even here in the United States.By2001，the population of the United States will be at least two hundred fifty million and possibly two hundred seventy million，and the nation will find it difficult to expand food production to fill the additional mouths.（74）This will be particularly true since energy pinch will make it difficult to continue agriculture in the highenergy American fashion that makes it possible to combine few farmers with high yields.

　　It seems almost certain that by2001the United States will no longer be a great foodexporting nation and that，if necessity forces exports，it will be at the price of belttightening at home.

　　In fact，as food items will end to decline in quality and decrease in variety，there is very likely to be incresing use of flavouring additives.（75）Until such time as mankind has the sense to lower its population to the point where the planet can provide a comfortable support for all，people will have to accept moreunnatural food.

　　1991年英译汉试题参考译文

　　事实是，虽然官方是突然宣布能源危机的存在，然而长期以来我们一直面临着能源危机，而且这种情况今后将会持续更长的时间。不管阿拉伯的石油能否源源不断地外流，人人都清楚，再也不能让世界工业依赖于如此脆弱的能源基础。（71）石油供应可能随时会被切断;不管怎样，以目前这种消费速度，只需30年左右，所有的油井都会枯竭。

　　（72）必须找到新的能源，这需要时间;而过去我们感觉到的那种能源廉价而充足的情况将不大可能再出现了。在今后的漫长的时间内，人类将谨慎前进，而它感到幸运的是它确实能够前进。

　　使目前状况糟糕的是，至今尚无迹象表明，世界人口的增长在近期内会减慢。虽然包括美国在内的一些国家的出生率已经下降，但是在21世纪初世界人口似乎肯定会超过60亿，或许甚至超过70亿。

　　（73）食品供应的增加将远远赶不上人口的增长，这就意味着我们在粮食的生产和购销方面已陷入危机。

　　考虑到所有这些因素，我们可以适当地估计一下2001年的超级市场将会是什么样子呢?首先，今后的30年内，世界的食品供应日益紧张，甚至美国这里也不例外。到2001年美国人口将至少达到2亿5千万，也可能是2亿7千万。那时，美国将很难扩大食品生产来满足人口增长的需要。（74）这种困境将是确定无疑的，因为能源的匮乏使农业无法以高能消费这种美国耕作方式继续下去了，而这种耕作方式可以投入少数农民就获得高产。

　　几乎可以肯定，到2001年美国将再也不是一个食品输出国;如果必须出口的话，那么其代价就是美国国内人民将勒紧裤带。

　　实际上，由于各种食品往往会质量下降、品种减少，这就有可能更多地使用调味添加物。（75）除非人类终于意识到要把人口减少到这样的程度，使地球能为所有人提供足够的饮食，否则人们将不得不接受更多的人造食品。

　　3.1992年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　Intellingenceat best is an assumptive construct—the meaning of the word has never been clear.（71）There is more agreement on the kinds of behavior referred to by the term than there is on how to interpret or classify them.But it is generally agreed that a person of high intelligence is one who can grasp ideas readily，make distinctions，reason logically，and make ue of verbal and mathematical symbols in solving problems.An intelligence test is a rough measure of a child’s capacity for learning the kinds of things required in school.It does not measure character，social adjustment，physical endurance，manual skills，or artistic abilities.It is not supposed to—it was not designed for such purposes.（72）To criticise it for such failure is roughly comparable to criticising a thermometer for not measuring wind velocity.

　　The other thing we have to notice is that the assessment of the intelligence of any subject is essentially a comparative affair.

　　（73）Now since the assessment of intelligence is a comparative matter we must be sure that the scale with which we are comparing our subjects provides avalidorfaircomparison.It is here that some of the difficulties which interest us begin.Any test performed involves at least three factors:the intention to do one’s best，the knowledge required for understanding what you have to do，and the intellectual ability to do it.（74）The first two must be equal for all who are being compared，if any comparison in terms of intelligence is to be made.In school populations in our culture these assumptions can be made fair and reasonable，and the value of intelligence testing has been proved thoroughly.Its value lies，of course，in its providing a satisfactory basis for prediction.No one is in the least interested in the marks a little child gets on his test;what we are interested in is whether we can conclude from his mark on the test that the child will do better or worse than other children of his age at tasks which we think requiregeneral intelligence.（75）On the whole such a conclusion can be drawn with a certain degree of confidence，but only if the child can be assumed to have had the same attitude towards the test as the others with whom he is being compared，and only if he was not punished by lack of relevant information which they possessed.

　　1992年英译汉试题参考译文

　　智力充其量只是一个假设性的概念，因为智力的含义从来就是模糊的。（71）人们对智力所指的不同表现，比对这些表现如何进行解释或分类，看法更为一致。但是一般认为，智力好的人是能够迅速领会思想、区分事物、进行逻辑推理并运用文字和数字符号来解决问题的人。智力测验只是粗略衡量一个儿童学习学校所要求的不同知识的能力。智力测验并不测定人的品格、社会适应能力、身体耐力、手工技能或艺术才能。智力测试没有这样的任务，因为它并不是为这样的用途而设计的。（72）批评智力测试不反映上述情况，就犹如批评温度计不测风速一样。

　　我们要注意的另一件事是，对任何测试对象的智力评估基本上是比较而言的事。

　　（73）既然对智力的评估是比较而言的事，那么我们必须确保，在对我们的对象进行比较时，我们所使用的尺度能提供有效的或公平的比较。由此而产生一些引起我们关注的问题。进行任何测试至少要包含三个因素:尽力考好测试的意向，了解要参加考试所需要的知识，以及做这件事情的智能。（74）如果要从智力方面进行任何比较的话，那么对所有比较对象来说，前两个因素必须是一样的。在我们培养的学生中，上述设想可以公平合理。这就完全证明了智力测试的价值。它的价值当然就在它对预测提供了满意的依据。没有人丝毫会对一个儿童在测试中所取得的分数感兴趣。我们感兴趣的是，我们能否从他测试的成绩中得出结论:这个儿童和与他年龄相同的其他儿童相比，在完成我们认为需要一般智力的任务时，他会做得更好还是更差。（75）总的来说，得出这种结论是有一定程度把握的，但是必须具备两个条件:能够假定这个孩子对测试的态度和与他比较的另一些孩子的态度相同;他也没有因为缺乏别的孩子已掌握的有关知识而被扣分。

　　4.1993年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　（71）The method of scientific investigation is nothing but the expression of the necessary mode of working of the human mind;it is simply the mode by which all phenomena are reasoned about and given precise and exact explanation.There is no more difference，but there is just the same kind of difference，between the mental operations of a man of science and those of an ordinary person，as there is between the operations and methods of a baker or of a butcher weighing out his goods in common scales，and the operations of a chemist in performing a difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely graded weights.（72）It is not that the scales in the one case，and the balance in the other，differ in the principles of their construction or manner of working;but that the latter is much finer apparatus and of course much more accurate in its measurement than the former.

　　You will understand this better，perhaps，if I give you some familiar examples.（73）You have all heard it repeated that men of science work by means of induction（归纳法）and deduction，that by the help of these operations，they，in a sort of sense，manage to extract from Nature certain natural laws，and that out of these，by some special skill of their own，they build up their theories.（74）And it is imagined by many that the operations of the common mind can be by no means compared with these processes，and that they have to be acquired by a sort of special training.To hear all these large words，you would think that the mind of a man of science must be constituted differently from that of his fellow men;but if you will not be frightened by terms，you will discover that you are quite wrong，and that all these terrible apparatus are being used by yourselves every day and every hour of your lives.

　　There is a wellknown incident in one of Moliere’s plays，where the author makes the hero express unbounded delight on being told that he had been talking prose（散文）during the whole of his life.In the same way，I trust that you will take comfort，and be delighted with yourselves，on the discovery that you have been acting on the principles of inductive and deductive philosophy during the same period.（75）Probably there is not one here who has not in the course of the day had occasion to set in motion a complex train of reasoning，of the very same kind，though differing in degree，as that which a scientific man goes through in tracing the causes of natural phenomena.

　　1993年英译汉试题参考译文

　　（71）科学研究的方法不过是人类思维活动的必要表达方式，也就是对一切现象进行思索并给以精确而严谨解释的表达方式。科学家的思维活动与普通人的思维活动之间的区别和面包商或卖肉者用普通磅秤称货的操作方法与化学家在进行艰难而复杂的分析时用天平和精密刻度的砝码的操作方法之间的区别是完全相同的，此外就没有别的区别了。（72）这并不是说面包师或卖肉者所用的磅秤和化学家所用的天平在构造原理和工作方式上存在差别，而是说与前者相比，后者是一种更精密得多的装置，因而在计量上必然更准确得多。

　　要是我给你举几个熟悉的例子，或许你会更清楚地理解这一点。（73）你们多次听说过，科学家是用归纳法和演绎法工作的，他们用这些方法，在某种意义上说，力求从自然界找出某些自然规律，然后他们根据这些规律，用自己的某种非同一般的本领，建立起他们的理论。（74）许多人以为，普通人的思维活动根本无法与科学家的思维过程相比，认为这些思维过程必须经过某种专门训练才能掌握。听了上面的夸张言词后，你会以为，科学家的思维结构与普通人的思维结构大不相同;但是假如你没有被这些言词所吓倒，你会发现，你是完全错了;你还会发现，所有这些令人望而生畏的说法你自己每时每刻也在使用。

在莫里哀的一个剧本中有这样一个著名的插曲:作者让主人公得知他在整个一生中一直在说散文后，表现出无限的喜悦。同样，我认为，当你一旦发现你在一生中一直在按归纳法和演绎法的哲理办事时，你也会感到欣慰和陶醉。（75）大概这里不会有人一整天都没有机会进行一连串复杂的思考活动，这些思考活动与科学家在探索自然现象原因时所经历的思考活动，尽管复杂程度不同，但在类型上是完全一样的。

　　5.1994年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　According to the new school of scientists，technology is an overlooked force in expanding the horizons of scientific knowledge.（71）Science moves forward，they say，not so much through the insights of great men of genius as because of more ordinary things like improved techniques and tools.（72）In short，a leader of the new school contends，the scientific revolution，as we call it，was largely the improvement and invention and use of a series of instruments that expanded the reach of science in innumerable directions.

　　（73）Over the years，tools and technology themselves as a source of fundamental innovation have largely been ignored by historians and philosophers of science.The modern school that hails technology argues that such masters as Galileo，Newton，Maxwell，Einstein，and inventors such as Edison attached great importance to，and derived great benefit from，craft information and technological devices of different kinds that were usable in scientific experiments.

　　The centerpiece of the argument of a technologyyes，geniusno advocate was an analysis of Galileo’s role at the start of the scientific revolution.The wisdom of the day was derived from Ptolemy，an astronomer of the second century，whose elaborate system of the sky put Earth at the center of all heavenly motions.（74）Galileo’s greatest glory was that in 1609 he was the first person to turn the newly invented telescope on the heavens to prove that the planets revolve around the sun rather than around the Earth.But the real hero of the story，according to the new school of scientists，was the long evolution in the improvement of machinery for making eyeglasses.

　　Federal policy is necessarily involved in the technology vs.genius dispute.（75）Whether the Government should increase the financing of pure science at the expense of technology or vice versa（反之）often depends on the issue of which is seen as the driving force.

　　1994年英译汉试题参考译文

　　新学派的科学家认为，技术是扩大科学知识的范围中被忽视的力量。（71）他们说，科学的发展与其说源于天才伟人的真知灼识，不如说源于改进了的技术和工具等等更为普通的东西。（72）新学派的一位领袖人物坚持说:简言之，我们所称谓的科学革命，主要是指一系列器具的改进、发明和使用，这些改进、发明和使用使科学发展的范围无所不及。

　　（73）工具和技术本身作为根本性创新的源泉多年来在很大程度上被科学史学家和科学思想家们忽视了。为技术而欢呼的现代学派争辩说，像伽利略、牛顿、麦克斯威尔、爱因斯坦这样的科学大师和像爱迪生这样的发明家十分重视科学实验中能使用的各种不同的工艺信息和技术装置并从中受益匪浅。

　　鼓吹技术第一、天才第二的论据的核心是分析了科学革命初期伽利略的作用。那时的聪明才智取自第二世纪的天文学家托勒密;了精心创立的太空体系把地球置于所有天体运动的中心。（74）伽利略的最光辉的业绩在于他在1609年第一个把新发明的望远镜对准天空，以证实行星是围绕太阳旋转，而不是围绕地球。但是，在新学派科学家看来，这件事中真正重要的因素是制造镜片的机械长期以来不断的改进和发展。

　　联邦政府的政策必然要卷入到技术与天才之争中去。（75）政府究竟是以减少对技术的经费投入来增加对纯理论科学的经费投入，还是相反，这往往取决于把哪一方看作是驱动力量。

　　6.1995年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　The standardized educational or psychological tests that are widely used to aid in selecting，classifying，assigning，or promoting students，employees，and military personnel have been the target of recent attacks in books，magazines，the daily press，and even in Congress.（71）The target is wrong，for in attacking the tests，critics divert attention from the fault that lies with illinformed or incompetent users.The tests themselves are merely tools，with characteristics that can be measured with reasonable precision under specified conditions.Whether the results will be valuable，meaningless，or even misleading depends partly upon the tool itself but largely upon the user.

　　All informed predicitions of future performance are based upon some knowledge of relevant past performance:school grades，research productivity，sales records，or whatever is appropriate.（72）How well the predictions will be validated by later performance depends upon the amount，reliability，and appropriateness of the information used and on the skill and wisdom with which it is interpreted.Anyone who keeps careful score knows that the information available is always incomplete and that the predictions are always subject to error.

Standardized tests should be considered in this context.They provide a quick objective method of getting some kinds of information about what a person learned，the skills he has developed，or the kind of person he is.The information so obtained has，qualitatively，the same advantages and shortcomings as other kinds of information.（73）Whether to use tests，other kinds of information，or both in a particular situation depends，therefore，upon the evidence from experience concerning comparative validity and upon such factors as cost and availability.

　　（74）In general，the tests work most effectively when the qualities to be measured can be most precisely defined and least effectively when what is to be measured or predicated can not be well defined.Properly used，they provide a rapid means of getting comparable information about many people.Sometimes they identify students whose high potential has not been previously recognized，but there are many things they do not do.（75）For example，they do not compensate for gross social inequality，and thus do not tell how able an underprivileged youngster might have been had he grown up under more favorable circumstances.

　　1995年英译汉试题参考译文

　　标准化教育测试或心理同在广泛应用于协助选拔、委派或提拔学生、雇员和军事人员;这些测试一直是某些人近年来在书本、杂志、日报，甚至国会中进行抨击的目标。（71）把标准化测试作为抨击目标是错误的，因为在抨击这类测试时，批评者没有注意到其弊病来自测试使用者对测试不解或使用不当。这些测试本身只是一种工具。它的各种特性可以在规定条件下用适当的精度来测定。测试的结果是在有价值的、无意义的、还是误导的，部分取决于这种工具本身，但主要取决于测试使用者。

　　所有对未来表现的有见识地的预测都是以在某种程度上了解有关过去的表现为基础的:学校学习成绩、研究效益、销售记录或任何符合需要的信息。（72）这些预测在多大程度上为的后来的表现所证实，这取决于所采用信息的数量、可靠性和适宜性，以及解释这些信息的技能和才智。任何仔细记分的人都知道，所得到的信息总是不完全的，而且这些预测也总是会有错误的。

　　应该根据这种观点去考察标准化测试。标准化测试提供了快速、客观地得到某些信息的方法，这些信息是有关一个人所学到的知识、他所获得的技能，或者他是属于哪一类型的人。这样得到的信息，从性质上讲，与其它种类的信息一样具有优点或缺点。（73）因此，在某一特定情况下，究竟是采用测试还是其他种类的信息，或是两者兼用，须凭有关相对效度的经验依据而定，也取决于诸如费用和有无来源等因素。

　　（74）一般来说，当所要测定的特征能很精确界定时，测试最为有效;而当所要测定或预测的东西不能明确地界定时，测试的效果则最差。这些测试如能恰当使用，就能提供一种快速的方法来获得有关许多人的可比性信息。有时这些测试能鉴别出一些学生，他们很高的潜在能力过去一直没有被承认。但是也有入场多事情这些测试是不能胜任的。（75）例如，测试并不弥补明显的社会不公;因此，它们不能说明一个物质条件差的年轻人，如果在较好的环境下成长的话，会有多大才干。

　　7.1996年英译汉试题及参考译文

　　The differences in relative growth of various areas of scientific research have several causes.（71）Some of these causes are completely reasonable results of social needs.Others are reasonable consequences of particular advances in science being to some extent self-accelerating.Some，however，are less reasonable processes of different growth in which preconceptions of the form scientific theory ought to take，by persons in authority，act to alter the growth pattern of different areas.This is a new problem probably not yet unavoidable;but it is a frightening trend.（72）This trend began during the Second World War，when several governments came to the conclusion that the specific demands that a government wants to make of its scientific establishment cannot generally be foreseen in detail.It can be predicted，however，that from time to time，questions will arise which will require specific scientific answers.It is therefore generally valuable to treat the scientific establishment as a resource or machine to be kept in functional order.（73）This seems mostly effectively done by supporting a certain amount of research not related to immediate goals but of possible consequence in the future.

　　This kind of support，like all government support，requires decisions about the appropriate recipients of funds.Decisions based on utility as opposed to lack of utility are straight forward.But a decision among projects none of which has immediate utility is more difficult.The goal of the supporting agencies is the praisable one of supportinggoodas opposed tobadscience，but a valid determination is difficult to make.Generally，the idea of good science tends to become confused with the capacity of the field in question to generate an elegant theory.（74）However，the world is so made that elegant systems are in principle unable to deal with some of the worlds more fascinating and delightful aspects.（75）New forms of thought as well as new subjects for thought must arise in the future as they have in the past，giving rise to new standards of elegance.

　　1996年英译汉试题参考译文

　　科学研究的各种领域的相关发展，存在若干原因。（71）在这些原因中，有些完全是自然而然地来自社会需求。另一些则是由于科学在一定程度上自我加速而产生某些特定发展的必然结果。然而，有些发展速度的差异其原因就不尽合理，这是因为某些权威人干对科学理论研究应采取何种形式有先入为主的想法，这些想法起了改变不同科学领域的发展模式的作用。这是一个新问题，也许并非是不可避免的问题，但其趋势却令人担忧。（72）这种趋势始于第二次世界大战期间，当时一些国家的政府得出结论:政府要向科研机构提出的具体要求通常是无法详尽预见的。然而，人们可以预见，往往会出现一些问题要求科学做出具体的回答。因此，将科研机构视为一种资源或一台机器，应维持其良好的运行状态。这样做通常是很有价值的。（73）给某些与当前目标无关但将来可能产生影响的科研以支持，看来通常能有效地解决这个问题。

　　此种资助也与所有政府资助一样，需要决定合适的投资对象。根据某一项目是否有效来做出决策是明确无误的。但是在几个都没有直接效用的项目中，要做出抉择就特别困难。资助机构的目标是支持好的科学，而不资助坏的科学，那是值得赞扬的。然而要做出正确的抉择却是困难的。人们往往将好科学与该科学是否有能力提出一套完美的理论混淆起来。（74）然而，世界就是如此，完美的体系一般是无法解决世上某些更加引人入胜的课题的。（75）同过去一样，将来必然会出现新的思维方式和新的思维对象，给完美以新的标准。