Immediately relevant to game theory are the sex ratios in certain parasitic wasp species that have a large excess of females. In these species, fertilized eggs develop into females and unfertilized eggs into males. A female stores sperm and can determine the sex of each egg she lays by fertilizing it or leaving it unfertilized. By Fisher‘s genetic argument that the sex ratio will be favored which maximizes the number of descendants an individual will have and hence the number of gene copies transmitted, it should pay a female to produce equal numbers of sons and daughters. Hamilton, noting that the eggs develop within their host—the larva of another insect—and that the newly emerged adult wasps mate immediately and disperse, offered a remarkably cogent analysis. Since only one female usually lays eggs in a given larva, it would pay her to produce one male only, because this one male could fertilize all his sisters on emergence. Like Fisher, Hamilton looked for an evolutionarily stable strategy, but he went a step further in recognizing that he was looking for a strategy.
The author suggests that the work of Fisher and Hamilton was similar in that both scientists
A. conducted their research at approximately the same time
B. sought to manipulate the sex ratios of some of the animals they studied
C. sought an explanation of why certain sex ratios exist and remain stable
D. studied game theory, thereby providing important groundwork for the later development of strategy theory
E. studied reproduction in the same animal species
解析：定位到文章最后一句话,结合文章主旨直接得出答案。A. 新内容,same time; B. 新内容,manipulate;(注：sought是seek(寻求)的过去式;)C. 答案;D. 新内容,game theory(实际上该文是由长阅读截取的,未保留的部门是有涉及博弈论的内容的), later development; E. 虽然貌似一直都在说reproduction,但是文章主旨是强调sex ratios.
Extraordinary creative activity has been characterized as revolutionary, flying in the face of what is established and producing not what is acceptable but what will become accepted. According to this formulation, highly creative activity transcends the limits of an existing form and establishes a new principle of organization. However, the idea that extraordinary creativity transcends established limits is misleading when it is applied to the arts, even though it may be valid for the sciences. Difference between highly creative art and highly creative science arise in part from a difference in their goals. For the sciences, a new theory is the goal and end result of the creative act. Innovative science produces new propositions in terms of which diverse phenomena can be related to one another in more coherent ways. Such phenomena as a brilliant diamond or a nesting bird are relegated to the role of data, serving as the means for formulating or testing a new theory. The goal of highly creative art is very different: the phenomenon itself becomes the direct product of the creative act. Shakespeare's Hamlet is not a tract about the behavior of indecisive princes or the uses of political power; nor is Picasso's painting Guernica primarily a propositional statement about the Spanish Civil War or the evils of fascism. What highly creative artistic activity produces is not a new generalization that transcends established limits, but rather an aesthetic particular. Aesthetic particulars produced by the highly creative artist extend or exploit, in an innovative way, the limits of an existing form, rather than transcend that form.
This is not to deny that a highly creative artist sometimes establishes a new principle of organization in the history of an artistic field; the composer Monteverdi, who created music of the highest aesthetic value, comes to mind. More generally, however, whether or not a composition establishes a new principle in the history of music has little bearing on its aesthetic worth. Because they embody a new principle of organization, some musical works, such as the operas of the Florentine Camerata, are of signal historical importance, but few listeners or musicologists would include these among the great works of music. On the other hand, Mozart's The Marriage of Figaro is surely among the masterpieces of music even though its modest innovations are confined to extending existing means. It has been said of Beethoven that he toppled the rules and freed music from the stifling confines of convention. But a close study of his compositions reveals that Beethoven overturned no fundamental rules. Rather, he was an incomparable strategist who exploited limits the rules, forms, and conventions that he inherited from predecessors such as Haydn and Mozart, Handel and Bach in strikingly original ways.
1. The author regards the idea that all highly creative artistic activity transcends limits with
A. deep skepticism
B. strong indignation
C. marked indifference
D. moderate amusement
E. sharp derision
2. The author implies that an innovative scientific contribution is one that
A. is cited with high frequency in the publications of other scientists
B. is accepted immediately by the scientific com- munity
C. does not relegate particulars to the role of data
D. presents the discovery of a new scientific fact
E. introduces a new valid generalization
a. Innovative science produces new propositions in terms of which diverse phenomena can be related to one another in more coherent ways. Such phenomena as a brilliant diamond or a nesting bird are relegated to the role of data, serving as the means for formulating or testing a new theory.
这个是关于science的说明，大致想表明的就是innovative science produce new propositions 但是跟D选项的discover new scientific fact意思上还是有点差距的。因为文中的propositions主要是关于各种现象之间的关联性。并没说发现一个新的事实之类的。
b. What highly creative artistic activity produces is not a new generalization that transcends established limits, but rather an aesthetic particular.
这个就说的更加明显了，既然强调了艺术和科学的区别，然后说艺术并不是produce a new generalization，那么可以推断出就是科学produce a new generalization了。
3. The passage supplies information for answering which of the following questions?
A. Has unusual creative activity been characterized as revolutionary?
B. Did Beethoven work within a musical tradition that also included Handel and Bach?
C. Who besides Monteverdi wrote music that the author would consider to embody new principles of organization and to be of high aesthetic value?
C. 选项是说同时 embody new principle 和 have high aesthetic value 的人有哪些。而整个最后一段，都在将讲「有创新和高价值不一定相关」(has little bearing) ，先是举Florentine Camerata 说创新不一定意味着 masterpiece ，然后说莫扎特《费加罗的婚礼》虽然没什么创新，仍被认为很杰出。最后讲贝多芬的意思是，大家觉得贝多芬很成功，好像是因为打破了藩篱，但他其实并没有什么颠覆性的创新。所以后面列举的人，都和「同时」满足两个条件无关。
Influenced by the view of some twentieth-century feminists that women's position within the family is one of the central factors determining women's social position, some historians have underestimated the significance of the woman suffrage movement. These historians contend that nineteenth-century suffragism was less radical and, hence, less important than, for example, the moral reform movement or domestic feminism—two nineteenth-century movements in which women struggled for more power and autonomy within the family. True, by emphasizing these struggles, such historians have broadened the conventional view of nineteenth-century feminism, but they do a historical disservice to suffragism. Nineteenth-century feminists and anti-feminist alike perceived the suffragists' demand for enfranchisement as the most radical element in women's protest, in part because suffragists were demanding power that was not based on the institution of the family, women's traditional sphere.
The passage provides information to support which of the following statements about the historians discussed in the passage EXCEPT
A. They rely too greatly on the perceptions of the actual participants in the events they study.
B. Their assessment of the significance of nineteenth- century suffragism differs considerably from that of nineteenth-century feminists.
C. They devote too much attention to nineteenth- century suffragism at the expense of more radical movements that emerged shortly after the turn of the century.
解析：A错是因为那些historians被20世纪的女权运动者影响了，而不是十九世纪的女权运动者。c错是因为事实刚好相反，他们觉得suffrage 后面的movement更radical和更important。所以他们不会pay too much attentions 在suffrage上。B对是因为historians是站在20世纪的女权主义者角度讲的，所以和当时十九世纪的女权主义者想的不一样。