【正文】 d to demonstrate mental capacity, even long after they39。ve lost it. The first part of his case is selfevident: pensions are protected while children39。s centers are closed, concepts such as sovereignty (最高權(quán)威) are prioritized over the far more urgent business of the future: climate change. Nostalgia (懷念) for a past the young wouldn39。t even recognize plays a central role, which is pletely unfair. Most of the arguments against giving sixyearolds a vote are that children would end up voting for something damaging and chaotic, if someone made unrealistic promises to them, which could never be realized. Well, it39。s not children39。s fault. Having said that, children do tend towards the progressive, having a natural sense of justice (which kicks in at the age of six months, psychologists have shown, by creating scenes of great unfairness to babies, and making them cry) and an underdeveloped sense of selfinterest. My kid, when he was six, made quite a forceful case against private property, on the basis that, since everybody needed a house, they shouldn39。t cost money, because nobody would want anyone else not to have one. Also, food should be free. It was a kind of preMarx munism, where you limit the coverage of the market to only those things that you wouldn39。t mind someone else not having. On that particular day, when we were registered as voters, my kid was quite far to the left of me, but in the normal run of things, we39。re united, which brings us to the point of the problem: children obey you on almost nothing, but they do seem to believe in your politics until they39。re adolescent. So giving kids the vote is really just a way of giving parents extra votes. And what can stop us having even more children, once there39。s so much enfranchisement (選舉權(quán)) in it for us? Now, if parents could be trusted to use their influence wisely, and hammer into children the politics it will take to assure a better future, then I wouldn39。t necessarily have a problem with that, apart from, obviously, that culture is already wildly twisted towards parents, and I can imagine a few nonparents boiling with fierce anger. But that39。s not worth talking about anyway, because parents can39。t be trusted, otherwise we39。d all already vote Green(綠黨). In short: no, sixyearolds should not get the vote。 but while we39。re here, if any votes e up in the near future, which will have an impact on the next five decades of British political life, alongside EU migrants, 16yearolds certainly should be enfranchised.（1）The author refers to his age of adulthood to prove that ________. A.certain rights are granted at different stages of lifeB.there39。s a mon standard for the age of adulthoodC.people mature at different rates in various aspectsD.a credit card is more difficult to get than the vote（2）People reject David Runciman39。s proposal because ________. A.they believe children are far from mature in many waysB.they are uncertain whether children can assume responsibilityC.they know the age to get the vote is not to be questionedD.they don39。t think a child can grow into adulthood earlier（3）What is the base for David Runciman39。s argument? A.Public ignorance of children39。s abilities.B.Inequalities of opportunity.C.A cultural preference for the old.D.The imbalance in political life.（4）The author talks about his kid to indicate that ________. A.children are in favor of a just society and tend to be idealisticB.children are innocent and don39。t want to be involved in politicsC.children are simpleminded and can fall for an adult39。s trickD.children are goodnatured and like to help people in need（5）The author thinks allowing children the vote may lead to ________. A.twisted cultureB.parents39。 objectionsC.misuse of rightsD.unusual maturation（6）What is the main point of the passage? A.There is a difference between adults and children.B.Allowing children the vote is not altogether absurd.C.The definition of adulthood is quite controversial.D.Parents should introduce politics to their children.【答案】 （1）C（2）A（3）D（4）A（5）C（6）B 【解析】【分析】本文是一篇議論文，講述了兒童成熟的速度是不同，所以作者認(rèn)為允許兒童投票的提議并不完全是荒謬的，如果將對(duì)未來(lái)50年的英國(guó)政治生活產(chǎn)生影響，16歲的孩子應(yīng)該被授予選舉權(quán)。 （1）考查細(xì)節(jié)理解。根據(jù)第一段中的“Indeed, maturation happens at varying speeds across different categories within the same individual, so I39。d say I was easily old enough to vote at 16, but nobody should have given me a credit card until I was 32, and I39。ve got the county court judgment to prove it.”可知，作者以他的成熟年齡來(lái)證明人們?cè)诟鱾€(gè)方面的成熟速度是不一樣的。故選C。 （2）考查推理判斷。根據(jù)第二段中的“Nobody would say that a sixyearold could be held criminally responsible, could be sent to war, could be capable of consent, could be given responsibility for anything.”沒(méi)人說(shuō)6歲的孩子會(huì)被追究刑事責(zé)任，會(huì)被送上戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)，會(huì)有同意的能力，會(huì)被賦予任何責(zé)任。由此推斷，人們拒絕David Runciman的提議是因?yàn)樗麄冋J(rèn)為孩子在很多方面還不夠成熟，不能被賦予相應(yīng)的責(zé)任。故選A。 （3）考查細(xì)節(jié)理解。根據(jù)第三段中的“Runciman39。s argument is that this is the only way to rebalance political life”可知，Runciman論點(diǎn)的基礎(chǔ)是，這是重新平衡政治生活的唯一途徑，即政治生活的不平衡導(dǎo)致他提出這個(gè)提議。故選D。 （4）考查推理判斷。根據(jù)倒數(shù)第四段中的“My kid, when he was six, made quite a forceful case against private property, on the basis that, since everybody needed a house, they shouldn39。t cost money, because nobody would want anyone else not to have one. Also, food should be free. It was a kind of preMarx munism, where you limit the coverage of the market to only those things that you wouldn39。t mind someone else not having.”可知，孩子反對(duì)私有財(cái)產(chǎn)，因?yàn)樗麄冇X(jué)得每個(gè)人需要房子，他們不應(yīng)該花錢(qián)買(mǎi)房，此外食物也應(yīng)該是免費(fèi)的，這是一種前馬克思共產(chǎn)主義的想法，由此可推測(cè)孩子更加公平，更期待理想社會(huì)。故選A。 （5）考查推理判斷。根據(jù)倒數(shù)第三段中的“So giving kids the vote is really just a way of giving parents extra votes.”可知，給孩子投票權(quán)其實(shí)只是給父母額外投票權(quán)的一種方式，由此推斷作者認(rèn)為給孩子投票權(quán)可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致投票權(quán)的濫用。故選C。 （6）考查主旨大意。根據(jù)最后一段“In short: no, sixyearolds should not get the vote。 but while we39。re here, if any votes e up in the near future, which will have an impact on the next five decades of British political life, alongside EU migrants, 16yearolds certainly should be enfranchised.”可知，作者認(rèn)為6歲的孩子不應(yīng)該獲得選舉權(quán)，但是如果將來(lái)有任何會(huì)影響英國(guó)以及歐盟移民未來(lái)50年政治生活的投票出現(xiàn)話，16歲的孩子應(yīng)該被賦予選舉權(quán)，由此可知作者認(rèn)為兒童被賦予選舉權(quán)并不完全是荒謬的。故選B。 【點(diǎn)評(píng)】本題考點(diǎn)涉及細(xì)節(jié)理解，推理判斷和主旨大意三個(gè)題型的考查，是一篇社會(huì)類閱讀，要求考生在捕捉細(xì)節(jié)信息的基礎(chǔ)上，進(jìn)一步根據(jù)上下文的邏輯關(guān)系，進(jìn)行分析，推理，概括和歸