As goods and services improved, people were persuaded to spend their money on changing from old to new, and found the change worth the expense. When an airline equipped itself with jets, for example, its costs (and therefore air fare) would go up, but the new planes meant such an improvement that the higher cost was justified. A new car (or wireless, washing machine, electric kettle) made life so much more comfortable than the old one that the high cost of replacement was fully repaid. Manufacturers still cry their goods as persuasively as ever, but are the improvements really worth paying for? In many fields, things have now reached such a high standard of performance that further progress is very limited and very, very expensive. Airlines, for example, go to enormous expense in buying the latest jets , in which vast research costs have been spent on ly small improvements. If we abandon these vast costs we might lose the chance of cutting minutes away from flying times; but wouldn't it be better to see airfares drop dramatically, as capital costs become ly insignificant? Again, in the context of a 70 m. p. h. Limit, with lines of cars traveling so close as to control each other's speeds, improvements in performance are actually irrelevant; improvements in handling are unnecessary, as most production cars grip the road perfectly, and comfort has now reached a very high level. Small improvements here are unlikely to be worth the thousands that anybody replacing an ordinary family car every two years may have spent on them. Let us instead have cars -- or wireless, electric kettles, washing machines, television sets -- which are made to last, and not to be replaced. Significant progress is obviously a good thing, but the insignificant progression from model-change to model-change is not. When manufactures have improved the performance of their products to a certain level, then it would be _ . A) justified for them to cut the price B) unnecessary for them to make any new changes C) difficult and costly to further better them D) insignificant for them to cut down the research costs
C
Canadian scientists have found that the more emotional or mental challenges a person faces in a day, the less determined they become to work out physically. However, the findings should not stop us from keeping fit. Experts believe that willpower is like a muscle, and needs to be exercised to help one avoid the temptation spending a night on the couch instead. Kathleen Martin-Ginis, a professor of kinesiology-the science of movement--who led the study, says everyone has a limited amount of willpower, and that it will be reduced by stress. Miss Martin-Ginis, of Canada's McMaster University, explains," Cognitive tasks, as well as tasks such as regulating one's emotions, can reduce one's capacity to force oneself to exercise. " Her team of scientists performed a so-called "Stroop" test on volunteers to reach their conclusions. The experiment involved showing participants words associated with color1s but printed in different color1s-for example, the word "blue" written in red ink Participants were divided into two groups. One group was asked to name the color1 of the ink, instead to say the printed word, while the other wasn't Martin-Girus says, "After we used this cognitive task to use up their self-regulatory capacity, the participants didn't exercise as hard as those who had not performed the task " The more people concentrated on the cognitive task, the more likely they were to skip exercise sessions over the next eight week You only have so much willpower. However, there are ways to strengthen willpower. The study found the listening to music before going to the gym can help, as well as making a commitment to work out with friends. It also concluded that willpower can be stretched by constant cake, or forcing oneself to study an extra hour each night Martin- Ginis adds," There are strategies people can use to help revitalize themselves after they've used up their self-regulation Willpower is like a muscle: it needs to be used to stay strong. " What can we infer from the passage? , A) Will power can be challenged to become powerful. B) McMaster University is famous for its kinesiology. C) Effective ways to resist temptations have been found D) The study has an impact on the science of movement
A
(Q).
My husband and son took a New York-to-Milwaukee flight that was supposed to leave Friday at 11:29 am. The flight boarded after 4 pm and didn't leave the gate until 4:40, and half an hour later the pilot announced it would be another hour until takeoff. At that point a Jewish family, worried about violating the Sabbath , asked to get off. Going back to the gate cost the plane its place in line for takeoff, and the flight was eventually cancelled. Was the airline right to grant that request? M. W, Norwalk, CONN. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Situations like that can bring out the worst in people. But despite the increasing resentment of a plane full of people, the pilot tried to do the right thing. He went out of his way to satisfy one family's urgent need. He should not have done so. Passengers bought tickets in the belief that the airline's primary goal was to get them to their destination as close to the schedule as possible. Once they got on the plane and the doors are locked, it's not correct to announce that the rules have changed and that a personal (as opposed to medical) emergency --no matter how urgent -- might take precedence . _ , since on a plane, even a slight delay can spread outward, from the people in the cabin to those meeting them to the passengers waiting to board the plane for the next leg of its journey and so on. It would also be true if the personal emergency were not religious -- if someone suddenly realized she'd made a professional mistake that might cost her millions, and she had to race back to the office to fix it. If a religious practice does nothing to harm others, then airlines should make a reasonable effort to accommodate it. Though that family has every right to observe the Sabbath, it has no right to enlist an airplane full of captive bystanders to help them do so. By boarding a flight on a Friday afternoon, the family knowingly risked running into trouble. The risk was theirs alone to bear. What do we know from the reply letter? A) The pilot did the right thing in spite of the fierce resentment. B) The plane should turn back if anyone aboard is seriously ill. C) Anybody who has boarded has no chance to get off the plane. D) Any flight shouldn't change its schedule no matter what has happened.
(A).
B