To summarize what has been said thus far about the definition and development of an addiction, an addiction is the habit of pacifying or blocking an urge by engaging in the desired activity or using the desired substance. The urge develops because past pleasurable experience and related benefits from the substance or activity are expected to reoccur on the next occasion. Urges are uncomfortable, and engaging in the addictive behavior is also experienced as pleasurable simply because (or perhaps only because) the urge is driven away. There is a broad range of prices and benefits for addictions. The addiction is negative if, for that individual, the price outweighs the pleasure and benefits. Various predisposing factors contribute to the development of an addiction. An addiction does not necessarily get stronger over time. If the pleasure expected from the addiction is the reduction of a negative mood, the addiction may, for that individual, be a primary means for coping with stress. In a strong addiction the addictive behavior has become integrated into many aspects of the individual's life. As we mature, the pleasures we crave also mature, and consequently our addictions can change.
So, if you decide that some activity you regularly indulge in is negatively addictive, how should you go about remedying the situation? Motivation is fundamental, because if you maintain motivation you can persist past any temporary obstacles. In most cases, the simplest way to establish and maintain motivation is to have an accurate and complete Benefits of Stopping/Cutting Back list, and to revise this list to reflect the changes that are occurring as progress and setbacks occur. From this list make a shorter Major Benefits list, the benefits which are the primary reasons you are stopping or cutting back. A Major Benefits list may be easier to remember than the entire original list. If these benefits are important enough to you, remembering them (and perhaps picturing them) regularly will be your motivation. As in learning any new skill, setbacks and rough spots should be expected, and made the most of as opportunities for learning. Do not allow setbacks to become distorted evidence for incorrect beliefs. Any skill can be improved upon with time and consistent practice, and good advice.
Questions 2-4
Complete the sentences below with words taken from Reading Passage 1. Use NO MORE THAN ONE WORD OR NUMBER for each blank. Write your answers in boxes 2-4 on your answer sheet.
2. An addiction is considered to be getting stronger when it provides greater for the addict.
3. Addictions function to or an urge.
4. A negative addiction is one for which the price the addict pays the reward.
Questions 5-8
Do the following statements agree with the views of the writer of Reading Passage 1? In boxes 5-8 on your answer sheet write
YES if the statement agrees with the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
5. All addictions ultimately damage a person's health.
6. Addiction to a substance is more harmful than addiction to an activity.
7. The pleasure of a habit often fades with the passage of time.
8. If the frequency of addictive behavior is controlled, the harm can also be controlled.
Questions 9-10
Using NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS, answer the following questions. Write your answers in boxes 9 and 10 on your answer sheet.
9. What, according to the author, is the most important thing in conquering an addiction?
10. The author suggests two techniques for utilizing a list of Major Benefits. Name one of these.
READING PASSAGE 2
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 11-25 which are based on Reading Passage 2.
FACING THE PAST
The perception of archaeologists and Native Americans as adversaries in the writing of Indian history understandably captures much media attention. Ten years after the passage of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), tensions remain high over fundamental questions raised by NAGPRA and related legal and ethical challenges affecting how archaeology is practiced in the United States. No Native American burial site may be disturbed without express permission from the local authorities, who in turn must get permission from the council of the local Native American tribe. Jeffrey L. Hantman, associate professor and chair of the department of anthropology at the University of Virginia, said, "From our own experience, as representatives of archaeological and Native American communities, we know that controversy does not have to be the norm. Our efforts over the past decade tell us that a cooperative relationship between Native American tribes and archaeologists is not only possible, but is beneficial in ways we ourselves did not initially imagine. We have learned to listen to each other's interests and needs concerning the respectful treatment of archaeological sites, objects, and human remains. We know that clearcut answers and consensus on some ethical questions are not readily available and that members of the communities to which we belong may not always agree with all of our decisions."
During the University of Virginia's Rapidan Mound study, which led to the October 1998 reburial of remains of hundreds of Monacans from that site, meetings were held with the Monacan Tribal Council about the work and the possible retention of a sample for possible future study. After much discussion and compromise, the Council permitted a sample to be kept. In the case of the Hayes Creek Mound, the keeping of samples was not desired by the Tribe, but in those discussions a member of the Council inquired about facial reconstruction. To the Monacan tribal members, none of whom had seen any image of their ancestors prior to photographs dating to ca. 1914, it became a collective and decidedly humanistic wish. Could they see one or more of their ancestors' faces? The skull of a Monacan woman dug up in 1901 provided the basis for this reconstruction, affording today's Monacans a look at their ancestors.
For a whole year, forensic artist Sharon Long of Sparks, Nevada, worked on reconstructing the faces of a Monacan Indian man and woman who lived in what is now west-central Virginia between A.D. 1000 and 1400. The moving force behind the project has been the modern descendants of these people. Their motive, quite simple and yet quite powerful, is to see the faces of their ancestors.
After the skull is cleaned, minute measurements are taken to determine the depth the skin would have been at the various parts of the head. Then a false skin is built up on the skull using strips of clay. When this is completed satisfactorily, a separate clay model of the head is made. A reproduction of the head, of which the face is the most important part in this project, is achieved from a latex mold taken from the model.
The skulls on which the reconstructions are based were removed, along with the skeletal remains of hundreds of people from a mound on Hayes Creek, by antiquarian E.P. Valentine in 1901. Valentine took them to Richmond, where they were displayed in a museum founded by his family. By 1990, the remains had been placed in the care of Virginia's Department of Historic Resources. Historical and archaeological evidence links these remains to the Monacan Indians, who, despite Thomas Jefferson's prediction that their culture would soon die out, still live in the area today. This evidence is strong enough for the remains to be returned to the Monacans under NAGPRA. The Monacan Tribal Council, in discussing the disposition of the remains with Hantman, raised the possibility of having facial reconstructions made from these ancestral remains. Karenne Wood, director of historic research for the Monacan Indian Nation, and Diane Shields, the coordinator of historic research, applied to the Virginia Humanities Foundation for a grant to fund the facial reconstructions.
The reconstructions of the ancient Monacan faces are now displayed in the Monacan Ancestral Museum in Amherst, Virginia. "Monacan tribal members were eager to see the reproduced likenesses of their ancestors," said Wood. "Many hurried to visit the museum once the reconstructions had arrived. Several tribal members noted a resemblance between the likenesses and two Monacan people of the previous generation. These tribal members were thrilled to realize that Monacan identity is still so recognizable. They left the museum with a renewed sense of pride in their Indian heritage and perhaps a better understanding of the cultural continuity that has allowed the Monacan Nation to survive."
Questions 11-13
The author of Reading Passage 2 mentions several influences which led to the successful reconstruction of the Monacan faces. One of these was the University of Virginia. Identify THREE other influences. Using NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS for each answer, write the three influences separately in boxes 11-13 on your answer sheet.
Questions 14-18
The sentences below describe the various stages in the reconstruction of the face of an ancient Monacan Indian. Rearrange them so that they are in the correct order.
14. A. Strips of clay are molded onto the skull to represent the skin.
15. B. The model is placed in a latex mold.
16. C. The depth of facial tissue is gauged.
17. D. A separate clay model of the built-up skull is made.
18. E. A reproduction of the face is produced.
Questions 19-21
Complete the partial summary below. Choose your answers A-F from the list below the summary and write them in boxes19-21 on your answer sheet.
NB There are more phrases than spaces, so you will not use them all. You may use any of the phrases more than once.
The passage of a bill in the United States, protecting the burial sites and other historical remains of Native Americans, known as C (Example), restricted the activities of archaeologists in their excavations of such sites and the preservation of such relics. But a breakthrough has been made through cooperation, promoting the study of the past while ensuring 19 for 20 Being able to see what their ancestors looked like has brought a new source of pride to 21.
A. a mound at Hayes Creek
B. facial reconstruction
C. NAGRA
D. the modern descendants of the Monacans
E. respectful treatment
F. the Native American heritage
Question 22
Choose the appropriate letters A-D, and write it in box 22 on your answer sheet.
22. Which of the following was NOT interested in preserving the Monacan heritage?
A. E.P. Valentine
B. Thomas Jefferson
C. Jeffrey L. Hantman
D. Karenne Wood
Question 23-25
Choose the appropriate letters A-D and write them in boxes 23-25 on your answer sheet.
23. Who has the right to decide what happens to Monacan relics?
A. The University of Virginia
B. NAGPRA
C. The Monacan Ancestral Museum
D. The Monacan Tribal Council
24. Why was Sharon Long chosen to reconstruct the faces?
A. Because she is a member of the Monacan tribe.
B. Because she is an archaeologist specializing in the ancient Native Americans.
C. Because she is from Sparks, Nevada.
D. Because she is an artist specializing in reconstructing corpses.
25. According to the writer, the success of the facial reconstruction project:
A. heralds a new era of cooperation between Native Americans an archaeologists.
B. puts to rest the spirits of the people buried at the Hayes Creek Mound.
C. proves that the modern Monacan people look exactly like their ancestors.
D. raises complex legal and ethical problems.
READING PASSAGE 3
You are advised to spend about 20 minutes on Questions 26-38 which are based on Reading Passage 3.
Is the Electric Vehicle Era at Hand?
Cars account for half the oil consumed in the U.S., about half the urban pollution and one fourth the greenhouse gases. They take a similar toll of resources in other industrial nations and in the cities of the developing world. As vehicle use continues to increase in the coming decade, the U.S. and other countries will have to address these issues or else face unacceptable economic, health-related and political costs. It is unlikely that oil prices will remain at their current low level or that other nations will accept a large and growing U.S. contribution to global climatic change.
Policymakers and industry have four options: reduce vehicle use, increase the efficiency and reduce the emissions of conventional gasoline-powered vehicles, switch to less noxious fuels, or find less polluting propulsion systems. The last of these—in particular the introduction of vehicles powered by electricity—is ultimately the only sustainable option. The other alternatives are attractive in theory but in practice are either impractical or offer only marginal improvements. For example, reduced vehicle use could solve congestion woes and a host of social and environmental problems, but evidence from around the world suggests that it is very difficult to make people give up their cars to any significant extent. In the U.S., mass-transit ridership and carpooling have declined since World War II. Even in western Europe, with fuel prices averaging more than $1 a liter (about $4 a gallon) and with pervasive mass transit and dense populations, cars still account for 80 percent of all passenger travel.
Improved energy efficiency is also appealing, but automotive fuel economy has barely budged in 10 years. Alternative fuels such as methanol or natural gas, burned in internal-combustion engines, could be introduced at relatively low cost, but they would lead to only marginal reductions in pollution and greenhouse emissions. Electric-drive vehicles (those whose wheels are turned by electric motors rather than by a mechanical gasoline-powered engine) could reduce urban pollution and greenhouse emissions significantly over the coming decade. And they could lay a foundation for a transportation system that would ultimately be almost pollution-free. Although electrically driven vehicles have a history as old as that of the internal-combustion engine, a number of recent technological developments-including by-products of both the computer revolution and the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) in the 1980s—promise to make this form of transportation efficient and inexpensive enough to compete with gasolin.
The term "electric-drive vehicle" includes not only those cars powered by batteries charged with household current but also vehicles that generate electricity onboard or store it in devices other than batteries. Their common denominator is an efficient electric motor that drives the wheels and extracts energy from the car's motion when it slows down. Internal-combustion vehicles, in contrast, employ a constantly running engine whose power is diverted through a series of gears and clutches to drive the wheels and to turn a generator for the various electrically powered accessories in the car.
