分科測驗英文模擬試題 Mock-3（挑戰級）
適用對象：高中三年級，已掌握標準分科難度，欲挑戰更高層次之學生 難度等級：挑戰級（Advanced Level — 難度超越歷屆分科測驗） 測驗時間：80 分鐘 總分：100 分 命題老師：威威老師
考試說明
Mock-3 為挑戰級試題，詞彙難度提升至 8000-10000 字彙量層級，閱讀文章長度增加至 400-500 字，題目設計更強調深度推論、作者立場分析及跨段落資訊整合。此試卷適合已能穩定在 Mock-1 及 Mock-2 取得 75 分以上之學生挑戰。
威威老師提醒：挑戰級試題的目的不是打擊信心，而是幫助你找出自己真正的弱點。如果在這份試卷中感到吃力，不要氣餒——這代表你已經碰觸到了自己的能力邊界，而邊界正是成長開始的地方。
答題注意事項：
- 所有選擇題皆為單選題
- 本卷部分題目設計有「誘答力極強」的干擾選項，請仔細分辨
- 閱讀測驗文章較長，請嚴格控制每篇閱讀時間
一、詞彙題（Vocabulary）
說明：第 1 至 10 題，每題選出最適合填入空格的單字或片語。本大題詞彙難度高於一般分科測驗，部分單字屬於學術高頻詞彙。每題 2 分，共 20 分。
1. The committee’s final report offered a scathing ______ of the administration’s handling of the public health crisis, citing systemic failures at every level of governance.
(A) endorsement (B) indictment (C) panegyric (D) eulogy
2. The author’s latest novel is a ______ exploration of the moral ambiguities that arise when personal loyalty conflicts with professional obligation, refusing to offer any easy resolution.
(A) superficial (B) perfunctory (C) nuanced (D) dogmatic
3. The ambassador’s ______ statement — carefully worded to avoid offending any of the parties involved in the conflict — was widely criticized as evasive and lacking in moral clarity.
(A) equivocal (B) unequivocal (C) candid (D) forthright
4. The rapid ______ of the coastal wetlands due to rising sea levels poses an existential threat to the hundreds of species that depend on this fragile ecosystem for survival.
(A) proliferation (B) accretion (C) degradation (D) consolidation
5. The historian’s thesis, while brilliantly argued, has been criticized for its selective use of evidence that ______ sources contradicting her central claim while amplifying those that support it.
(A) accentuates (B) corroborates (C) marginalizes (D) synthesizes
6. The philosopher’s prose is notoriously ______; even seasoned scholars often require multiple readings to unpack the dense layers of argument embedded in a single paragraph.
(A) lucid (B) pellucid (C) opaque (D) transparent
7. The administration’s attempt to ______ dissent within the academic community backfired when a coalition of prominent scholars published an open letter condemning the policy in the nation’s leading newspaper.
(A) foment (B) galvanize (C) stifle (D) propagate
8. The discovery that the drug’s purported benefits were largely ______ — the result of a placebo effect rather than genuine pharmacological action — led to its withdrawal from the market.
(A) tangible (B) illusory (C) verifiable (D) demonstrable
9. The diplomatic negotiations reached an ______ when both sides dug into positions from which neither was willing to retreat, necessitating the intervention of a third-party mediator.
(A) impasse (B) accord (C) zenith (D) epiphany
10. The psychologist’s research provides ______ evidence that early childhood trauma produces neurobiological changes that persist well into adulthood, affecting stress regulation, emotional processing, and cognitive function.
(A) anecdotal (B) conjectural (C) compelling (D) speculative
二、綜合測驗（Cloze）
說明：第 11 至 20 題，請依據下文文意選出最適合填入空格的選項。每題 2 分，共 20 分。
The idea that economic growth is the primary metric by which a society’s success should be measured has become so deeply (11) in modern political discourse that it is rarely subjected to serious scrutiny. Gross Domestic Product, originally developed as a wartime accounting tool to measure productive capacity, has (12) into the dominant indicator of national well-being, shaping policies that range from tax rates and infrastructure spending to environmental regulation and immigration law.
Yet a growing chorus of economists, environmental scientists, and philosophers has begun to challenge the (13) of GDP as a measure of human flourishing. The limitations of the metric are well documented: GDP counts the economic activity generated by pollution cleanup and disaster recovery as positive contributions to growth, while (14) to assign any value to unpaid care work, ecosystem services, or leisure time — activities that demonstrably contribute to human well-being. As the ecological economist Herman Daly (15) observed, “We treat the Earth as if it were a business in liquidation.”
The search for alternative metrics has produced a (16) of proposals. The Human Development Index, developed by the United Nations, combines measures of life expectancy, education, and per capita income. The Genuine Progress Indicator adjusts GDP by accounting for income inequality, environmental degradation, and the value of household and volunteer work. Bhutan has famously adopted Gross National Happiness (17) its central policy objective, though the index’s methodological foundations remain (18).
The resistance to abandoning GDP as the dominant metric is not primarily intellectual but political. GDP growth provides a simple, quantifiable narrative that lends itself (19) electoral messaging and media coverage. More nuanced metrics, whatever their analytical superiority, lack the rhetorical simplicity that makes GDP so politically useful. Until alternative metrics can match GDP’s communicative (20), they are unlikely to displace it in the arena of public debate.
11. (A) entrenched (B) disregarded (C) dismantled (D) dislodged
12. (A) degenerated (B) metamorphosed (C) deteriorated (D) retrogressed
13. (A) precision (B) adequacy (C) redundancy (D) parsimony
14. (A) neglecting (B) striving (C) endeavoring (D) aspiring
15. (A) wistfully (B) sardonically (C) exuberantly (D) indifferently
16. (A) dearth (B) paucity (C) proliferation (D) scarcity
17. (A) as (B) for (C) with (D) by
18. (A) unassailable (B) incontrovertible (C) contentious (D) irrefutable
19. (A) to (B) for (C) with (D) against
20. (A) opacity (B) complexity (C) efficacy (D) intricacy
三、文意選填（Contextual Fill-in）
說明：第 21 至 30 題，請從下方 12 個選項中選出最適合填入文章中 10 個空格的單字。選項詞彙難度較高，請仔細分析詞性與語意。每題 2 分，共 20 分。
| (A) inextricably | (B) proliferation | (C) exacerbating | (D) resilience |
|---|---|---|---|
| (E) mitigate | (F) unprecedented | (G) vulnerable | (H) disproportionate |
| (I) anthropogenic | (J) precipitating | (K) catalyze | (L) systemic |
Note: Two of the above options are distractors and will NOT be used.
Climate-induced migration — the movement of populations driven by environmental changes that render their homes uninhabitable or their livelihoods unsustainable — is emerging as one of the defining humanitarian challenges of the twenty-first century. The World Bank estimates that by 2050, climate change could force more than 200 million people to move within their own countries, a figure that is (21) in both scale and scope relative to any migration crisis in recorded history.
The causes of climate-induced migration are diverse and (22) linked to broader patterns of global inequality. Rising sea levels threaten the very existence of low-lying island nations such as the Maldives and Tuvalu, while (23) desertification in sub-Saharan Africa is rendering vast tracts of previously arable land incapable of supporting agriculture. In South Asia, the combination of glacial melt, erratic monsoon patterns, and intensifying heat waves is (24) food and water insecurity that drives rural populations toward already overburdened urban centers.
The populations most (25) to climate-induced displacement are, paradoxically, those who have contributed least to the greenhouse gas emissions driving the crisis. Subsistence farmers in Bangladesh, pastoralist communities in the Horn of Africa, and indigenous peoples in the Amazon basin bear a (26) burden of climate impacts relative to their carbon footprints. This asymmetry underscores the profound injustice at the heart of the climate crisis: those least responsible are suffering the most severe consequences.
The existing international legal framework is ill-equipped to address the challenges posed by climate-induced migration. The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as someone with a “well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion” — criteria that do not (27) environmental degradation or climate change. Those displaced by climate impacts thus fall into a legal gray zone, lacking the protections afforded to convention refugees while facing hardships that are often equally severe.
Addressing this governance gap will require (28) reforms that go far beyond piecemeal adjustments to existing refugee law. A comprehensive approach must integrate climate adaptation funding, planned relocation programs, and the development of legal pathways that recognize climate-displaced persons as a distinct category (29) of international protection. Equally important are investments in community (30) — measures that enable vulnerable populations to adapt in place, reducing the need for displacement in the first instance.
四、篇章結構（Text Organization）
說明：第 31 至 35 題，請從下方 6 個句子中選出最適合填入文章中標示(31)至(35)處的選項。本題文章結構較為複雜，請注意段落間的邏輯推進關係。每題 2 分，共 10 分。
| (A) The existence of such a limit, if confirmed, would fundamentally constrain the ambitions of theoretical physics. |
|---|
| (B) The most radical version of this argument holds that mathematics itself is a human construction — a set of formal games whose rules we have invented rather than discovered. |
| (C) This position, known as mathematical Platonism, has been the dominant view among working mathematicians for centuries. |
| (D) The history of science is replete with examples of apparent cognitive limits that were subsequently transcended: relativity and quantum mechanics, for instance, both violate intuitions shaped by our experience of the mesoscopic world. |
| (E) The debate over whether mathematics is discovered or invented strikes at the heart of how we understand the relationship between the human mind and the physical universe. |
| (F) Eugene Wigner captured this sentiment in his famous essay “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,” expressing wonder at the fact that abstract mathematical structures developed for purely theoretical purposes so often turn out to describe the physical world with astonishing precision. |
The question of whether mathematics is a human invention or a discovery of pre-existing truths has fascinated philosophers for millennia and continues to generate vigorous debate among mathematicians, physicists, and cognitive scientists. (31)
Most practicing mathematicians operate on the implicit assumption that they are discovering truths that exist independently of human minds. When a mathematician proves a theorem, the prevailing intuition is that the theorem was true before anyone proved it and would remain true even if humanity ceased to exist. (32)
(33) Mathematical concepts that were developed with no thought of practical application — non-Euclidean geometry, complex numbers, group theory — have later proven indispensable for formulating physical theories. How, Platonists ask, can this “unreasonable effectiveness” be explained unless mathematics describes something real?
The opposing view — that mathematics is a human invention — has gained ground in recent decades, driven by developments in cognitive science and the philosophy of language. (34) The patterns and regularities that mathematics describes, on this account, are not features of an abstract Platonic realm but reflections of the cognitive structures through which humans organize their experience.
(35) Yet the discovery-invention debate is not merely an academic curiosity. It bears directly on the scope and limits of scientific knowledge. If mathematics is a human invention, there may be aspects of reality that lie permanently beyond its reach — not because we have not yet found the right equations, but because the very structure of our cognitive apparatus prevents us from formulating them. The question of what we can know is, in the end, inseparable from the question of what kind of knowers we are.
31-35 answer format: 31. ( ) 32. ( ) 33. ( ) 34. ( ) 35. ( )
五、閱讀測驗（Reading Comprehension）
說明：第 36 至 55 題，共 5 篇文章，每篇 4 題。本大題文章較長（400-500 字），題目強調深度推論、隱含意義及作者立場判讀。每題 2 分，共 40 分。
Passage 1: The Epistemology of Conspiracy Theories
The question of why people believe conspiracy theories has attracted growing attention from psychologists, political scientists, and philosophers in the wake of events that have brought such beliefs from the cultural margins to the center of public life. Early research in this area tended to pathologize conspiracy belief, treating it as the product of cognitive deficits, emotional disturbances, or social marginalization. More recent scholarship, however, has adopted a more nuanced approach, recognizing that conspiracy theories serve genuine psychological and social functions that cannot be reduced to mere irrationality.
One influential framework identifies three categories of motives that drive conspiracy belief. Epistemic motives involve the desire for understanding, certainty, and meaning: conspiracy theories offer explanatory frameworks that impose order on complex, confusing, or threatening events, satisfying a deep human need for cognitive closure. Existential motives concern the need for safety, security, and a sense of control: in situations of perceived powerlessness, conspiracy theories can restore a feeling of agency by identifying the forces — however malevolent — that are responsible for one’s predicament. Social motives pertain to the need to maintain a positive image of oneself and one’s group: conspiracy theories can protect collective identity by attributing negative outcomes to the machinations of outsiders or enemies.
The epistemological status of conspiracy theories is more complex than is often acknowledged. While many specific conspiracy theories are demonstrably false, the blanket dismissal of conspiratorial thinking as inherently irrational is philosophically questionable. Actual conspiracies do occur — the Tuskegee syphilis experiment, the Watergate cover-up, the tobacco industry’s systematic concealment of the health risks of smoking — and some beliefs that were initially dismissed as conspiracy theories have later been vindicated. The epistemic challenge lies not in rejecting all conspiracy claims but in developing criteria for distinguishing warranted from unwarranted ones.
This challenge is made more difficult by the structural features of the contemporary information environment. Algorithmic curation, partisan media ecosystems, and the decline of shared epistemological authorities have created conditions in which conspiracy theories can spread with unprecedented speed and reach. The result is an epistemic environment in which citizens increasingly inhabit different factual universes, rendering democratic deliberation — which presupposes shared standards of evidence and a common pool of agreed-upon facts — extraordinarily difficult.
Some philosophers have argued that the appropriate response to this situation is not to dismiss conspiracy believers as irrational but to strengthen the institutional and cultural foundations of epistemic trust: independent journalism, transparent governance, rigorous science education, and platforms for deliberation across ideological divides. The alternative, they warn, is a public sphere in which conspiracy becomes not an exception to normal epistemic practice but its default mode.
36. According to the passage, how has the scholarly approach to conspiracy belief changed?
(A) From treating it as a rational response to treating it as pathology. (B) From pathologizing it to recognizing its psychological and social functions. (C) From ignoring it entirely to studying it as a purely political phenomenon. (D) From celebrating it as creative thinking to condemning it as dangerous.
37. Which of the following best represents “existential motives” for conspiracy belief as described in the passage?
(A) The desire to appear intelligent to one’s peers by claiming access to hidden knowledge. (B) The need to feel a sense of control by identifying forces responsible for one’s situation. (C) The wish to protect one’s group identity by blaming external enemies. (D) The drive to achieve cognitive closure by imposing order on complex events.
38. The author mentions the Tuskegee syphilis experiment and the Watergate cover-up primarily to:
(A) argue that all conspiracy theories are ultimately justified. (B) provide examples of government conspiracies that were never exposed. (C) demonstrate that some beliefs initially dismissed as conspiracy theories have proven true. (D) suggest that conspiracy theories are more common in the United States than elsewhere.
39. The author’s attitude toward the blanket dismissal of conspiracy theories as irrational can best be described as:
(A) wholeheartedly supportive. (B) cautiously critical. (C) completely indifferent. (D) enthusiastically endorsing.
Passage 2: The Microbiome Revolution
The human body contains roughly as many bacterial cells as human cells, a fact that has fundamentally reshaped our understanding of what it means to be an individual organism. The collection of microorganisms that inhabit the human body — collectively termed the microbiome — is now understood to play a role in processes ranging from digestion and immune function to mental health and cognitive performance. The implications of this realization extend far beyond medicine, touching on foundational questions in biology, philosophy, and even our conception of selfhood.
The most dramatic demonstration of the microbiome’s importance has come from research on the gut-brain axis — the bidirectional communication network linking the gastrointestinal tract and the central nervous system. Experiments have shown that altering the gut microbiome of laboratory animals can produce measurable changes in behavior, stress reactivity, and cognitive function. Mice raised in germ-free environments, lacking any microbiome, exhibit altered brain development and abnormal social behavior. Transplanting gut bacteria from depressed humans into rats produces depressive-like behaviors in the recipients — a finding that has electrified psychiatric research.
The therapeutic implications of microbiome science are immense but also raise complex questions. Fecal microbiota transplantation — the transfer of gut bacteria from a healthy donor to a patient — has proven remarkably effective for treating recurrent Clostridium difficile infections, with cure rates exceeding 90%. Researchers are now investigating whether similar approaches could be effective for conditions including inflammatory bowel disease, obesity, autism spectrum disorders, and major depression. Yet the long-term consequences of fundamentally altering an individual’s microbial ecosystem remain poorly understood, and the regulatory frameworks governing such interventions are still in their infancy.
More philosophically, the microbiome revolution challenges our intuitive understanding of the boundaries of the self. If our moods, our cognitive capacities, and even our personalities are shaped by microorganisms that are not, in any straightforward sense, “us,” then the distinction between self and other becomes considerably more complex than common sense suggests. We are not autonomous individuals but ecosystems — walking communities of interacting species whose collective functioning constitutes our experience of being human. As one researcher has provocatively put it, “I contain multitudes.”
This reconceptualization has implications for how we think about identity, responsibility, and human agency. If a person’s behavior is influenced by their microbiome — over which they have limited control — to what extent can they be held responsible for that behavior? How should the legal system account for biological factors that blur the boundary between the self and its microbial constituents? These questions are no longer merely speculative; they are becoming increasingly pressing as microbiome science advances from the laboratory to the clinic.
40. According to the passage, the gut-brain axis refers to:
(A) the physical connection between the stomach and the brain via the spinal cord. (B) the bidirectional communication network between the gastrointestinal tract and the central nervous system. (C) the theory that the brain controls all digestive functions without feedback from the gut. (D) a specific nerve that connects the large intestine directly to the cerebral cortex.
41. The passage mentions that transplanting gut bacteria from depressed humans into rats produces depressive-like behaviors. This finding is presented primarily to:
(A) argue that animal research is unethical and should be discontinued. (B) demonstrate the causal influence of the microbiome on mental states. (C) prove that depression is exclusively caused by gut bacteria. (D) suggest that rats are better models for human psychology than previously thought.
42. The phrase “I contain multitudes” in the passage serves to:
(A) express scientific confusion about the number of bacteria in the human body. (B) illustrate the reconceptualization of the self as an ecosystem of interacting species. (C) criticize the microbiome research community for overstating their findings. (D) argue that human beings are incapable of understanding their own biology.
43. The passage suggests that the microbiome revolution raises questions about legal responsibility because:
(A) it proves that all human behavior is determined by bacteria. (B) it complicates the boundary between self and other, raising questions about agency. (C) it demonstrates that criminal behavior has no biological basis whatsoever. (D) it shows that fecal transplants can cure all forms of mental illness.
Passage 3: The Paradox of Tolerance
Karl Popper’s concept of the “paradox of tolerance” — the idea that unlimited tolerance must lead to the destruction of tolerance by the intolerant — has acquired renewed urgency in an era of resurgent authoritarian movements and deepening political polarization. Popper argued that a tolerant society has the right, and indeed the obligation, to be intolerant of intolerance, lest the intolerant exploit the openness of a free society to dismantle it from within. The difficulty, of course, lies in determining where legitimate intolerance of intolerance ends and illegitimate suppression of dissent begins.
The paradox of tolerance is not merely an abstract philosophical puzzle; it confronts democratic societies with concrete institutional dilemmas. Should political parties that advocate the destruction of democratic institutions be permitted to participate in elections? Should platforms that host speech advocating violence or discrimination be compelled to remove such content, or does the principle of free expression protect even odious views? Should universities provide a forum for speakers whose ideas are widely regarded as harmful, or does the educational mission justify restrictions on who may address the community?
The European approach to these questions has generally been more restrictive than the American one. Several European democracies have laws that prohibit Holocaust denial, hate speech, and the display of Nazi symbols — restrictions that would be unconstitutional under the First Amendment as interpreted by the U.S. Supreme Court. Proponents of the European model argue that the historical experience of fascism demonstrates that democracies cannot afford to be neutral about their own survival. Critics counter that restricting speech, even hateful speech, drives extremist ideas underground where they fester and grow, while also handing the intolerant the moral authority of the censored.
A different approach to the paradox emphasizes the distinction between tolerance as a personal virtue and tolerance as a political principle. As a personal virtue, tolerance may indeed require extending forbearance to the intolerant — turning the other cheek, as it were. As a political principle, however, tolerance is not an end in itself but a means of securing conditions under which citizens can live together despite deep disagreements. When tolerance ceases to serve that end — when it is weaponized by those who would destroy the conditions of peaceful coexistence — the political principle no longer requires it.
This distinction, while analytically useful, leaves many practical questions unresolved. The line between views that threaten the conditions of democratic coexistence and views that are merely objectionable or offensive is contested and will remain so. Democratic societies must navigate this line through the imperfect mechanisms of law, institutional norms, and public deliberation — knowing that there is no algorithm that can substitute for the exercise of judgment in specific cases.
44. According to the passage, Popper’s “paradox of tolerance” refers to the idea that:
(A) tolerance and intolerance are ultimately the same thing. (B) unlimited tolerance enables the intolerant to destroy tolerance itself. (C) all forms of intolerance are equally dangerous to democratic societies. (D) tolerance is an outdated concept with no relevance to modern politics.
45. The passage contrasts European and American approaches primarily to:
(A) argue that the American approach is superior in all respects. (B) demonstrate that there are different legitimate ways of addressing the paradox of tolerance. (C) prove that European democracies are fundamentally intolerant societies. (D) suggest that the First Amendment should be amended to permit hate speech restrictions.
46. According to the passage, what is the distinction between tolerance as a “personal virtue” and as a “political principle”?
(A) Personal tolerance requires always being intolerant, while political tolerance requires always being tolerant. (B) As a personal virtue, tolerance may include forbearance toward the intolerant; as a political principle, it is a means to peaceful coexistence that need not extend to those who threaten it. (C) There is no meaningful distinction; the author argues the two are identical. (D) Personal virtue concerns only religious matters, while political principle concerns only economic matters.
47. The author’s concluding observation that “there is no algorithm that can substitute for the exercise of judgment” suggests that:
(A) artificial intelligence will eventually solve the paradox of tolerance. (B) the paradox of tolerance is an unsolvable problem that should be ignored. (C) addressing the paradox requires contextual judgment rather than rigid rules. (D) all speech restrictions are equally unjustified and should be eliminated.
Passage 4: Post-Truth and the Fragmentation of Epistemic Authority
The term “post-truth,” named the Oxford Dictionaries’ Word of the Year in 2016, describes a cultural condition in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief. While the phenomenon of political deception is as old as politics itself, scholars argue that the contemporary post-truth condition is qualitatively different, shaped by structural transformations in the media landscape, the erosion of trust in traditional institutions, and the rise of digital technologies that enable the rapid dissemination of misinformation.
Central to the post-truth condition is the fragmentation of epistemic authority — the institutions and practices that societies rely upon to distinguish warranted from unwarranted claims about the world. In the twentieth century, a relatively small number of institutions — major newspapers, broadcast networks, universities, scientific academies — served as gatekeepers that filtered and validated information before it reached the public. This gatekeeping function was never perfect, and these institutions were never free from bias or error; but they provided a shared epistemological framework within which public debate could occur.
The digital revolution has dismantled this model. The barriers to publishing and distributing information have collapsed, enabling anyone with an internet connection to reach global audiences. While this democratization of information production has genuine benefits — giving voice to marginalized perspectives and enabling scrutiny of powerful institutions — it has also eliminated the filtering mechanisms that once distinguished professional journalism from rumor, expert knowledge from amateur speculation, and evidence-based claims from fabrications. The result is an information environment in which citizens must navigate a torrent of competing claims with diminished access to reliable epistemic signposts.
The problem is compounded by algorithmic curation, which tends to amplify content that generates strong emotional reactions — outrage, fear, indignation — over content that is careful, measured, or complex. The economic incentives of the attention economy reward sensationalism and penalize nuance, creating a structural bias toward the kind of content most likely to mislead. Users find themselves enclosed in algorithmically constructed “filter bubbles” that reinforce existing beliefs while screening out contradictory information, deepening the fragmentation of the shared factual universe that democratic deliberation requires.
Addressing the post-truth condition requires interventions at multiple levels. Media literacy education that equips citizens to evaluate sources and recognize manipulation is essential but insufficient. Structural reforms to the digital advertising economy that currently rewards misinformation, platform governance that prioritizes accuracy over engagement, and the revitalization of institutions dedicated to rigorous, independent journalism are all necessary components of a comprehensive response. The challenge is not merely to restore a pre-digital epistemic order — which was itself flawed in important respects — but to construct new institutional forms capable of sustaining shared standards of truth in a radically transformed information environment.
48. According to the passage, what distinguishes the contemporary “post-truth” condition from historical political deception?
(A) Historical deception was more widespread and effective than contemporary misinformation. (B) Contemporary post-truth is shaped by structural changes in media, trust in institutions, and digital technology. (C) Historical societies had no concept of truth or falsity whatsoever. (D) Contemporary post-truth affects only western democracies, whereas historical deception was universal.
49. The passage describes the twentieth-century media model as featuring:
(A) complete freedom from bias, error, and institutional corruption. (B) a small number of institutions that served as gatekeepers filtering and validating information. (C) a system in which all information was produced by individual citizens without institutional mediation. (D) government-controlled media that dictated a single official version of all facts.
50. The author’s attitude toward the “democratization of information production” is best described as:
(A) entirely negative, viewing it as an unmitigated disaster. (B) recognizing both its genuine benefits and its destructive effects on epistemic filtering. (C) enthusiastically supportive, with no reservations. (D) indifferent, viewing it as irrelevant to the post-truth condition.
51. According to the passage, algorithmic curation contributes to the post-truth condition by:
(A) carefully fact-checking all content before it reaches users. (B) amplifying emotionally charged content over measured, complex information. (C) ensuring that all perspectives receive equal exposure regardless of merit. (D) preventing users from encountering any content that might challenge their views.
Passage 5: The Anthropocene and the End of Nature
The proposal to designate a new geological epoch — the Anthropocene, or the “Age of Humans” — reflects the growing recognition that human activity has become the dominant force shaping the Earth’s physical, chemical, and biological systems. From the composition of the atmosphere to the acidity of the oceans, from the distribution of species to the cycling of nitrogen and phosphorus through the biosphere, human influence is now detectable in virtually every planetary process. The implications of this recognition extend far beyond geology, challenging fundamental categories through which Western thought has understood the relationship between humanity and the natural world.
The concept of the Anthropocene destabilizes the nature-culture distinction that has organized much of modern thought. If there is no corner of the planet untouched by human influence — if the “pristine wilderness” is a historical fiction — then the very idea of “nature” as a domain separate from and opposed to human civilization becomes difficult to sustain. Environmental philosophers have responded to this challenge in divergent ways. Some argue that the Anthropocene should prompt a renewed commitment to preserving what remains of wild nature. Others contend that the binary opposition between nature and culture was always problematic and that the Anthropocene provides an opportunity to develop more integrated frameworks for understanding human-environment relationships.
The political implications of the Anthropocene concept are profound and contested. The term itself implies a unified human agent — “anthropos” — whose collective activity has reshaped the planet. Yet this apparent unity obscures vast disparities in responsibility for and vulnerability to environmental change. The wealthy nations and social classes whose consumption patterns have driven the bulk of historical greenhouse gas emissions are not those who will bear the brunt of climate impacts. Critics of the Anthropocene concept argue that a more accurate designation would be the “Capitalocene” — an epoch shaped not by humanity in general but by the specific economic and social relations of industrial capitalism.
The temporal dimension of the Anthropocene also raises difficult questions. If we are living in a new geological epoch defined by human impact, when did it begin? Candidates proposed by the Anthropocene Working Group include the Industrial Revolution, the mid-twentieth-century “Great Acceleration” of population, consumption, and environmental impact, and the dawn of agriculture thousands of years ago. Each starting date implies a different narrative about the causes and character of the current environmental crisis — and, by extension, different prescriptions for how to address it.
Ultimately, the Anthropocene is not merely a scientific concept but an invitation to rethink fundamental assumptions about progress, development, and the human place in the cosmos. It asks us to recognize that we are not external observers of the Earth system but integral components of it — and that our fate is inseparable from the fate of the planetary processes we have so profoundly altered.
52. According to the passage, how does the concept of the Anthropocene challenge the nature-culture distinction?
(A) It proves that nature and culture have always been entirely separate domains. (B) By showing that human influence is now detectable everywhere, it undermines the idea of nature as separate from human civilization. (C) It demonstrates that human culture has no impact on the natural world whatsoever. (D) It argues that geological epochs are cultural inventions with no scientific basis.
53. The passage mentions the term “Capitalocene” as:
(A) the official scientific designation for the current geological epoch. (B) a critique suggesting that capitalism, not humanity as a whole, should be identified as the driver of planetary change. (C) a term coined by the Anthropocene Working Group to replace “Anthropocene.” (D) an outdated concept that has been definitively refuted by geological research.
54. According to the passage, why does the starting date of the Anthropocene matter?
(A) Different starting dates imply different narratives about causes and thus different prescriptions for solutions. (B) The exact date determines which geological stratum will be officially designated as the boundary marker. (C) International law requires a precise date before any environmental regulations can be implemented. (D) The starting date is irrelevant; the passage mentions it only as a minor detail.
55. The author’s overall perspective on the Anthropocene concept is best characterized as:
(A) dismissive, viewing it as a scientifically baseless and politically dangerous idea. (B) viewing it as a profound challenge to fundamental assumptions that demands a rethinking of humanity’s relationship with the Earth. (C) enthusiastically celebratory, welcoming it as evidence of human mastery over nature. (D) neutral, describing the concept without taking any discernible position.
🔐 此內容需要解鎖碼才能查看。輸入解鎖碼 →
一、詞彙題
| 題號 | 答案 | 解析 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | B | indictment = 控訴、譴責。報告對政府的處理方式提出嚴厲的「譴責/控訴」。panegyric（頌詞）、eulogy（悼詞）語意相反。endorsement（背書）也不符。 |
| 2 | C | nuanced = 細膩入微的。小說對道德模糊性進行了「細膩的」探索。dogmatic（教條式的）與 refusing easy resolution 的開放態度矛盾。 |
| 3 | A | equivocal = 模稜兩可的、含糊的。大使的「含糊」聲明被批評為迴避問題。unequivocal/candid/forthright 皆為「明確直率」之意，語意相反。 |
| 4 | C | degradation = 退化、惡化。沿海濕地的快速「退化」威脅物種生存。proliferation/accretion/consolidation 皆為「增長、積累」。 |
| 5 | C | marginalizes = 使邊緣化。史學家被批評選擇性使用證據——「邊緣化」反證、放大支持證據。accentuates（強調）、corroborates（證實）、synthesizes（綜合）。 |
| 6 | C | opaque = 晦澀難懂的。哲學家文風「晦澀」，連資深學者都需要多次閱讀。lucid/pellucid/transparent 皆為「清晰透明」。 |
| 7 | C | stifle = 壓制、扼殺。行政部門試圖「壓制」學界異議，結果適得其反。foment/galvanize/propagate 皆為「煽動、激發」。 |
| 8 | B | illusory = 虛幻的、錯覺的。藥物的功效被發現主要是「虛幻的」——源於安慰劑效應。tangible/verifiable/demonstrable 語意相反。 |
| 9 | A | impasse = 僵局、死胡同。談判陷入「僵局」。accord（協議）、zenith（頂峰）、epiphany（頓悟）不符。 |
| 10 | C | compelling = 令人信服的、有說服力的。心理學家的研究提供「令人信服的」證據。anecdotal/conjectural/speculative 皆為「軼事般的、推測性的」。 |
二、綜合測驗
| 題號 | 答案 | 解析 |
|---|---|---|
| 11 | A | entrenched = 根深蒂固的。經濟增長作為衡量標準「根深蒂固」。 |
| 12 | B | metamorphosed = 蛻變、變形。GDP 從戰時會計工具「蛻變」為國家福祉的主要指標。degenerated/deteriorated/retrogressed 皆為貶義「惡化」。 |
| 13 | B | adequacy = 適當性、充分性。挑戰 GDP 作為人類發展衡量標準的「適當性」。 |
| 14 | A | neglecting。GDP「忽視」無償照護、生態服務、休閒時間的價值。 |
| 15 | B | sardonically = 諷刺地。生態經濟學家「諷刺地」觀察到「我們對待地球像在清算事業」。wistfully（愁思地）、exuberantly（興高采烈地）、indifferently（漠不關心地）。 |
| 16 | C | proliferation = 激增。替代指標的「激增」。dearth/paucity/scarcity 皆為「缺乏」。 |
| 17 | A | as。adopt A as B（採納 A 作為 B）。 |
| 18 | C | contentious = 有爭議的。GNH 的方法論基礎仍「有爭議」。unassailable/incontrovertible/irrefutable 皆為「無可否認的」。 |
| 19 | A | to。lend itself to（適合於）。 |
| 20 | C | efficacy = 效力、效能。GDP 的溝通「效力」。opacity/complexity/intricacy 皆為「不透明/複雜」。 |
三、文意選填
選項框： A(inextricably) B(proliferation) C(exacerbating) D(resilience) E(mitigate) F(unprecedented) G(vulnerable) H(disproportionate) I(anthropogenic) J(precipitating) K(catalyze) L(systemic)
| 題號 | 答案 | 選項 | 解析 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 | F | unprecedented | 「前所未有的」氣候挑戰。 |
| 22 | A | inextricably | 環境議題與社會公正「密不可分地」相連。 |
| 23 | C | exacerbating | 「加劇的」沙漠化過程。 |
| 24 | J | precipitating | 「促成／導致」糧食不安全的危機。 |
| 25 | G | vulnerable | 影響最「脆弱的」人口群體。 |
| 26 | H | disproportionate | 對發展中國家造成「不成比例的」負擔。 |
| 27 | E | mitigate | policies designed to mitigate environmental degradation = 為「減緩」環境惡化而設計的政策。 |
| 28 | L | systemic | 需要「系統性的」改革。 |
| 29 | K | catalyze | to catalyze meaningful change = 「催化／推動」有意義的改變。 |
| 30 | D | resilience | 社區的抗災「韌性」。 |
多餘選項： (B) proliferation、(I) anthropogenic
四、篇章結構
| 題號 | 答案 | 解析 |
|---|---|---|
| 31 | E | 開頭介紹數學是發明還是發現的辯論。 |
| 32 | C | 承接收學家（數學家）的直覺：此立場即數學柏拉圖主義。 |
| 33 | F | 以 Wigner 的「數學不合理的有效性」支持柏拉圖主義。 |
| 34 | B | 反方觀點：最激進版本認為數學是人類建構。 |
| 35 | A | 過渡到結論段前段：若數學有認知極限，將限制理論物理的野心。 |
五、閱讀測驗
| 題號 | 答案 | 解析 |
|---|---|---|
| 36 | B | 第一段：早期研究病理化陰謀論信仰，近期研究則認知到其心理和社會功能。 |
| 37 | B | 第二段：存在性動機涉及安全感和控制感——透過識別（即使邪惡的）力量來恢復駕馭感。 |
| 38 | C | 第三段說明雖然許多陰謀論是錯的，但有些被認定為陰謀論的信仰事後被證實。 |
| 39 | B | 作者認為全面否定陰謀論思維為非理性在哲學上是有問題的——因為真實的陰謀確實存在。這是「謹慎批判」（cautiously critical），不是盲目支持。 |
| 40 | B | 第二段第一句定義。 |
| 41 | B | 第二段末：此發現在精神病學研究中引起轟動，顯示腸道菌群對心理狀態的因果影響。 |
| 42 | B | 第四段末：此短語用以說明將自我重新概念化為一個由互動物種組成的生態系統。 |
| 43 | B | 最後一段：如果微生物組影響行為，自我與他者的界限變得模糊，責任歸屬變得複雜。 |
| 44 | B | 第一段：“unlimited tolerance must lead to the destruction of tolerance by the intolerant.” |
| 45 | B | 第三段對比歐美不同做法，未斷言哪種較優，而是展示不同合法應對方式。 |
| 46 | B | 第四段明確區分個人美德（可能包括對不寬容者的寬容）和政治原則（是達到和平共處的手段）。 |
| 47 | C | 作者結論為沒有演算法可以取代具體案例中的判斷鍛煉——強調需要情境化的判斷而非僵化規則。 |
| 48 | B | 第一段末句。 |
| 49 | B | 第二段說明二十世紀由少數機構擔任守門人過濾和驗證資訊。 |
| 50 | B | 第三段：民主化資訊生產有「genuine benefits」但也消除了過濾機制——認識到正反兩面。 |
| 51 | B | 第四段：演算法策展放大情緒化內容而非謹慎、複雜的資訊。 |
| 52 | B | 第二段：人類影響無所不在，使作為獨立於文明的「自然」概念難以維持。 |
| 53 | B | 第三段：“Capitalocene” 是由特定經濟社會關係——工業資本主義——所塑造的世代。 |
| 54 | A | 第四段：“Each starting date implies a different narrative about the causes and character of the current environmental crisis — and, by extension, different prescriptions for how to address it.” |
| 55 | B | 整體而言，作者將人類世視為對基本假設的深層挑戰，要求重新思考人與地球的關係。（非 neutral——文章有明確的立場表達） |
單字整理（Vocabulary List）
以下 25 個高難度單字選自本模擬試題，附中英文解釋：
| # | Word | Chinese | English Definition |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | indictment | 控訴、譴責 | a formal charge or accusation of a serious crime; a thing that serves to illustrate a bad quality |
| 2 | nuanced | 細膩的、有細微差別的 | characterized by subtle shades of meaning or expression |
| 3 | equivocal | 模稜兩可的 | open to more than one interpretation; ambiguous |
| 4 | degradation | 退化、惡化 | the condition or process of degrading or being degraded |
| 5 | marginalize | 使邊緣化 | treat a person, group, or concept as insignificant or peripheral |
| 6 | opaque | 晦澀難懂的 | not able to be seen through; not transparent; difficult to understand |
| 7 | stifle | 壓制、扼殺 | make someone unable to breathe properly; suffocate; restrain a reaction or stop oneself acting on an emotion |
| 8 | illusory | 虛幻的、錯覺的 | based on illusion; not real |
| 9 | impasse | 僵局 | a situation in which no progress is possible; a deadlock |
| 10 | compelling | 令人信服的 | evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way |
| 11 | entrenched | 根深蒂固的 | firmly established and difficult or unlikely to change |
| 12 | metamorphose | 蛻變、變形 | change completely in form or nature |
| 13 | sardonic | 諷刺的、嘲弄的 | grimly mocking or cynical |
| 14 | proliferation | 激增 | rapid increase in numbers |
| 15 | contentious | 有爭議的 | causing or likely to cause an argument; controversial |
| 16 | efficacy | 效力、效能 | the ability to produce a desired or intended result |
| 17 | inextricably | 密不可分地 | in a way that is impossible to disentangle or separate |
| 18 | exacerbate | 加劇、使惡化 | make a problem, bad situation, or negative feeling worse |
| 19 | precipitate | 導致、促成（加速發生） | cause an event or situation to happen suddenly or before expected |
| 20 | vulnerable | 脆弱的、易受傷的 | susceptible to physical or emotional attack or harm |
| 21 | disproportionate | 不成比例的 | too large or too small in comparison with something else |
| 22 | resilience | 韌性、復原力 | the capacity to recover quickly from difficulties |
| 23 | epistemic | 認識論的、知識的 | relating to knowledge or to the degree of its validation |
| 24 | fragmentation | 碎片化、分裂 | the process or state of breaking or being broken into small parts |
| 25 | Anthropocene | 人類世 | the current geological age, viewed as the period during which human activity has been the dominant influence on climate and the environment |
閱讀文章難度分析
| Passage | 主題 | 字數 | 難度 | Flesch-Kincaid | 特色 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P1 | 陰謀論認識論 | ~440 | ★★★★☆ | 14.2 | 哲學與心理學跨領域論述，論證結構複雜 |
| P2 | 微生物組革命 | ~450 | ★★★★☆ | 14.0 | 生物醫學與哲學對話，概念密度高 |
| P3 | 寬容的悖論 | ~430 | ★★★★★ | 14.5 | 政治哲學文本，抽象概念層層推進 |
| P4 | 後真相時代 | ~460 | ★★★★★ | 14.8 | 媒體研究與認識論交織，結構性分析 |
| P5 | 人類世 | ~450 | ★★★★★ | 15.0 | 地質學與環境哲學，跨學科視野最廣 |
分數估算對照表（Score Estimation Guide）
| 原始分數 | 預估級分 | 程度描述 |
|---|---|---|
| 85-100 | 15（頂標） | 英文能力頂尖，分科測驗穩拿高分 |
| 75-84 | 14-13（前標） | 挑戰級過關，實際分科測驗應可得高分 |
| 65-74 | 12-11（均標） | 實力紮實，持續練習即可突破 |
| 55-64 | 10-9（後標） | 高難度詞彙與深度推論需加強 |
| 45-54 | 8-7（底標） | 建議回到 Mock-1/2 建立基礎後再挑戰 |
| < 45 | 6 以下 | 此卷超出目前能力範圍，先打好基礎 |
時間管理檢查清單（Time Management Checklist）
| 階段 | 時間 | 內容 | 完成打勾 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0-8 min | 詞彙題（10 題）：高難度詞彙，善用字根字首推測 | [ ] |
| 2 | 8-18 min | 綜合測驗（10 題）：注意抽象學術文章的邏輯結構 | [ ] |
| 3 | 18-27 min | 文意選填（10 題）：詞彙難度高，先確認詞性再選 | [ ] |
| 4 | 27-35 min | 篇章結構（5 題）：複雜邏輯關係，注意讓步與轉折 | [ ] |
| 5 | 35-70 min | 閱讀測驗（20 題）：每篇控在 7 分鐘，長文章先抓主旨 | [ ] |
| 6 | 70-76 min | 檢查：回顧不確定題目，特別檢查推論題 | [ ] |
| 7 | 76-80 min | 最後確認：所有題目皆有劃記，答案卡清晰 | [ ] |
威威老師的話： Mock-3 挑戰級完成了。這份試卷的詞彙難度和閱讀深度都超過了歷屆分科測驗的平均水準。如果你能在這份試卷中拿到 75 分以上，恭喜你——你已經超越了大多數分科考生。如果分數不如預期，也不必沮喪：挑戰級的意義在於暴露弱點，而不是打擊信心。把你錯的題目仔細分析，看看是哪一種題型、哪一種文章類型讓你卡住。針對弱點進行專項訓練，下一次的表現一定會更好。Mock-4 會是另一個挑戰級試卷，主題將更加多元——準備好了嗎？
本試卷由威威老師命題，僅供教學與個人練習使用。