任务型阅读（共10小题；每小题1分，满分10分）请认真阅读下面短文，并根据所读内容在文章后表格中的空格里填入最适当的单词。注意：每空1个单词。
Should doctors ever lie to benefit their patients to speed recovery or to cover the coming of death? In medicine as in law, government, and other lines of work, the requirements of honesty often seem dwarfed by greater needs; the need to protect patients from brutal news, to uphold a promise of secrecy or to advance the public interest.
What should doctors say, for example, to a 46-year-old man coming in for a routine physical checkup just before going on vacation with his family who, though he feels in perfect health, is found to have a form of cancer that will cause him to die within six months? Is it best to tell him the truth? If he asks, should doctors reject that he is ill, or minimize the gravity of the illness? Should they at least hide the truth until after the family vacation?
Doctors face such choices often. At times, they see important reasons to lie for the patients’ own sake; in their eyes, such lies differ sharply from self-serving ones.
Studies show that most doctors sincerely believe that the seriously ill patients do not want to know the truth about their condition, and that informing them of risks destroys their hope, so that they may recover more slowly, or deteriorate faster, perhaps even commit suicide.
But other studies show that, contrary to the belief of many physicians, a great majority of patients do want to be told the truth, even about serious illness, and feel cheated when they learn that they have been misled. We are also learning that truthful information, humanely conveyed, helps patients cope with illness; help them tolerate pain better with less medicine, and even recover faster after surgery.
There is an urgent need to debate this issue openly. Not only in medicine, but in other professions as well, practitioners may find themselves repeatedly in difficulty where serious consequences seem avoidable only through deception. Yet the public has every reason to know the professional deception, for such practices are peculiarly likely to become deeply rooted, to spread, and to trust. Neither in medicine, nor in law, government, or the social sciences can there be comfort in the old saying, “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”
Title:  1  Or Not

Should doctors ever lie to benefit their patients to speed recovery or to cover the coming of death? In medicine as in law, government, and other lines of work, the requirements of honesty often seem dwarfed by greater needs; the need to protect patients from brutal news, to uphold a promise of secrecy or to advance the public interest.

What should doctors say, for example, to a 46-year-old man coming in for a routine physical checkup just before going on vacation with his family who, though he feels in perfect health, is found to have a form of cancer that will cause him to die within six months? Is it best to tell him the truth? If he asks, should doctors reject that he is ill, or minimize the gravity of the illness? Should they at least hide the truth until after the family vacation?

Doctors face such choices often. At times, they see important reasons to lie for the patients’ own sake; in their eyes, such lies differ sharply from self-serving ones.

Studies show that most doctors sincerely believe that the seriously ill patients do not want to know the truth about their condition, and that informing them of risks destroys their hope, so that they may recover more slowly, or deteriorate faster, perhaps even commit suicide.

But other studies show that, contrary to the belief of many physicians, a great majority of patients do want to be told the truth, even about serious illness, and feel cheated when they learn that they have been misled. We are also learning that truthful information, humanely conveyed, helps patients cope with illness; help them tolerate pain better with less medicine, and even recover faster after surgery.

There is an urgent need to debate this issue openly. Not only in medicine, but in other professions as well, practitioners may find themselves repeatedly in difficulty where serious consequences seem avoidable only through deception. Yet the public has every reason to know the professional deception, for such practices are peculiarly likely to become deeply rooted, to spread, and to trust. Neither in medicine, nor in law, government, or the social sciences can there be comfort in the old saying, “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”

Title:  71  Or Not

任务型阅读（共10小题；每小题1分，满分10分）请认真阅读下面短文，并根据所读内容在文章后表格中的空格里填入最适当的单词。注意：每空1个单词。

Should doctors ever lie to benefit their patients to speed recovery or to cover the coming of death? In medicine as in law, government, and other lines of work, the requirements of honesty often seem dwarfed by greater needs; the need to protect patients from brutal news, to uphold a promise of secrecy or to advance the public interest.

What should doctors say, for example, to a 46-year-old man coming in for a routine physical checkup just before going on vacation with his family who, though he feels in perfect health, is found to have a form of cancer that will cause him to die within six months? Is it best to tell him the truth? If he asks, should doctors reject that he is ill, or minimize the gravity of the illness? Should they at least hide the truth until after the family vacation?

Doctors face such choices often. At times, they see important reasons to lie for the patients’ own sake; in their eyes, such lies differ sharply from self-serving ones.

Studies show that most doctors sincerely believe that the seriously ill patients do not want to know the truth about their condition, and that informing them of risks destroys their hope, so that they may recover more slowly, or deteriorate faster, perhaps even commit suicide.

But other studies show that, contrary to the belief of many physicians, a great majority of patients do want to be told the truth, even about serious illness, and feel cheated when they learn that they have been misled. We are also learning that truthful information, humanely conveyed, helps patients cope with illness; help them tolerate pain better with less medicine, and even recover faster after surgery.

There is an urgent need to debate this issue openly. Not only in medicine, but in other professions as well, practitioners may find themselves repeatedly in difficulty where serious consequences seem avoidable only through deception. Yet the public has every reason to know the professional deception, for such practices are peculiarly likely to become deeply rooted, to spread, and to trust. Neither in medicine, nor in law, government, or the social sciences can there be comfort in the old saying, “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”

Title:  1  Or Not

Mr. Smith is well known in Washington because of his many social blunders. He always likes to attend the various so??cial functions because he wants to expand his circle of friends. Whenever he is invited, he goes, unless he is ill.

Recently he received an invitation to a fashionable ban??quet. Although he did not know the hostess, he accepted the invitation. He was secretly very pleased, because he felt that his reputation as a desirable guest was growing.

When he arrived at the banquet hall, he found that about one hundred people had been invited. He began to move a-round the hall. He spoke to other guests whether he knew them or not. He soon realized that he had never met any of the other people present, although they seemed to know each other.

At dinner he was seated beside a very dignified woman. The woman tried to be friendly even though she had never met Mr. Smith before. She spoke politely whenever he spoke to her. Between the first and the second course of the meal, she, turned to Mr. Smith and said, “Do you see that gray-haired man at the end of the table? The one with glasses.”

“Ah, yes. Who is he?”

“He’s the Secretary of the Interior!” she replied.

Mr. Smith said, “So that’s the secretary of the Interior! I’ m afraid that I find very little to admire about him, although he is the Secretary.”

The woman stiffened and did not reply. Mr. Smith contin??ued in spite of her coldness. “I really can’t see how he re??ceived his appointment unless he is perhaps a relative of the President.”

“It hardly matters whether you like the Secretary or not,” she said. “He was chosen because the President thought he was the man for the job. If he does the job well, you should have no complaint.”

“That’s just it,” persisted Mr. Smith. “No one does the things he does, unless he is a complete fool!”

“Sir!” said the woman in all her dignity. “Do you know who I am?” “No,” replied Mr. Smith.

“I am the Secretary’s wife,” she said coldly. Mr. Smith was shocked, but he went on in spite of his embarrassment. “Madam, do you know who I am?”

“No, I don’t,” the woman replied.

“Thank goodness!” exclaimed Mr. Smith, as he quickly left the table.

Why is Mr. Smith well known in Washington?

A. He’s the Secretary of the Interior.

B. He has more friends than other people.

C. He always makes foolish mistakes on social occasions.

D. He likes to go to all kinds of parties.

At dinner he was seated beside a very dignified woman. The underlined part means ________.

A. beautiful          B. serious             C. noble                D. kind-hearted

When Mr. Smith learned that the woman didn’t know who he was, he felt ________.

A. shocked            B. worried          C. embarrassed   D. relieved

Should doctors ever lie to benefit their patients to speed recovery or to cover the coming of death? In medicine as in law, government, and other lines of work, the requirements of honesty often seem dwarfed by greater needs; the need to protect patients from brutal news, to uphold a promise of secrecy or to advance the public interest.
What should doctors say, for example, to a 46-year-old man coming in for a routine physical checkup just before going on vacation with his family who, though he feels in perfect health, is found to have a form of cancer that will cause him to die within six months? Is it best to tell him the truth? If he asks, should doctors reject that he is ill, or minimize the gravity of the illness? Should they at least hide the truth until after the family vacation?
Doctors face such choices often. At times, they see important reasons to lie for the patients’ own sake; in their eyes, such lies differ sharply from self-serving ones.
Studies show that most doctors sincerely believe that the seriously ill patients do not want to know the truth about their condition, and that informing them of risks destroys their hope, so that they may recover more slowly, or deteriorate faster, perhaps even commit suicide.
But other studies show that, contrary to the belief of many physicians, a great majority of patients do want to be told the truth, even about serious illness, and feel cheated when they learn that they have been misled. We are also learning that truthful information, humanely conveyed, helps patients cope with illness; help them tolerate pain better with less medicine, and even recover faster after surgery.
There is an urgent need to debate this issue openly. Not only in medicine, but in other professions as well, practitioners may find themselves repeatedly in difficulty where serious consequences seem avoidable only through deception. Yet the public has every reason to know the professional deception, for such practices are peculiarly likely to become deeply rooted, to spread, and to trust. Neither in medicine, nor in law, government, or the social sciences can there be comfort in the old saying, “What you don’t know can’t hurt you.”
Title:  1  Or Not