Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of today's technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and it's perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. That's one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.

　　But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.

　　This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.

　　31. Our vision of the future used to be inspired by

　　[A] our desire for lives of fulfillment

　　[B] our faith in science and technology

　　[C] our awareness of potential risks

　　[D] our belief in equal opportunity

　　32. The IUCN`s “Red List” suggest that human being are

　　[A] a sustained species

　　[B] a threaten to the environment

　　[C] the world`s dominant power

　　[D] a misplaced race

　　33. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?

　　[A] Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies.

　　[B] Technology offers solutions to social problem.

　　[C] The interest in science fiction is on the rise.

　　[D] Our Immediate future is hard to conceive.

　　34. To ensure the future of mankind, it is crucial to

　　[A] explore our planet`s abundant resources

　　[B] adopt an optimistic view of the world

　　[C] draw on our experience from the past

　　[D] curb our ambition to reshape history

　　35. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?

　　[A] Uncertainty about Our Future

　　[B] Evolution of the Human Species

　　[C] The Ever-bright Prospects of Mankind

　　[D] Science, Technology and Humanity

　　Text 4

　　On a five to three vote, the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizona's immigration law Monday-a modest policy victory for the Obama Administration. But on the more important matter of the Constitution, the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the federal government and the states.

　　In Arizona, United States, the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizona's controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigrations law. The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to "establish a uniform Rule of naturalization" and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial. Arizona had attempted to fashion state police that ran to the existing federal ones.

　　Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Court's liberals, ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun. On the overturned provisions the majority held the congress had deliberately "occupied the field" and Arizona had thus intruded on the federal's privileged powers

　　However, the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement. That`s because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.

　　Two of the three objecting Justice-Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas-agreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute. The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia, who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the alien and Sedition Acts.

　　The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as “a shocking assertion of federal executive power”. The White House argued the Arizona`s laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities, even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter. In effect, the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.

　　Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government, and control of citizenship and the borders is among them. But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status. It never did so. The administration was in essence asserting that because it didn't want to carry out Congress's immigration wishes, no state should be allowed to do so either. Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.

　　36. Three provisions of Arizona`s plan were overturned because they

　　[A] deprived the federal police of Constitutional powers.

　　[B] disturbed the power balance between different states.

　　[C] overstepped the authority of federal immigration law.

　　[D] contradicted both the federal and state policies.

　　37. On which of the following did the Justices agree, according to Paragraph4?

　　[A] Federal officers` duty to withhold immigrants` information.

　　[B] States` independence from federal immigration law.

　　[C] States` legitimate role in immigration enforcement.

　　[D] Congress`s intervention in immigration enforcement.

　　38. It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that the Alien and Sedition Acts

　　[A] violated the Constitution.

　　[B] undermined the states` interests.

　　[C] supported the federal statute.

　　[D] stood in favor of the states.

　　39. The White House claims that its power of enforcement

　　[A] Outweighs that held by the states.

　　[B] is dependent on the states` support.

　　[C] is established by federal statu