相关试题
【单选题】
在实际工作中,要注意掌握分寸,防止“过”或“不及”,其关键在于___
A. 抓住事物的主要矛盾
B. 确定事物的质
C. 认识事物的量
D. 把握事物的度
【单选题】
区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___
A. 事物的变化是否显著
B. 事物的变化是否迅速
C. 事物的某些属性是否发生了变化
D. 事物的变化是否超出度的范围
【单选题】
量变的复杂性是指___
A. 量变的程度发展不同
B. 量变形式的多样性和总的量变过程中有部分质变
C. 质变中有量的扩张
D. 量变有在度的范围内的变化和突破度的范围的变化
【单选题】
量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___
A. 事物内部各部分之间变化的不平衡性
B. 事物整体与某些构成部分之间变化的不平衡性
C. 事物与事物之间变化的不平衡性
D. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化的不平衡性
【单选题】
量变中的局部性部分质变是___
A. 事物的本质属性与非本质属性之间变化不平衡性的表现
B. 事物的各个部分之间变化不平衡性的表现
C. 事物的内部矛盾和外部条件变化不平衡性的表现
D. 事物的量和质变化不平衡性的表现
【单选题】
揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展规律
【单选题】
“肯定和否定相互渗透,在一定意义上,肯定就是否定。”这是一种___
A. 相对主义诡辩论的观点
B. 唯物辩证法的观点
C. 主观唯心主义的观点
D. 形而上学的观点
【单选题】
事物的否定方面是指___
A. 事物的积极方面
B. 事物的消极方面
C. 事物中维持其存在的方面
D. 事物中促使其灭亡的方面
【单选题】
作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___
A. 既保留又继承
B. 彻底抛弃
C. 既克服又保留
D. 矛盾的调和
【单选题】
辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___
A. 把旧事物完全抛弃
B. 使旧事物发生量变
C. 是新事物产生、旧事物灭亡
D. 是从外部强加给事物的
【单选题】
否定之否定规律___
A. 在事物完成一个发展周期时才能完整地表现出来
B. 在事物发展过程中任何一点上都可以表现出来
C. 在事物经过量变和质变两种状态后表现出来
D. 在事物发展过程中经过肯定和否定两个阶段表现出来
【单选题】
事物发展的周期性体现了___
A. 事物发展的直线性与曲折性的统一
B. 事物发展是一个不断地回到出发点的运动
C. 事物发展的周而复始的循环性
D. 事物发展的前进性和曲折性的统一
【单选题】
直线论的错误在于只看到___
A. 事物发展的周期性而否认了前进性
B. 事物发展的前进性而否认了曲折性
C. 事物发展的间接性而否认了连续性
D. 事物发展的曲折性而否认了周期性
【单选题】
循环论的错误在于___
A. 只看到事物发展的普遍性,没有看到事物发展过程的特殊性
B. 只看到事物的绝对运动,没有看到事物的相对静止
C. 只看到事物发展道路的曲折性,没有看到事物发展趋势的前进性
D. 只看到新旧事物之间的连续性,没有看到新旧事物之间的间断性
【单选题】
对立统一规律揭示了___
A. 事物发展的动力和源泉
B. 事物发展的状态和过程
C. 事物发展的方向和道路
D. 事物发展的两种趋向
【单选题】
唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___
A. 对立统一规律
B. 质量互变规律
C. 否定之否定规律
D. 联系和发展的规律
【单选题】
辩证法所说的矛盾是指___
A. 人们思维中的前后不一的自相矛盾
B. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的对立统一
C. 对立面之间的相互排斥
D. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的相互依赖
【单选题】
矛盾的基本属性是___
A. 普遍性和特殊性
B. 绝对性和相对性
C. 变动性和稳定性
D. 斗争性和同一性
【单选题】
依据是___
A. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性辩证关系的原理
B. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性辩证关系的原理
C. 事物发展的量变和质变辩证关系的原理
D. 事物发展的内因和外因辩证关系的原理
【单选题】
矛盾问题的精髓是___
A. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性关系的问题
B. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性关系的问题
C. 主要矛盾和次要矛盾关系的问题
D. 矛盾的主要方面和次要方面关系的问题
【单选题】
题的方法都是___
A. 重点论
B. 均衡论
C. 一点论
D. 两点论
【单选题】
“任何个别(无论怎样)都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___
A. 特殊性就是普遍性
B. 特殊性存在于普遍性之中
C. 普遍性是特殊性的总和
D. 特殊性中包含普遍性
【单选题】
在唯物辩证法看来,水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___
A. 共性和个性的关系
B. 整体和部分的关系
C. 本质和现象的关系
D. 内容和形式的关系
【单选题】
“是就是是,不是就是不是,除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___
A. 形而上学的观点
B. 相对主义的观点
C. 唯心主义的观点
D. 辩证法的观点
【单选题】
真象和假象的区别在于___
A. 真象是客观的,假象是主观的
B. 真象表现本质,假象不表现本质
C. 真象深藏于事物内部,假象外露于事物外部
D. 真象从正面直接地表现本质,假象从反面歪曲地表现本质
【单选题】
有的哲学家说,在大风扬起的尘土中,每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___
A. 辩证唯物主义决定论的观点
B. 形而上学的机械决定论的观点
C. 唯心主义非决定论的观点
D. 庸俗唯物主义的观点
【单选题】
“或然率”是指___
A. 可能性在质上的一种科学说明和测定
B. 可能性在量上的一种科学说明和测定
C. 必然性的一种科学说明和判定
D. 偶然性的一种科学说明和测定
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___
A. It is based on questionable statistics.
B. It reflects the economic changes.
C. It evidences the improved welfare.
D. It provides much food for thought.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It is widely used to compare the economic growth across countries.
B. It revolutionizes the way of measuring ordinary people’s livelihood.
C. It focuses on people’s consumption rather that their average income.
D. It is a more comprehensive measure of people’s economic well-being.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___
A. It reflected the existing big gap between the two economies.
B. It neglected many important indicators of people’s welfare.
C. It covered up the differences between individual citizens.
D. It failed to count in their difference in natural resources.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___
A. It can accurately pinpoint a country’s current economic problems.
B. It can help to raise people’s awareness of their economic well-being.
C. It can diagnose the causes of a country’s slowing pace of economic improvement.
D. It can compare a country’s economic conditions between different periods of time.
【单选题】
Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago?
In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income.
While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time.
The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005.
In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare.
Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%.
The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly.
Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates.
What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___
A. It is much better than that of their European counterparts.
B. It has been on the decline ever since the turn of the century.
C. It has not improved as much as reported by the Census Bureau.
D. It has not been accurately assessed and reported since mid-2000s.
【单选题】
大学生的成才目标是___。
A. 培养德智体美全面发展的人才
B. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者
C. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者和接班人
D. 培养专业化、创新化的人才
【单选题】
世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。
A. “多极化”
B. 单边主义
C. 两极格局形成
D. 一超独霸
【单选题】
在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可,统一存在的,其中处于主导地位的是___。
【单选题】
时代精神的内涵十分丰富,其中___居于核心地位。
A. 艰苦奋斗
B. 自强不息
C. 团结统一
D. 改革创新
【单选题】
民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。
A. 爱国主义
B. 人道主义
C. 科学主义
D. 革命英雄主义
【单选题】
下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。
A. 艰难困苦,玉汝于成
B. 先天下之忧而忧
C. 生于忧患,死于安乐
D. 民无信不立
推荐试题
【判断题】
在曲线地段向外拨而轨缝过大,向里拨而轨缝过小时,要考虑或计算其影响量,预先做好调整
【判断题】
更换道岔尖轨作业目的确保线路稳定,保证地铁列车安全运行
【判断题】
尖轨非工作边与基本轨工作边的最小距离为65mm,容许误差为-4mm
【判断题】
使用撬棍翻动钢轨时,要有经验人员操作,其他人要远离撬棍和钢轨翻动的方向,禁止用手翻动钢轨
【判断题】
钢轨拨进拨出时,要统一指挥,动作一致,注意前后、左右人员安全,以防伤人
【判断题】
上道时要执行“眼看、手比、口呼”制度,确保人身安全
【判断题】
铁路支距尺用于测量标准轨距铁路道岔导曲线的支距
【判断题】
液压起道器应定期检查液压油是否清洁,并及时更换新油
【判断题】
液压起道器更换液压油前,用汽油或柴油将油箱内洗干净
【判断题】
液压起道器不工作时,油缸柱塞应全部回缩,防止表面锈蚀
【判断题】
液压拨道器,是适用于铁道线路日常保养和维修的专用工具,具有起道拔道两种功能
【判断题】
液压起拨道器由底盘、底盘两端销轴、拨杆、起道轮液压传动系统组成
【判断题】
液压起拨道器油箱渗油的原因为油箱紧固螺栓松动
【判断题】
捣固机器操作时,应避开防爬器、轨距杆、支撑等障碍物
【判断题】
捣固机器作业中,操作手应密切注意机器运转情况和线路状态
【判断题】
捣固作业发生故障时,应立即停机,用手压泵急速提镐下道进行处理,严禁在线路上停机处理故障
【判断题】
进行绝缘接头拆卸作业时,需通号人员配合,长柄工具应有绝缘套,作业中不得将两股钢轨搭接
【判断题】
进行锯轨和打磨时,非操作人员应离开作业区至少1m以上
【判断题】
翻动钢轨或拨钢轨时,要指派业务熟悉、体力较好的人员进行,同时应喊号使动作一致
【判断题】
更换钢轨时,如需动用道岔,需供电部门联系进行配合
【判断题】
上道作业前应对磨轨机进行全面细致的检查,若机器工作性能不良,砂轮片受潮,可以使用
【判断题】
上道作业前应对磨轨机进行全面细致的检查,以电动机为动力的,若发现电气开关状态不良,电缆线绝缘不良,单边绝缘性能不良,禁止上道作业
【判断题】
安放工料具及卸、运钢轨时,不得损坏轨旁设备
【判断题】
检查、改正尖轨部分轨距,调整好尖轨开程、动程,以及轮缘槽尺寸、竖切部分密贴状况,配合通号人员调试尖轨密贴
【判断题】
运送备用钢轨及工具材料至施工现场,放在轨枕头时,距线路上的钢轨净距不少于50㎜
【判断题】
运送备用钢轨及工具材料至施工现场,放在道心时,距线路的钢轨净距不少于300㎜
【判断题】
运送备用钢轨及工具材料至施工现场,新轨高度不得超过线路上的钢轨面25㎜
【判断题】
起道捣固作业看道:起道人俯身距起道机20~30m处的标准股上往回看,以起好的地段为准,看钢轨下腭水平线的高低情况,指挥压机手起道
【判断题】
起道捣固作业根据车流密度和线路状态,接头应适当抬高,不用考虑沉落量
【判断题】
在坡道上起道,从上坡往下坡看时,每点都不能低,从下坡往上坡看时每点都不能高
【判断题】
正线路轨距变化率不大于1/1000,其他线路不大于2/1000
【判断题】
锯轨作业时,锯后钢轨长度误差不超过±5mm
【判断题】
钻孔作业时,螺孔允许误差:孔径±3mm,位置±3mm
【判断题】
钻孔作业时,钢轨孔两边应到棱,边缘不得有毛刺;倒棱倒角45°~60°,顺长0.5~1.0mm
【判断题】
安装接头鱼尾板时,曲线线路接头的紧固顺序为:先紧2、5位,再1、6位,最后紧3、4位
【判断题】
安装接头鱼尾板时,直线线路的接头螺栓紧固顺序为:先紧1、6位,再紧3、4位,最后拧紧2、5位
【判断题】
安装接头鱼尾板时,初步紧固后,要用扭矩扳手按顺序扭紧螺帽,调校至所需的扭矩