开展“不忘初心、牢记使命”主题教育，是以习近平同志为核心的党中央统揽（）作出的重大部署，对决胜全面建成小康社会、夺取新时代中国特色社会主义伟大胜利、实现中华民族伟大复兴的中国梦，具有重大而深远的意义。(出题单位：嘉定区委宣传部)

领导班子和班子成员要发扬刀刃向内的自我革命精神，认真检视反思，针对工作短板、具体问题，从思想、政治、作风、能力、廉政方面进行深入剖析，并形成检视剖析材料。重点采取五联方式，其中“五联”具体指的是：（）

党的十九届四中全会《决定》指出：中国特色社会主义制度和国家治理体系是以马克思主义为指导、植根中国大地、（）的制度和治理体系，是（）的制度和治理体系，是能够持续推动拥有近十四亿人口大国进步和发展、确保拥有五千多年文明史的中华民族实现“两个一百年”奋斗目标进而实现伟大复兴的制度和治理体系。

坚持和完善中国特色社会主义制度、推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化，是全党的一项重大战略任务。各级党委和政府以及各级领导干部要切实强化制度意识，带头维护制度权威，做制度执行的表率，带动全党全社会（）。

根据工信部于2019年报批公示的《电动汽车用动力蓄电池安全要求》，我国新能源汽车动力电池包或系统需经过包括（）、（）、（）、（）、（）等在内的16项安全检测。（出题单位：上汽集团）

上海市优秀历史建筑的保护要求分为以下哪几类？（出题单位：徐汇区房管局历保办）

上海市闵行区颛桥镇作为“全国文明镇”，多项特色文化品牌入选上海市非物质文化遗产名录，以下属于“颛桥三艺”的项目有：（出题单位：闵行区颛桥镇）

宗教事务管理要坚持哪些原则？。（出题单位：普陀区民族和宗教事务办公室）

自1998年10月1日起正式施行的《中华人民共和国献血法》鼓励（）、（）和（）率先献血，为树立社会新风尚作表率。（出题单位：复旦大学附属华山医院）

上海市养老模式有（ ）。（出题单位:上海健康医学院）

儿科“冬病夏治”有哪些治疗手段？（出题单位：上海市儿童医院）

人与环境密切的联系体现在（）。（出题单位：上海中医药大学）

县级以上地方人民政府的（）主管本行政区域内的档案事业。中央和县级以上地方各级各类（），是集中管理档案的文化事业机构，负责接收、收集、整理、保管和提供利用各分管范围内的档案。（出题单位：上海市档案局）

扑救有毒性液体的火灾时，应（）。（出题单位：上海铁路监督管理局）

___是我们理解当前所处历史方位的关键词。

中国特色社会主义进入新时代,意味着科学社会主义在21世纪的中国焕发出强大生机活力,在世界上高高举起了___伟大旗帜。

“思想道德修养与法律基础”,是一门融思想性、政治性、科学性、理论性、实践性于一体的___课。

党的十九大提出到本世纪中叶,要把我国建设成富强、民主、文明、和谐、___的社会主义现代化强国。

思想道德和___都是调节人们思想行为、协调人际关系、维护社会秩序的重要手段。

中国特色社会主义思想道德建设和___紧密联系、相互促进,为中国特色社会主义事业提供坚实的思想基础、精神支撑和法治保障。

___是中国最早的现代大学。

《礼记·中庸》认为，道德修养应“莫见乎隐，莫显乎微，故君子慎其独也”。这种“慎独”的道德修养方法要求我们在学习“思想道德修养与法律基础”课时要注重___。

“业精于勤，荒于嬉；行成于思，毁于随”，这句话说明了学习必须做到___

大学生活的中心内容应是___

创新学习的基础是___

“知之为知之，不知为不知，是知也。”这句话告诉我们，在学习上一定要培养___的优良学风。

以下关于思想道德和法律的关系表述错误的是___。

___是人们的思想观念、政治立场、价值取向、道德情操和行为习惯等方面品质和能力的综合体现，反映着一个人的思想境界和道德风貌。

“人的本质不是单个人所固有的抽象物，在其现实性上，它是一切社会关系的总和。”这句话说明___

马克思运用辩证唯物主义和历史唯物主义的立场、观点和方法，揭开了人的本质之谜，指出人的本质是___。

马克思指出：人的本质不是单个人所固有的抽象物，在其现实性上，它是一切___的总和。

对人的认识，核心在于认识___。

关于人生观与世界观的关系，以下说法错误的是___。

___是人生观的核心，在人生实践中具有重要的作用。

___是指生活在一定历史条件下的人，对“人为什么活着”这一人生根本问题的认识和回答。

人生目的是人在人生实践中关于自身行为的根本指向和人生追求，它所认识和回答的根本问题是___

___是指人的生命及其实践活动对于社会和个人所具有的作用和意义。

___是个体的人生活动对社会、他人所具有的价值。

___是人们通过生活实践形成的对人生问题的一种稳定的心理倾向和精神状态。

人生态度与人生目的、人生价值的关系是___。

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?___

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?___

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?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

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___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

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___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___

有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___

一行人在过路口时迎面遇到红灯，看到近处没有车辆便径直通过。他这样做是___

任何一个社会成员，无论具有何种身份、职业和地位，都必须在公共生活中遵守社会公德。这体现了社会公德具有的___特点。

影响公共生活、公共秩序、文明礼貌、清洁卫生以及其他影响社会生活的最主要行为规范是___

《公民道德建设实施纲要》明确指出，社会公德涵盖了___

为调整和规范人类社会生活三大领域，相应分别形成了___