[讨论]GWD32-Q25-Q28 文章主旨题

There is widespread belief that the emergence of giant industries has been accompanied by an equivalent surge in industrial research. A recent study of important inventions made since the turn of the century reveals that more than half were the product of individual inventors working alone, independent of organized industrial research. While industrial laboratories contributed such important products as nylon and transistors, independent inventors developed air conditioning, the automatic transmission, the jet engine, the helicopter, insulin, and streptomycin. Still other inventions, such as stainless steel, television, silicones, and Plexiglas
                        were developed through the combined efforts of individuals and laboratory teams.

Despite these finding, we are urged to support monopolistic power on the grounds that such power creates an environment supportive of innovation. We are told that the independent inventor, along with the small firm, cannot afford to undertake the important research needed to improve our standard of living while protecting our diminishing resources; that only the giant corporation or conglomerate, with its prodigious assets, can afford the kind of expenditures that produce the technological advances vital to economic progress. But when we examine expenditures for research, we find that of the more than $35 billion spent each year in this country, almost two-thirds is spent by the federal government. More than half of this government expenditure is funneled into military research and product development, accounting for the enormous increase in spending in such industries as nuclear energy, aircraft, missiles, and electronics. There are those who consider it questionable that these defense-linked research projects will either improve our standard of living or do much to protect our diminishing resources.

Recent history has demonstrated that we may have to alter our longstanding conception of the process actuated by competition. The price variable, once perceived as the dominant aspect of the process, is now subordinate to the competition of the new product, the new business structure, and the new technology. While it can be assumed that in a highly competitive industry not dominated by single corporation, investment in innovation—a risky and expensive budget item—might meet resistance from management and stockholders concerned about cost-cutting, efficient organization, and large advertising budgets, it would be an egregious error to equate the monopolistic producer with bountiful expenditures on research. Large-scale enterprises tend to operate more comfortably in stable and secure circumstances, and their managerial bureaucracies tend to promote the status quo and resist the threat implicit in change. Moreover, in some cases, industrial giants faced with little or no competition seek to avoid the capital loss resulting from obsolescence by deliberately obstructing technological progress. By contrast, small firms undeterred by large investments in plant and capital equipment often aggressively pursue new techniques and new products, investing in innovation in order to expand their market shares.

      The conglomerates are not, however, completely except from strong competitive pressures. There are instances in which they too must compete with another industrial Goliath, and then their weapons may include large expenditures for innovation.

(B)    point out a common misconception about the relationship between the extent of industrial research and the growth of monopolistic power in industry

(C)   describe the inadequacies of small firms in dealing with the important matter of research and innovation

(D)   show that America’s strength depends upon individual ingenuity and resourcefulness

(E)    encourage free-market competition among industrial giants

------------------------------------------------------------------------

答案是B。没有查到相关的讨论帖。想了想，没觉得B有多正确，因为文章先说大部分的发明由个人创造，然后说我们被鼓励去支持垄断力量开创创新的环境，然而发现这些垄断力量都去用来军事发明了，没有对我们的环境和生活水平的提高做出贡献，然后又说在竞争激烈的行业和垄断的行业都不会有动力去创新，只有小公司去为了市场份额而创新，最后说垄断也没有不创新只是没创到点子上，都创军事上了。 

B说指出了对行业研究的延伸和行业中垄断力量发展的一个普遍误解。这不是第三段的中心内容吗？怎么可以作为文章中心内容呢？请大家指教

      The conglomerates are not, however, completely except from strong competitive pressures. There are instances in which they too must compete with another industrial Goliath, and then their weapons may include large expenditures for innovation.

(B)    point out a common misconception about the relationship between the extent of industrial research and the growth of monopolistic power in industry

(C)   describe the inadequacies of small firms in dealing with the important matter of research and innovation

(D)   show that America’s strength depends upon individual ingenuity and resourcefulness

(E)    encourage free-market competition among industrial giants

------------------------------------------------------------------------

答案是B。没有查到相关的讨论帖。想了想，没觉得B有多正确，因为文章先说大部分的发明由个人创造，然后说我们被鼓励去支持垄断力量开创创新的环境，然而发现这些垄断力量都去用来军事发明了，没有对我们的环境和生活水平的提高做出贡献，然后又说在竞争激烈的行业和垄断的行业都不会有动力去创新，只有小公司去为了市场份额而创新，最后说垄断也没有不创新只是没创到点子上，都创军事上了。 

B说指出了对行业研究的延伸和行业中垄断力量发展的一个普遍误解。这不是第三段的中心内容吗？怎么可以作为文章中心内容呢？请大家指教

我自己写的一个逻辑图,供楼主参考

LOGIC MAP:

1.原来人们相信工业化发展同工业研究相同步，但调查发现大多数的发明都是由个人发明者做出的

2.继续削弱旧观点，尽管人们依然相信大多数发明有大公司做出，调查发现其中很大一部分投资是由联邦政府投入在军事工业的发展上的。

3.认为新产品和新技术是引导这个过程的主要因素，并说明大公司大企业对于开发新产品没有太大兴趣，但小企业却往往在这方面十分积极

4.但是工业集团也不是完全没有新产品的竞争压力。

文章的行文思路：可能作者是这样的思路，第1、2段说明大企业是没有太多的创新的动力的，第3段分析为什么大企业没有这样的动机，第4段照例进行圆场