【单选题】
是 ___
A. 主张充分发挥意识能动作用的观点
B. 主观唯心主义的观点
C. 客观唯心主义的观点
D. 朴素唯物主义的观点
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题

答案
B
解析
暂无解析
相关试题
【单选题】
区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___
A. 是不是在新的历史条件下出现的
B. 是不是符合事物发展规律、有强大生命力
C. 是不是具有新形式和新特点
D. 是不是得到绝大多数人的承认
【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】
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】
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】
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】
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】
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.
推荐试题
【多选题】
下列关于登革热的表述,正确的是:_____。
A. 主要传播蚊媒:埃及伊蚊、白纹伊蚊
B. 主要临床症状表现为:突发高热,伴三痛:头痛、肌肉、关节痛;三红:面、颈、胸部潮红;多样性皮疹
C. 潜伏期一般为2天~15天,平均5天~6天,通常3天~5天
D. 流行情况不受海拔影响
【多选题】
下列关于副溶血弧菌感染特征的表述,正确的是:_____。
A. 生食海鱼、凉菜或食品烹调加热不足、食品及食品容器被污染均可引起传播
B. 无人群特异性
C. 5月~11月流行,高峰在7月~9月,有明显季节性
D. 潜伏期一般为2小时~48小时
【多选题】
下列关于现况研究的表述,正确的是:_____。
A. 抽样调查是一种观察法
B. 抽样调查适合大人群的调查
C. 单纯随机抽样所得的样本代表性最好
D. 普查不适于发病率很低的疾病
【多选题】
____是流行性感冒的确诊依据。
A. 实验室诊断表现为:血常规检查白细胞总数偏高
B. 从病人鼻咽分泌物分离到流感病毒
C. 恢复期病人血清中抗流感病毒抗体滴度比急性期有4倍或4倍以上升高
D. 直接检查呼吸道上皮细胞的流感病毒抗原阳性
【多选题】
前往疟疾流行地区的旅客除预防性服药外,还可采取的防护措施有:_____。
A. 穿戴浅色长袖衣物
B. 在裸露皮肤上使用趋避剂
C. 使用蚊香和其他杀虫剂喷雾器
D. 在蚊帐内睡觉以及改善居住环境
【多选题】
病媒生物疫情通报和管理中,____,应在24小时之内报告总署。
A. 入境航空器上发现鼠类
B. 截获输入性活鼠
C. 检出鼠疫耶尔森菌、霍乱弧菌和黄热病毒
D. 截获来自鼠疫流行区死鼠
【多选题】
入境船舶蚊类重点监测场所包括:_____。
A. 后甲板(包括门洞、溢油池、对外开放的仓库间、理货房、船尾缆绳堆、绞缆机底座等)
B. 各层甲板及货舱舱口周围、前尖舱两侧角的阴凉避风场所墙壁下部
C. 生活区(底层走廊、更衣室、驾驶台)
D. 室外积水场所和容器等
【多选题】
低风险防护适用于____。
A. 对可疑病例和密切接触者进行流行病学调查和医学观察的检疫人员
B. 处理除呼吸道传染病及中等危害以上经接触传播传染病以外的疑似病例使用过的物品、分泌物、排泄物的人员
C. 对公共场所进行预防性消毒的工作人员
D. 对除经呼吸道途径外的其他途径传播的传染病疫点进行终末消毒的人员
【多选题】
民用航空器上,口岸呼吸道传染病密切接触者的判定标准为____,以及在上述区域内提供客舱服务的乘务员。
A. 民用航空器上舱内以疑似病例座位为中心,周边各方位相邻座位(含通道另一侧)的旅客
B. 疑似病例的同行人员
C. 航空器驾驶员
D. 托运行李的装卸人员
【多选题】
____,为疑似病例。
A. 痰结核菌检查阴性,胸部X线检查怀疑活动性肺结核病变者
B. 痰结核菌检查阳性,胸部X线检查怀疑活动性肺结核病变者
C. 痰结核菌检查阴性,胸部X线检查有异常阴影,病人有咳嗽、吐痰、低烧、盗汗等肺结核症状或按肺炎治疗观察2-4周未见吸收
D. 儿童结核菌素试验(5个单位,相当于1∶2000)强阳性反应者,伴有结核病临床症状
【多选题】
在入出境或者过境途中发生人员死亡,需要运送尸体入境的,托运人或者其代理人应当向海关申报并提交____。
A. 尸体、骸骨入出境卫生检疫申报单
B. 死者有效身份证明
C. 有效死亡证明或者由公安机关出具的死亡鉴定书
D. 托运人或者其代理人身份证明
【多选题】
海关对骸骨的现场查验内容包括:_____。
A. 检查骸骨的包装容器是否密闭,有无渗漏
B. 包装容器非密闭的
C. 检查骸骨是否干爽,是否带肌腱
D. 检查骸骨有无异味、病媒昆虫等
【多选题】
____,海关不给予电讯检疫。
A. 来自或经停受染地区的入境船舶
B. 本航次发现受染人或受染嫌疑人的入境船舶
C. 本航次有人非因意外伤害而死亡并且死因不明的入境船舶
D. 入境废旧船舶