영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Labeling theory approaches deviance not as a fixed property of certain acts, but as a social process ①created when powerful groups attach a negative label to a person's behavior. According to this view, nearly everyone breaks minor rules at some point, yet only some individuals ②are singled out, caught, and formally branded as delinquents, criminals, or troublemakers. Sociologist Howard Becker argued that this label often becomes what he called a master status, a single identity that ③overshadow every other trait a person has and shapes how others treat them from that point onward. Once labeled, an individual may find legitimate opportunities ④closing off, pushing them toward the very community of offenders that the label predicted they would join. Critics of harsh punitive policies frequently invoke labeling theory to argue that stigmatizing young offenders may ⑤entrench criminal identities rather than correct behavior.

Philosopher Harry Frankfurt devised a scenario ①to challenge a long-held assumption about moral responsibility: that a person can be blamed for an action only if they could genuinely have done otherwise. Imagine a man named Black who secretly implants a device in another man's brain, ②ready to force a particular decision if the second man shows any sign of choosing differently. The second man, however, decides entirely on his own to perform the very action Black wanted, and the device never ③activating at all. Black's hidden mechanism made it impossible for the man ④to have chosen otherwise, yet most people still consider him fully responsible for what he freely decided to do. Frankfurt used this scenario to argue that moral responsibility depends on the actual reasoning behind a choice, not on some abstract guarantee that an alternative path ⑤remained available the entire time.

Prospect theory proposes that the subjective value of money is not a straight line but a curved function, ①differing sharply from the assumptions of classical economic models. In the domain of gains, the function bends downward as amounts ②increase, so the psychological difference between earning zero and one hundred dollars feels far greater than between earning one thousand and eleven hundred. A parallel pattern appears among losses, where the curve ③bend in the opposite direction, yet sensitivity still fades as the amount grows larger. This tendency, ④known as diminishing sensitivity, explains why a shopper barely notices a ten dollar increase on a two thousand dollar purchase. Researchers illustrate this curvature with graphs ⑤shaped like an S turned sideways, sloping gently near the center and flattening toward both extremes.

When sociologist Émile Durkheim studied suicide rates across different societies, he noticed something ①puzzling: rates rose not only during economic depression but also during sudden prosperity. He concluded that both crises share a common feature, the ②collapse of shared norms that once told individuals what to expect and how to behave. Durkheim called this state of normlessness anomie, arguing that rapid social change can ③strengthen the moral guidelines that regulate human desire, leaving individuals disoriented even when material conditions improve. Decades later, Robert Merton extended the concept to explain deviance within stable societies, proposing that anomie also arises when a culture insists that everyone pursue ④identical goals, such as wealth, while denying many people the legitimate means to achieve them. Anomie theory therefore suggests that crime is less a product of individual failure than of ⑤structural imbalance within society itself.

Scientists have long searched for a way to describe, in a single coherent framework, the outer limits within which human activity can safely continue without ①stabilizing the planet's fundamental systems. The concept of planetary boundaries, introduced by earth-system researchers, identifies nine interconnected processes, including climate change, biodiversity loss, and nitrogen pollution, each possessing a threshold beyond which abrupt and ②irreversible change becomes likely. Unlike conventional environmental limits, often defined locally, these boundaries are framed at a planetary scale, reflecting the idea that the Earth functions as a single ③interdependent system rather than a collection of isolated regions. Crossing one boundary, proponents argue, does not merely damage the system involved but can also ④destabilize others, since climate, oceans, and land are bound together by feedback loops that transmit disturbance across the system. Some philosophers have likened this framework to a ship's safe operating margin, within which passengers may move freely without risking the vessel's stability. Critics, however, contend that the boundaries are drawn with more ⑤confidence than the data can support.

John Rawls proposed an unusual thought experiment to determine what principles of justice a society ought to adopt. Imagine a group of rational people gathered to design the basic rules of their future society, but placed behind what he called a veil of ignorance, a condition under which ①none of them knows their own race, gender, wealth, talents, or social position in advance. Since no one can predict whether they will be born into privilege or poverty, each person has a strong incentive to choose rules that ②protect the worst-off members of society, rather than rules that merely favor whichever group they happen to belong to. Rawls argued that rational people placed in this position would not gamble on inequality; instead, they would favor arrangements that guarantee basic liberties for everyone and permit unequal outcomes only when those outcomes actually ③benefit the least advantaged. Justice, on this view, is what ④impartial reasoning produces once self-interest is ⑤maximized.

The sunk cost fallacy also complicates decisions in personal relationships and long-term commitments. (A) A person who has invested years in a career path that no longer brings satisfaction may nonetheless continue along that path, reluctant to treat those years as time that cannot be reclaimed regardless of future choices. (B) This reluctance often stems less from genuine hope for improvement than from an unwillingness to admit that the time and effort already invested failed to produce the desired outcome. (C) Recognizing this pattern requires distinguishing between a decision genuinely worth continuing and one being sustained merely to justify past commitment, a distinction that is often uncomfortable to draw honestly.

Social mobility refers to the movement of individuals or families between different positions within a society's system of stratification, whether upward, downward, or sideways. (C) Structural mobility, caused by large-scale economic shifts such as the growth of new industries, must be distinguished from individual mobility, which results from a single person's particular choices. (A) Sociologists distinguish intragenerational mobility, changes within a single person's lifetime, from intergenerational mobility, differences between the social position of parents and their children. (B) Research across many nations has found that education functions as the primary channel of upward mobility, yet access to quality education is itself unevenly distributed.

주어진 문장: This dual function, capturing carbon while simultaneously enriching the soil, distinguishes biochar from many other carbon removal methods that offer no agricultural benefit. Among the many strategies proposed to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, one of the oldest draws on an agricultural technique predating modern industry, converting organic material into a stable form of charcoal known as biochar. ① Biochar is produced through pyrolysis, a process in which crop residues or wood chips are heated in an environment with little or no oxygen, preventing the material from burning away as in an open fire. ② This process leaves behind a carbon-rich solid that resists decomposition far longer than raw organic matter, locking carbon in a form remaining stable in soil for centuries. ③ When mixed into farmland, biochar also improves soil structure, retaining moisture and nutrients otherwise lost, which can boost crop yields in depleted soils. ④ For example, farmers cultivating nutrient-poor tropical soils have reported measurable increases in productivity after adding biochar. ⑤ Nevertheless, researchers caution that the climate benefits of biochar depend on the feedstock and method used, since poorly managed pyrolysis can release as much carbon as it sequesters, undermining its own purpose. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤

Because the two sums occupy entirely separate mental categories, the household feels no contradiction in treating them so differently. Consider a household that maintains two separate financial habits that, from a purely economic standpoint, appear difficult to reconcile. ( ① ) On one hand, the household carefully sets aside a fixed percentage of its income each month into a long-term retirement account, resisting any temptation to withdraw from it early. ( ② ) On the other hand, the same household carries a persistent balance on a credit card, paying a substantial interest rate simply for the convenience of short-term borrowing. ( ③ ) A purely rational calculation would suggest withdrawing a small amount from savings to eliminate the higher-interest debt, since the interest earned on savings is far lower than the interest owed on the card. ( ④ ) Yet the household rarely considers this option, since retirement savings are mentally categorized as untouchable while credit card debt is treated as a separate, ongoing obligation. ( ⑤ ) This example illustrates how mental accounting can lead to financial choices that persist despite being demonstrably suboptimal.