영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Sociologist Mark Granovetter challenged a common assumption when he found that job seekers were more likely ①to hear about new opportunities from casual acquaintances than from close friends and family. This finding, ②published as the strength of weak ties, rests on a structural insight: close friends tend to belong to the same tight social circle and therefore already share most of the same information, whereas casual acquaintances typically move in different circles and can act as bridges to information a person would otherwise never ③encounter. Weak ties, precisely because they connect otherwise separate networks, ④transmitting novel information more efficiently than the redundant, overlapping ties within a tightly bonded group. Granovetter's insight has since been applied well beyond job searches, ⑤informing research on how innovations spread and how epidemics travel through a population.

When workers receive a five percent raise in a year when prices have ①climbed five percent as well, their real purchasing power has not changed at all, yet many still report feeling noticeably better off. This tendency to judge economic well-being by nominal figures ②printing on a paycheck, rather than by what that money can actually purchase, is known among economists as money illusion. Employers exploit this pattern by ③favoring modest nominal raises over deeper structural adjustments, since a visible increase on a payslip satisfies employees more effectively than an explanation about inflation could. The illusion persists even among people who claim to understand inflation well, which suggests that the bias ④operates at an intuitive level that formal knowledge does not easily override. Some economists ⑤argue that policymakers should exploit this illusion strategically, since workers resist nominal wage cuts far more fiercely than they resist the equivalent erosion of real wages.

Generative AI systems learn to write, draw, and compose by studying enormous collections of existing human work, much of ①which was created without the artists' knowledge or consent. Supporters of the technology argue that this process ②resembles how a human student learns by studying the masters, absorbing style and technique rather than copying specific pieces. Critics respond that the comparison ③breaks down at scale: a single AI model can absorb millions of works in days and then generate outputs that directly compete with the very artists whose work ④trained it. Courts around the world are now ⑤ask to decide whether training an algorithm on copyrighted material counts as fair use or as infringement.

Imagine a distant planet identical to Earth in every visible respect, except that the clear liquid its inhabitants call "water" is not H2O but a different compound, XYZ, that happens to look, taste, and behave exactly the same. When an Earthling and a Twin Earthling each say the word "water," they seem to mean the ①same thing, since neither could tell the substances apart without a chemistry lab. Philosopher Hilary Putnam used this scenario to argue that the meaning of a word is not determined solely by what happens inside a speaker's head. Even though the two speakers hold ②opposing thoughts and mental images when they use the word, their statements refer to ③two different substances, because the underlying chemical composition, not personal belief, fixes what a word ultimately picks out. Meaning, Putnam concluded, depends ④partly on the world outside the mind, not merely on the ⑤private mental states of whoever happens to be speaking.

When engineers design the software that controls a self-driving car, they face a question philosophers have debated for decades: should a crashing vehicle protect its own passenger, or minimize total harm even at the passenger's expense? Surveys reveal an uncomfortable contradiction: most people say a car should be programmed to save the greater number of lives, yet the same people admit they would never buy a vehicle designed to sacrifice its own owner. This suggests that _______________. Manufacturers, regulators, and philosophers must instead agree on transparent rules before autonomous vehicles are allowed to make such decisions.

Classical economic theory assumes that consumers evaluate every price change in the same rational way, weighing marginal benefit against marginal cost regardless of the absolute numbers involved. Behavioral economists, however, have discovered a striking exception: the moment a price drops to exactly zero, people's judgment shifts in a way that ordinary discounting cannot explain. In a well-known laboratory experiment, participants chose between two chocolates, one of higher quality priced at a small fee and one of lower quality offered for free. When both prices were merely reduced by the same amount, most participants still preferred the higher-quality option. Yet once the cheaper chocolate's price was lowered to zero, the majority abruptly switched their preference, even though the price gap between the two options had not actually changed. Researchers explain this reversal by noting that _______________.

Change blindness refers to a striking limitation of human perception in which observers fail to notice substantial alterations to a visual scene, provided the change occurs during a brief disruption such as an eye movement or a momentary obstruction. In a now-famous demonstration, researchers showed participants two versions of a photograph in alternation, separated by a short blank screen, and asked them to identify what had changed. Even when an entire building disappeared or a person's clothing shifted color, many viewers stared at the picture without detecting anything unusual. This phenomenon occurs because visual attention, rather than passively recording every detail like a camera, _______________. Whatever falls outside that narrow spotlight is represented only sparsely, if at all, leaving it vulnerable to being overwritten without notice. Consequently, change blindness demonstrates that our impression of a rich, complete visual world is, to a surprising extent, an illusion constructed by the mind, not a faithful record of external reality.

Factories that once employed hundreds of workers on an assembly line now run with a fraction of that staff, as robotic arms handle tasks that used to require human hands. (A) However, critics point out that earlier transitions unfolded over generations, giving workers time to retrain, whereas today's robots are being deployed much faster. (B) Historical evidence offers some comfort: previous waves of automation eventually created new categories of work that no one had predicted. (C) A factory worker displaced this year, therefore, cannot simply wait for a new industry to emerge decades from now.

주어진 문장: Such consistency across repeated trials suggests that the pattern is a genuine feature of human cognition, not random noise. In a classic experiment inspired by Keynes's beauty contest analogy, participants choose a number between zero and one hundred, and the winner is whoever selects the number closest to two-thirds of the average of all guesses submitted. ( ① ) A perfectly rational player, assuming every other participant reasons with unlimited depth, would conclude the equilibrium number is zero, since reasoning about others' reasoning collapses the average toward that single point. ( ② ) In practice, however, actual guesses rarely converge on zero; most participants stop reasoning after a round or two of imagining what others might guess, producing average guesses that cluster between twenty and thirty-five. ( ③ ) This gap between theoretical equilibrium and observed behavior reveals that human reasoning is bounded, capable of anticipating a few steps ahead but rarely capable of iterating the process indefinitely. ( ④ ) Economists use this game as a diagnostic tool, since the number a person submits reveals how many levels of strategic thinking that person is willing to perform. ( ⑤ ) This is a measure that idealized rational agents could never provide.

Because the donkey is assumed to be a perfectly rational creature that always chooses the option supported by the strongest reason, it finds itself, in this case, with no rational basis for choosing either pile. Medieval philosophers told the story of a hungry donkey placed exactly midway between two identical, equally fragrant piles of hay, with no factor whatsoever tipping the balance toward either option. ( ① ) Neither pile offers any advantage over the other. ( ② ) Paralyzed by this perfect symmetry, the donkey starves to death precisely because it can find no reason to move in either direction. ( ③ ) Critics of the story point out that real animals, and real humans, rarely face situations of such flawless symmetry. ( ④ ) Even a tiny, arbitrary preference, they note, is usually enough to break the tie in practice. ( ⑤ ) The paradox nevertheless raises a serious question about whether purely rational deliberation can ever generate action on its own.