Text 2

　　As Samuel Goldwyn so widely advised, never make predictions—especially about the future. But here is one: the analogy between 20th�瞔entury physics and 21st century biology will continue, for both good and ill.

　　Physics gave two things to the 20th century. The most obvious gift was power over nature. That power was not always benign, as the atomic bomb showed. Physics also gave the 20th century a more subtle boon than mere power. It also brought an understanding of the vastness of the universe and humanity’s insignificant place in it. But if the 20th century was distinguished by anything from its predecessors, that distinctive feature was physical technology, from motor cars and airplanes to computers and the internet.

　　It is too early to be sure if the distinguishing feature of the 21st century will be biological technology, but there is a good chance that it will be. Simple genetic engineering is now routine; indeed, the first patent application for an artificial living organism has recently been filed. Both the idea of such an organism and the idea that someone might own the rights to it would have been science fiction even a decade ago. And it is not merely that such things are now possible.

　　The other driving force of technological change—necessity—is also there. Many of the big problems facing humanity are biological, or are susceptible to biological intervention. The question of how to deal with an aging population is one example. Climate change, too, is intimately bound up with biology since it is the result of carbon dioxide going into the air faster than plants can remove it. And the risk of a new, lethal infection suddenly becoming pandemic as a result of modern transport links is as biological as it gets. Even the fact that such an infection might itself be the result of synthetic biology only emphasizes the biological nature of future risks.

　　At the moment, policymakers have inadequate technological tools to deal with these questions. But it is not hard to imagine such tools. Aging is directly biological. It probably cannot be stopped, but knowing how cells work—really knowing—will allow the process to be transformed for the better. At least part of the answer to climate change is fuel that grows, rather than fuel that is dug up. Only biotechnology can create that. And infections, pandemic or otherwise, are best dealt with by vaccines, which take a long time to develop. If cells were truly understood, that process might speed up to the point where the vaccine was ready in time to do something useful.

　　26. The word “benign” (Line 2, Paragraph 2) most probably means

　　[A] harmful [B]beneficial

　　[C] powerful [D] frightening

　　27. According to the author, what distinguishes the 21st century from the 20th century?

　　[A] biological technology 　[B] physical technology

　　[C] computers and the internet 　[D] modern transport links

　　28. According to the author, biological technology in the 21st century will

　　[A] speed up the aging population. [B] aggravate the climate change.

　　[C] keep new fatal infections in check. [D] understand the vast universe.

　　29. It can be inferred from the ending paragraph that

　　[A] Biotechnology will find fuel that is dug up from underground.

　　[B] Understanding of cells succeeded in preventing humans from aging.

　　[C] The vaccines have been developed to curb pandemic infections.

　　[D] There still lacks adequate technology to handle climate change.

　　30. What is the author’s attitude towards the 21st century?

　　[A] carefree [B]detached 　[C] optimistic [D] dubious