Extraordinary creative activity has been characterized as revolutionary， flying in the face of what is established and producing not what is acceptable but what will become accepted. According to this formulation， highly creative activity transcends the limits of an existing form and establishes a new principle of organization. However， the idea that extraordinary creativity transcends established limits is misleading when it is applied to the arts， even though it may be valid for the sciences. Differences between highly creative art and highly creative science arise in part from differences in their goals. For the sciences， a new theory is the goal and end result of the creative act. Innovative science produces new propositions in terms of which diverse phenomena can be related to one another in more coherent ways. Such phenomena as a brilliant diamond or a nesting bird are relegated to the role of data， serving as the means for formulating or testing a new theory. The goal of highly creative art is very different: the phenomenon itself becomes the direct product of the creative act. Shakespeare‘s Hamlet is not a tract about the behavior of indecisive princes or the uses of political power， nor is Picasso‘s painting Guernica primarily a propositional statement about the Spanish Civil War or the evils of fascism. What highly creative artistic activity produces is not a new generalization that transcends established limits， but rather an aesthetic particular. Aesthetic particulars produced by the highly creative artist extend or exploit， in an innovative way， the limits of an existing form， rather than transcend that form. This is not to deny that a highly creative artist sometimes establishes a new principle of organization in the history of an artistic field: the composer Monteverdi， who created music of the highest aesthetic value， comes to mind. More generally， however， whether or not a composition establishes a new principle in the history of music has little bearing on its aesthetic worth. Because they embody a new principle of organization， some musical works， such as the operas of the Florentine Camerata， are of signal historical importance， but few listeners or musicologists would include these among the great works of music. On the other hand， Mozart‘s The Marriage of Figaro is surely among the masterpieces of music even though its modest innovations are confined to extending existing means. It has been said of Beethoven that he toppled the rules and freed music from the stifling confines of convention. But a close study of his compositions reveals that Beethoven overturned no fundamental rules. Rather， he was an incomparable strategist who exploited limitsthe rules， forms， and conventions that he inherited from predecessors such as Haydn and Mozart， Handel and Bachin strikingly original ways. 1. The author considers a new theory that coherently relates diverse phenomena to one another to be the A. basis for reaffirming a well-established scientific formulation B. byproduct of an aesthetic experience C. tool used by a scientist to discover a new particular D. result of highly creative scientific activity2. The passage supplies information for answering all of the following questions EXCEPT: A. Has unusual creative activity been characterized as revolutionary? B. Did Beethoven work within a musical tradition that also included Handel and Bach? C. Is Mozart‘s The Marriage of Figaro an example of a creative work that transcended limits? D. Who besides Monteverdi wrote music that the author would consider to embody new principles of organization and to be of high aesthetic value?3. The author regards the idea that all highly creative artistic activity transcends limits with A. deep skepticism B. strong indignation C. marked indifference D. moderate amusement4. The author implies that an innovative scientific contribution is one that A. is cited with high frequency in the publications of other scientists B. is accepted immediately by the scientific community C. does not relegate particulars to the role of data D. introduces a new valid generalization5. Which of the following statements would most logically conclude the last paragraph of the passage? A. Unlike Beethoven， however， even the greatest of modern composers， such as Stravinsky， did not transcend existing musical forms. B. In similar fashion， existing musical forms were even further exploited by the next generation of great European composers. C. Thus， many of the great composers displayed the same combination of talents exhibited by Monteverdi. D. By contrast， the view that creativity in the arts exploits but does not transcend limits is supported in the field of literature. 1．D。前四个选项在文中均未提到，应该排除掉。根据文章第一段中的“Differencesbetween highly creative art．．．related to one another in more coherent ways．”，不难看出：具有创造性的科研活动的结果就是把不同现象合理地联系起来，只有D符合原文的意思。 2．D。文中的第一句话就回答了选项A的问题。文中最后一句话回答了选项B的问题。根据第二段中的“On the other hand，…existing means．”可以找到选项C的答案。第二段的第一句话中只提到了Monteveredi“who created music of the highest aesthetic value‘’，因此D选项的问题没有得到回答。 3．A。从第一段第三句中的misleading一词可以推断是持怀疑态度的。 4．D。首先排除A和B两个选项，因为文章中根本就没有提及这两方面的问题。根据第一段中的“Innovative science produces new propositions in terms Of which diversephenomena can be related to one another in more coherent ways”，可以推断的观点是：创新性科学提出新的命题。根据这些命题，不同的现象可以更加合理地联系起来，也就是说，创新性科研的主要贡献就是“归纳出一种全新的、合理的命题”(即选项D）， 5．B。通过仔细阅读第二段，我们知道A、C和D这三个选项都不能概括该段的主要意思，只有B是合理的选项。
发布者：ws2012
来源：育龙MBA网本页网址：http://mba.china-b.com/mbaxw/20090728/2026824_1.html
声明：我方为第三方信息服务平台提供者，本文来自于网络，登载出于传递更多信息之目的，并不意味着赞同其观点或证实其描述，文章内容仅供参考。如若我方内容涉嫌侵犯其合法权益，应该及时反馈，我方将会尽快移除被控侵权内容。
手机版
咨询热线：
