___0346.电影院各类用房应按其噪声等级分区布置。有噪声的用房不宜与（ ）贴邻设置。

___0347.电影院观众厅的设计应与银幕的设置空间统一考虑，观众厅的长度不宜大于（ ）。

___0348.《电影院建筑设计规范》（JGJ 58—2008）规定，银幕边框、银幕后墙及附近的侧墙和银幕前方的顶棚应采用无光（ ）或（ ）装修材料。

___0349.电影院银幕后墙面应（ ）。

___0350.当电影院建在（ ）时，应形成独立的防火分区。

___0351.电影院观众厅疏散门应为（ ）门。

___0352.电影院观众厅疏散门的数量不应少于（ ）个。

___0353.《电影院建筑设计规范》（JGJ 58—2008）规定，乙级及乙级以上电影院应设踏步灯或座位排号灯，其供电电压应为不大于（ ）。

___0354.（ ）可能会导致硫化氢中毒，甚至发生“闪电型”死亡。

___0355.一深7m左右的电力井内有多台柴油抽水机在工作，3名工人下到井内巡检时，发生一起2人中毒窒息死亡的事故。最有可能引起该事故的物质是 （ ）。

___0356.某物业公司组织工人进入下水道和化粪池进行疏通作业时，由于未采取有效的安全防护措施，导致多人中毒死亡。此类场所最常见的，可导致人员中毒的有害物质是（ ）。

___0357.《尾矿库建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1252—2015）规定，尾矿库企业应对每座尾矿库设置生产运行作业班组，实行24小时值班制，每班值班人数不少于（ ）人。

___0358.《尾矿库建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1252—2015）规定，尾矿库建设项目安全设施试运行时间不应超过（ ），且尾矿排放不应超过初期坝坝顶标高。

___0359.根据《尾矿库建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1252—2015），关于尾矿库封堵作业应注意的事项说法错误的是（ ）。

___0360.《尾矿库建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1252—2015）规定，尾矿库滩顶高程测点应当布设于滩顶较低处，测点数量应不少于（ ），且尽量沿坝轴线均匀设置。

___0361.《尾矿库建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1252—2015）规定，暴雨期间停止向库内排尾，应24小时不间断巡查，至少每间隔（ ）向值班调度报告尾矿库运行情况一次。

___0362.根据《金属非金属矿山建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1251—2015），下列关于金属非金属矿山说法错误的是（ ）。

___0363.根据《金属非金属矿山建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1251—2015），金属非金属矿山企业应配备专职安全生产管理人员，人数不少于（ ）人，其中是注册安全工程师的人员不少于（ ）人。

___0364.根据《金属非金属矿山建设生产安全规范》（DB11/T 1251—2015），金属非金属矿山企业应定期组织安全生产管理人员、专业技术人员和其他相关人员集中开展隐患排查，每月不少于（ ）。

___0365.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，企业安全生产委员会应当（ ）至少召开一次安全工作会议。遇到较重大的安全问题，应当随时召开安全工作会议。

___0366.依据《生产区域动火作业安全规范》（HG 30010—2013）动火作业的分级不包括（ ）。

___0367.根据《生产区域动火作业安全规范》（HG 30010—2013），在生产运行状态下的易燃易爆生产装置上的动火作业属于（ ）。

___0368.《生产区域动火作业安全规范》（HG 30010—-2013）规定，特殊动火作业应事先制定安全施工方案，落实安全防火措施，必要时可请（ ）到现场监护。

___0369.下列关于民用爆破器材生产企业安全生产要求的说法中，错误的是（ ）。

___0370.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，企业法定代表人、主要负责人和分管安全的负责人应当在任职（ ）之内参加安全生产监督管理部门或行业主管部门的安全培训教育，并考核合格取得相应的资格证书；（ ）之内应当及时参加复训教育。

___0371.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，浆粕生产、蒸球设备的安全阀、压力表等应当齐全有效，地面应当（ ）。

___0372.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，丝绸的出绸装置、涂层机、热风拉幅定形机等应当（ ），作用良好。

___0373.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，涂层机室照明应当采用（ ）型灯具。

___0374.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，电熨斗（吊瓶熨斗）等定型工具、设备应当符合移动电具安全设计要求，电线、插头、温控、指示等完好无损，绝缘可靠，使用（ ）纱包线，长度不得超过（ ）m，并安装漏电保护装置。

___0375.关于电熨斗（吊瓶熨斗）的使用，以下说法错误的是（ ）。

___0376.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，罗纹机工作灯、棉毛机工作灯、氯氧联漂流水线离工作地面（ ）m以下的照明灯应当使用安全电压。

___0377.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，起毛机储尘室出风面积应大于墙面积的1/5，储存室容积应大于（ ）m3，做到（ ），具有安全泄爆口，安置喷淋灭火管。禁止使用无防护措施的电气装置。

___0378.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，使用卧式裁断机（带式裁布机）等专用设备的从业人员必须佩戴（ ）。

___0379.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，商标印刷机电气控制开关、锭带刮浆机电气开关、苯吸附装置电气控制箱等应当采用（ ）电气设施和装置。

___0380.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，燃气分配室、储气罐、储油罐、汽油汽化器、热煤炉等所使用的电气设备、装置和照明灯具必须采取（ ），电气开关装置应设置在（ ）。

___0381.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，燃气设备、设施排气孔应当朝向（ ）的区域。

___0382.紧急停车开关形状应当区别一般控制开关，颜色为（ ），应当保证操作人员易于接触，不发生危险。

___0383.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，企业应当对在用的特种设备进行经常性日常维护保养，应当（ ）组织一次安全自行检查。

___0384.《纺织工业企业安全管理规范》（AQ 7002—2007）规定，特种设备在使用过程中，有效期届满前（ ），必须向当地特种设备检验检测机构提出检验要求。

___0385.移动电具必须绝缘可靠，完好无损。潜水泵、冲洗泵、电锤、电钻、风机等电具应当根据所在地域的安全管理规定，定期进行安全检测。检测有效期不得大于（ ）天。

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___

量变的复杂性是指___

量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___

量变中的局部性部分质变是___

揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___

“肯定和否定相互渗透，在一定意义上，肯定就是否定。”这是一种___

事物的否定方面是指___

作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___

辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___

否定之否定规律___

事物发展的周期性体现了___

直线论的错误在于只看到___

循环论的错误在于___

对立统一规律揭示了___

唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___

辩证法所说的矛盾是指___

矛盾的基本属性是___

依据是___

矛盾问题的精髓是___

题的方法都是___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

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___

“或然率”是指___

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?___

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?___

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?___

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?___

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 can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。