高炉炼铁是CO气体的重要用途之一，其基本反应为：FeO（s）+CO（g）⇌Fe（s）+CO₂（g）△H＞0．已知在1 100℃时，该反应的化学平衡常数K=0.263．

①温度升高，化学平衡移动后达到新的平衡，此时平衡常数K值____（填“增大”、“减小”或“不变”）；

②1100℃时测得高炉中，c（CO₂）=0.025mol•L^﹣1，c（CO）=0.1mol•L^﹣1，则在这种情况下，该反应向____进行（填“左”或“右”），判断依据是____．

阅读下面的文字，完成小题。

“爱”是儒墨两家措意最深的话题之一，它把罕言乃至不言“爱”的道家、法家、名家、阴阳家同儒家、墨家区别开来，也把言“爱”心曲不尽相合的儒墨两家区别开来。孔子由“仁”说“爱”，“爱”只是“仁”心的发用之一；墨子以“兼爱”为其学说的主导取向。而“兼”以“爱”之的底蕴却是由“交相利”之“利”来申说的。从墨子与孔子在“爱”上的这一微妙差异，大致可窥见儒墨两种教化何以终究会各趋一途。

随着平等意识的觉醒，清末民初以后的学人多以“兼爱”之所爱不分亲疏厚薄而赞许墨家，并以此贬责主张“亲亲”而爱有差等的儒家。立足于平等对“兼爱”和“亲亲”做褒贬之判，这在上个世纪的许多年中已被人们视为当然。但如此认同“兼爱”而厌弃“亲亲”，却在更大程度上出于人们对平等和爱的关系的误解。平等属于权利范畴，它只在权利的意义上构成一种值得人们肯定的价值；爱是一种情感，由衷的“爱”原是不能借着“平等”的尺度相强求的。单就爱的情愫尚应向更广博处推扩而言，墨子的“兼爱”当然是值得称道的，而孔子在从“爱人”的一角度上指点他所谓的“仁”时，却也未尝不曾教诲人们“泛爱众”。“泛爱”并不比“兼爱”爱得偏狭，所不同的是儒家的“泛爱”毕竟连着“亲亲”的根蒂；这由“亲亲”之爱到“泛爱”之爱固然显出爱的差等来。然而，却正是对爱的差等的认可表明了儒家比墨家更懂得作为一种情而不是作为一种理的“爱”。

《礼记·礼运》把“爱”作为人“情”之一而由“情”说“爱”，意味着“爱”在先秦儒者这里达到了怎样的自觉。对“情”的反省可使人悟出一种“理”，但“情”并不直接就是“理”。墨子以“兼爱”立论，无论他出于怎样好的动机，事实上在他这样做时却是把“情”作为“理”来推证或辩说了。“爱”在儒家学说中从不曾像墨家著述中那样被标举为一个规范某种道理的范畴。“爱”既然终是被儒者视为一种“情”，而情的可贵又首先在于它必是出于自然而非强制，那么，它在儒家这里便永远只在于润泽或滋养那种与人的心性有关联的性理，而决不至于被直接以理相称。

基督教把“要爱你的仇敌”作为教义写在福音书里，那“爱”是被一个外在的权威要求的，墨家学说的“兼爱”的训示在被要求的意味上似乎不像基督教那样决绝，但“顺天意者，兼相爱，交相利，必得赏”的说法显然给了一个有意志的“天”以“爱”的督责者的地位。如果说儒家的“爱”是出于人之自然的心性发动，因而可勉强以“自律”之“爱”相称的话，那么，墨家所倡说的“爱”则可说是一种有着“他律”性质的“爱”。“自律”之“爱”——根自人之心性中自然涌出的“爱”——不染涉利益，不权衡得失，因此儒者由“亲亲仁也”所崇尚的那种仁者之“爱”是超功利的，这“爱”本身即有着一种独立的价值。

（摘自黄克剑《儒墨之辨》，有删改）

    I am a strong believer that if a child is raised with approval, he will learn to love himself and will be successful in his own way.

    Several weeks ago, I was doing homework with my son in the third grade and he kept standing up from his chair to go over the math lines. I kept asking him to sit down, telling him that he should concentrate better. He sat but seconds later, as if he didn't even notice he was doing it, he got up again. I was getting frustrated, but then it hit me. I started noticing his answers were much quicker and accurate when he stood up. Could he be more intent while standing up?

    This made me start questioning myself and what I had been raised to believe. I was raised to believe that a quiet, calm child was a sure way to success. This child would have the discipline to study hard, get good grades and become someone important in life.

    Now those same people perhaps come to realize that their kids are born with their own sets of DNA and personality traits, and all you can do is loving and accepting them. As parents, throughout their growing years and beyond that, we need to be our kids' best cheerleaders, guiding them and helping them find their way.

    I have stopped asking my son to sit down and concentrate. Obviously, he is concentrating just in his own way and not mine. We need to learn to accept our kids' ways of doing things. Some way may have worked for me but doesn't mean we need to carry it through generations. There is nothing sweeter than being individual and unique. It makes us free and happy and that's just the way I want my kids to live their own life.