2. 外语
  3. A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological process behind viruses and the human body in a twee

A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological process behind viruses and the human body in a twee

admin2022-09-05  57
问题     A few weeks ago, a well-meaning professor tried to explain the physiological process behind viruses and the human body in a tweet and was immediately criticized for a mistake in his information. He then issued an apology and deleted his erroneous tweet.
    Communicating science beyond the academic bubble is necessary to augmenting public understanding of health and environmental issues and helping individuals make well-informed personal decisions.
    However, scientists who engage in science communication must acknowledge that even in their area, their expertise is deep but narrow. They need to recognize the constraints in their own knowledge. That is not to suggest that they only write or present on their own research, but rather, that they consult with an expert if the topic is outside of their discipline. Fact-checking with a scientist who works in the specialty will prevent the unintentional spread of misinformation, and the process of doing so may yield tiny pieces of interesting new information that can be incorporated.
    Some have argued that the public is not educated enough to understand scientific information, especially for any complex phenomena, but this is absurd. Science instruction can be found at all levels of public education with most secondary schools offering classes on biology, physics, and chemistry. If anything, social media has shown that the public craves knowledge based on a solid scientific foundation. Even the public discourse that follows most scientific articles shows that online readers can understand even the most baffling of scientific principles.
    It is equally imperative to emphasize that being an expert on a topic does not automatically make a scholar qualified to communicate it to a nonscientific audience. A number of scientists recently have been offering public-aimed explanations of scientific phenomena. Even though they have appropriate credentials, they often do very little in the way of explaining. One biologist shared an intricate analogy involving a library, books, paper, a recipe, ingredients, and a cake to explain the process behind vaccines. Any explanation that requires a written key to keep track of what each item represents is not a clear example for public consumption.
    Science communication is a science in and of itself. It requires rigorous training and instruction. A scientist should take communication courses that can teach a person how to identify and eliminate jargon and how to develop effective analogies to explain complex concepts. One cannot assume communication expertise-imagine if someone just decided that they were a physicist and started trying to contribute to the field without the necessary background. Doing a poor job communicating science to the public will only create confusion and widen the gap between science and society, a gap that scientists are trying to close.
What does the author say we can learn from social media?
选项 A、A solid academic foundation is essential to understanding baffling scientific principles.
B、Modern technology has facilitated communication between scientists and the public.
C、Scientific articles have gained increasing popularity among the general public.
D、The public’s understanding of science is much better than some have claimed.
答案D
解析 由题干中的social media定位到第四段最后两句。推理判断题。作者在定位部分提到从社交媒体得到的两点发现：一是公众渴望基于坚实科学基础的知识；二是一些在线读者甚至可以理解最令人困惑的科学原理；而本段开头提到，一些人认为公众无法理解科学信息，特别是关于任何复杂现象的信息，由此可以推知，社交媒体所体现的公众对于科学知识的理解力超出某些人的预估，故答案为D。A杂糅了第四段最后两句的部分信息，作者在最后两句中分别强调了公众渴望的知识是有坚实科学基础的知识，以及大众有能力理解令人困惑的科学原理，可知A与原文意思不一致，故排除；原文虽然提到了在线读者对科学文章的探讨，但意在强调公众对科学的理解比有些人认为的要好，而非说明现代技术对科学家与公众交流的作用，故排除B项；C项是对本段倒教第二句的过度推断，公众渴望科学知识不等同于科学文章受到欢迎，故排除该项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/3sR7777K
0

大学英语六级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)