首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Back in Seattle,around the corner from the Discovery Institute,Stephen Meyer offers some peer-reviewed evidence that there truly
Back in Seattle,around the corner from the Discovery Institute,Stephen Meyer offers some peer-reviewed evidence that there truly
admin
2012-07-18
67
问题
Back in Seattle,around the corner from the Discovery Institute,Stephen Meyer offers some peer-reviewed evidence that there truly is a controversy that must be taught. "The Darwinists are bluffing, "he says over a plate of oysters at a downtown seafood restaurant. "They have the science of the steam engine era,and it’s not keeping up with the biology of the information age. "
Meyer hands me a recent issue of Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews with an article by Carl Woese.an eminent microbiologist at the University of Illinois. In it. Woese decries the failure of reductionist biology—the tendency to Jook at systems as merely the sum of their parts—to keep up with the developments of molecular biology. Meyer says the conclusion of Woese’s argument is that the Darwinian emperor has no clothes.
It’s a page out of the antievolution playbook: using evolutionary biology’s own literature against it, selectively quoting from the likes of Stephen Jay Gould to illustrate natural selection’s downfalls. The institute marshals Journal articles discussing evolution to provide policymakers with evidence of the raging controversy surrounding the issue.
Woese scoffs at Meyer’s claim when I call to ask him about the paper. "To say that my criticism of Darwinists says that evolutionists have no clothes,"Woese says, "is like saying that Einstein is criticizing Newton,therefore Newtonian physics is wrong". Debates about evolution’s mechanisms,he continues, don’t amount to challenges to the theory. And intelligent design "is not science. It makes no predictions and doesn’t offer any explanation whatsoever, except for’God did it’. "
Of course Meyer happily acknowledges that Woese is an ardent evolutionist. The institute doesn’t need to impress Woese or his peers; it can simply co-opt the vocabulary of science—"academic freedom. " "sci-entific objectivity,""teach the controversy"—and redirect it to a public trying to reconcile what ap-pear to be two contradictory scientific views. By appealing to a sense of fairness. ID finds a place at the political table,and by merely entering the debate it can claim victory. "We don’t need to win every argu-ment to be a success, "Meyer says,"We’re trying to validate a discussion that’s been long suppressed. "
This is precisely what happened in Ohio. "I’m not a PhD in biology, "says board member Michael Cochran. "But when I have X number of PhD experts telling me this, and X number telling me the opposite, the answer is probably somewhere between the two. "
An exasperated Krauss claims that a truly representative debate would have had 10000 pro-evolution Scientists against two Discovery executives. "What these people want is for there to be a debate, "says Krauss. "People in the audience say,Hey,these people sound reasonable. They argue, ’people have different opinions, we should present those opinions in school.’That is nonsense. Some people have opinions that the Holocaust never happened, but we don’t teach that in history. "
Eventually, the Ohio board approved a standard mandating that students learn to "describe how scientists continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory. "Proclaiming victory, Johnson barnstormed Ohio churches soon after notifying congregations of a new, ID-friendly standard. In response, anxious board members added a clause stating that the standard "does not mandate the teaching or testing of intelligent design."Both sides claimed victory. A press release from IDNet trumpeted the mere inclusion of the phrase intelligent design,saying that "the implication of the statement is that the ’teaching or testing of intelligent design’is permitted. "Some pro-evolution scientists, meanwhile,say there’s nothing wrong with teaching students how to scrutinize theory. "I don’t have a problem with that," says Patricia Princehouse,a professor at Case Western Reserve and an outspoken opponent of ID."Critical analysis is exactly what scientists do."
Why did Meyer initiate the debate between him and Woese as he claimed?
选项
A、To make it possible the alternative use of the vocabulary of science
B、To reconcile what appear to be two contradictory scientific views
C、To claim victory for the views which are so significant
D、To establish the soundness of a discussion that’s been long suppressed
答案
D
解析
题目问:Meyer为什么发起他与沃斯之间的争论?第五段最后一句“‘We don’t need to win every argument to be a success,’Meyer says,‘We’re trying to validate a discussion that’s been long suppressed’.”通过这句话可知,Meyer发起他与沃斯之间的争论,并非要把赢得每一次争论当作胜利,而是试图证实一个长久以来被禁止发表的论述。据此判断,答案是D。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/N4nO777K
0
考博英语
相关试题推荐
Mostscientistsandengineersfindcareersinthreegeneralsectorsofsociety:collegesanduniversities,industries,andfeder
MuchoftheAmericananxietyaboutoldageisaflightfromtherealityofdeath.OneofthestrikingqualitiesoftheAmerican
Thesourcesofanti-Christianfeelingweremanyandcomplex.Onthemoreintangibleside,therewasageneralpiqueagainstthe
Collegesinthe(newlyformed)UnitedSates,(inrecovering),fromtheadverseeffectsoftheAmericanRevolution,inaugurated(
Thelittlegirlfindsgreatpleasureinplayingwithherdolls.(delight)______.
______,heneveraltersadecision.
There(is)muchinourlife(which)wedonorcontrol(andweare)notevenresponsible(for).
语言不是一种孤立的现象,语言是一种社会现象,它的使用、变化和发展受到种种社会因素的制约。语言和社会之间的关系是社会语言学研究的主要内容。语言又是一种人类的心智活动,人是怎样习得母语的,语言信息是如何在人的头脑中被加工、被记忆的,对诸如此类问题的研究构成了心
认命对于获取幸福发挥着作用,且其作用与努力产生的效果相差无几。聪明的人虽然不会对着可免的灾难坐以待毙,但也不会为不可免的患难空耗精力与时间,而且即使对某些可免的灾难,他也宁愿屈服,如果避免这种不幸所做的努力会妨害他更重要的追求。许多人会因为一些小事出现差错
Hewasnot______andpreferredtobealonemostofthetime.
随机试题
骨骺分离属于:()
《民法通则》规定,()可以开办个人理财业务。
甲公司7月1日通过报纸发布广告,称其有某型号的电脑出售,每台售价8000元,随到随购,数量不限,广告有效期至7月30日。乙公司委托王某携带金额16万元的支票于7月28日到甲公司购买电脑,但甲公司称广告所述电脑已全部售完。乙公司为此受到一定的经济损失。根据合
中国共产党的最大政治优势是()。
甲某每天工作12小时,每个月工资扣除缴纳金后为2700元,但没有工资条,也没有年假。甲某和单位没有签订劳动合同,单位也没有给他补发加班费。对这一做法的认定不正确的是()。
设函数.其中n=1,2,3,…为任意自然数,f(x)为[0,+∞)上正值连续函数.求证:收敛;
Withtheriseofthewomen’smovementinthelate1960s,thepoliticalsignificanceofdressbecameincreasinglyexplicit.Rejec
下面关于S3C2410中UART的叙述中,错误的是()。
•LookatthestatementsbelowandatthefiveshortadvertisementsforMBA(MasterinBusinessAdministration)courses.•Which
AccordingtoUNICEF,around564millionIndians,nearlyhalfthepopulation,stilldefecateintheopen—infields,forests,ne
最新回复
(
0
)