In the idealized version of how science is done,facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective rese

admin2019-12-28  10

问题 In the idealized version of how science is done,facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work.But in the everyday practice of science,discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route.We aim to be objective,but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experiences.Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience,what we think our experiences mean,and the subsequent actions we take.Opportunities for misinterpretation,error,and self-deception abound.
    Consequently,discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience.Similar to newly staked mining claims,they are full of potential.But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery.This is the credibility process,through which the individual researcher’s me,here,now becomes the community’s anyone,anywhere,anytime.Objective knowledge is the goal,not the starting point.
    Once a discovery claim becomes public,the discoverer receives intellectual credit.But,unlike with mining claims,the community takes control of what happens next.Within the complex social
     structure of the scientific community,researchers make discoveries;editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process;other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes;and finally,the public(including other scientists)receives the fiew discovery and possiblv accompanying technology.As a discovery claim works its way through the community,the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the techn010gY involved transforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s credible discovenr.
    Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process.First,scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect.Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed.The goal is new-search,not re-search.Not surprisingly,newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers.Second,novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief.Nobel Laureate and phvsiologist Albert once described discovery as“seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobodv has thought.”But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views.Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.
    In the end,credibility“happens”to a discovery claim—a process that corresponds to what philosopher
Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind.“We reason together,challenge,
revise,and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions 0f reason.”
    请回答下列问题。
According to the first paragraph,the process of discovery is characterized  by  its___________.

选项 A、uncertainty and complexity
B、misconception and deceptiveness
C、logicality and obj ectivity
D、systematicness and regularity

答案A

解析 细节题。根据题干定位在第一段。第二句“But in the everyday practice of science,discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route.”即在日常的科学实践中,科学发现常常遵循一条模糊而复杂的路径。A项uncertainty and complexity(不确定性和复杂性)是对原文ambiguous and complicated的同义替换。B项“误解和欺骗”、C项“逻辑性和客观性”都是对原文的曲解。D项“系统性和规律性”原文未提及。故本题选A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/PBjY777K
0

相关试题推荐
最新回复(0)