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
When I was a graduate student in biochemistry at Tufts University School of Medicine, I read an abridged version of Montaigne’s
When I was a graduate student in biochemistry at Tufts University School of Medicine, I read an abridged version of Montaigne’s
admin
2014-12-11
41
问题
When I was a graduate student in biochemistry at Tufts University School of Medicine, I read an abridged version of Montaigne’s Essays. My friend Margaret Rea and I spent hours wandering around Boston discussing the meaning and implications of the essays. Michel de Montaigne lived in the 16th century near Bordeaux, France. He did his writing in the southwest tower of his chateau, where he surrounded himself with a library of more than 1,000 books, a remarkable collection for that time. Montaigne posed the question, "What do I know?" By extension, he asks us all: Why do you believe what you think you know? My latest attempt to answer Montaigne can be found in Everyday Practice of Science: Where Intuition and Passion Meet Objectivity and Logic, originally published in January 2009 and soon to be out in paperback from the Oxford University Press.
Scientists tend to be glib about answering Montaigne’s question. After all, the success of technology testifies to the truth of our work. But the situation is more complicated.
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 interests 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 communal 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 new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works its way through the community, a dialectic of interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s credible discovery.
Two paradoxes infuse 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 research. 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 physiologist Albert Szent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as "seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody 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 of reason," she wrote in a book with that title. In the case of science, it is the commons of the mind where we find the answer to Montaigne’s question: Why do you believe what you think you know?
Paragraph 5 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it
选项
A、has attracted the attention of the general public.
B、has been examined by the scientific community.
C、has received recognition from editors and reviewers.
D、has been frequently quoted by peer scientists.
答案
B
解析
推理判断题。题干中的a discovery claim becomes credible对应第五段尾句中的an individua’sdiscovery claim into the community’s credible discovery,可见前面内容是在讲述科学界中发现申明转变成可信的发现需要经历的过程,综合概括这一过程的特征是:需要接受科学界的验证,所以答案选[B]。[A]在文中未提及:[C]和[D]均为discovery claim变成了credible discovery中涉及的一个部分,表述片面。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/eDdO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
HandleWithCareWhenThomasButlersteppedoffaplaneinApril2002onhisreturntotheUnitedStatesfromatriptoTanz
OnJuly7th,IwastravelinginLondon.IwashavingbreakfastatahotelverynearLiverpoolStreetStationwhenthefirstexpl
Stupendouspriceswerepaidinahistoricsaleof19th-and20th-centuryavant-gardepaintingscollectedoveralifetimebyJohn
RobertBrowning’s______isoneofthemostfamousdramaticmonologuesintheEnglishpoem.
IcametoAfricawithonepurpose:IwantedtoseetheworldoutsidetheperspectiveofEuropeanegocentricity.Thesimplestway
AccordingtoDr.Adams,whatshouldwehaveasanattainablegoaloflanguagelearning?
Accordingtothenews,UEFA
TheoriesofHistoryI.Howmuchweknowabouthistory?A.Writtenrecordsexistforonlyafractionofman’stimeB.Theaccurac
TheoriesofHistoryI.Howmuchweknowabouthistory?A.Writtenrecordsexistforonlyafractionofman’stimeB.Theaccurac
Whichdescriptionofthebluesisright?Intheearlytimeof20thcentury,
随机试题
若输入3个整数3,2,1<回车>则下面程序的输出结果是#include<stdio.h>main(){inti,n,aa[10]={0,0,0,0,0,0};scanf("%d%d%d",&n,&aa[0],&aa
存储容量1TB等于__________。
症见小便不通或通而不爽,情志抑郁,多烦善怒,胁腹胀满,舌红,苔薄黄,脉弦,治法为
《全国生态脆弱区保护规划纲要》提出的总体任务的中心是()。
下列关于报关单位和报关员关系的理解错误的是( )。
在完成审计业务前,通常情况下导致被审计单位业务变更的合理理由有()。
简述评剧的产生和发展。
一群在实验室里研究老鼠体内的新陈代谢的科学家发现去除老鼠的甲状旁腺可以导致老鼠血液中钙的水平比正常水平低得多。这个发现使科学家们假设甲状旁腺的功能是调节血液中的钙的水平,当钙的水平降到正常范围之下,它就升高钙的水平。在进一步的实验中,科学家不但去除了老鼠的
手球比赛的目标是将更多的球攻入对方球门,从而比对方得更多的分。球队的一名防守型选手专门防守对方的一名进攻型选手。旋风队的陈教练预言在下剧手球赘中本队将战胜海洋队。他的根据是:海洋队最好的防守型选手将防不住旋风队最好的进攻型选手曾志强。以下哪项如果为真,最能
A、Farmingactivities.B、Themeaningoflife.C、Revolution.D、Morality.A短文说从诗人的视角,我们可以感受到农场的日常生活,还有一些背景场景,比如犁地、摘苹果或者补墙,故选A。D项是强干
最新回复
(
0
)