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
2015-07-27
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?
Albert Szent-Gyorgyi would most likely agree that
选项
A、scientific claims will survive challenges.
B、discoveries today inspire future research.
C、efforts to make discoveries are justified.
D、scientific work calls for a critical mind.
答案
D
解析
观点态度题。由题干中的人名Albert Szent-Gy6rgyi将答案出处定位到第六段倒数第三句。该句提到Albert Szent-Gy6rgyi曾把发现描述为“见他人所见,想他人所未想”。结合后面提到的“但是思考没人想过的事情,再告诉别人他们漏掉了什么…”可知,Albert Szent-Gy6rgyi的言外之意就是科学工作需要敢于挑战已有的发现,需要有批判的精神,故答案为[D]。[A]和[B]是第一个悖论中涉及的观点,故排除。[C]与该段讲述内容无关,故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/qMOO777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
A:WhereisPaul?B:Somewhereinouruniversity.Inthisdialogue,B’sanswerviolateswhichofthefourmaximsofCooperative
Insixteenth-centuryItalyandeighteenth-centuryFrance,waningprosperityandincreasingsocialunrestledtherulingfamilie
Insixteenth-centuryItalyandeighteenth-centuryFrance,waningprosperityandincreasingsocialunrestledtherulingfamilie
Everyculturehasacceptedstandardswhenitcomestopersonalhygiene.ForeignvisitorsshouldthereforebeawareofwhatAmer
Everyculturehasacceptedstandardswhenitcomestopersonalhygiene.ForeignvisitorsshouldthereforebeawareofwhatAmer
Everyculturehasacceptedstandardswhenitcomestopersonalhygiene.ForeignvisitorsshouldthereforebeawareofwhatAmer
EffectiveAssignmentsUsingLibraryandInternetResourcesAwell-designedassignmentcanteachstudentsvaluableresearchskill
Educationalphilosophyhaschangedagreatdealinthe50yearssinceIwasinschool.Backthen,forexample,Ihadthehighe
A、NewYorkB、LosAngelesC、SeattleD、DallasDB洛杉矶是美国第二大城市,尤以Hollywood的电影工业等闻名,C西雅图是美国西北部最大的城市,D达拉斯是美国的石油工业中心。
随机试题
A.对症下药、剂量安全B.全神贯注,语言得当C.全面系统,认真细致D.举止端庄,态度热情E.从诊治需要出发、目的合理医生在对患者进行药物治疗时,要遵守哪项原则
以下()项关于城镇体系含义的描述是错误的。
当利用S形曲线比较法分析设备工程项目实际进度和计划进度时,通过比较计划S形曲线和实际S形曲线,可获得的信息有( )。
学校教育与生产劳动相脱离始于()。
某日,网上出现了一段视频:一名黑衣男子骑着共享单车,追逐几名孩子。该视频被误传为“近期出现人贩子”的谣言,在某小业主间传播,引发群众恐慌。该小区的社区民警首先要做的是()。
食物中毒是指摄人了含有生物性、化学性有毒物质的食品或将有毒有害物质当做食品摄人后所出现的一类最典型、最常见的食源性疾患。下列对食物中毒特征的描述,说法错误的是()。
响尾蛇是顶级的杀手,甚至有导弹以它命名。现存已知约有50种响尾蛇及多个亚种。在沙漠中以角响尾蛇为主。角响尾蛇的数量很多,平均寿命是20年,角响尾蛇以沙漠鼠为食,而沙漠鼠的平均寿命只有700天,所以沙漠鼠将会在将来的某一天灭绝。下列哪项如果为真,能够最大程度
设D为xOy平面上的有界闭区域,z=f(x,y)在D上连续,在D内可偏导且满足,,若f(x,y)在D内没有零点,则f(x,y)在D上().
下面控件中,没有Caption属性的是
Everyprofessionortrade,everyart,andeverysciencehasitstechnicalvocabulary.Differentoccupations,however,differwid
最新回复
(
0
)