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
Accidental Scientists A A paradox lies close to the heart of scientific discovery. If you know just what you are looking for, fi
Accidental Scientists A A paradox lies close to the heart of scientific discovery. If you know just what you are looking for, fi
admin
2018-09-11
69
问题
Accidental Scientists
A A paradox lies close to the heart of scientific discovery. If you know just what you are looking for, finding it can hardly count as a discovery, since it was fully anticipated. But if, on the other hand, you have no notion of what you are looking for, you cannot know when you have found it, and discovery, as such, is out of the question. In the philosophy of science, these extremes map onto the purist forms of deductivism and inductivism: In the former, the outcome is supposed to be logically contained in the premises you start with; in the latter, you are recommended to start with no expectations whatsoever and see what turns up.
B As in so many things, the ideal position is widely supposed to reside somewhere in between these two impossible-to-realise extremes. You want to have a good enough idea of what you are looking for to be surprised when you find something else of value, and you want to be ignorant enough of your end point that you can entertain alternative outcomes. Scientific discovery should, therefore, have an accidental aspect, but not too much of one. Serendipity is a word that expresses a position something like that. It’s a fascinating word, and the late .Robert King Merton—"the father of the sociology of science"—liked it well enough to compose its biography, assisted by the French cultural historian Elinor Barber.
C The word did not appear in the published literature until the early 19th century and did not become well enough known to use without explanation until sometime in the first third of the 20th century. Serendipity means a "happy accident" or "pleasant surprise", specifically, the accident of finding something good or useful without looking for it. The first noted use of "serendipity" in the English language was by Horace Walpole. He explained that it came from the fairy tale, called The Three Princes of Serendip(the ancient name for Ceylon, or present day Sri Lanka), whose heroes "were always making discoveries, by accidents and sagacity, of things which they were not in quest of.
D Antiquarians, following Walpole, found use for it, as they were always rummaging about for curiosities, and unexpected but pleasant surprises were not unknown to them. Some people just seemed to have a knack for that sort of thing, and serendipity was used to express that special capacity. The other community that came to dwell on serendipity to say something important about their practice was that of scientists, and here usages cut to the heart of the matter and were often vigorously contested. Many scientists, including the Harvard physiologist Walter Cannon and, later, the British immunologist Peter Medawar, liked to emphasise how much of scientific discovery was unplanned and even accidental. One of the examples is Hans Christian
rsted’s discovery of electromagnetism when he unintentionally brought a current-carrying wire parallel to a magnetic needle. Rhetoric about the sufficiency of rational method was so much hot air. Indeed, as Medawar insisted, "There is no such thing as The Scientific Method," no way at all of systematis-ing the process of discovery. Really important discoveries had a way of showing up when they had a mind to do so and not when you were looking for them. Maybe some scientists, like some book collectors, had a happy knack; maybe serendipity described the situation rather than a personal skill or capacity.
E Some scientists using the word meant to stress those accidents belonging to the situation; some treated serendipity as a personal capacity; many others exploited the ambiguity of the notion. Yet what Cannon and Medawar took as a benign nose-thumbing at Dreams of Method, other scientists found incendiary. To say that science had a significant serendipitous aspect was taken by some as dangerous denigration. If scientific discovery were really accidental, then what was the special basis of expert authority? In this connection, the aphorism of choice came from no less an authority on scientific discovery than Louis Pasteur: "Chance favors the prepared mind." Accidents may happen, and things may turn up unplanned and unforeseen, as one is looking for something else, but the ability to notice such events, to see their potential bearing and meaning, to exploit their occurrence and make constructive use of them—these are the results of systematic mental preparation. What seems like an accident is just another form of expertise. On closer inspection, it is insisted, accident dissolves into sagacity.
F The context in which scientific serendipity was most contested and had its greatest resonance was that connected with the idea of planned science. The serendipitists were not all inhabitants of academic ivory towers. As Merton and Barber note, two of the great early-20th-century American pioneers of industrial research—Willis Whitney and Irving Langmuir, both of General Electric—made much play of serendipity, in the course of arguing against overly rigid research planning. Langmuir thought that misconceptions about the certainty and rationality of the research process did much harm and that a mature acceptance of uncertainty was far more likely to result in productive research policies. For his own part, Langmuir said that satisfactory outcomes "occurred as though we were just drifting with the wind. These things came about by accident." If there is no very determinate relationship between cause and effect in research, he said, "men planning does not get us very far." So, from within the bowels of corporate capitalism came powerful arguments, by way of serendipity, for scientific spontaneity and autonomy. The notion that industry was invariably committed to the regimentation of scientific research just doesn’t wash.
G For Merton himself—who one supposes must have been the senior author—serendipity represented the keystone in the arch of his social scientific work. In 1936, as a very young man, Merton wrote a seminal essay on "The Unanticipated Consequences of Purposive Social Action." It is, he argued, the nature of social action that what one intends is rarely what one gets: Intending to provide resources for buttressing Christian religion, the natural philosophers of the Scientific Revolution laid the groundwork for secularism; people wanting to be alone with nature in Yosemite Valley wind up crowding one another. We just don’t know enough—and we can never know enoughs—to ensure that the past is an adequate guide to the future: Uncertainty about outcomes, even of our best-laid plans, is endemic. All social action, including that undertaken with the best evidence and formulated according to the most rational criteria, is uncertain in its consequences.
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 on the following pages.
Questions 27-32
Reading Passage 3 has seven paragraphs, A-G.
Choose the most suitable heading for paragraphs A-G from the list of headings below.
Write the appropriate number, i-x, in boxes 27-32 on your answer sheet.
List of Headings
i Examples of some scientific discoveries
ii Horace Walpole’s fairy tale
iii Resolving the contradiction
iv What is the Scientific Method
v The contradiction of views on scientific discovery
vi Some misunderstandings of serendipity
vii Opponents of authority
viii Reality doesn’t always match expectation
ix How the word came into being
x Illustration of serendipity in the business sector
Example Answer
Paragraph B iii
Paragraph E
选项
答案
vi
解析
段落开头第一句话的“Some…;some…;many others…”讲述了人们对serendipity的不同误解,对应标题vi.Some misunderstandings of serendipity。而其后出现的“…other scientists found incendiary…taken by some as dangerous denigration”和反问句“If scientific discovery were really accidental,then what was the special basisof expert authority?”也许会让有些考生认为该段落应该对应标题vii.Opponents ofauthority,但是这里并未讲述反抗权威的人有哪些或者他们是如何反抗权威的,而是讲述众多科学家对“serendipity”的误用或滥用的憎恶,所以应当排除。综上所述,正确答案为vi。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/zONO777K
本试题收录于:
雅思阅读题库雅思(IELTS)分类
0
雅思阅读
雅思(IELTS)
相关试题推荐
Britishpoliticalscientistsoncehaddifficultyunderstandinghowtheunbalancingeffectsofaffordinggreaterrepresentationt
Sendingarobotintospacetogatherinformationiscertainlyaviableoption,Linebutshouldberegardedonlyasthat--anopt
Toaperson______naturalhistory,hiscoun-tryorseasidestrollisawalkt,hroughagalleryfilledwithwonderfulworksofart
WhileforensicscientistscommonlyrelyonfingerprintstohelpidentifyaLineperson,itisnotpossibletousethesamekind
ThispassageisadaptedfromTheAmericanRepublic:Constitution,Tendencies,andDestinybyO.A.Brownson,1866.Thean
Asconcernsoverman’simpactontheglobalenvironmentincrease,manyinterestinginnovationsarebeingconsidered.Forexample
DuringaEuropeanbroadcastin2002,televisionviewerswere(i)______byabordercollie’sabilitytocorrectlyretrievespecifi
Inagrievousexampleof______behavior,theconsultantsrepeatedlymanagedtodupetheteamofscientistsbypresentingfabricat
Itwouldbenaivetotreatremarksmadeindiariesorpersonallettersasgivingespeciallycandidaccesstohistoricaltruthor
随机试题
直接材料预算所属的预算类别是()
A.妇女型骨盆B.均小型骨盆。C.扁平骨盆D.男子型骨盆E.类人猿型骨盆入口横椭圆形,前后径变短,横径较长,中骨盆平面宽大
A、《幼科发挥》B、《小儿药证直诀》C、《幼幼集成》D、《温病条辨》E、《颅囟经》提出“脏腑柔弱,易虚易实,易寒易热”的著作是()
既可促使新生儿核黄疽发生,又可使葡萄糖醛酸酶缺乏的新生儿出现溶血的是
【背景资料】某城市给水工程项目,通过招标投标确定了本市一家具有工程项目资质的施工企业承担该施工任务。施工企业在给水厂站工程施工时制订了以下施工技术要求:(1)水池底板混凝土应分层分次浇筑完成;(2)水池底板混凝土浇筑采用掺外加剂的泵送混凝土时,其坍落度
采用记账凭证财务处理程序增加了填制汇总记账凭证的工作程序,增加了总账的登记工作量。()
我国证券投资基金业伴随着证券市场的发展而诞生,其发展线索主要包括()。Ⅰ.基金业的主管机构从中国人民银行过渡为中国证监会Ⅱ.基金的监管法规从地方行政法规起步,到国务院证券委员会出台行政条例,再到全国人民代表大会通过并修订《证券投资基
小张向银行贷款10万元,年利率为6%,要求5年内均匀地偿还。已知:(A/P,6%,5)=0.2374,(P/F,6%,5)=0.7473,(P/F,6%,4)=0.7921,(P/F,6%,3)=0.8396,(P/F,6%,2)=0.8900,(
实施素质教育,就是要坚持以“教育要()、面向世界、面向米来”的思想为指导。
Thegeneralaimsofgroupdiscussionsaremanifold.Themostimportantobjectiveistogivestudentsthechancetoaskquestions
最新回复
(
0
)