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
61
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
PEOPLE:CROWD::
Scientistsstudyingtheeffectoflargevolcaniceruptionsonglobalclimatehavelongfocusedonthemajorquantitiesof
Scientistshavelongspeculatedastotheextentthatinbreedingcontributestothedeclineandeventualextinctionofla
Relativismamountstothedenialofanobjectiveworldaboutwhichtrueandfalsestatementscanbemade;thereisnoabs
Relativismamountstothedenialofanobjectiveworldaboutwhichtrueandfalsestatementscanbemade;thereisnoabs
ThispassageisadaptedfromTheAmericanRepublic:Constitution,Tendencies,andDestinybyO.A.Brownson,1866.Thean
ThispassageisadaptedfromTheAmericanRepublic:Constitution,Tendencies,andDestinybyO.A.Brownson,1866.Thean
Sally,thoroughlyconvincedofherownimportance,oftenactswithout______:shefeelsnoguilt,forexample,aboutappropriatin
InformationaboutAbigailandJohnAdamsisso______becauseofthewealthoflettersthecoupleexchangedduringJohn’sfrequent
GiventheevidenceofEgyptianandBabylonian____laterGreekcivilization,itwouldbeincorrecttoviewtheworkofGreeksci
随机试题
工业反应器的设计评价指标有:a、转化率;b、选择性;c、()。
设某种器件的使用寿命(单位:小时)服从指数分布,平均使用寿命为20小时,具体使用时,当一个器件损坏后立即更换一个新器件,如此继续,假定一年内需用2000个工作小时.(1)求100个这样的器件够用一年的概率;(2)要以95%的把握够用一年,至少需要多少个
伯基特淋巴瘤的特点是
咯血出血
现行的《环境空气质量标准》关于各项污染物数据统计的有效性规定中,日平均采样时间至少为12h的污染物是()。
案例2012年6月6日B炼油厂油罐区的2号汽油罐发生火灾爆炸事故,造成1人死亡、3人轻伤,直接经济损失420万元。该油罐为拱顶罐,容量200m3。油罐进油管从罐顶接入罐内,但未伸到罐底。罐内原有液位计,因失灵已拆除。2012年5月20日,油罐完
企业下列活动中,属于经营活动产生的现金流量有()。【2006年考试真题】
()应妥善保管证券执业证书申请人的书面申请表及有关材料。
A、 B、 C、 D、 A
A、Shewasusingthewrongpaint.B、Shehasrunoutofpaintbrushes.C、Shedoesn’tfeellikegoingtoclass.D、Shehasdroppedo
最新回复
(
0
)