【段1】①In the idealized version of how sci

2024-08-18 12:06:21

139

【段1】①In 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. ②But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. ③We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experiences. ④Prior knowledge and interests influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. ⑤Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.

【段2】①Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. ②Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. ③But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. ④This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here, nowbecomes the community’s anyone, anywhere, anytime. ⑤Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.

【段3】①Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. ②But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. ③Within 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. ④As a discovery claim works its way through the community, the 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.

【段4】①Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. ②First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. ③Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. ④The goal is new-search, not re-search . ⑤Not 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. ⑥Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. ⑦Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Szent-Györgyi once described discovery as“seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” ⑧But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. ⑨Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.

【段5】①In 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 . ②“We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions of reason.”

35.Which of the following would be the best title of the text?

[A]Novelty as an Engine of Scientific Development

[B]Collective Scrutiny in Scientific Discovery

[C]Evolution of Credibility in Doing Science

[D]Challenge to Credibility at the Gate to Science

答案：C

问：下列哪些是本文的主题词？（多选）

A : discovery

B : collective scrutiny

C : credibility

D : challenge

查看答案和解析