2. 考研
  3. In the following article, some sentences have been removed. For questions 1 — 5, choose the most suitable one from the list A—G

In the following article, some sentences have been removed. For questions 1 — 5, choose the most suitable one from the list A—G

admin2014-07-25  10
问题 In the following article, some sentences have been removed. For questions 1 — 5, choose the most suitable one from the list A—G to fit into each of the numbered blank. There are two extra choices which you do not need to use.
    How’s this for a cynical view of science? "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it. " Scientific truth, according to this view, is established less by the noble use of reason than by the stubborn exertion of will. One hopes that the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Max Planck, the author of the quotation above, was writing in an unusually dark moment.
    And yet a large body of psychological data supports Planck’s view: we humans quickly develop an irrational loyalty to our beliefs, and work hard to find evidence that supports those opinions and to discredit, discount or avoid information that does not. 【R1】______.
    Scientists are not immune. In an experiment, psychologists were asked to review a paper submitted for journal publication in their field. They rated the paper’s methodology, data presentation and scientific-contribution significantly more favorably when the paper happened to offer results consistent with their own theoretical stance. 【R2】______.
    This is a worry. Doesn’t the ideal of scientific reasoning call for pure, dispassionate curiosity? Doesn’t it positively shun the ego-driven desire to prevail over our critics and the prejudicial urge to support our social values? Perhaps not. 【R3】______.
    Let’s take pigheadedness first. In a much discussed article this year in Behavioral and Brain Sciences , the cognitive scientists Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber argue that our reasoning skills are really not as dismal as they seem. They don’t deny that irrationalities like the confirmation bias are common. 【R4】______. Reasoning, they claim, is for winning arguments. And an irrational tendency like pigheadedness can be quite an asset in an argumentative context.
    It’s salvation of a kind: our apparently irrational quirks start to make sense when we think of reasoning as serving the purpose of persuading others to accept our point of view. And by way of positive side effect, these heated social interactions, when they occur within a scientific community, can lead to the discovery of the truth.
    And what about scientists’ prejudices? 【R5】______. However, the philosopher of science Heather Douglas has argued that social values can safely play an indirect role in scientific reasoning. Consider- The greater we judge the social costs of a potential scientific error, the higher the standard of evidence we will demand. Science often makes important contributions to debates that involve clashes of social values. Yet Ms. Douglas suggests that, with social values denied any legitimate role in scientific reasoning, "debates often dance around these issues, attempting to hide them behind debates about the interpretation of data "
    For all its imperfections, science continues to be a stunning success. Yet maybe progress would be even faster and smoother if scientists would admit, and even embrace, their humanity.
[A]The fact that prejudice often occurs automatically doesn’t mean we can’t find ways of overcoming its negative effects. For example, there is evidence that when people are made aware of their automatic prejudices, they can self-correct.
[B]Instead, they suggest that we stop thinking of the primary function of reasoning as being to improve knowledge and make better decisions.
[C]Identical research methods prompted a very different response in those whose scientific opinion was challenged.
[D]So when Professor A concludes that a research study is excellent, while Professor B declares it seriously mistaken, it may be that neither is irrationally inflating or discounting the strength of the evidence; rather, each is tending to a different social concern.
[E]Clearly, social values should never count as evidence for or against a particular hypothesis.
[F]In the laboratory, this is labeled confirmation bias; observed in the real world, it’s known as pigheadedness.
[G]Some academics have recently suggested that a scientist’s pigheadedness and social prejudices can peacefully coexist with — and may even facilitate — the pursuit of scientific knowledge.
【R1】
选项
答案F
解析 本题空格出现在第二段末。空格前内容指出，有很多心理学数据都支持普朗克的观点：人类对自己所持观点具有一种毫无理性的忠诚，会努力地去寻找证据来支撑自己的观点，而怀疑、贬损或者是忽略掉那些不支撑我们所持观点的信息。潜在含义是，人会固执地忠于自己的观点，偏向于与自己观点一致的观点，而排斥与自己观点不一致的观点。空格下文列举了一项试验：当受试心理学家被要求评估论文时，如果论文内容恰与他们自身的理论立场相一致，则他们对论文的评价就更为积极友好。该试验符合人们偏向于与自己观点一致的观点。[F]选项中，就表层语义而言，可看出confirmation bias与pigheadedness所蕴含的“偏见、固执”恰与原文语境相符合，这样this便指代空格前所述内容，实现其指代功能；该段也可实现由“泛泛分析”到“归结为行业术语”的深层过度，故该选项正确。[D]选项对本题有一定的干扰，考生可能将Professor A concludes…is excellent while Professor Bdeclares…mistaken与supports those opinions and to discredit…that does not对应起来而误选，但原文a large body of psychological data supports Planck’s view表明该段是肯定“support…discredit…”这一现象的存在的，而[D]选项So表明其本应是由前文得出的结论，但该选项却得出了“两者都没有毫无理性地夸大或贬损证据，而是每个都出于不同的社会关注考虑”，反而推翻了前文的观点而提出了新观点，语义逻辑上与原文不符，故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/mSMRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)