Question

    For several decades, there has been an extensive and organized campaign intended to generate distrust in science, funded by those whose interests and ideologies are threatened by the findings of modern science. In response, scientists have tended to stress the success of science. After all, scientists have been right about most things.

Stressing successes isn’t wrong, but for many people it’s not persuasive. An alternative answer to the question “Why trust science?” is that scientists use the so-called scientific method. If you’ve got a high school science textbook lying around, you’ll probably find that answer in it. But what is typically thought to be the scientific method — develop a hypothesis (假设), then design an experiment to test it — isn’t what scientists actually do. Science is dynamic: new methods get invented; old ones get abandoned; and sometimes, scientists can be found doing many different things.

If there is no identifiable scientific method, then what is the reason for trust in science? The answer is how those claims are evaluated. The common element in modern science, regardless of the specific field or the particular methods being used, is the strict scrutiny (审查) of claims. It’s this tough, sustained process that works to make sure faulty claims are rejected. A scientific claim is never accepted as true until it has gone through a lengthy “peer review” because the reviewers are experts in the same field who have both the right and the obligation (责任) to find faults.

A key aspect of scientific judgment is that it is done collectively. No claim gets accepted until it has been vetted by dozens, if not hundreds, of heads. In areas that have been contested, like climate science and vaccine safety, it’s thousands. This is why we are generally justified in not worrying too much if a single scientist, even a very famous one, disagrees with the claim. And this is why diversity in science — the more people looking at a claim from different angles — is important.

Does this process ever go wrong? Of course. Scientists are humans. There is always the possibility of revising a claim on the basis of new evidence. Some people argue that we should not trust science because scientists are “always changing their minds.” While examples of truly settled science being overturned are far fewer than is sometimes claimed, they do exist. But the beauty of this scientific process is that it explains what might otherwise appear paradoxical (矛盾的): that science produces both novelty and stability. Scientists do change their minds in the face of new evidence, but this is a strength of science, not a weakness.

1.How does the author think of the scientific method?

A.Stable. B.Persuasive.

C.Unreliable. D.Unrealistic.

2.What does the underlined word “vetted” in Paragraph 4 probably mean?

A.Explained. B.Examined.

C.Repeated. D.Released.

3.According to the passage, the author may agree that ______.

A.it is not persuasive to reject those faulty claims

B.settled science tends to be collectively overturned

C.a leading expert cannot play a decisive role in a scrutiny

D.diversity in knowledge is the common element in science

4.Which of the following would be the best title for the passage?

A.Put Your Faith in Science B.Defend the Truth in Science

C.Apply Your Mind to Science D.Explore A Dynamic Way to Science

Answer

1.C

2.B

3.C

4.A

【解析】

这是一篇议论文。文章主要论述了为什么科学值得我们信任。

1.推理判断题。由第二段中的But what is typically thought to be the scientific method — develop a hypothesis (假设), then design an experiment to test it — isn’t what scientists actually do. Science is dynamic: new methods get invented; old ones get abandoned; and sometimes, scientists can be found doing many different things.可知，但是通常被认为是科学方法的方法——提出一个假设，然后设计一个实验来验证它——并不是科学家们真正在做的。科学是动态的：新方法被发明；旧的被遗弃；有时，科学家们会做很多不同的事情。由此可知，作者认为科学不是一成不变的，是新的方法不断发明，取代旧的方法。即科学方法不是固定的，不可信赖的，我们不能一成不变地依赖一种方法。故选C项。

2.词义猜测题。由划线词所在句的前文A key aspect of scientific judgment is that it is done collectively.可知，科学判断的一个关键方面是集体判断。由此推知，划线词所在句No claim gets accepted until it has been vetted by dozens, if not hundreds, of heads.意为“只有经过几十个（如果不是几百个）负责人的审查，观点才会被接受。”由此可知，划线词意为“审查，仔细检查”。故选B项。

3.推理判断题。由第四段中的A key aspect of scientific judgment is that it is done collectively. No claim gets accepted until it has been vetted by dozens, if not hundreds, of heads.(科学判断的一个关键方面是集体判断。只有经过几十个（如果不是几百个）负责人的审查，观点才会被接受)及This is why we are generally justified in not worrying too much if a single scientist, even a very famous one, disagrees with the claim.(这就是为什么当一个科学家，即使是一个非常著名的科学家，不同意这种观点时，我们通常没有理由过分担心)可知，科学观点是经过多人审查的，而某一个人，即使是非常著名的科学家也不能在审查中起决定性作用。故选C项。

4.主旨大意题。由第一段For several decades, there has been an extensive and organized campaign intended to generate distrust in science, funded by those whose interests and ideologies are threatened by the findings of modern science. In response, scientists have tended to stress the success of science. After all, scientists have been right about most things. (几十年来，一直存在着一场广泛的、有组织的运动，旨在引起人们对科学的不信任，其资助者是那些其利益和意识形态受到现代科学发现威胁的人。作为回应，科学家们倾向于强调科学的成功。毕竟，科学家在大多数事情上都是正确的)及最后一段中的Scientists do change their minds in the face of new evidence, but this is a strength of science, not a weakness.(面对新的证据，科学家的确会改变主意，但这是科学的强项，而不是弱点)可知，文章主要论述了我们为什么要相信科学。由此可知，A. Put Your Faith in Science(相信科学)适合做本文最佳标题。故选A项。