考研英語閱讀理解真題附翻譯
考研英語閱讀理解,關(guān)鍵是擴(kuò)大英語閱讀量還有要多些做練習(xí)題真題。下面就是學(xué)習(xí)啦小編給大家整理的考研英語閱讀理解真題附翻譯，希望對你有用!
考研英語閱讀原文
In 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.
But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route.
We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience.
Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take.
Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.
Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience.
Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential.
But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery.
This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher's me, here,
now becomes the community's anyone, anywhere, anytime.
Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.
Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit.
But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next.
Within 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.
As a discovery claim works it 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.
Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process.
First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect.
Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed.
The goal is new-search, not re-search.
Not 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.
Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief.
Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as
"seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought."
But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views.
Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.
In 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.
"We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other's reasoning and each other's conceptions of reason."
考研英語閱讀翻譯
在科學(xué)研究的理想狀態(tài)下，
關(guān)于世界的事實(shí)正在等待著那些客觀的研究者來觀察和搜集，研究者們會用科學(xué)的方法來進(jìn)行他們的工作。
但是在每天的科學(xué)實(shí)踐中，發(fā)現(xiàn)通常遵循一條模糊和復(fù)雜的路徑。
我們的目標(biāo)是做到客觀，但是我們卻不能逃離我們所處的獨(dú)特的生活經(jīng)驗(yàn)的環(huán)境。
之前的知識和興趣會影響我們所經(jīng)歷的，會影響我們對于經(jīng)驗(yàn)意義的思考，以及我們會采取的隨后的行動。
這里充滿著誤讀，錯誤和自我欺騙的機(jī)會。
所以，對于發(fā)現(xiàn)的申明應(yīng)該被當(dāng)做是科學(xué)的原型。
這與新近開發(fā)的采礦資源比較類似，他們都充滿著可能性。
但是將發(fā)現(xiàn)的申明變?yōu)橐粋€成熟的發(fā)現(xiàn)是需要集體的審查和集體的接受。
這個過程就配稱之為"信用的過程"，通過這個過程一個單個研究者的"我"
在這里就變成了這個社區(qū)中的任何人，任何地方和任何時間。
客觀的知識不應(yīng)該是起點(diǎn)而是目標(biāo)。
一旦一個科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)變成公開的，那么發(fā)現(xiàn)者就獲得了知識的認(rèn)可。
但是和采礦權(quán)不一樣的是，科學(xué)協(xié)會將控制接下來會發(fā)生的事情。
在復(fù)雜的科研機(jī)構(gòu)的社會結(jié)構(gòu)中，研究者去做出發(fā)現(xiàn);
編輯和審稿者通過控制出版過程扮演著看門人的角色;
其他的科學(xué)家使用新的發(fā)現(xiàn)來滿足他們自己的目標(biāo);
最后，公眾(也包括其他科學(xué)家)接受到新的發(fā)現(xiàn)和可能相伴隨的技術(shù)。
當(dāng)一個發(fā)現(xiàn)的聲明最終通過了機(jī)構(gòu)的審查，
在有關(guān)所涉及到的共享的和抵觸的信念之間的互動和沖突
將把一個人的發(fā)現(xiàn)變?yōu)橐粋€機(jī)構(gòu)的可信的發(fā)現(xiàn)
在整個信任的過程中存在著兩個悖論，
第一：科學(xué)工作傾向于關(guān)注一些流行科學(xué)的某些方面，而這些方面又是被認(rèn)為是不完全和不正確的。
去復(fù)制和確認(rèn)已經(jīng)被人所知和所信的東西不會有多少回報。
科學(xué)要做的是去探究新的東西而不是再次探究。
不足為奇的是，新發(fā)表的重要的，有說服力發(fā)現(xiàn)和可信的發(fā)現(xiàn)
將會被后來的研究者質(zhì)疑，并帶來潛在的修改甚至駁斥。
第二個悖論是：新穎的東西本身就經(jīng)常會招致懷疑。
諾貝爾獎獲得者，生理學(xué)家Albert Azent-Gyorgyi曾經(jīng)將發(fā)現(xiàn)描述為：
"觀察每個人觀察的，思考沒有人想到的。"
但是思考其他人沒有想到的并且告訴其他人他們所遺漏的可能并不會改變這些人的觀點(diǎn)。
有時候，真正新穎的科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)被人們所接受和認(rèn)可將會花好多年的時間。
最后，一個科學(xué)的發(fā)現(xiàn)獲得了信任，
這個過程是與哲學(xué)家Annette Baier所描述的心靈的共性的觀點(diǎn)是一致的。
"我們共同去推理，去質(zhì)疑，其修改并且完善各自的推理以及各自的推理概念。
考研英語閱讀詞語解析
acceptance[?k'sept?ns]n. 接受(禮物、邀請、建議等)，同意，認(rèn)可，承兌
interaction[.int?'ræk??n]n. 相互作用，相互影響，互動交流
community[k?'mju:niti]n. 社區(qū)，社會，團(tuán)體，共同體，公眾，[生]群落
unique[ju:'ni:k]adj. 獨(dú)一無二的，獨(dú)特的，稀罕的
ambiguous[æm'bigju?s]adj. 模棱兩可的
control[k?n'tr?ul]n. 克制，控制，管制，操作裝置
vt. 控制
escape[is'keip]v. 逃跑，逃脫，避開
n. 逃跑，逃脫
confirmation[.k?nf?'mei??n]n. 確認(rèn)，證實(shí)，____的堅(jiān)信禮
credible['kred?bl]adj. 可信的，可靠的
route[ru:t]n. 路線，(固定)線路，途徑
猜你喜歡：