閱讀高階2012真題年講解text

1、詞匯plexitynU2.misconceptionn C復(fù)雜性；錯綜復(fù)雜的狀態(tài)誤解；錯誤的想法合邏輯；合理規(guī)律性；規(guī)則性；經(jīng)常性審閱；持續(xù)不斷的；不間斷的認(rèn)可；承認(rèn)；確認(rèn)；引述；引證3.logicality 4.regularity 5.inspection 6.persistent7.recognitionn Un Un UadjnU8.quotev T9.inspire v 10.idealized 11.objective 12.ambiguous14.priorTadj adj adj adj賦予靈感；啟示；啟迪理想化的；完美的客觀的；如實(shí)的；無偏見的含糊不清的；不明確的(時間、順序

2、、重要性)在先的，后來的；隨后的n C,U誤解的15.subsequentadj16.misreion17.self-deception 18.aboundv I19.claimn CnU自欺大量存在聲稱；主張；斷言復(fù)雜的；費(fèi)解的原科學(xué)立界標(biāo)(以表明所采礦；礦業(yè)plicated 20.protoscience21.stakev TadjnU)；(對某物)擁有所22.miningn U 23.collectiveadj 24.scrutinyn C，U25.credibilityn U集體完成(或進(jìn)行)的；集體的詳細(xì)；仔細(xì)觀察性；可靠性、同種族、同職業(yè)或其他具有共同特征的人組成的)團(tuán)體；界稱贊；

3、賞識；表揚(yáng)munity27.creditn 28.reviewernCUn C(由同復(fù)查者；審核人panyingadj伴隨的；陪伴的；和一起發(fā)生的30.31.eractionnUnC，U相互影響；相互作用對抗(論據(jù)、主張、理論等)相互petingadj的33.paradoxnC自相的說法prevailingadjduplicationnU現(xiàn)存的；存在的；重復(fù)證實(shí)；證明令人信服的修改；更改駁斥；反駁 激起；引起生理學(xué)家；生理學(xué)研究者新奇的；新穎的；新的認(rèn)識到的全部價值；重視36.confirmation37.convincingadjnU38.modificationnU39.refuionnU

4、40.provokev T41.physiologist42.noveladjnC43.appretevT44.philosopher45.revisevTnC哲學(xué)家；家更正；修改；修正觀點(diǎn)；想法；看法；認(rèn)識執(zhí)行；實(shí)施；相當(dāng)于；符合46.conception 47.carry out 48.correspondself_checkText 3nUtohe idealized verobserved and collectedof how science is done, factsaboutthe world are waiting to bebyobjective researchers w

5、ho use the scientific method to carry out theirwork .But complicatedexperience.he everydayroute. We aimpractice of science, discoveryto be objective, but we cannotfrequently followsan ofweambiguous and our unique lifethink ourescthe contextPrior knowledge anderest influence whatxperience, whatexperi

6、enmean, and the subsequent actions we take, opportunities for miserror, and self-deception abound.reion,Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as proto scienimilar tly stakedmining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance totransform a discover

7、y claimo a mature discovery. This is the credibility pros, throughwhich the individual researchers me, here, nowes the communitys anyone ,anywhere,anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting po.Once a discovery claimes public, the discoverer receivesellectual credit. But, unlikewith m

8、ining claims, the community takes control of whappensnext. Withheand newcomplex sol reviewer finding to suitthe newstructure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries, editorsas gatekeepers their own pur discovery and community, thescience and thecontrolling the publication pros; oth

9、er scientists use thees; and finally, the public (including other scientist) receivessibly eractiontechnologypanying andinvolvedtechnology. As a discovery claim works it through thebetn shared andtransforms an individualscompeting befs about thediscovery claimo thecommunitys credible discovery.Two p

10、aradoxes exist throughout thiscredibility pros.,scientific work tends to focuson some aspect of prevailing knowledget is viewed asplete or incorrect. Little rewardpanies duplication and confirmation of what isalreadyknown andconfirmation of what is surprising, newly important and convincingion by fu

11、ture researchers,already known and beved. The goal is new-search,not research. Nott appear to bepublished discovery claims and credible discoverieswill always be open to challenge and potential modification or refuSecond, novelty itself frequently provokes disbef .Nobel Laureate and physiologist Alb

12、ertSzent-Gyyi once described discovery as seeing what everybody has seen and thinking whatnobody has thought andling others what they have missed may not change their views.Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreted.he end, credibility “happens” to a di

13、scovery claima prost corresponds to whatphilosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind, We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each others reasoning and each others conceptions of reason.重點(diǎn)review經(jīng)典句式分析1.he idealized verof how science isdone, facts about the world are

14、researchers who use the scientificwaiting to be observed and collected by objectivemethod to carry out their work.2.As a discovery claim works its way throughthe community, theeraction andabout the science and the technologybetn shared and competing befsinvolved transforms an individuals discovery c

15、laimo the communitys credible discovery.3.Not surprisingly, newly published discovery, claims and credible discoveriest appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potentialmodification or refuion by future researchers.4.he end, credibility happens to a discovery claim

16、a prostof the mind.corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons參考譯文全文參考譯文科學(xué)研究的理想形式是，用科學(xué)的方法進(jìn)行研究的客觀研究者觀察并收集關(guān)于的事實(shí)。然而，在現(xiàn)實(shí)的科學(xué)實(shí)踐學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)的過程通常是含糊而復(fù)雜的。期望能做到客觀公正，但是無法擺脫獨(dú)特的生活經(jīng)歷帶來的影響。原有的知識和會影響的經(jīng)歷，會影響對經(jīng)歷的理解以及隨后采取的行動。這里可能存在大量的誤解、錯誤和自欺。因此，科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)應(yīng)該被認(rèn)為是原科學(xué)。類似于新的采礦權(quán)，科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)也充滿了各種可能性。但一項科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)要變?yōu)槌煽茖W(xué)

17、發(fā)現(xiàn)，需要集體的詳細(xì)和認(rèn)可。這就是性的證實(shí)過程，在這個過程中，單個研究者的“我”、“這里”和“現(xiàn)在”變成了科學(xué)界里的“任何人”、“任何地方”和“任何時間”?？陀^的知識是目標(biāo)，而不是起點(diǎn)。一旦科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)被公開，知識成果被歸功于發(fā)現(xiàn)者。然而，與采礦權(quán)不同，科學(xué)界控制著下一步的發(fā)展。在科學(xué)界復(fù)雜的社會結(jié)構(gòu)中，研究者做出發(fā)現(xiàn)；編輯和者通過控制成果過程扮演著看門人的角色；其他科學(xué)家利用新發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)現(xiàn)他們各自的研究目的；最終，公眾(包括其他科學(xué)家)獲知新發(fā)現(xiàn)，以及可能應(yīng)運(yùn)而生的新科技。在一項發(fā)現(xiàn)被業(yè)界的過程中，關(guān)于此科學(xué)或技術(shù)的相同和不同觀點(diǎn)之間的相互影響和碰撞，把個人的發(fā)現(xiàn)變成了科學(xué)界可靠的發(fā)現(xiàn)。這一性證實(shí)過程存在兩個。第一，科學(xué)研究通常關(guān)注現(xiàn)有知識中被認(rèn)為不完整或不正