Text 3
Inthe idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waitingto be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientificmethod to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science,discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to beobjective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience.Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think ourexperiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities formisinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.
Consequently,discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly stakedmining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny andacceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is thecredibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here, nowbecomes the community’s anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is thegoal, not the starting point.
Oncea discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit.But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happensnext. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community,researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers bycontrolling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding tosuit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists)receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discoveryclaim works it through the community, the interaction and confrontation betweenshared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involvedtransforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s crediblediscovery.
Twoparadoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific worktends to focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is viewed asincomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmationof what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search.Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveriesthat appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge andpotential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, noveltyitself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist AlbertAzent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “seeing what everybody has seen andthinking what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thoughtand telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimesyears are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted andappreciated.
In the end, credibility “happens” to a discovery claim – a process thatcorresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as thecommons of the mind. “We reasontogether, challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and eachother’s conceptions of reason.”
31. According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery ischaracterized by its
[A] uncertainty and complexity.
[B] misconception anddeceptiveness.
[C] logicality and objectivity.
[D]systematicness and regularity.
32. It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility processrequires
[A] strict inspection.
[B]shared efforts.
[C] individual wisdom.
[D]persistent innovation.
33.Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it
[A] has attracted the attention ofthe general public.
[B]has been examined by thescientific community.
[C] has received recognition fromeditors and reviewers.
[D]has been frequently quoted bypeer scientists.
34. Albert Szent-Györgyi would most likely agree that
[A] scientific claims will survivechallenges.
[B]discoveries today inspirefuture research.
[C] efforts to make discoveriesare justified.
[D] scientific work calls for acritical mind.
35. Which of the following would be the best title of the test?
[A] Novelty as an Engine ofScientific Development.
[B] Collective Scrutiny inScientific Discovery.
[C] Evolution of Credibility inDoing Science.
[D]Challenge to Credibility atthe Gate to Science.
用户评论