Why the inductive and mathematical sciences, after their first rapid development at the culmination of Greek civilization, advanced as slowly for two thousand years—and why in the following two hundred years a knowledge of natural and mathematical science has accumulated, which so vastly exceeds all that was previously known that these sciences may be justly regarded as the products of our own times—are questions which have interested the modern philosopher not less than the objects with which these sciences are more immediately conversant. Was it the employment of a new method of research, or in the exercise of greater virtue in the use of the old methods, that this singular modern phenomenon had its origin? Was the long period one of arrested development, and is the modern era one of normal growth? Or should we ascribe the characteristics of both periods to so-called historical accidents—to the influence of conjunctions in circumstances of which no explanation is possible, save in the omnipotence and wisdom of a guiding Providence?
The explanation which has become commonplace, that the ancients employed deduction chiefly in their scientific inquiries, while the moderns employ induction, proves to be too narrow, and fails upon close examination to point with sufficient distinctness the contrast that is evident between ancient and modern scientific doctrines and inquiries. For all knowledge is founded on observation, and proceeds from this by analysis, by synthesis and analysis, by induction and deduction, and if possible by verification, or by new appeals to observation under the guidance of deduction—by steps which are indeed correlative parts of one method; and the ancient sciences afford examples of every one of these methods, or parts of one method, which have been generalized from the examples of science.
A failure to employ or to employ adequately any one of these partial methods, an imperfection in the arts and resources of observation and experiment, carelessness in observation, neglect of relevant facts, by appeal to experiment and observation—these are the faults which cause all failures to ascertain truth, whether among the ancients or the moderns; but this statement does not explain why the modern is possessed of a greater virtue, and by what means he attained his superiority. Much less does it explain the sudden growth of science in recent times.
The attempt to discover the explanation of this phenomenon in the antithesis of “facts” and “theories” or “facts” and “ideas”—in the neglect among the ancients of the former, and their too exclusive attention to the latter—proves also to be too narrow, as well as open to the charge of vagueness. For in the first place, the antithesis is not complete. Facts and theories are not coordinate species. Theories, if true, are facts—a particular class of facts indeed, generally complex, and if a logical connection subsists between their constituents, have all the positive attributes of theories.
Nevertheless, this distinction, however inadequate it may be to explain the source of true method in science, is well founded, and connotes an important character in true method. A fact is a proposition of simple. A theory, on the other hand, if true has all the characteristics of a fact, except that its verification is possible only by indirect, remote, and difficult means. To convert theories into facts is to add simple verification, and the theory thus acquires the full characteristics of a fact.
25. The title that best expresses the ideas of this passage is?
26. According to the author, one possible reason for the growth of science during the days of the ancient Greeks and in modern times is ____.
27. The underlined word “ascertain” in the third paragraph probably means ____.
28. The difference between “fact” and “theory”____.
29. According to the author, mathematics is ____.
30. The statement “Theories are facts” may be called ____.
25. 【选项释义】
The title that best expresses the ideas of this passage is? 最能表达这篇文章观点的题目是?
A. Philosophy of mathematics. A. 数学的哲学
B. The Recent Growth in Science. B. 科学的最新发展
C. The Verification of Facts. C. 事实的核实
D. Methods of Scientific Inquiry. D. 科学探究的方法
【考查点】主旨大意题。
【解题思路】
1)分析文章行文结构:本文的结构大致为“提出问题——对已有的解释进行分析”。
第一段提到“现代哲学家感兴趣的问题,为什么归纳和数学科学,在希腊文明达到顶峰时第一次快速发展(their first rapid development)之后,两千年来发展缓慢(slowly for two thousand years),以及为什么在接下来的二百年中,自然科学和数学的发展(so vastly exceeds)大大超过了以前所知道的一切”;
第二段否定了解释1——“古人在科学研究中主要采用演绎法(deduction),而现代人则采用归纳法(induction),这种解释过于狭隘(too narrow),经仔细考察,无法充分(fails)清楚地指出古代和现代科学学说和研究之间明显的对比”;
第三段否定了解释2——“没有使用或充分使用这些局部方法中的任何一种,在观察和实验的艺术和资源上的缺陷,在观察中粗心,忽视相关事实,诉诸于实验和观察”;
第四段否定了解释3——古人试图通过将“事实”与“理论”或“事实”与“观念”对立来解释这一现象;
第五段肯定了第四段中将“事实”与“理论”进行区分的可取之处,即这种区分包含了真正方法的一个重要特征。
2)提炼复现词:methods“方法”。
综上所述,D选项“科学探究的方法”最适合做本文的标题。
【干扰项排除】
A选项“数学的哲学”,本文并未提及,属于无中生有;
B选项“科学的最新发展”,只是在开头第一段引入问题时被提到,属于背景信息,并不能概括全文,不适合做本文标题,属于本末倒置;
C选项“事实的核实”,只是本文第四、五段的内容,并不能概括全文,不适合做本文标题,属于本末倒置。
26 【选项释义】
According to the author, one possible reason for the growth of science during the days of the ancient Greeks and in modern times is ____. 作者认为,古希腊和现代科学发展的一个可能原因是____。
A. the similarity between the two periods A. 这两个时期的相似之处
B. that it was an act of God B. 是上帝的杰作
C. that both tried to develop the inductive method C. 他们都试图发展归纳法
D. due to the decline of the deductive method D. 由于演绎法的衰落
【考查点】事实细节题。
【解题思路】根据题干关键词the growth of science during the days of the ancient Greeks and in modern times可定位到本文第1段最后一句,该句说到“或者,我们是否应该把这两个时期的特点归因于所谓的历史偶然性——归因于环境中结合的影响?这种影响,除非以指导我们的上帝的全能和智慧(the omnipotence and wisdom of a guiding Providence)来解释,否则是无法解释的。”由此可知,作者认为上帝是一个可能的原因。“God”是“a guiding Providence”的同义替换。
【干扰项排除】
A选项“这两个时期的相似之处”,原文并未提及,属于无中生有;
C选项“他们都试图发展归纳法”,原文虽然提到了归纳法,但并没有说这两个时期都试图发展归纳法,该选项属于无中生有;
D选项“由于演绎法的衰落”,原文虽然提到了演绎法,但并没有说演绎法的衰落,该选项属于无中生有。
27. 【选项释义】
The underlined word “ascertain” in the third paragraph probably means ____. 第三段中划线的单词“ascertain”的意思可能是____。
A. find out A. 发现
B. confirm B. 证实
C. announce C. 宣布
D. make sure D. 确保
【考查点】词汇推测题。
【解题思路】
句中前后信息衔接:根据题干关键词the third paragraph定位到原文第3段。本段第1句破折号后ascertain所在部分的句意是“无论是古代还是现代,这些都是导致不能____真理/真相的错误。”
2)上下文语义衔接:由第一题的解析可得,本文的主题是“科学研究的方法”,第3段第1句破折号前的句子是展开介绍在科学实验中犯的错误,那么此处的truth指的应该是科学真理,由此可知,ascertain是搭配“真理”的动词,“宣布真理”和“确保真理”不能搭配,由此可排除C、D选项;
3)分析词汇本身:ascertain中certain是“确实,确信”的意思,因此B选项“证实”更符合题意。
【干扰项排除】A、C、D三个选项均不符合原文。
28. 【选项释义】
The difference between “fact” and “theory”____. “事实”和“理论”的区别____。
A. is that the latter needs confirmation A. 是后者需要证实
B. rests on the simplicity of the former B. 在于前者的简单性
C. is the difference between the modern scientists and the ancient Greeks C. 是现代科学家和古希腊科学家的区别
D. helps us to understand the deductive method D. 帮助我们理解演绎法
【考查点】事实细节题。
【解题思路】根据题干关键词The difference between “fact” and “theory”定位到原文最后一段。该段最后两句提到“如果一个理论是正确的,它就具有事实的所有特征,只是它的证实(except that its verification)只能通过间接的、遥远的和困难的手段。”“将理论转化为事实就是增加了简单的验证(add simple verification),从而使理论获得了事实的全部特征。”由此可知,理论得到验证之后就会变成真理,因此,A选项“是后者需要证实”就是“事实”和“理论”的区别。
【干扰项排除】
B选项“在于前者的简单性”,可定位到原文最后一段第2句,该句说“事实是简单的命题”,原文虽然提到了“事实”很简单,但并没有说这是两者之间的区别,该选项属于无中生有;
C选项“是现代科学家和古希腊科学家的区别”,原文并未提及,该选项属于无中生有;
D选项“帮助我们理解演绎法”,原文并未提及,该选项属于无中生有。
29. 【选项释义】
According to the author, mathematics is ____. 据作者介绍,数学是____。
A. an inductive science A. 归纳科学
B. in need of simple verification B. 需要简单的验证
C. a deductive science C. 演绎科学
D. based on fact and theory D. 以事实和理论为基础
【考查点】推理判断题。
【解题思路】原文并未直接介绍数学是什么科学,只在首段引入话题时提到了数学。根据原文第一段第1句“为什么归纳和数学科学(the inductive and mathematical sciences),在希腊文明达到顶峰时第一次快速发展之后,两千年来发展缓慢”,由此可知,数学是一种科学,根据作者将归纳科学(inductive science)与数学(mathematical science)并列可推断,作者认为两者非同类的科学,“归纳和演绎”是相对的两种科学方法分类,因此,作者认为数学是一种演绎科学。
【干扰项排除】
A选项“归纳科学”,根据【解题思路】可排除该选项;
B选项“需要简单的验证”,可定位到原文最后一段最后一句,该句提到“理论变成事实需要简单的验证(To convert theories into facts is to add simple verification)”,由此可知,该选项表述的是一种科学方法,不是对数学的介绍,属于偷换概念;
D选项“以事实和理论为基础”,原文在最后两段提到了“事实和理论”,但并未涉及数学,该选项属于无中生有。
30. 【选项释义】
The statement “Theories are facts” may be called ____. “理论就是事实”这句话可以叫作____。
A. a metaphor A. 比喻(暗喻)
B. a paradox B. 悖论
C. an appraisal of the inductive and deductive methods C. 对归纳和演绎方法的赞美
D. a pun D. 双关
【考查点】推理判断题。
【解题思路】根据题干关键词Theories和facts定位到原文最后两段。倒数第2段第2句提到“事实和理论不是完全对立的(the antithesis is not complete)”,后一句又说“事实和理论不是协调的类别(not coordinate species)”由此可知,事实和理论不是完全对立又不是完全统一的。第4段最后一句说到“如果理论是正确的(Theories, if true),那么它就是一类特定的事实(a particular class of facts)”,由此可知,正确的理论是事实,错误的理论不是事实。因此题干中“理论就是事实”的表述是B选项“悖论”。(注:悖论是“如果其中一部分是正确的,那么另一部分就不可能是正确的”的陈述。)
【干扰项排除】A、C、D三个选项均没有依据,属于无中生有。