2. 职称英语
  3. Humans are fascinated by the source of their failings and virtues. This preo

Humans are fascinated by the source of their failings and virtues. This preo

游客2023-08-07  23
问题     Humans are fascinated by the source of their failings and virtues. This preoccupation inevitably leads to an old debate: whether nature or nurture moulds us more. A revolution in genetics has poised this as a modern political question about the character of our society: if personalities are hard-wired into our genes, what can governments do to help us? It feels morally questionable, yet claims of genetic selection by intelligence are making headlines.
    This is down to "hereditarian" (遗传论的) science and a recent paper claimed "differences in exam performance between pupils attending selective and non-selective schools mirror the genetic differences between them". With such an assertion, the work was predictably greeted by a lot of absurd claims about "genetics determining academic success". What the research revealed was the rather less surprising result: the educational benefits of selective schools largely disappear once pupils’ inborn ability and socio-economic background were taken into account. It is a glimpse of the blindingly obvious—and there’s nothing to back strongly either a hereditary or environmental argument.
    Yet the paper does say children are "unintentionally genetically selected" by the school system. Central to hereditarian science is a tall claim: that identifiable variations in genetic sequences can predict an individual’s aptness to learn, reason and solve problems. This is problematic on many levels. A teacher could not seriously tell a parent their child has a low genetic tendency to study when external factors clearly exist. Unlike-minded academics say the inheritability of human traits is scientifically unsound. At best there is a weak statistical association and not a causal link between DNA and intelligence. Yet sophisticated statistics are used to create an intimidatory atmosphere of scientific certainty.
    While there’s an undoubted genetic basis to individual difference, it is wrong to think that socially defined groups can be genetically accounted for. The fixation on genes as destiny is surely false too. Medical predictability can rarely be based on DNA alone; the environment matters too. Something as complex as intellect is likely to be affected by many factors beyond genes. If hereditarians want to advance their cause it will require more balanced interpretation and not just acts of advocacy.
    Genetic selection is a way of exerting influence over others, "the ultimate collective control of human destinies," as writer H. G. Wells put it. Knowledge becomes power and power requires a sense of responsibility. In understanding cognitive ability, we must not elevate discrimination to a science; allowing people to climb the ladder of life only as far as their cells might suggest. This will need a more sceptical eye on the science. As technology progresses, we all have a duty to make sure that we shape a future that we would want to find ourselves in. [br] What do hereditarians need to do to make their claims convincing?
选项 A、Take all relevant factors into account in interpreting their data.
B、Conduct their research using more sophisticated technology.
C、Gather gene data from people of all social classes.
D、Cooperate with social scientists in their research.
答案 A
解析 由题干中的hereditarians和claims定位到第四段最后一句。推理判断题。第四段最后一句提到，如果遗传论者想推进他们的工作，就需要更多客观公正的解释，而不仅仅是宣扬他们的论点。也就是说，如果遗传论者想要更多人信服他们的观点，就应该对他们研究的结果做更加周全与综合的解释，即将更多相关因素考虑在内，故答案为A)。本文并未提及遗传论者在做研究时所用的技术精密与否，故排除B)；C)是针对第四段中socially defined groups设置的干扰，但原文的意思是社会群体的界定不能只用基因来解释，外部环境的影响同样重要，与C)提出的“收集社会各阶层人群的基因数据”的论点不一致，故排除；D)项在文章中并未提及，故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2904874.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)