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2024-03-10  6
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 does the author warn against in the passage?
选项 A、Exaggerating the power of technology in shaping the world.
B、Losing sight of professional ethics in conducting research.
C、Misunderstanding the findings of human cognition research.
D、Promoting discrimination in the name of science.
答案 D
解析 由选项中的technology、cognition及discrimination等词定位到最后一段。推理判断题。最后一段第三句指出，在理解认知能力的过程中，我们不能将歧视抬高为科学，这将导致人类只能在他们基因暗示的范围内攀登人生的阶梯。结合该段第一句中作者引用作家威尔斯对遗传选择的看法：是对人类命运集体控制的终极形式，综合可知，作者认为不能以科学的名义宣扬歧视，故答案为D)。A)是针对最后一段最后一句话中的as technology progresses设置的干扰。原文的意思是随着技术的进步，我们有责任守住底线，不去宣扬歧视，与选项中夸大技术改变世界的力量的意思完全不一致，故排除A)；原文没有提及职业道德，故排除B)；原文中提到在理解认知能力的过程中，我们要警惕将歧视抬高为科学，这与C)“误解对人类认知研究的发现”意思不一致，故排除C)。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3521135.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)