研究生英语考试summary

Scientists Shouldn‟t Be Surprised by the Popularity of Intelligent Design In this article Scientists S houldn‟t Be Surprised by the Popularity of Intelligent Design which addresses many scientists‟ grumps over the persistence if ID (Intelligent Design), Scott Lilienfeld postulates that many Americans‟approval of id cannot be blamed on their lack of common sense but rather their dependence on their common sense or intuition in making judgments which turns them away from the theory of natural selection. According to Lilienfeld, the difficulty in intuiting how marvelous creatures and organisms have resulted from natural selection has prevented many Americans from accepting Darwinian Theory while the same common sense has made ID rather tempting to them. As is indicated by a multitude of examples of wrong beliefs based on common sense, intuition does not provide a reliable means of understanding the world. Unfortunately, scientists and science educators have failed to teach research methods and academic skills that can help debunk misconceptions compatible with people‟s common sense. Finally, Lilienfeld concludes that a radical shift in science education has to be initiated so that scientists would not face fiasco when confronting erroneous claims refuged by people‟s common sense. Empowerment and Restraint in Scientific Communication

In his article” Empowerment and Restraint in Scientific Communication”, Philip Campbell highlights a dire likely consequence of biologists‟increased ability to obtain and distribute scientific information that such information may be exploited by people with heinous intentions. Scientific communication, according to Campbell, has seen significant development due to the invention of powerful software and hardware that facilitate scientists‟acquisition of information and reduce the trouble the may otherwise have to take in order to publicize their research. However, the resulting plethora of biological information spawns a hazard that the information may be used to build biological weapons, and this hazard has come to people‟s attention with synthetic biology‟s resent development. Campbell points out that it is relatively easy to abuse biological knowledge while biological studies often bring about unexpected results. People using biological information for malicious purposes may be whoever have leant to exploit simple biological technologies and are not necessarily committed to terrorist agendas. Campbell believes that the decisions made by funding agencies and scientific journals who are the gatekeepers of biological research will be crucial in reducing the risks of information abuse and what proactive measures should be taken has to be considered by all related parties.