Passage 5
Sce, in practice, depends far less on the experiments it prepares than on the preparedness of the minds of the men
who watch the experiments. Sir Isaaewton supposedly discravity through the fall of an apple. Apples had been
falling in many pces for turies and thousands of people had seen them fall. But on for years had been curious
about the cause of the orbital motion of the moon and ps. What kept them in pce? Why didn’t they fall out of the sky?
The fact that the apple fell down toward the earth and not up into the tree answered the question he had been asking himself
about ther fruits of the heavens, the moon and the ps.
How many men would have sidered the possibility of an apple falling up into the tree? on did because he was
n to prediything. He was just w. His mind was ready for the uable. Uability is part of
the essential nature of research. If you don’t have uable things, you don’t have research. Stists tehis
when writing their cut and dried reports for the teical journals, but history is filled with examples of it.
In talking to some stists, particurly younger ones, you might gather the impression that they find the “stific
method” a substitute for imaginative thought. I’ve attended research ferences where a stist has been asked what he
thinks about the advisability of tinuing a certain experiment. The stist has frowned, looked at the graphs, and said,
“the data are still inclusive.” “We know that,” the men from the budget office have said, “but what do you think? Is it
worthwhile going on? What do you think we might expect?” The stist has been shocked at having even been asked to
specute.
What this amounts to, of course, is that the stist has bee the victim of his own writings. He has put forward
uioned cims so sistently that he not only believes them himself, but has vinced industrial and business
ma that they are true. If experiments are pnned and carried out acc to pn as faithfully as the reports in the
sce journals indicate, then it is perfectly logical for ma to expect research to produce results measurable in
dolrs as. It is entirely reasonable for auditors to believe that stists who kly where they are going and
how they will get there should not be distracted by the y of keeping one eye on the cash register while the other eye
is on the microscope. Nor, if regurity and ity to a standard pattern are as desirable to the stist as the writing of
his papers would appear to reflect, is ma to be bmed for discriminating against the “odd balls” among researchers
in favor of more ventional thinkers who “work well with the team”.
27. The author wants to prove with the example of Isaaewton that.
［A］ inquiring minds are more important than stific experiments
［B］ sce advances when fruitful researches are ducted
［C］ stists seldom fet the essential nature of research
［D］ uability weighs less thaion in stific research
28. The author asserts that stists.
［A］ shouldn’t repce “stific method” with imaginative thought
［B］ shouldn’t o specute on uable things
［C］ should write more cise reports for teical journals
［D］ should be fident about their research findings
29. It seems that some young stists.
［A］ have a keen i iion
［B］ oftee oure
［C］ think highly of creative thinking
［D］ stick to “stific method”
30. The author implies that the results of stific research.
［A］ may not be as profitable as they are expected
［B］ be measured in dolrs as
［C］ rely on ity to a standard pattern
［D］ are mostly uimated by managemen
Part III Englishese Transtion
Dires:
Read the following passage carefully and then trahe underlined segments into ese. Your transtion must be written clearly on ANSWER SHEET 2. (15 points)
31 ） While there are almost as many definitions of history as there are historians, modern practice most closely s to ohat sees history as the attempt to recreate and expin the signifit events of the past . Caught in the web of its own time and pce, each geion of historiaermines anew what is signifit for it in the past. In this search the evidence found is always ie and scattered; it is also frequently partial or partisan. The irony of the historian’s craft is that its practitioners always know that their efforts are but tributions to an unending process.
32）I in historical methods has arisehrough external challeo the validity of history as an intellectual discipline and more from internal quarrels among historians themselves. While history once revered its affinity to literature and philosophy, the emerging social sces seemed to affreater opportunities for asking new questions and providing rewarding approaches to an uanding of the past. Social sce methodologies had to be adapted to a discipline governed by the primacy of historical sources rather than the imperatives of the porary world. 33 ） During this traraditional historical methods were augmented by additional methodologies desigo interpret the new forms of eviden the historical study.
Methodology is a term that remains ily ambiguous in the historical profession. 34 ） There is no agreement whether methodology refers to the cepts peculiar to historical work in general or to the research teiques appropriate tothe various branches of historical inquiry. Historians, especially those so blinded by their researterests that they havebeen accused of “tunnel method,” frequently fall victim to the “teical falcy.” Also on iural sces, theteicist falcy mistakenly identifies the discipline as a whole with certain parts of its teical implementation.
35）It applies equally to traditional historians who view history as only the external and internal criticism of sources,and to social sce historians who equate their activity with specific teiques.