当前位置:主页 > 产品展示 > 兰格精密泵 >

产品展示

Products Classification

unit 10“华体会体育官网”

  • 产品时间:2021-10-31 14:24
  • 价       格:

简要描述:一、中文翻译二十世纪科学领域取得的最大成就是发现人类无知无知。我们对自然、宇宙、尤其对我们自身,从来没有像现在这样感应困惑不解。这是人类一种新的感受。一百年前,在达尔文和华莱士引起的惊动平静下来,人们明白并接受了自然选择的基本看法之后,我们以为对进化论的实质问题全都一清二楚了。 十八世纪不存在重大的难明之谜。其时欲知宇宙秘密、只需借助人的理性就行了。在此以前的若干世纪里,教会提出问题同时提供谜底,巧妙地包揽了一切。 如今,在人类历史上我们第—次觉察到了自己的无知。...

详细介绍
本文摘要:一、中文翻译二十世纪科学领域取得的最大成就是发现人类无知无知。我们对自然、宇宙、尤其对我们自身,从来没有像现在这样感应困惑不解。这是人类一种新的感受。一百年前,在达尔文和华莱士引起的惊动平静下来,人们明白并接受了自然选择的基本看法之后,我们以为对进化论的实质问题全都一清二楚了。 十八世纪不存在重大的难明之谜。其时欲知宇宙秘密、只需借助人的理性就行了。在此以前的若干世纪里,教会提出问题同时提供谜底,巧妙地包揽了一切。 如今,在人类历史上我们第—次觉察到了自己的无知。

华体会app官网登录

一、中文翻译二十世纪科学领域取得的最大成就是发现人类无知无知。我们对自然、宇宙、尤其对我们自身,从来没有像现在这样感应困惑不解。这是人类一种新的感受。一百年前,在达尔文和华莱士引起的惊动平静下来,人们明白并接受了自然选择的基本看法之后,我们以为对进化论的实质问题全都一清二楚了。

十八世纪不存在重大的难明之谜。其时欲知宇宙秘密、只需借助人的理性就行了。在此以前的若干世纪里,教会提出问题同时提供谜底,巧妙地包揽了一切。

如今,在人类历史上我们第—次觉察到了自己的无知。我们可以一如既往依旧想出种种说法来解释世界,但现在这些说法必须通过实验加以证实,再证实。

这是科学方法,一旦开始根据这种方法去做,我们就不能走转头路了。我们只能始终带着怀疑的眼光,对关于自然的每个论断都要求拿出证据来。除了行动起来,笃志探索,没有其他措施。我们希望未来能够找到谜底,但在此之前的这段漫长岁月里,我们只利益于一种似懂非懂、一知半解的状态。

认可无知会导致进步,其原因不只是由于解决某个详细疑问面直接增添—点知识,而更是由于这个疑问——如能引起众多科学家的兴趣——会促使人们去钻研。昆虫学中有一种称作 "stigmergy" 的类似现象,这一术语是格拉塞新造的,其意思是“激励做出努力”。把三四只白蚁放在室内,它们会漫无目的地随处乱爬,但要是再添些白蚁进去,它们就会着手营造了。等到足够多的白蚁聚集在一处,劳动便正式开始了:它们捡起相互的屎粒,堆成一个个整齐的柱状物,当这些柱状物正好到达所要求的高度时,白蚁便横向搭建,巧妙地构筑完美的拱,作为蚁巢的基础。

单唯一只白蚁是不明白去干这些的,但一旦足够数量的白蚁聚在一起,它们就成了无懈可击的修建师。白蚁虽然看不见,但能觉察相互距离几多距离,筑起极其庞大的有着自己的空气和湿度调治机制的蚁巢。它们在自己建成的生态系统中劳作一生。

人类行为中我能想起的最近似构筑白蚁巢的事例要算缔造语言了。一代接一代,我们与别人相处、来往,缔造着语言,依靠某种本能改变着语言的结构。人们对这种群体行为知之甚少。如今谈 “超有机个体”已不适时尚了,但手头基础没有足够的从研究单个昆虫着手的资料,可把白蚁和其他群体昆虫体现出来的这种现象解释清楚。

对它们的化学信号系统可以做出一些很是合理的推测。但它们体现出的像有团体智慧这一明摆着的事实,却叫人捉摸不透,岂论怎么说,总是个尚未解决的问题。

这一问题也许对一般社会生活具有重要寄义。这个谜一般的问题是我能想到的大学生物学课的最好的导言。这个问题的奇特之处和模棱两可的寄义都应该在课堂上讲一讲。

这个问题应该讲给医科大学预科学生听,他们在事业开始之初,就需要相识科学领域中存在的种种未获定论的问题。也许一开始就应该让大学生甚至中学生接触科学家当前争论的重大问题。重大的论争会引起他们的兴趣,弄得好还能极大地吸引他们的注意力。

训练有素、善于辩说的论敌间展开的猛烈辩说是那样引人入胜,生活中很少有什么事能与之相比。然而,青年学生对今世学术上的主要分歧却知之甚少。老师也许对他们教学一百年前达尔文主义者及其论敌之间的争论,但他们并不知道,其他问题上类似的争论——其中许多争论涉及我们如何认识自然的重大问题——仍在继续举行,而且确是科学生长历程中的主要特点。

我担忧教学科学的老师不愿谈及这些事,他们认为,学生必须先学习并掌握“基本知识”,然后才气明白这些争论是怎么回事。我很想看到有关这方面的实验。我想到好几个今世学术争鸣的例子。

人们纵然对这些课题缺乏深刻、详尽的相识,仍能很容易地领会到辩说的或许意思。动物的意识问题就是一个例子。从事动物行为研究的一派生态学家认为,人类是唯一具有意识的生物,人类与其他一切生物差别,能够对事物举行仔细的思考,使用已往的履历,井对未来做出有凭据的推测。

其他“低级的”动物 (黑猩猩,鲸鱼和海豚可能是破例),不能用它们的大脑做这些事情。它们过一天算一天。

它们的大脑只能牢固稳定地对周围情况中的偶发事件自动地或通过条件作用做出反映。行为心理学家认为,这一自动反映或条件反射同样也可以用来解释人类的心理运动,虽然他们不喜欢“心理”这个词。站在另一边的,则是一些似乎越发豁达漂亮的生态学家。

他们认为,没有什么令人信服的理由怀疑一般的动物完全能够并确实在举行许多真正的思维运动——这种思维不像人类的思维那样麋集,因为缺乏语言,因而也缺少比喻资助推进思维历程,但无论怎样是在思维。这一争论的意义在于不是这一方或那一方拥有一系列更强有力的令人信服的事实,情况恰恰相反。双方都没有足够的事实举行恒久的真正的论争,动物意识问题是—个还没有定论的问题。当我们把整个生物圈,即地球上连在一起的全体生命加以仔细思量时,就会泛起另外一个可争论的问题。

在只有偶然事件起决议作用的情况下,地球生物圈怎么会像一种庞大的发育着的胚胎一样,具有如此的稳定性和—致性呢?面临这一问题,洛夫洛克和马古利斯提出了盖亚假说。简言之,这个假说认为,地球自己是一种生命形式,“一个庞大的统一体,它包罗地球生物圈、大气层、海洋和土壤;其总和组成一个反馈或控制系统,这个系统为地球上的生命寻求最佳的物理和化学情况。”洛夫洛克还假定,“生命自己的存在一直而且现在仍然努力在使地球外貌、大气层和海洋的物理及化学条件变得适宜和舒服。

”一些迹象讲明这一看法已开始激起风暴。如果这一看法盛行起来——我认为会这样的——我们不久就会见到生物学界破裂为怒气冲发的两派,一派说,生物圈的进化显示出是有计划有意图地举行的,面另一派则诋毁这种异端邪说。

我认为学生应该尽可能多地相识这一争论。现在正在举行的也是牵涉到未知世界的另一场论战,是在社会生物学家和反社会生物学家之间举行的。这是一个可使学生大开眼界的绝妙事例。

华体会app官网登录

一群极其智慧、受过良好训练、知识渊博、富于想象的科学家坚持认为,一切行为,不管是动物的还是人类的,都完全是由基因支配的,而另一群同样才气横溢的科学家则断言,一切行为都是由情况或文化所决议的。这场论战会使人目瞪口呆又很有教育意义,任何一个大学生都不应该错过。要学的至关重要的一课,与论据的相对可靠性并无关系。

争论自己才是教育意义之所在:迄今为止,我们的知识还不足以解决这样的一些问题。听力质料Do animals think? How could the earth show so many signs of design and purpose and yet be random? Our best scientists are heatedly debating both sides of these and other scientific questions. In the following essay, the author takes a look at science education and argues that as well as telling students the facts and theories that have already been proved and accepted, science teacher should spend more time introducing their students to the many mysteries that remain unsolved and the arguments taking place between scientists. What better way, he argues, to stimulate their interest in thing scientific?DEBATING THE UNKNOWABLELewis ThomasThe greatest of all the accomplishment of twentieth-century science has been the discovery of human ignorance. We live, as never before, in puzzlement about nature, the universe, and ourselves most of all. It is a new experience for the species. A century ago, after the turbulence caused by Darwin and Wallace had subsided and the central idea of natural selection had been grasped and accepted, we thought we knew everything essential about evolution. In the eighteenth century there were no huge puzzles; human reason was all you needed in order to figure out the universe. And for most of the earlier centuries, the Church provided both the questions and the answers, neatly packaged. Now, for the first time in human history, we are catching glimpses of our incomprehension. We can still make up stories to explain the world, as we always have, but now the stories have to be confirmed and reconfirmed by experiment. This is the scientific method, and once started on this line we cannot turn back. We are obliged to grow up in skepticism, requiring proofs for every assertion about nature, and there is no way out except to move ahead and plug away, hoping for comprehension in the future but living in a condition of intellectual instability for the long time.It is the admission of ignorance that leads to progress, not so much because the solving of a particular puzzle leads directly to a new piece of understanding but because the puzzle -- if it interests enough scientists -- leads to work. There is a similar phenomenon in entomology know as stigmergy, a term invented by Grasse, which means "to incite to work." When three or four termites are collected together in a chamber they wander about aimlessly, but when more termites are added, they begin to build. It is the presence of other termites, in sufficient numbers at close quarters, that produces the work: they pick up each other's fecal pellets and stack them in neat columns, and when the columns are precisely the right height, the termites reach across and turn the perfect arches that form the foundation of the termitarium. No single termite knows how to do any of this, but as soon as there are enough termites gathered together they become flawless architects, sensing their distances from each other although blind, building an immensely complicated structure with its own air-conditioning and humidity control. They work their lives away in this ecosystem built by themselves. The nearest thing to a termitarium that I can think of in human behavior is the making of language, which we do by keeping at each other all our lives, generation after generation, changing the structure by some sort of instinct.Very little is understood about this kind of collective behavior. It is out of fashion these days to talk of "superorganisms", but there simply aren't enough reductionist details in hand to explain away the phenomenon of termites and other social insects: some very good guesses can be made about their chemical signaling systems, but the plain fact that they exhibit something like a collective intelligence is a mystery, or anyway an unsolved problem, that might contain important implications for social life in general. This mystery is the best introduction I can think of to biological science in college. It should be taught for its strangeness, and for the ambiguity of its meaning. It should be taught to premedical students, who need lessons early n their careers about the uncertainties in science.College students, and for that matter high school students, should be exposed very early, perhaps at the outset, to the big arguments currently going on among scientists. Big arguments stimulate their interest, and with luck engage their absorbed attention. Few things in life are as engrossing as a good fight between highly trained and skilled adversaries. But the young students are told very little about the major disagreements of the day; they may be taught something about the arguments between Darwinians and their opponents a century ago, but they do not realize that similar disputes about other matters, many of them touching profound issues for our understanding of nature, are still going on and, indeed, are an essential feature of the scientific process. There is, I fear, a reluctance on the part of science teachers to talk about such things, based on the belief that before students can appreciate what the arguments are about they must learn and master the "fundamentals". I would be willing to see some experiments along this line, and I have in mind several examples of contemporary doctrinal dispute in which the drift of the argument can be readily perceived without deep or elaborate knowledge of the subject.There is, for one, the problem of animal awareness. One school of ethologists devoted to the study of animal behavior has it that human beings are unique in the possession of consciousness, differing from al other creatures in being able to think things over, capitalize on past experience, and hazard informed guesses at the future. Other, "lower", animals (with possible exceptions made for chimpanzees, whales, and dolphins) cannot do such things with their minds; they live from moment to moment with brains that are programmed to respond, automatically or by conditioning, to contingencies in the environment, Behavioral psychologists believe that this automatic or conditioned response accounts for human mental activity as well, although they dislike that word "mental". On the other side are some ethologists who seems to be more generous-minded, who see no compelling reasons to doubt that animals in general are quite capable of real thinking and do quite a lot of it —— thinking that isn't as dense as human thinking, that is sparser because of the lack of language and the resultant lack of metaphors to help the thought along, but thinking nonetheless.The point about this argument is not that one side or the other is in possession of a more powerful array of convincing facts; quite the opposite. There are not enough facts to sustain a genuine debate of any length; the question of animal awareness is an unsettled one.Another debatable question arises when one contemplates the whole biosphere, the conjoined life of the earth. How could it have turned out to possess such stability and coherence, resembling as it does a sort of enormous developing embryo, with nothing but chance events to determine its emergence? Lovelock and Margulis, facing this problem, have proposed the Gaia Hypothesis, which is, in brief, that the earth is itself a form of life, "a complex entity involving the Earth's biosphere, atmosphere, oceans and soil; the totality constituting a feedback or cybernetic system which seeks an optimal physical and chemical environment for life on this planet." Lovelock postulates, in addition, that "the physical and chemical condition of the surface of the Earth, of the atmosphere, and of the oceans has been an is actively made fit and comfortable by the presence of life itself."This notion is beginning to stir up a few signs of storm, and if it catches on, as I think it will, we will soon find the biological community split into fuming factions, one side saying that the evolved biosphere displays evidences of design and purpose, the other decrying such heresy. I believe that students should learn as much as they can about the argument.One more current battle involving the unknown is between sociobiologists and antisociobiologists, and it is a marvel for students to behold. To observe, in open-mouthed astonishment, one group of highly intelligent, beautifully trained, knowledgeable, and imaginative scientists maintaining that all behavior, animal and human, is governed exclusively by genes, and another group of equally talented scientists asserting that all behaviors is set and determined by the environment or by culture, is an educational experience that no college student should be allowed to miss. The essential lesson to be learned has nothing to do with the relative validity of the facts underlying the argument. It is the argument itself that is the education: we do not yet know enough to settle such questions.。


本文关键词:华体会体育官网,unit,“,华,体会,体育,官网,”,一,、,中文,翻译

本文来源:华体会体育-www.shou-rong.com

 


产品咨询

留言框

  • 产品:

  • 留言内容:

  • 您的单位:

  • 您的姓名:

  • 联系电话:

  • 常用邮箱:

  • 详细地址:


推荐产品

Copyright © 2008-2021 www.shou-rong.com. 华体会体育科技 版权所有 备案号:ICP备39911551号-7

在线客服 联系方式 二维码

服务热线

076-707312257

扫一扫,关注我们