课程咨询

GRE首页 GRE课程 GRE动态 0元讲座 GRE模考网站

新东方在线 > GRE > GRE写作 > 正文
扫码关注掌握一手留学资讯

扫码关注掌握一手留学资讯

回复XDF免费领

水平测试和备考资料

扫码关注公众号

GRE北美范文关于科学领域的发言权

2015-02-03 19:48:50来源：网络

　　新东方在线为大家精心整理了GRE北美范文关于科学领域的发言权的相关内容,分享给大家,供大家参考,希望对大家有所帮助!

　　"Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field."

　　The speaker's assertion that work in any field can be judged only by experts in that field amounts to an unfair generalization, in my view. I would concur with the speaker when it comes to judging the work of social scientists, although I would strongly disagree when it comes to work in the pure physical sciences, as explained in the following discussion.

　　With respect to the social sciences, the social world presents a seamless web of not only anthropogenic but also physical forces, which interact in ways that can be understood only in the context of a variety of disciplines. Thus experts from various fields must collectively determine the merit of work in the social sciences. For example, consider the field of cultural anthropology. The merits of researcher's findings and conclusions about an ancient civilization must be scrutinized by biochemists, geologists, linguists, and even astronomers.

　　Specifically, by analyzing the hair, nails, blood and bones of mummified bodies, biochemists and forensic scientists can pass judgment on the anthropologist's conjectures about the life expectancy, general well-being, and common causes of death of the population. Geologists are needed to identify the source and age of the materials used for tools, weapons, and structures--thereby determining whether the anthropologist extrapolated correctly about the civilization's economy, trades and work habits, life styles, extent of travel and mobility, and so forth. Linguists are needed to interpret hieroglyphics and extrapolate from found fragments of writings. And astronomers are sometimes needed to determine with the anthropologist's explanations for the layout of an ancient city or the design, structure and position of monuments, tombs, and temples is convincing-because ancients often looked to the stars for guidance in building cities and structures.

　　In contrast, the work of researchers in the purely physical sciences can be judged only by their peers. The reason for this is that scientific theories and observations are either meritorious or not, depending solely on whether they can be proved or disproved by way of the scientific method. For example, consider the complex equations which physicists rely upon to draw conclusions about the nature of matter, time, and space, or the origins and future of the universe. Only other physicists in these specialties can understand, let alone judge, this type of theoretical work. Similarly, empirical observations in astrophysics and molecular physics require extremely sophisticated equipment and processes, which only experts in these fields have access to and who know how to use reliably.

　　Those who disagree that only inside experts can judge scientific work might point out that the expertise of economists and pubic-policy makers is required to determine whether the work is worthwhile from a more mundane economic or political viewpoint. Detractors might also point out that ultimately it is our philosophers who are best equipped to judge the ultimate import of ostensibly profound scientific discoveries. Yet these detractors miss the point of what I take to be the speaker's more narrow claim: that the integrity and quality of work---disregarding its socioeconomic utility---- can be judged only by experts in the work's field.

　　In sum, in the social sciences no area of inquiry operates in a vacuum. Because fields such as anthropology, sociology, and history are so closely intertwined and even dependent on the physical sciences, experts from various fields must collectively determine the integrity and quality of work in these fields. However, in the purely physical sciences the quality and integrity of work can be adequately judged only by inside experts, who are the only ones equipped with sufficient technical knowledge to pass judgment.

　　以上就是新东方在线为大家总结的GRE北美范文关于科学领域的发言权的相关内容，最后预祝大家在GRE考试中取得优异的成绩!

　　---本文节选自新东方在线论坛


本文关键字: GRE北美范文 GRE北美范文解析

添加新东方美研助教回复【GRE】获取

模考真题|写作题库|阅读机经|佛脚词汇

更多资料

添加美研助教号，
回复【GRE】获取备考必看资料包

  • 1.打开手机微信【扫一扫】，识别上方二维码；
  • 2.点击【添加美研助教号】，回复对应关键字领取学习资料。
更多>>
  • GRE写作分数真的重要吗

    GRE写作分数真的重要吗，来本文和新东方在线雅思一起来看看详细信息。

    来源 : 网络综合整理 2022-03-10 18:18:27 关键字 : GRE写作 2022GRE考试

  • GRE写作常用高频词汇替换词

    GRE写作常用高频词汇替换词来啦，快来和新东方在线GRE一起来看看详细信息吧。

    来源 : 网络综合整理 2022-03-06 19:30:42 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE考试 2022GRE考试

  • GRE写作备考5点技巧

    相较于GRE Verbal 和 Math部分，GRE 写作长期以来不受大家的重视。但GRE是中国学生最弱的部分，如何进行GRE写作备考呢？来本文看看。

    来源 : 网络综合整理 2022-02-24 15:19:39 关键字 : GRE写作 2022GRE考试

  • GRE写作题目如何正确练习 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作题目如何正确练习，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作考前的小练习 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作考前的小练习，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作的标准了解 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作的标准了解，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GR

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作的名言警句 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作的名言警句，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GR

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作怎么应对高频题目 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作怎么应对高频题目，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作提分的建议 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作提分的建议，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GR

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

  • GRE写作常用的词汇 　　

    　　为了帮助大家高效备考GRE，新东方在线GRE频道为大家带来GRE写作常用的词汇，希望对大家GRE备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GR

    来源 : 网络 2021-01-25 13:23:00 关键字 : GRE写作 GRE

更多内容

关注新东方美研助教

回复【GRE】获取备考必看资料包

新东方美研备考资料
GRE录播课（全科班/单项班） GMAT6-8人直播VIP小班 托福直播精讲班（30天/60天）
更多>>
更多惊喜>>

添加美研助教号，
回复【GRE】获取备考必看资料包

  • 1.打开手机微信【扫一扫】，识别上方二维码；
  • 2.点击【添加美研助教号】，回复对应关键字领取学习资料。
更多>>
更多资料
我要
反馈 返回
首页
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10