2. 职称英语
  3. Chemistry did not emerge as a science until after the scientific revolution

Chemistry did not emerge as a science until after the scientific revolution

游客2024-10-31  33
问题      Chemistry did not emerge as a science until after the scientific revolution in the seventeenth century and then only rather slowly and laboriously. But chemical knowledge is as old as history, being almost entirely concerned with the practical arts of living. Cooking is essentially a chemical process; so is the melting of metals and the administration of drugs and potions. This basic chemical knowledge, which was applied in most cases as a rule of thumb, was nevertheless dependent on previous experiment. It also served to stimulate a fundamental curiosity about the processes themselves. New information was always being gained as artisans improved techniques to gain better results.
     The development of a scientific approach to chemistry was, however, hampered by several factors. The most serious problem was the vast range of material available and the consequent difficulty of organizing it into some system. In addition, there were social and intellectual difficulties, chemistry is nothing if not practical; those who practice it must use their hands, they must have a certain practical flair. Yet in many ancient civilizations, practical tasks were primarily the province of a slave population. The thinker or philosopher stood apart from this mundane world, where the practical arts appeared to lack any intellectual content or interest.
     The final problem for early chemical science was the element of secrecy. Experts in specific trades had developed their own techniques and guarded their knowledge to prevent others from stealing their livelihood. Another factor that contributed to secrecy was the esoteric nature of tile knowledge of alchemists, who were trying to transform base metals into gold or were concerned with the hunt for the elixir that would bestow the blessing of eternal life. In one sense, the second of these was the more serious impediment because the records of the chemical processes that early alchemists had discovered were often written down in symbolic language intelligible to very few or in symbols that were purposely obscure. [br] Which of the following statements best explains why "the second of these was the more serious impediment" ?
选项 A、Chemical knowledge was limited to a small number of people.
B、The symbolic language used was very imprecise.
C、Very few new discoveries were made by alchemists.
D、The records of the chemical processes were not based on experiments.
答案 A
解析 选项A“化学知识只是局限在少数人的手中。”文章第三段所讲的内容正是关于这一点，故选项A是正确答案；选项B的意思是“所使用的符号语言不准确”，文章第三段中提到了intelligible to very few or in symbols that were purposely obscure告诉我们这些符号并不是不准确；选项C“非常少的发现是由炼金术士发现的”，文章第三段中所提到的信息告诉我们大部分发现都是由这些术士发现的，与文章内容不符；选项D“关于化学过程的记录不是建立在实验的基础上”，原文中明确提到所
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.tihaiku.com/zcyy/3825765.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)