The final quarter of the nineteenth century marked a turning point in the history of biology— biologists became less interested in applying an ideal of historical explanation deductively to organic function and more interested in discerning the causes of vital processes through experimental manipulation. But it is impossible to discuss the history of biology in the nineteenth century without emphasizing that those areas of biology most in the public eye had depended on historical explanation. Wherever it was applied, historical explanation was deemed causal explanation. The biologist-as-historian and the general historian of human events dealt with comparable phenomena and assumed necessarily a common mode of explanation.

Nineteenth-century biologists found a historical explanation of organic function attractive partly because their observation of the formation of a new cell from a preexisting cell seemed to confirm a historical explanation of cell generation. The same direct observation of continuous stages of development was also possible when they examined the complex sequence of events of embryogenesis. In both cases, the observer received a concrete impression that the daughter cell was brought into being, or caused, by the prior cell. The argument that these scientists employed confuses temporal succession and causal explanation, of course, but such confusion is the heart of most historical explanation.

Not surprisingly, the evolutionary biologists of the nineteenth century encountered a particularly troublesome problem in their attempts to document historical explanation convincingly: the factual record of the history of life on earth (e.g., that provided by fossils) was incomplete. The temporal continuity of living forms was convincing, but was an assumption that was difficult to uphold when one compared species or organisms forming any two stages of the evolutionary record. Nineteenth-century biologists recognized this problem and attempted to resolve it. Their solution today appears to be only verbal, but was then regarded as eminently causal. The fact of evolution demanded some connection between all reproducing individuals and the species that they compose, as well as between living species and their extinct ancestors. Their solution, the concept of heredity, seemed to fill in an admittedly deficient historical record and seemed to complete the argument for a historical explanation of evolutionary events.


The primary purpose of the passage is to


compare the information about organic function made available by historical explanation with that made available by the experimental investigation of living organisms

assess the influence that theories of history had on developments in the field of biology in the nineteenth century

discuss the importance of historical explanation in the thinking of nineteenth century biologists

contrast biologists’ use of historical explanation during the early nineteenth century with its use during the final quarter of the nineteenth century

evaluate the way in which the concept of heredity altered the use of historical explanation by nineteenth-century biologists

考题讲解

此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。

正确答案是 C。本文的主要目的是讨论 19 世纪生物学家对历史解释的重要性。文章开头说,19 世纪的最后一个季度标志着生物学史上的一个转折点,生物学家不再将历史解释的理想以归纳的方式应用于有机功能,而是更感兴趣于通过实验操纵来探寻生命过程的原因。紧接着,重点强调的是,那些最受公众关注的生物学领域依赖于历史解释。随后,文章进一步解释在 19 世纪,生物学家特别感兴趣于历史解释,部分因为他们观察到新细胞是从既有细胞生成,而这似乎证实了细胞生成的历史解释,并且也可以通过直接观察到发育过程的连续阶段。这种论证会混淆时间上的继承与因果解释,但这种混淆是大部分历史解释的核心。紧接着,文章强调 19 世纪的进化生物学家在尝试将历史解释得到明确的证据时遭遇了一些特别棘手的问题,尤其是关于生命在地球上的历史记录(如化石提供的记录)的不完整性。这样,19 世纪的生物学家提出了解决问题的方法,今天看来只是口头上的解决方案,但当时被认为是充分的因果解释,这就是“遗传”这一概念,它填补了历史记录中明显的缺陷,并且似乎有完成对进化事件历史解释的论证。因此,本文的主要目的是讨论 19 世纪生物学家对历史解释的重要性,所以答案是 C。

展开显示

登录注册 后可以参加讨论

DaQuan-RC