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.
Which of the following best summarizes the "turning point" mentioned in line 2?
The beginning of the conflict between proponents of the ideal of historical explanation and the proponents of experimentation
The substitution of historical explanation for causal explanation
The shift from interest in historical explanation to interest in experimentation
The attention suddenly paid to problems of organic function
The growth of public awareness of the controversies among biologists
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. The shift from interest in historical explanation to interest in experimentation。
第二行提到的转折点是生物学家们从对历史解释的兴趣转向实验操纵来洞察生命过程的原因。为了理解这一转变,我们必须知道九十年代生物学家之前对历史解释的兴趣,并且他们转向实验操纵的原因。文章进一步解释了他们对历史解释的兴趣,因为它们和公众最关心的生物学领域有关,而且也被视为因果关系的解释。文章还提到,19世纪生物学家们发现,由于基于古生物记录不完整,他们在试图证实历史解释时遇到了麻烦。因此,最佳总结是:19世纪生物学家们从对历史解释的兴趣转向实验操纵的兴趣。
the turning point was a shift away from historical explanation—the dominant thread in biology throughout most of the nineteenth century—toward experimentation.