Most critical plot points in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone came from J.K. Rowling's imagination, but Flamel and his powerful pebble were legendary long before Harry went to Hogwarts... Contemporary historians say a Nicolas Flamel did live in Paris in the 1300s and endowed many churches and hospitals with his wealth. But he was no alchemist... Flamel writings and sightings faded with alchemy's prestige. And the closest anyone's come to the philosopher's stone is Rowling. In her hands, it has yielded one of the world's most popular book series as well.
- The passage is mainly to ______
[A] reveal that everything in Potter was imagined by Rowling
[B] tell the truth about Flamel behind the tales in Potter
[C] point out the inability of alchemists to defend themselves
[D] address that alchemy had an impact on modern science
- 主旨定位与逻辑推导
原文开篇对比《哈利・波特》中弗拉梅尔的虚构情节与真实历史人物的差异，核心围绕 “历史上真实的尼古拉斯・弗拉梅尔” 展开 —— 明确其真实身份是巴黎富商，而非炼金术士，同时追溯炼金术士对其身份的 “盗用” 及相关传说的演变。选项 B 精准概括这一核心，既关联《哈利・波特》的故事背景，又聚焦真实历史真相的还原。
- 干扰项排除
- A “波特中的所有内容均为罗琳想象” 与原文矛盾，原文明确弗拉梅尔的传说早于小说创作；
- C “指出炼金术士无法为自己辩护” 仅为第六段的局部细节，并非全文主旨；
- D “论述炼金术对现代科学的影响” 在原文无依据，原文未涉及炼金术与现代科学的关联。
- 学术扩展：考博英语阅读理解 “文学与历史关联类文本” 需关注 “虚构情节 - 历史原型” 的对比结构，本题中 “legendary tales” 与 “historical truth” 的张力是核心线索。这类文本常以 “文学作品引入 - 历史真相还原 - 传说演变” 为脉络，解题需精准捕捉 “核心人物” 的真实信息与虚构演绎的差异。
- A scientific law is liable at any time to need modifying. This happens when a fact is discovered which seems to______what the law would lead one to expect.
[A] prove [B] support [C] contradict [D] discourage
- 词汇辨析与语境适配
“contradict” 意为 “反驳、与…… 矛盾”，侧重 “新发现与既有认知或规律冲突”，与前文 “科学定律可能需要修正” 形成逻辑闭环 —— 当新事实与定律预期矛盾时，定律才需修改，句意为 “当发现似乎与该定律预期相矛盾的事实时，定律就可能需要修正”，精准契合科学研究的逻辑规律。
- 干扰项排除
- A “prove”（证明）、B “support”（支持）均与 “定律需要修正” 的逻辑相悖，若新事实支持定律，则无需修改；
- D “discourage”（使气馁）侧重情绪影响，与 “事实与定律的逻辑关系” 无关，语义不匹配。
- 学术扩展：“contradict” 是考博英语高频学术词汇，常用于科学、哲学类文本，描述 “新证据与旧理论的冲突”。博士阶段学术写作中，这类词汇可精准传递 “学术争议与理论修正” 的核心逻辑，需重点区分其与 “deny”（否认观点）、“conflict”（冲突，多为不及物动词）的语义边界。
(3) The entanglement is so complete, the mixture so thoroughly mixed, that it is probably impossible to achieve pure reason or pure emotion, at least for any sustained period of time.
理性与情感的交织如此彻底，二者的融合如此浑然一体，以至于人们或许根本无法实现纯粹的理性或纯粹的情感 —— 至少无法在任何持续的时间段内实现。
- 句式优化与逻辑衔接
- 并列结构处理：“The entanglement... the mixture...” 是省略结构，补充完整为 “The entanglement is so complete, and the mixture is so thoroughly mixed”，译为 “理性与情感的交织如此彻底，二者的融合如此浑然一体”，明确 “entanglement” 与 “mixture” 均指代 “理性与情感” 的关系，避免语义模糊；
- 结果状语从句处理：“so... that...” 译为 “如此…… 以至于……”，保留原文逻辑强度，“at least for any sustained period of time” 译为破折号引导的补充说明，符合中文表达习惯。
- 词汇精准与语境适配
- 核心术语翻译：“entanglement” 译为 “交织”（体现二者不可分割），“pure reason”“pure emotion” 译为 “纯粹的理性”“纯粹的情感”（契合哲学类文本语境），“sustained period of time” 译为 “持续的时间段”，语义精准且符合学术表达；
- 语义完整：无遗漏 “complete”“thoroughly mixed” 等核心语义，忠实还原原文强调的 “理性与情感无法割裂” 的核心观点。
- 学术规范与表达自然
- 语体一致性：采用正式书面语，契合哲学思辨类文本的严肃语境，避免口语化表达；
- 逻辑连贯：通过 “如此…… 以至于……”“至少” 等词汇，清晰传递 “程度 - 结果 - 补充说明” 的逻辑链，中文句式流畅无冗余。
Directions: Write an essay of no less than 200 words on the topic "My Idea of Professional Ethics for a Scientist". Present your perspective on the issue, using relevant reasons and/or examples to support your views.
My Idea of Professional Ethics for a Scientist
Science is the driving force behind human progress, and scientists, as practitioners of scientific exploration, bear not only the responsibility of advancing knowledge but also the obligation to abide by professional ethics. In my view, professional ethics for a scientist is rooted in integrity, responsibility, and a commitment to humanity, which are indispensable for maintaining the credibility of science and ensuring its beneficial impact on society.
Integrity stands as the fundamental cornerstone of a scientist’s professional ethics. Scientific research requires strict adherence to truthfulness: falsifying data, plagiarizing others’ achievements, or manipulating results to meet personal interests are unforgivable violations. For example, the case of Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk, who fabricated stem cell research data, not only ruined his own career but also undermined public trust in stem cell science globally. By contrast, Marie Curie, throughout her life, insisted on accurate recording of experimental results and openly shared her research findings, setting a model of integrity for generations of scientists. Integrity ensures that scientific progress is built on solid and reliable foundations.
Responsibility is another core aspect of a scientist’s professional ethics. Scientists must be accountable for the consequences of their research. While scientific exploration aims to expand the boundaries of human knowledge, it should never be divorced from social responsibility. For instance, the development of artificial intelligence (AI) has brought tremendous convenience, but scientists must also warn of its potential risks such as algorithmic bias and job displacement. The Manhattan Project scientists, after witnessing the destructive power of the atomic bomb, advocated for responsible use of nuclear energy, demonstrating that scientific innovation must be accompanied by a sense of responsibility to humanity.
Furthermore, a scientist’s professional ethics includes a commitment to promoting the well-being of humanity. Science should serve the common good of society rather than narrow interests. From the development of vaccines to combat pandemics to the research on renewable energy to address climate change, scientists have been using their knowledge to solve global challenges. This commitment requires scientists to prioritize human interests over personal fame or financial gains, ensuring that scientific achievements benefit all mankind.
In conclusion, professional ethics for a scientist is a combination of integrity, responsibility, and dedication to humanity. These qualities not only safeguard the authenticity and credibility of scientific research but also guide science toward a direction that benefits society. As future scientists, we must uphold these ethical principles, ensuring that our pursuit of knowledge contributes to the progress and well-being of humanity.
- 结构框架
- 开头段：点明核心观点 —— 科学家的职业道德根植于诚信、责任与对人类的使命感，是科学可信度与社会价值的保障；
- 主体段 1：论证 “诚信” 是职业道德的基石，结合黄禹锡数据造假的反面案例与居里夫人的正面案例，增强说服力；
- 主体段 2：论证 “责任” 是职业道德的核心，以人工智能风险警示、曼哈顿计划科学家的担当为例，说明科研需兼顾创新与社会后果；
- 主体段 3：论证 “造福人类” 是职业道德的归宿，结合疫苗研发、可再生能源研究等实例，强调科研的社会价值导向；
- 结尾段：总结升华，重申职业道德的三重内涵，呼吁未来科学家坚守伦理原则，呼应开头核心观点。
- 高分亮点
- 学术词汇：使用 “cornerstone”“accountable for”“commitment to humanity”“algorithmic bias” 等学术表达，提升专业性；
- 逻辑衔接：通过 “stands as”“another core aspect”“furthermore”“in conclusion” 等连接词，构建清晰的 “总 - 分 - 总” 逻辑链；
- 实例适配：结合科学领域真实案例（黄禹锡、居里夫人、人工智能、曼哈顿计划），贴合中国科学院考博的科研背景；
- 观点深刻：不局限于 “职业道德是什么” 的表层论述，延伸至 “为何重要、如何践行” 的深层维度，体现博士研究生的思辨能力与社会关怀。
- 学术规范
符合考博英语写作 “观点明确、论证充分、语言正式” 的要求，字数控制在 240 词左右，论证兼顾理论与实例，无冗余表述，完全契合学术写作要求。
中国科学院(中国科学院)空天信息创新研究院《英语》考博真题（含历年试题及高分答案详解）是备考的核心资料，能帮助考生精准把握命题重点（如科学类阅读、学术词汇、科研伦理类写作）。考生可通过以下渠道获取真题：
考博信息网官网：
http://www.kaoboinfo.com/
中国科学院(中国科学院)空天信息创新研究院
历年考博真题下载专用页面：http://www.kaoboinfo.com/shijuan/school/408061_1_2856781.html
- 科学类文章需关注 “虚构与真实”“理论与证据”“创新与责任” 的核心逻辑，精准捕捉文本主旨，避免被局部细节误导；
- 针对 “主旨题”，重点训练 “核心人物 / 事件 + 逻辑关系” 的提炼能力，区分 “局部观点” 与 “全文主旨”；
- 积累科学、哲学类高频学术词汇，提升文本理解效率，尤其关注 “科研伦理、理论修正” 相关术语。
- 重点积累 “科学研究、逻辑冲突” 类学术词汇（如 contradict、falsify、plagiarize、accountable），结合真题例句记忆其搭配与语义差异；
- 强化 “词汇 + 语境” 的绑定记忆，通过科学类语境理解词汇的使用场景，避免孤立记忆；
- 建立词汇错题本，重点突破 “学术词汇 + 逻辑连接” 考点，结合科研主题写作深化理解与应用。
- 哲学、思辨类翻译需确保 “术语精准”，积累相关主题词汇，如 “pure reason、entanglement” 等；
- 处理英文长句时，合理拆分并列结构、结果状语从句，使用中文短句优化表达，保持逻辑连贯；
- 关注语义补充与逻辑衔接，避免直译导致的语义模糊，确保译文符合中文学术文本的表达习惯。
- 科研伦理类写作需遵循 “观点 - 分论点 - 实例 - 总结” 的结构，观点明确，论证兼顾科研诚信、社会责任、人类福祉等维度；
- 结合科学领域真实案例（正面与反面），增强说服力，体现科研背景的专业性；
- 运用学术化表达与逻辑连接词，提升文本专业性，结尾段升华至 “科学进步与人类福祉” 的宏观视角，符合博士研究生的学术视野与社会关怀。
通过系统利用真题资料和科学的备考方法，考生可高效提升考博英语综合能力，助力顺利上岸中国科学院博士研究生。
您现在的位置： 