①In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experiences. Prior knowledge and interests influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self deception abound.

②Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here, now becomes the community’s anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.

③Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works its way through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s credible discovery.

④Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Szent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.

⑤In the end, credibility “happens” to a discovery claim—a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. “We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions of reason.” 

1.According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by its _________

A uncertainty and complexity.

B misconception and deceptiveness.

C logicality and objectivity.

D systematicness and regularity.

解析：选A。A细节理解题。根据题目定位到第一段，根据第二句可知，在科学的日常实践中，科学发现经常遵循一个模糊而复杂的路线，A符合原文，故选A。

2.It can be inferred from Paragraph 2 that credibility process requires _________

A strict inspection.

B shared efforts.

C individual wisdom.

D persistent innovation.

解析：选B。B推理判断题。根据Paragraph 2和credibility process定位到第二段，可知将一项发现声明转变为一项成熟的发现，需要集体审查和接纳，这个过程是由“我，这里，现在”转变成“任何人，任何地方，任何时间”，可推知credibility process需要的是集体的努力，故选B。

3.Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it _________

A has attracted the attention of the general public.

B has been examined by the scientific community.

C has received recognition from editors and reviewers.

D has been frequently quoted by peer scientists.

解析：选B。B推理判断题。根据题目定位到第三段，可知一个发现声明之所以变得可信，不仅仅是依靠普通大众、编辑和评审员、以及其他科学家，是发现声明在科学群体中传播时，各种观点之间的相互作用和相互对抗，促使个人的发现声明转变成可信发现。即是整个科学群体的检验使得发现声明变得可信，B符合原文，故选B。

4.Albert Szent-Gyorgyi would most likely agree that _________

A scientific claims will survive challenges.

B discoveries today inspire future research.

C efforts to make discoveries are justified.

D scientific work calls for a critical mind.

解析：选D。D细节理解题。根据Albert Szent-Gyorgyi定位到第四段倒数第二句，可知Albert Szent-Gyorgyi曾将发现描述为“看到大家都看到的，思考没人思考过的。”D“科学工作需要批判精神”更符合原文，故选D。

5.Which of the following would be the best title of the text?

A Novelty as an Engine of Scientific Development.

B Collective Scrutiny in Scientific Discovery.

C Evolution of Credibility in Doing Science.

D Challenge to Credibility at the Gate to Science.

解析：选C。C主旨大意题。根据原文可知，整篇文章都在围绕Credibility及其发展展开，可知C符合原文，故选C。