题目内容：
根据下面资料，回答题 In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waitingto be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific methodto carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequentlyfollows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannotescape the context of our unique life experiences. Prior knowledge and interestsinfluence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the
subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and
self-deception abound.
Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar tonewly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutinyand acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is thecredibility process, through which the individual researcher's me, here, now becomesthe community's anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not thestarting point.
Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectualcredit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happensnext. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchersmake discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling thepublication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes;and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery andpossibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works its way through thecommunity, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefsabout the science and the technology involved transforms an individual's discoveryclaim into the community's credible discovery.
Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific worktends to focus on some aspect of prevailing knowledge that is viewed as incompleteor incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what isalready known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly,newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appear to beimportant and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modificationor refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokesdisbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Szent-Gy6rgyi once describeddiscovery as "seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has
thought." But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what theyhave missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for trulynovel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.
In the end, credibility "happens" to a discovery claim - a process thatcorresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of themind. "We reason together, challenge, revise, and complete each other's reasoningand each other's conceptions of reason."
According to the first paragraph, the process of discovery is characterized by its_______. A．uncertainty and complexity.
A．uncertainty and complexity.
B．misconception and deceptiveness.
B．misconception and deceptiveness.
C．Iogicality and objectivity.
C．logicality and objectivity.
D．systematicness and regularity.
D．systematicness and regularity.
参考答案：
答案解析：