3. Superficial differences between the special </p> problems and techniques of the physical sciences , t' O$ n, W9 A5 {% w! a6 t
and those of the biological sciences are some-( A6 z' v/ B( o" y/ M
times cited as evidence for the ---- of biology 1 F6 Z4 r" `, |* E
and for the claim that the methods of physics
- `+ V5 C# W6 Q# B; b8 H: ^) u+ Uare therefore not adequate to biological inquiry.
: s6 G- N2 K* r9 d (A) autonomy
/ s9 K, X% ^ h( y4 k% F! ~ (B) vitalism . n4 D+ C9 S4 v# K
(C) purposiveness
0 Z. S9 b; l5 B* x s% _ (D) obsolescence , g5 u* l* i! }) M, s
(E) irrelevance5 M$ K. ~2 U+ o
4. As the creation of new knowledge through
- S3 d/ Y6 J6 d& f1 W$ l2 wscience has become ---- resistance to innova-# U1 d0 J G; [7 m) q; U7 N9 z
tion has become less ---- taking the form of & H# c# b2 G5 ^
inertia rather than direct attack.
1 d/ Z7 l5 e5 p- {2 K% B" F9 Q (A) controversial .. sporadic + m# w% X' x8 q5 A) [+ Z
(B) institutionalized .. aggressive; F8 R8 \) l( A: [" O4 z/ p
(C) essential .. effective ! n# z1 A8 w# x% `! y" U
(D) public .. circumspect ! r% |% j( r5 ]' n. W
(E) suspect .. lively
0 d P& Z- t% o# W 5. Lizzie was a brave woman who could dare to @9 D7 a( \. O
incur a great danger for an adequate ----.5 W q l I5 W: w$ D2 x
(A) risk
6 X4 ~2 |! E9 X (B) combat
$ o$ x& y6 G# n (C) object
8 f5 Z' Q( `; Q5 D/ n* i% G" D; e (D) event d9 A: a) s2 ~
(E) encounter $ T- _! |' h7 A% a H
1.E 2.C 3.A 4.B 5.C |