|
一。Rumor has it that more than 20 books on creationism/evolution are in the publishers pipelines. A few have already appeared. The goal of all will be to try to explain to a confused and often unenlightened citizenry that there are not two equally valid cientific theories for the origin and evolution of universe and life. Cosmology, geology, and iology have provided a consistent, unified, and constantly improving account of what happened. "Scientific" creationism, which is being pushed by some for "equal time" in the classrooms whenever the scientific accounts of evolution are given, is based on religion, not science. Virtually all scientists and the majority of non-fundamentalist religious leaders have come to regard "scientific" creationism as bad science and bad religion. The first four chapters of Kitchers book give a very brief introduction to evolution. At appropriate places, he introduces the criticisms of the creationists and provides answers. In the last three chapters, he takes off his gloves and gives the creationists a good beating. He describes their programmes and tactics, and, for those unfamiliar with the ways of creationists, the extent of their deception and distortion may come as an unpleasant surprise. When their basic motivation is religious, one might have expected more Christian behavior. Kitcher is philosopher, and this may account, in part, for the clarity And fectiveness of his arguments. The non-specialist will be able to obtain at least a notion of the sorts of data and argument that support evolutionary theory. The final chapter on the creationists will be extremely clear to all. On the dust jacket of this fine book, Stephen Jay Gould says: "This book stands for reason itself." And so it does - and all would be well were reason the only judge in the creationism/evolution debate. 参考译文： 进化论 据传言有20多本关于神创论/进化论的书已经在出版商的印刷厂里了。其中的几本已经面市了，出版这些书的目的就是向那些未被启蒙的处于混乱之中的人们揭示并没有两种相等的可用的科学理论来解释宇宙和人的起源和进化。宇宙学，地质学生物学已经为过去发生的事情提供了一个固定的统一的并且不断发展的解释。"科学的"神创论建立在宗教而不是科学的基础上的，实际上所有的科学家和非原教主义的大多数人已经逐渐将"科学的"神创论看作是坏的科学和宗教。 K的书的前四章，把进化论做了一个简明的介绍。在合适的地方他引进了对神创论的评判并提供解答。在最后三章里，他取下拳击手套，给与神创论者重重的打击。他描述神创论的程序和策略，并且对那些不熟悉神创论者行为方式的人而言，神创论者的欺骗和歪曲会令他们有不愉快的惊奇。当他们的动机是宗教时，一个人可能用行为。 K是一位哲学家，也许者也可以部分的说明他论述的条理清晰性和有效性。非专业人士也至少通过一系列数据和争论得到进化论的观点。在神创论的最后一章这个更为清晰。在这本书的包装封面上写道：这本书代表了理性。
二。It‘s a rough world out there. Step outside and you could break a leg slipping on your doormat. Light up the stove and you could burn down the house. Luckily， if the doormat or stove failed to warn of coming disaster， a successful lawsuit might compensate you for your troubles. Or so the thinking has gone since the early 1980s， when juries began holding more companies liable for their customers misfortunes. Feeling threatened， companies responded by writing ever-longer warning labels， trying to anticipate every possible accident. Today， stepladders carry labels several inches long that warn， among other things， that you might - surprised! - fall off. The label on a childs Batman cape cautions that the toy “does not enable user to fly.” While warnings are often appropriate and necessary - the dangers of drug interactions， for example - and many are required by state or federal regulations， it isnt clear that they actually protect the manufacturers and sellers from liability if a customer is injured. About 50 percent of the companies lose when injured customers take them to court. Now the tide appears to be turning. As personal injury claims continue as before， some courts are beginning to side with defendants， especially in cases where a warning label probably wouldnt have changed anything. In May， Julie Nimmons， president of Schutt Sports in Illinois， successfully fought a lawsuit involving a football player who was paralyzed in a game while wearing a Schutt helmet. “Were really sorry he has become paralyzed， but helmets arent designed to prevent those kinds of injuries，” says Nimmons. The jury agreed that the nature of the game， not the helmet， was the reason for the athletes injury. At the same time， the American Law Institute - a group of judges， lawyers， and academics whose recommendations carry substantial weight - issued new guidelines for tort law stating that companies need not warn customers of obvious dangers or bombard them with a lengthy list of possible ones. “Important information can get buried in a sea of trivialities，” says a law professor at Cornell Law School who helped draft the new guidelines. If the moderate end of the legal community has its way， the information on products might actually be provided for the benefit of customers and not as protection against legal liability. 参考译文： 外面是一个危险的世界。出门的时候你可能被踏脚垫绊倒摔断腿，点燃火炉的时候你可能烧掉房子。幸运的是如果踏脚垫或者火炉没有能提醒你可能带来的灾难，那么一场成功的法律诉讼可以补偿一下你的麻烦的损失。在20世纪80年代早期这种就有了这种想法，那时候陪审团开始让公司为其顾客的不幸承担更多的责任。 感觉到这种威胁的存在，公司开始用写的很长的警告标签来作出反映，试图预料每一种可能的事故。今天四角梯可能带有长达几英寸的警告标签，在这些警告中由你可能感到惊奇的内容：警告说你可能从梯子上滑落。在孩子们的蝙蝠侠的斗篷的警告标签说：不能让使用者飞起来。虽然警告是无可厚非和必要的例如药物的相互作用——这些也被联邦和州的法律所要求的，如果一个顾客受到伤害，我们也不清楚这种警告能否确保生产和销售商免于责任。当受到伤害的顾客与他们打官司的时候，50%的公司都会输掉的。 现在的形势开始改变了。随着个人受伤的指控还像以前一样，但是一些法庭开始站在被告一边了，特别是在警告标签不能起到作用的案件中。5月份，I的总裁成功的赢得了关于一个美式橄榄球运动员受伤的法律诉讼，这个运动员在运动中受伤瘫痪，那时带了S的头盔。N说到“我们真的很遗憾他变成了瘫痪，但是头盔不是设计用来防止这种损伤的。”法官也同意是运动本身的特性而不是头盔才是运动员受伤的原因。 与此同时ALI-一个由法官律师和学者组成的团体，他们的意见举足轻重-发布了新的行为伤害法的指导方针，指出公司不需要对明显的危害对顾客进行警告，也不需要尽可能的列出所有可能的危害。C法律院校的教授说重要的信息可能被淹没在这无用的琐碎信息之中，他也帮助起草这个指导方针。 |
|
|
来自： 昵称18261913 > 《个人》
